Full text of "Cobbett's complete collection of state trials and proceedings for high treason and other crimes and misdemeanors from the earliest period to the present time"

See other formats

Google 



This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project 

to make the world's books discoverable online. 

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject 

to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books 

are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover. 

Marks, notations and other maiginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the 

publisher to a library and finally to you. 

Usage guidelines 

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the 
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing tliis resource, we liave taken steps to 
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying. 
We also ask that you: 

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for 
personal, non-commercial purposes. 

+ Refrain fivm automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine 
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the 
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help. 

+ Maintain attributionTht GoogXt "watermark" you see on each file is essential for in forming people about this project and helping them find 
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it. 

+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just 
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other 
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of 
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner 
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liabili^ can be quite severe. 

About Google Book Search 

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers 
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web 

at |http: //books .google .com/I 



I 



«5 



GENERAL INDEX 



TO THE 



COLLECTION OF 



STATE TRIALS 



COMPILED BY 



T. B. HOWELL, and T. J. HOWELL, Esqrs. 



By DAVID JARDINE, Esq. 

OF THB MIDDLB TXUPI.B, BARRISTBR-AT-IJIW. 

KOBIS IN ARCTO ET INOLORIUS LABOR,— 7aoi7. Annai. Lib. tr. cap. K, 



LONDON: 

LONGMAN, REES, ORME, BROWN & GREEN ; J. M. RICHARDSON ; PARBURY, 
ALLEN & CO. ; BALDWIN & CRADOCK ; £. JEFFERY & SON ; J. HATCHARD 
ft SON ; R. H. EVANS ; J. BOOKER ^ J. BOOTH ; and BUDD & CALKIN. 



1828. 



,„„ iSZ^««'«"- 



^U6 2T 1900 



rr 



T. C. HAwsAikD, Printer, PatBr-noster-row, London. 



APVERTISEMENT. 



•^r**!'*— ••■•w^fiBPfwiw^ 



JLT hQA kmg heek « auAi^el of legset ta ali clasads of ilMukte, and 
pmrti^dai^ly to Metatera o£ Aa ii^* I\ofes8ioii» thai tlKf mass, of; 
yMmhlk iiifenniion oii U^ atld coiistiitttiiMibl subjeets^ conUdned' 
iot tke Stele Triahr »1]k>iiM- imaih lit a gteat otfeasnre ka^iceadible for^ 
want <^f m cbkii^iaant lodte. the 6ea€»al'lnd«x to Haufgntw's Stalia 
Tnab, yftHSuSi W4la* iipHoifipited^^y Iba^ Wii^d Editor of the work^ iis^ 
atnauidiy impeyfidct/ iAi 'ftift of ^t^tfa^i^ ; ttd ef«tt lAtl^ the 
a8di»taBc6 (^ & Table of Parallel Reftfeiiee^ fiimisheti a Tery «i»kwardt 
and insufficient guide to the con<feht6 of the Octavo edition; 
besides which, the matter which is common to both editions forms 
fittle more than half of the contents of HowelFd Collection. By 
the chronological arrangement of Howell's State Trials, a part of 
the inconvenience which applied to the earlier editions is removed ; 
but it is obvious that there are innumerable points and circumstances, 
fidntly remembered, and not associated in the mind with any date or 
time, which it is hopeless to attempt to find amongst three and thirty 
volumes of desultory matter, without the assistance of an Index. 



Under these circumstances, it is hoped that no apology is necessary 
for offering to the Public a Work, upon which much time and labour 
have been employed, and which must be usefiil to some extent, even 
though imperfectly executed. It was originally intended to form a 
Digest, or Abstract, of the State Trials, with Notes and Illustrations 
of a merely professional character, with a view of rendering more 
practically useful the information on legal subjects which the work 
contains ; but the appearance of Mr. Phillipps's excellent Book, upon 
a somewhat similar, though less comprehensive plan, with other 
considerations, induced the Compiler to abandon that intention, and 
to restrict his undertaking to the formation of an Index. It has been 



ADVERTISEMENT. 

considered that the object of an Index, namely, that of furnishing a 
ready means of reference to the contents of the work, would be best 
attained by the simplest method of arrangement, and that any arti« 
ficial analysis would be altogether inapplicable to the State Trials ; 
this Compilation, therefore, merely consists of two Tables, alphabeti- 
cally arranged ; the first being a Table of Names, with a short abstract, 
under each name, of the contents of the work,, so far as they relate 
to the individual to whom the name belongs, and a reference to the 
passages in which he is mentioned: the second being a Table of 
Principal Matters, containing references to the leading subjects, as 
well as the points of ISw, arguments, and' other circumstances, 
incidentally mentioned throughout the whole Collection. The heads 
of reference in both these Tables have been made as numerous and 
partic^^dar as possible, in order to afford a large number of such points 
as tosiy most probably occur to the memory of the Reader, smd by 
v^hich he may be guided directly to the object of his search. A Table 
of Parallel Reference has been added, for, the purpose of rendering 
the Index applicable to Hargrave's State Trials, as well as to the 
Octavo Edition. This Table is the converse of that which is given 
in the twenty-first Volume of the Work; the one containing, a 
reference from the Folio edition to the Octavo, and the other a 
reference from the Octavo to the Folio. 

. It may be necessary to explain to the Reader, that as it frequently 
happens that eminent and remarkable Characters are mentioned . in 
the State Trials, as having been present on particular trials or occa- 
sions, without their having taken any prominent part in the proceed^ 
ings, it has been thought proper to refer to theftn in the Index of 
Names, with their description as Judges, Serjeants, Counsel, &c. and 
the date of the transactions in which their names occur. 



geserax 



GENERAL INDEX 



TO THE 



STATE TRIALS. 



Part I. — Names. 



iM^^MiitfHaM 



AbBOT^ George, Archbishop of Canterbury. 
— *He is appointed one of the Commissioners 
for examining the matters contained in a 
Petition of Divorce, by Frances Howard, 
Countess of Essex, against her husband, 
Robert, Earl of Essex, 11 Jac. 1, 1613, 
2 vol. 785. — His Reasons against the 
Divorce, ibid. 794. — ^Answer of King James 
the First to these Reasons, ibid. 798. — Arch- 
bishop Abbot's Account of the Proceedings 
in this Case, ibid. 805. — Speech intended to 
have been delivered by him in the Court of 
Delegates against the Divorce, ibid. 844. — 
The King's Letter to him respecting his 
Opinion in this Case, ibid. 860. — ^For his 
conduct in this Case he was excluded from 
the Council Table, ibid. 786 (note). — Pro- 
ceedings against him for accidentally kill- 
ing Edward Hawkins, 19 Jac. 1, 1621, 

2 vol. 1160. — The King refers the Case to 
certain Bisbops and Judges fur their opinion, 
ibid, 1161. — ^Their Answer thereto, ibid. 
1162. — The King directs a Commission to 
the Lord Keeper and certain Bishops to grant 
a Dispensation to the Archbishop, ibid. 
1163. — ^Form of the Dispensation, ibid. 
11 81. --Apology for Archbishop Abbot, ibid. 
1165. — Spelman*s Answer to the Apolocy, 
ibid. 1169.— Proceedings against him for 
refusing to license Dr. Sibthorp's Sermon, 

3 Car. 1, 1627, ibid. 1449.--The King's 
Commission for the Sequestration of his 
Ecclesiastical Offices, ibid. 1451. — His Nar- 
rative of these Proceedings against him, 
ibid. 1453.— ffis Account of the first Pro- 
motion of the Duke of Buckingham, ibid. 
1478. — ^His Speech at the Conference be- 
tween the two Houses of Parliament respect- 
ing the Liberty of the Subject, 3 vol. 166. 

ABBOTSBURY Witnesses. See Gibbons, Jokn. 

ABBOTT, Charles, Counsel, 26 vol. 8, 534, 
1218.— 27 vol. 821, 1283. — 28 vol. 356, 
529.-29 vol. 1, 423,«'His Argument in 
VOL. XXXIV, 



support of the Demurrer to the Plea in 
Abatement to the Jurisdiction of the Court 
in Judge Johnson's case, 29 vol. 388. . 

ABBOTT, Sir Charles, Judge of K. B., 32 
vol. 20, 765. — His Charge to the Jury on the 
Trial of John Hatchard, for a Libel, 32 vol. 
713. — His Charge to the Juiy on the Trial of 
Ludlam for High Treason, at Derby, ibid. 
1271. 



", Chief Justice of 
K. B. — His Charge to the Grand Jury 
assembled under the Special Conunission at 
Clerkenwell for the Trial of the several 
persons concerned in the Cato Street Plot, 
33 vol. 683. — His Charge to the Jury on 
the Trial of Thistlewood, ibid. 919.— His 
Address in passing Sentence upon Thistle- 
wood and the other Prisoners convicted of 
High Treason, in being concerned in the 
Cato Street Plot, ibid. 1560. 

ABINGTON, Edward.-^His Trial at West- 
minster, with Charles Tilney, Edward Jones, 
John Travers, John Chamock, Jerome 
Bellamy, and Robert Gage, for High 
Treason, in conspiring to kill Queen Eliza- 
beth, at the instigation of the Papists, 28 £liz« 
1586, 1 vol. 1141.— They all plead Not 
Guilty, ibid. 1143. — ^Abiogton's Trial, ibid, 
ib.— Tilney's Trial, ibid. 1149.— Jones's 
Trial, ibid. 1151.— Travers's Trial, ibid. 
1152.— Chamock's Trial, ibid, ib — Gage's 
Trial, ibid. 1154.— Bellamy's Trial, ibid. ib. 
—Judgment of death is passed upon them, 
ibid. 1156. — They are executed, ibid. ib. 

ABNEY, Sir Thomas, Counsel.— His Speech 
for the Plaintiff on the Trial of an Issue 
upon the Return to a Mandamus to the 
Town and Port of Hastings, 17 vol. 849.— 
His Reply in the same Case, ibid. 906. 

■ I ■ Judge of Ct p., f Geo. 
2, 18 vol. 329. 

B 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



ACTON, Wilham.-^The House of Commons 
order bim to be prosecuted for the Murder 
ot several Prisoners under his custody in 
^e Marshalsea Prisop, 17 vol., SJO.-Hui 
P^i^^ the Surrey Assizes, fop the Murd^er 
ot Ihomas Bliss, 3 Geo. 2, 1729, ibid. 461. 
—Upening Speeches of the Counsel for the 
Prosecution, ibid. 463.-~Evidence for the 
I'rosecution, ibid. 466.— The Prisoner's De- 

•r^®;^'^'"^- 485.— Evidence for him, ibid. 
ib.--Mr. Baron Carter's Charge to the Jury, 
ibid. 503.~The Jury acquit him, 'Ibid. 510. 
--•liis Trial at the same Assizes for the 
:Murder of John Bromfield, ibid. 511.— 
J^ndence against him, ibid. 513.— Evidence 
Jor him, ibid. 518.~Mr. Baron Carter's 
Charge to the Jury, ibid. 522.— The Jury 
acquit him, ibid. 524.— His Trial at the 
same Assizes for the Murder of Robert 
iVcwton, ibid. 525.— Evidence against him, 
jjid. lb.— His Defence, ibid. 533.— Mr. 
Baron Carter's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 
540. — The Jury acquit him, ibid. 544.— His 
Trial at the same Assizes for the Murder of 
James Thompson, ibid. 546. — Evidence 
against him, ibid. ib.-^His Defence, ibid. 
554.— Mr. Baron Carter's Charge to the 
Jury, ibid. 558.— The Jury acquit him, ibid. 
562.— Another Bill of Indictment is prefer- 
red against him, but is thrown out by the 
Grand Jury, ibid. 563. 

AD AI{t, James, Serjeant-at-Law,and Recorder 
of London, 21 vol. 687.-24 vol. 238.-25 
vol. 2.— His Speech in Defence of Stone, 
for High Treason, 25 vol. 1320. 

ADAM, William, Counsel, 26 vol. 1218.— 27 
vol. 821.— 30 vol. 450. — His Speech in 
Defence of Crossfield, on his Trial for 
Treason, 26 vol. 91.— His Speech for the 
Prosecution on the Trial of the Bishop of 
Bangor, ibid. 464.— His Speech in Defence 
ofWm. Cobbett, on his Trial for a Libel 
on the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, 29 vol. 
37.— His Speech in Defence of Wm. Cob- 
bett, in an Action by Mr. Plunkett against 
him for a Libel, ibid. 72.— His Speech in 
Defence of Mr. Justice Johnson, on his 
Trial for publishing a Libel on the Lord 

Lieutenant of Ireland, ibid. 468 HisSpeech 

on summing up the Evidence for the De- 
fence, on the Trial of Lord Melville, ibid. 
1313. ' 

ADOLPHUS, John, Counsel.— His Speech in 
Defence of Thistlewood, on his Trial for 
High Treason, in being concerned in the 
Cato Street Plot, 38 vol. 850.— His Speech 
m Defence of Ings, on his Trial for the 
same Treason, ibid. 1079.— His Speech in 
<• Defence of Brunt, on his Trial for the same 
Treason, ibid. 1272.— His Speech in De- 
fence of Davidson and Tidd, on their Trial 
foe the same Treason, ibid. 1441; 

AIKENHEAD, Thomas. — Proceedings in 
8 Will. 3, 1696, 13 vol. 917.-^The -ladiet* 



ment, ibid. ib. — His Petition to the Court of 
Justiciary, containing his retractation, ibid. 
921 (note). — Evidence against him, ibid. 923. 
— He is ^n4 Guilty, and sentenced to be 
l)aiig»d, ibid, 927.— IJis Petition to the 
Privy Council, ibid. ib. — Letter of Mr. 
Locke to Sir Fras. Masham, respecting his 
Case, ibid. 928. — Another Letter respecting 
him, ibid. 929. — His Speech at the place of 
Execution, ibid. 930. — His Letter to his 
frifsfi^n, w7n(teii.on the day of his death, ibid. 
034. — Animadversions upon his doctrines, 
ibid. ib. Arnot's account of his Trial, ibid. 
917 (note). 

AITKEN, James, otherwise John the Painter. 
— His Trial for feloniously setting Fire to a 
Rope House in the Dock Yard at Ports- 
mouth, 17 Geo. 3, 1777, 20 vol. 1317.— The 
Indictment, ibid, ib.— Mr. Serjt. Davy opens 
the Case for the Prosecution, ibid. 1319* — 
Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 1328. — 
The Prisoner's Defence, ibid. 1347. — Mr. 
Baron Hotham's Charge to the Jur^, ibid. 
1348.— The Jury find hira Guilty, ibid. 136S. 
•—Sentence of Death is passed upon htm, 
ibid. 1364.— His Confeswon, ibid. 1865. — 
Account of his Execution, ibid. 1368. 

ALAND, John fortescue. Solicitor Genetal. 
r-His Reply for the Crown on the Trial of 
Francia for High Treason, 15 vqI. 975. 

^, Sir John Fortescue, Baron of the Ex- 
chequer.— His Aigument on delivering his 
Opinion in favour of the King's Prerogative, 
respecting the Education and Marriage of 
the Royal Family, 16 vol. 1216. 

— *^, Judge of K.B. 



16 vol. 114, 



ALLEN, John. See O'Coigly, James. 

ALLEYNE,- — rr,Counsel.^His Argument in 
the case of the Island of Grenada, 20 vol. 268. 

ALLYBONE, Sir Richard, Judge of K. B. 12 
vol. 122.--Hi3 Charge to the Grand Jury of 
the County of Surrey, immediately after the 
Trial of the Seven Bishops, 12 vol. 1§0 
(note).— He was one of the Judges, before 
whom the Seven Bishops were tried, ibid. 
189. — He was said by lord Camden, to have 
been a rigid Papist, 19 vol. 993. 

ALMQN, John.— His Trial, upon an Ex-officio 
Information, for publishing Junius'a Letter 
to the King, 10 Geo. 3, 1770, 20 vojl. 803.^ 
The Information, ibid, ib.— XHe Speech of 

•u?, ^"„T^y„^.^''®'^^ *^' ^'^ Prosecution, 
ibid. 823.— Evidence for the Prosecution 
ibid. 828.— Serjeant Glynn's Speech for the 
Defendant, ibid. 8f31.— Evidence for the 
defendant, ibid. 835.— Lord Mausaeld's 
Charge to the Juyy ibi^. 836.^Tlie jZy 
find him Guilty ibid. 839.-.proceeaings on 
a Motion for a New Trial, upon the grouudl 
Uiat there was no proof of pHblioation by the 
PefendantpersoB^ly, but. only by his ^op- 
mn, itad, ib.^The Qouft h(M Ods \& U 



THE STATE TRIALS* 



sufficient prim& facie Evidence of publication 
by the Defendant, and refuse a New Trial, 
ibid. 842. — Proceedings on his being brought 
up for Judgment, ibid. 843.*— His Sentence, 
ibid. 847.— Other Accounts of the Proceed- 
ings, on the application for a New Trial, 
ibid. 848. 

ALTHAM, John, Baron of the Exchequer, 
6 Jac. 1, 2 vol. 576, 725, 952. 

ANANDALE, William, Marquis of. See 
Baillie, David, 

ANDERSON, Sir Edmund, Chief Justice of 
C. P., 1 vol. 1096, 1128, 1251, 1315, 
1333. — He was ope of the Commissioners 
named by Queen Elizabeth for the Trial of 
Mary, Queen of Scots, 1 vol.1167, — His 
Speech on the Proceedings against William 
Davison, the Queen's Secretary, for a Con- 
tempt in delivering the Warrant for the 
Execution of Mary Queen of Scots, ibid. 
1235. — He was one of the J udges on the Trial 
of Sir Walter Raleigh, 2 vol. 1. 

ANDERSON, Lionel, alias Munson.— His 
Trial with William Russel, alias Napper, 
Charles Parris, alias Parry, Henry Stark ey, 
James Corker, William Marshal and Alex- 
ander Lumsden, for High Treason, under the 
Stat. 27 Eliz. c. 2, for being Seminary Priests 
in England, 31 Car. 2, 1680, 7 vol. 811. — 
Corker and Marshal object, at their Arraign- 
ment, that they have been already tried for 
Treason, but the Court overrule the Objec- 
tion, ibid. 830, 831. — They all plead Not 
Guilty, ibid. 829. — The King's Counsel. open 
their Case against Anderson, ibid. 833 — 
Evidence against him, ibid. 835. — Oates's 
Evidence, ibid. 837. — His Defence, ibid. 
841. — Evidence against Corker, ibid. 846. — 
Evidence against Marshal, ibid. 847. — Evi- 
dence in bis Defence, ibid. 853. — ^Evidence 
against Russel, ibid. 858. — Evidence against 
Parry, ibid. 860. — Evidence for him, ibid. 
863. — Evidence against Starkey, ibid. 867. 
Evidence against Lumsden, ibid. 8^9. — ^He 
is proved to be a Scotchman, and the Court 
direct the Jury to find a Special Verdict as 
to him, ibid. 871. — The Jury return a Special 
Verdict as to Lumsden, and find the others 
Guilty, ibid. ib. — Sentence of Death passed 
upon all, excepting Lumsden, ibid. 882. 

ANDERTON, William.— His Trial at the 
Old Bailey for High Treason, in publishing 
treasonable Libels, 5 Will, and Mary, 1693, 
12 vol. 1245. — ^Account of his Trial, from the 
Sessions Paper, ibid. ib. — ^His Trial, as pub- 
lished by his Friends, ibid. 1250. — The Jury 
Hod him Guilty, ibid. 1259. — He pleads in 
arrest of Judgment, ibid. 1261. — Science 
of Death is passed upon him, ibid. 1262. — 
His conduct at the place of Execution, ibid. 
1264. — Paper given by him to the Sheriffs, 
ibid. 1265. 

ANDREWS, Eusebius.-- Prooeedings against 
bin for iUgh TrtasoD, 9 Car. 2, t^Q, 5 



vol. 1.— He is arrested and examined before 
the Council, ibid. ib. — He is committed to 
the Tower, ibid. 2.— His Narrative of the 
Matters upon which the Charge against him 
was founded, ibid. 3.— He is brought before 
the High Court of Justice, ibid. 13. — His 
Answer to the Charge against him, ibid. ib. 
— His Arguments against the validity of the 
Court, ibid. 19. — ^Judgment of Death is 
passed upon him, ibid. 31. — His Speech, 
and Conauct on the Scaffold, ibid. 37. 

ANGLESEA, Richard, Eari of. See Anneskyy 
James, — Trial of an Action of Ejectment in 
Ireland, between him and James Annesley, 

17 Geo. 2, 1743, 17 vol. 1139.— His Trial 
with Francis Annesley, and John Jans, for 
nn Assault upon James Annesley and others, 

18 Geo. 2, 1744, 18 vol. 197.— The Indict- 
ments, ibid, ib.— The Defendants are tried 
upon four separate Indictments, for four 
Assaults on different Persons, ibid. 198. — 
Speeches of the Counsel for the Prosecution, 
ibid, ib.— -Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 
206.— Speeches of the Counsel for the De- 
fendants, ibid. 256.— The Counsel for the 
Defendants apply to the Court to charge the 
Jury to return their Verdict, as to Francis 
Annesley and Jans, upon one of thr* Indict- 
ments, before the Defence is' opened, in 
order that they may be competent Witnesses 
for Lord Anglesea, ibid. 259. — The Court 
grant the application, ibid. 267. — The Jury 
tind Lord Anglesea guilty on the First In- 
dictment, but acquit the other Defendants, 
ibid. ib. — Evidence for Francis Annesley, 
on the Second Indictment, ibid. ib. — He is 
acquitted of that Indictment, ibid. ib. — He 
gives Evidence for the other Defendaots on 
the same, ibid. 268.-^Lord Anglesea and 
Jans are found guilty upon the Second In- 
dictment, ibid. 274. — Defence on the Third 
Indictment, ibid. ib. — Lord Anglesea and 
Jans found guilty on the Third Indictment, 
ibid. 280. — ^The Court charge the Jury upon 
the Evidence on the Third Indictment, as to 
Francis Annesley, and upon the whole Case 
upon the Fourth Indictment, ibid. 286. — 
The Jury find Francis Annesley guilty upon 
the Third Indictment, and acquit all the 
Defendants upon the Fourth, ibid. 287. — Sen- 
tence is passed upon them, ibid. 289. 

ANGLESEY, Arthur, Earl of.— Proceedings 
against him before the King in Council, 
respecting a Book reflecting upon the Duke 
of Ormond, 34 Car. 2, 1684, 8 vol. 989.— 
The Duke of Ormond's Petition to the King 
against him, ibid, ib.— Order of Council 
thereupon, ibid. 998. — His Speech to the 
King on appearing before the Privy Covincily 
ibid. 999. — His Answer to the Duke's Charge 
against him, ibid. 1000,— The Duke's Par- 
ticulars of Charge against him, ibid. 1008. — 
His Answer thereto, ibid. 1009. — The 
Council resolve that the Book is a Scandalous 
Libel, ibid. 1011.— He is oidered to deliver 
up the Privy Seal, ibid. I014---Letter from , 
B 3 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



Dr. Morley^ Bishop of Winchester, to him, 
ibid. 1015. — Letters between the Earl of 
Anglesey and the Duke of Ormond, on the 
subject of the Book in question, ibid. 992 
(note). 

ANNESLEY, Francis. See Anglesea, Bichard, 
Earl of. 

ANNESLEY, James.— His Trial with Joseph 
Redding at the Old Bailey for the Murder of 
Thomas Egglestone, 15 Geo. 2, 1742, 17 
vol. 1093.— The Indictments, ibid. 1094.— 
The Counsel for the Prosecution open their 
Case, ibid. 1098.— Evidence for the Prosecu- 
tion, ibid. 1099.— Tlieir Defence, ibid. 1112. 
— Evidence for the Prisoners, ibid. 1113. — 
Arguments for the Prisoners, that the Homi- 
cide in this Case, amounted only to Chance- 
medley, ibid. 1126. — Arguments for the Pro- 
secution contra, ibid. 1129. — Reply of the 
Prisoners' Counsel, ibid. 1130.— The Court 
charge the Jury, ibid. 1133. — ^The Jury acquit 
them of Murder, on the ground that the facts 
amounted only to Chance-medley, ibid. 1139. 
— ^Trial of his Title to certain Lands in Ireland, 
in an Action of Ejectment between Campbell 
Craig, his Lessee, and Richard, Earl of Angle- 
sea, in the Court of Exchequer in Ireland, 17 
Geo. 2, 1743, ibid. ib. — The Declaration, ibid. 
1141. — Opening Speeches of the Counsel for 
the Lessor of the Plaintiff, ibid, 1143. — Evi- 
dence for the Lessor of the Plaintiff, ibid. 
1149. — ^The Attorney-General's Speech for 
the Defendant, ibid. 1254. — Evidence for 
the Defendant, ibid. 1262. — Evidence in 
Reply, ibid. 1338.— Speeches of the Defend- 
ant's Counsel, on the close of the Evidence, 
ibid. 1355. — Spe'feches of the Counsel for 
the Lessor of the Plaintiff, ibid. 1383.— The 
Lord Chief Baron's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 
1406* — Mr. Baron Mounteney's Address to 
the Jury, ibid. 1425. —Mr. Baron Dawson's 
Address to the Jury, ibid. 1439. — The Jury 
return a Verdict for the Lessor of the Plain- 
tiff, ibid. 1443. — This is said to have been 
the longest Trial ever known, ibid. 1139 
(note), 1406. — Account of Annesley ex- 
tracted from the Gentleman's Magazine, 
ibid. 1443. — ^Trial of Mary Heath, one of 
the principal witnesses for the Defendant 
in the Ejectment, for Perjury, 18 vol. 1. — 
Trial of the Earl of Anglesea and others, for 
an Assault upon him, ibid. 197. 

APPLETREE, Thomas. See Messenger, 
Peier. 

ARCHER, John, Judge of C. P., 18 Car. 2, 
6 vol. 769. 

ARCHER, Thomas.— -His Trial with Alex, 
ander Sheils, and others, at Edinburgh, for 
Treason, in being engaged in Argyle's Rebel- 
lion, 1 Jac. 2, 1685, 11 vol. 889.— The In- 
dictment, ibid. ib. — ^He is found Guilty, and 
sentenced to Death, ibid. 901. — His Dying 
Speech, ibid. 904 (note). — ^^Vodrow's Ao- 
count of hioDj ibid. 90} (Qote)«-«^FouQtaiQ- 



hall's Account of these Proceedings, ibid. 
889 (note). 

ARGYLE, Archibald, Earl of.— His Trial in 
Scotland for Treason, 33 Car. 2,1681, 8 vol. 
843. — He takes the Test required from him, 
as a Privy Councillor, with an Explanation 
of the mode in which he understood it, ibid. 
883.— Letter from the Council to the King, 
informing him of their having committed the 
Earl of Aigyle, ibid. 892.— The King's 
Answer, ibid. 897. — Indictment against 
him, ibid. 898.— Abstract of the Acts of 
Parliament on which the Indictment is 
founded, ibid. 901.— His Speech to theCourt, 
on his Arraignment, ibid. 909. — Charles 
the 2nd's Letter to him, when Lord Lorn, 
ibid. 912.— Debate on the relevancy of 
the Libel, ibid. 918.— The Court find the 
Libel relevant, ibid. 944.— He is found 
Guilty by the Assize, ibid. 946.— Letter from 
the Council to the King, desiring leave to 

Pronounce Sentence upon him, ibid. ib. — 
he Duke of York says, that if the King's 
Answer did not arrive soon, he should take 
upon himself what was to be done, ibid. 858 
(note). — Speech which he intended to have 
made before Sentence was pronounced upon 
him, ibid. 946. — He makes his Escape, ibid. 
980.— The King's Answer to the Letter of 
the Council, ibid. ib. — His Reasons for his 
Escape, ibid. 983. — Accounts of these Pro- 
ceedings, by Burnet and Laing, ibid. 843 
(note). — Fountainhall's Account of the Pnj- 
ceedings against his Advocates, and his 
Remarks on his Conviction, 11 vol. 1063 
(note). — Account of his Invasion of Scotland, 
in concert with the Duke of Monmouth, in 
1685, 10 vol. 1016. — Declarations published 
by him on landing in Scotland, ibid. 103,2. 

ARGYLE, Archibald, Marquis of.—- Proceed- 
ings in Scotland against him for High 
Treason, 12 and 13 Car. 2, 1661, 5 vol. 
1369. — Laing's Account of these Proceed- 
ings, ibid. ib. (note). — Charge exhibited to 
the Parliament of Scotland against him, ibid. 
1369. — His Answer thereto, ibid. 1394. — 
Indictment for Treason exhibited against 
him by the Lord Advocate, ibid. 1405. — His 
Petition to the Parliament of Scotland, 
claiming Precognition of his Case, ibid. 
1419. — His Speech in his own Defence, ibid. 
1422. — His submission, ibid. 1434. — ^His 
Defences to . the Indictment, ibid. 1438.-^ 
Bishop Burnet's Account of these Proceed- 
ings, ibid. 1500. — He is found Guilty, and 
sentenced to be beheaded, ibid. 1504.— 
His Conduct at the place of Execution, ibid. 
1505. — Laing's Character of him, ibid. 
1508 (note).— Lord Clarendon's Character 
of him, ibid. 1509. 

ARLINGTON, Henry Bennett, Earl of. — 
Proceedings in the House of Commons 
against him, 25 Car. 2, 1674, 6 vol. 1053. — 
Articles of Complaint against him, ibid, 

}Q54«-^Ha requests to be heard by th^ 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



House> ibid. i057.— His Speech in the 
House, ibid. ib. — Questions put to him by 
the House, with his Answers, ibid. 1061. — 
The Resolution moved against him is nega- 
tived, ibid. 1062. — Buraet's Account of him, 
ibid. 307 (note). 

ARMSTRONG, Sir Thomas.— Proceedings 
against him in the King's Bench, upon an 
Outlawry for High Treason, 36 Car, 2, 
1684, 10 vol. 105. — He is brought to the 
King's Bench Bar by Habeas Corpus, ibid. 
ib. — ^He claims the benefit of the Stat. 6 
Edward 6, and desires to be tried, ibid. 110. 
— ^The Court decide, that he is not entitled 
to the benefit of that Statute, as he did not 
voluntarily surrender, ibid. 111.— The Court 
refuse to bear Counsel upon the point, ibid. ib. 
— ^The Rule for Execution granted, ibid. 112. 
— ^His Wife applies for a Writ of Error, ibid. 
119. — His Execution, ibid. 115. — His Con- 
versation with Dr. Tennison, at the place of 
£zecution,l 3 vol. 432. — The Paper delivered 
by him to the Sheriff, at the place of Exe- 
cution, ibid. 122. — The Proceedings con- 
demned in Parliament, after the Revolution, 
and 5,000/. is voted to be paid to his Wife 
and Children by his Judges and Prosecutors, 
ibid. 1 16. — Sir John Hawles's Remarks upon 
these Proceedings, ibid. 123. — Mr. Erskine's 
allusion to Jefferies's conduct in this Case, 
in his Defence of Hardy, 24 vol. 944. 

ARNOLD, Edward.— His Trial at the Surrey 
Assizes for maliciously shooting at Lord 
Onslow, 10 Geo. 1, 1724, 16 vol. egS.—The 
Indictment, ibid. ib. — He pleads Not Guilty, 
ibid. 696. — His Counsel apply to the Court 
to permit the Solicitor to assist the Prisoner 
in calling his Witnesses, ibid. 697. — ^The 
Court refuse the Application, ibid. 698. — 
Speeches of the Counsel for the Prosecution, 
ibid. 699. — Evidence for the Prosecution, 
ibid. 702. — ^Witnesses called by the Pri- 
soner, to prove his Insanity, ibid. 717. — 
Reply of the Counsel for the Prosecution, 
ibid. 745. — Evidence in reply, ibid. 751. — 
Mr. Justice Tracy's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 
754. — He is found Guilty, and sentenced to 
Death, but is respited at the intercession of 
Lord Onslow, ibid. 766. 

ARUNDEL, Philip Howard, Earl of.— His 
Trial for High Treason, in conspiring with 
Parsons, and other Papists, against Queen 
Elizabeth, 31 Eliz. 1589, 1 vol. 1249.— 
Henry, Earl of Derby, created Lord High 
Steward, ibid. 1259.— He pleads Not Guilty, 
ibid. 1253. — He is found Guilty, and sen- 
tenced to Death, ibid. 1258. — He dies in the 
Tower, ibid. 1259.— Account of his Trial, 
from Kennett's Complete History, ibid. ib. 

ARUNDEL, Richard, Earl of. See Gloucester, 
Thomas^ Duke of. 

ARUNDEL, Thomas Howard, Earl of*— Is 
Lord High Steward, on the Trial of Thomas, 
Eail of Strafford, 3 vol. 1417. 



ARUNDEL, of Wardour, Henry, Lord. See 

Stafford^ William, Viscount. 

ASHBY and WHITE.— Proceedings in Parlia- 
ment, and in tlie Queen's Bench, in this 
Case, 2 and 3 Anne, 1704-1705, 14 vol. 
695.— *-Recordof the Judgmentin the Queen's 
Bench, ibid. 697.— Judgment was given for 
the Defendants, in the Queen's Bench, by 
three Judges, against Holt, C. J., ibid. 779- 
—The Judgment of the Queen's Bench re- 
versed in Error in the House of Lords, ibid, 
ib. — Debates in the House of Commons upon 
the question raised by this case, whether an 

" action lies at Common Law by an Elector, 
whose vote has been refused at an Election 
for Members of Parliament, ibid. 696.— Sir 
Thomas Powis's Argument for the negative, 
ibid. 712.— Sir John Hawles's Argument tor 
theaffirmative, ibid. 724.— Resolutions of the 
House of Commons, asserting an original 
and exclusive right in themselves to deter- 
mine all matters relating to the Election of 
their own Members, ibid. 776.— They resolve 
that Ashby is Guilty of a Breach of Privilege, 
in prosecuting the Action, ibid. 778.— Pro- 
ceedings in the House of Lords on these 
Resolutions of the House of Commons, ibid, 
ib.— Report of the Committee of the Lords, 
appointed to draw up the State of the Case 
upon the Writ of Error, ibid, ib.— Reasons of 
the Lords for reversing the Judgment of the 
Queen's Bench, ibid. 781.— The Defendants' 
Case on the Writ of Error, as drawn up by 
their Counsel, ibid. 779 (note).— Resolutions 
of the House of Lords upon the Proceedings 
in the House of Commons, ibid. 799. — Exe- 
cution is taken out upon the Judgment in 
this case, and other similar Actions are 
brought, ibid. 800.— Proceedings in the 
House of Commons respecting them, ibid, 
ib.— The Plaintiffs in those Actions are voted 
Guilty of a Breach of Privilege and sent to 
Newgate, ibid. 804.— Their Petitions to the 
House of Lords, and Orders of that House 
thereupon, ibid. 811.— Proceedings in the 
Queen's Bench, upon a Habeas Corpus 
brought by the Aylesbury Men, ibid. 849.— 
Arguments of Counsel on that occasion, ibid. 
850.— The Judges of the Queen's Bench desire 
the Assistance of the other Judges, who are 
all of opinion, excepting Holt, C. J., that the 
Prisoners ought to be remanded, ibid, ib.— 
The Counsel, who pleaded in the Queen's 
Bench on the return of the Habeas Corpus, 
ordered by the House of Commons to be taken 
into the custody of the Serjeant at Arms, for 
a Breach of Privilege, ibid. 807.— Writs of 
Habeas Corpus, issued to the Serjeant at 
Arms, requiring him to brihg them before 
the Lord Keeper, ibid. 830.— Resolutions of 
the House thereon, ibid. ib. — Conference be- 
tween the two Houses of Parliament, on occa- 
sion of these Proceedings, ibid. 1813. — Free 
Conference on the same Subject, ibid. 831. — 
Representation and Address of the Lords to 
the Queen,, on occasion of the commitment of 



6 



6£MI;ttAt tNDEX to 



the I^laliittffs in the Actions, ibid. 861.— 
The Queen's Answer, ibid. 8T8.-^The Par- 
liament is prorogued, ibid. 879. — Some 
Arguments used by the House of Lords Xo 
maintain their own Resolutions in tiiis Case, 
ibid. ib. — Reference to Books and Pam- 
phlets in which the Points in this Case are 
discussed, ibid. 695 (note). 

ASHLEY, Sir Francis, Serjeant at Law. — His 
Argument on behalf of the King, and against 
the Arguments of the Commons, at a con- 
ference of the Lords and Commons, respect- 
ing the Liberty of the Subject, 3 vol. 148. — 
He is committed by the House of Lords, fol 
his Speech on that occasion, ibid. 151. 

ASHLEY, James. See Simons, Henry, 

ASHTON, John. See Graham, Sir Richard. 

ASK, Richard. See Constable, Sir Robert. 

ATKINS, Edward, Counse1.--He was of 
counsel for Prynr.e, on the Proceedings in 
the Star-Chamber against him, for writing 
Histrio-mastix, 3 vol. 564. 

, Serjeant at Law, 3 vol. 



763. 

ATKINS, Sir Edward, Judge of C. P. during 
the Protectorate.— Ha was one of the Com- 
missioners for the Trial of the Portuguese 
Ambassador, Don Pantaleon Sa, 6 vol. 
466. 



there should b^ twd Witnesiies to ev^ry 
Overt Act, ibid. 1528. 

ATKYNS, Sir Robert, Judge of C. P. 30 Car. 2 . 

—7 vol. 99, 249, 261, 424, 601, 734, 831, 
12 vol. 656, 833, 1244.— His Argument in 
the Case of Barnardiston against Soames, 6 
vol. 1074.— His Argument for Sir Wm. Wil- 
liams, on an Information in the King's 
Bench against him, for publishing Danger- 
field's Narrative, 13 vol. 1380. 



Knight of the Bath.- 



His Defense of Lord Wm. Russell's Inno- 
cency, 9 vol. 719. — His Discourse concern- 
ing Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction in England, 
occasioned by the Ecclesiastical Commission 
of James 2nd, 11 vol. 1148 (note). — His 
Inquiry into the Dispensing power, ibid. 
1200. 



■ ■ ■ , Baron of the Exchequer, 

12 Car. 2^ 6 vol. 769, 879. — He was one of 
the Judges, to whom the Special Commission 
for the Trial of the Regicides was directed, 
5 vol. 986. 

ATKINS, Samuel.— His Account of his Ex- 
amination before a Committee of Lords, 
appointed to investigate, the Murder of Sir 
Edmondbury Godfrey, 6 vol. 1473. — His 
Trial at the Bar of the King's Bench, for 
being accessary to that Murder, 31 Car. 2, 
1679, 7 vol. 231. — Indictment against him, 
ibid, ib.— He pleads Not Guilty, ibid. 232. 
The Court offer to dischi^rge him on Bail till 
the Sessions, ibid. 233. — The Attorney- 
General's Speech for the Prosecution, ibid. 
237. — Evidence against him, ibid. 238. — 
His Defence, ibid. 245. — Evidence for him, 
ibid* 246.— He is acquitted, ibid. 249. 

ATKINS, William.— His Trial at Stafford 
for High Treason, under Stat. 27 Eliz. c. 2., 
for coming, as a Seminary Priest, into Eng- 
land, and remaining there, 31 Car. 2, 1679, 
7 vol. 725. — He is found Guilty, and sen- 
tenced, ibid. 730. 

ATKYNS, Edward, Baron of the Exchequer, 
32 Car. 2. — His Charge to the Jiiry on the 
Trial of Thomas Thwing, and Mary Pres- 
sicks, for Treason, 7 vol. 1179. — His Speech 
on delivering his Opinion in the House of 
Lords, on the Trial of Lord Stafford, that it 
was unnecessary, in cases of Treason, that 



Chief Baron of the 

Exchequer, 2 Will, and Mary, 12 vol, 656, 
833, 1244. 

ATTERBURY, Francis, Bishop of Rochester. 
— Proceedings in Parliament against him, 
John Plunkett,and George Kelly, alias John- 
son, upon Bills of Pains and Penalties for a 
treasonable Conspiracy to restore the Pre- 
tender, 9 Geo. 1, 1723, 16 vol. 323.— Com- 
mittee of the House of Commons appointed 
to take Examinations of several persons in 
the Tower respecting the Conspiracy, ibid, 
ib. — Report of the Committee, ibid. 325. 
— ^The House resolve to bring in Bills of 
Pains and Penalties against them, ibid. 425. 
— The House of Commons refer the Report 
of the Committee to the House of Lords, 
ibid. 427. — Minutes of the progress of the 
Bills through the House of Commons, ibid« 
428. — Proceedings in the House of Lords, 
ibid. 438. — Report of the Committee of 
Lords, ibid. ib. — Proceedings respecting 
the Bill against Plunkett, ibid. 460.— The 
Bill, of Pains and Penalties against him, 
ibid. 468. — Proceedings respecting the Bill 
against Kelly, ibid. 469.— The Bill of Pains 
and Penalties against him, ibid* 476. — His 
Speech at the Bar of the House of Lords, 
ibid. 477. — Proceedings respecting the Bill 
against Bishop Atterbury, ibid. 490. — Sir 
C. Phipps*s Speech in his Defence, ibid. 
498.— Serjeant Wynne's Speech in his De- 
fence, ibid. 516. — ^The Bishop's Counsel 
produce Evidence against the Bill» ibid. 
570. — Sir C. Phipps recapitulates the Evi- 
dence, ibid. 573. — The Bishop's Speech in 
his own Defence, ibid. 585. — Reply of the 
Counsel for the Bill, ibid. 607.— The Bill is 
passed, ibid. 640. — Bill of Pains and Penal- 
ties against Bishop Atterbury, ibid. 644. — 
The Bishop quits the Kingdom, ibid. 646. — 
Speech of Dr. Willis, Bishop of Salisbury, 
in favour of the Bill against Atterbury, ibid, 
ib. — ^The Duke of Wharton's Speech against 
it, ibid. 664. — Remarkable Anecdote re- 
specting the Duke of Wharton*s Speech on 
this occasion, ibid. 693. 



ftit g^ATE I'kfALS. 



ATTWOdt>, William.— His Exatninatioh of 
the Authorities quoted by Lord Chief Justice 
Herbert^ m the Case of Sir Edward Hales, 
upon the subject of the King's Dispensing 
Pdwer^li yol.|1280. 

AUDLEY, Mervin Lord.— His Trial in the 

House of Lords for Rape and Sodomy, 7 

Car. 1, 1631, 3 voL 401. — Points resolved 

at a coosultatioh of the Judges ptevrous to 

tbe Trial, ibid. 409. — ^Three Indictments 

found against him, one for Rape on his 

Wife, the tWo others for Sodomy with a 

Man, ibid^ 401. — ^The Indictments, ibid. 

406.— He pleads Ifot Guilty, ibid. 408.~ 

The Lord High Steward's Charge to the 

Lords, ibid. ib« — The Attortiey Generars 

Speech, ibid, ib.^— The Evidence against 

lillil, ibid. 41(j.— His Defence, ibid. 415.— 

Is fdtmd Guiity on all tbe Indictments, and 

sentenced t6 be hanged, ibid. 416. — His 

Execution, ibid. 417.'^He denies his guilt 

on the scalTold, ibid. ib. — Confession of his 

Servants at their Execution, ibid. 421. — If 

he iiad Stood Inute upon the Indictment for 

Rape he tvotild have entitled himself to the 

benefit of Clergy as to that offence, 13 vol. 

1032 (note). 

AUDLEY, Sif Thomas, Lord Chancellor.— 
He presides on the Commission for the Trial 
0^ Sir Thomas More> I vol. 387. 

AVONMORE, Lord. See Yelverton, Barry, 
Lord* 

AXTEL, Daniel, 5 vol. 971. See Regicides. 



BABlNGTON, Anthony. — Indicted ^ith 
Ghidiock Titchbume, Thomas Salisbury, 
ftobert Bamewell, John Savage, Henry 
I)own, and John Ballard, for High Treason, 
in conspiring to kill the Queen, at the insti- 
piion of the Papists, 28 Eliz., 1586, 1 vol. 
1127.— They all plead Guilty, ibid. 1135.— 
Babidgton*s Letter to the Queen after his 
condemnation, ibid. 1140.— Their cfuel 
Execution, ibid. 1158. — Mary Queen of 
Scots accused of being privy to Babington's 
Treason, ibid. 1173.— His Letter to Mary 
Queen of Scots, ibid. 1174. 

BACON, Sir Francis, Solicitor General.— His 
Speech for the Prosecution on the Trial of 
Lord Sanquire, for Murder, 3 vol. 750. — 
His Argument in the House of Commons 
in support of the Prerogative of the Crown 
to impose Taxes without the interference of 
Parliament, ibid. 395. — His Argument in 
the Eiebequer Chamber as Counsel for 
Calvin, in the Case of the Postnati, ibid. 



- Attorney General. — His 

Speech in the Star-chamber^ on the Prose- 
cution of Mr. James Whitelocke, for giving 
an opinion as Counsel against the King's 
Prerogative, 2 vol. 706. — His Speech before 
a Select Council, aaainst the Countesii of 
Shrewsbtity, fot tefuslng to answer Questions 



before the Privy Cottncil, ibid. 776.— fiis 
Speech in the Star-chamber against Mr. St. 
John, for publishing a Paper against Be- 
nevolences, ibid. 902. — His Speech for the 
Prosecution on the Trial of the Earl of 
Somerset, for the Murder of Sir Thomas 
Overbury, ibid. 909.-^Speech intended to 
have been made by him on the Trial of the 
Countess of Somerset for the same Murder, 
ibid. 957. — His Speech in the Star-chamber 
on opening the Cfharge against Sir Thomas 
Hollis and others, for traducing public 
Justice, ibid. 1021. — His Speech in the Star- 
chamber in the Case of Duels, ibid. 1034. — 
His Letters to James the First respecting 
Peacham^s Case, ibid. 871. — He is said by 
Home Tooke to have been the first Attorney 
General who was permitted to sit in the 
House of Commons^ 20 vol. 696. 

BACON, Francis, Lord Verulam, Viscount St. 
Albans^ Lord Chaneellor.-^His account of 
the Proceedings against Sir William Stanley, 
1 vol. 280. — His Speech on presenting the 
Petition of Grievances to James 1st, 2 vol. 
531.— Proceedings against bim for Bribery 
and Corruption in the execution of his office 
of Lord Chancellor, 18 and 19 Jac. 1, 1620, 
ibid. 1087* — Report of the Committee of 
tbe House of Commons, ibid. ib. — Second 
Report of the Committee, ibid. 1090. — 
Debate in the House of Commons, ibid. 
1092. — Message from the King to the Com- 
mons, recommending a Commission to ex- 
amine the charge, ibid. 1094. — The charges 
against Lord Ekcon opened at a Conference 
between the Lords and Commons, ibid. 
1097. — Particulars of the Charges against 
him, ibid. llOl. — He sends ft general^ Sub- 
mission to the Lords, ibid. 1102. — To which 
they object, ibid. 1105^ — He sends a par- 
ticular Confession of each of the Charges, 
ibid. ib. — ^Judgment against him, ibid. 1112. 
— His Letter to the King, praying a remis- 
sion of the punishment, ibia. 1113 (note). — 
The King pardons him, ibid. ib. — He dies 
in great poterty, ibid. 1114, 

BACON, Francis^ Judge of K. B.| 20 Car. 2, 

4 vol. 666. 

BAD BY, John, — Proceedings against him for 
Heresy, 10 Hen. 4, 1409, 1 vol. 219* — 
Articles of his Opinions, ibid. 220. — His 
Answers to them, ibid. 223. — On his re- 
fusing to recant he is declared a Heretic, 
and delivered to the Secular Power, ibid. 
225. — He is executed at Smithfield, ibid.ib. 

BAILEY, Dr. Thomas.— Extracts from the 
Life of John Fisher, Bishop of Rochester, 
ascribed to him, 1 vol. 398. — This Life was, 
in fact, written by Dr. Richard Hall| ibid. 
397. 

6AILLI£| David. — ^The Proceedings before 
the Lords of the Council in Scotland against 
bim,. for defamine the Duke of Queensberry 
and the Marquis of AnandalC; 3 Anoe, 



8 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



ir04, 14 vol. 1035.— His first Examination 
before the Council, in which he charges the 
Duke and Marquis with soliciting him to 
depose against the Duke of Hamilton and 
others, ibid. ib. — His second Examination 
before the Council, ibid. 1036.— Written 
Interrogatories delivered to him, with his 
partial answers thereto, ibid. 1037. — Entries 
from the Council Records at Edinburgh 
respecting these Proceedings, ibid. 1040. — 
TheJ-ibel,ibid. 1043.— His Answers thereto, 
ibid. 1047.— Reply of the Queen's Advocate, 
ibid. 1051.— The Lords of the Council find 
the libel Proven, and pass Sentence upon 
him, ibid. 1053.— The Sentence was not 
carried into complete execution, ibid. 1056. 
— ^Further particulars respecting this Case, 
from Lord Fountainhall, and other Works, 
ibid. 1055.— Letters alluded to in the Pro- 
ceedingSy ibid. 1057. 

BAILLIE,Robert,dff Jerviswood.— His Trial 
at Edinburgh for High Treason, 36 Car. 2, 
1684, 10 vol. 647.— The Indictment, ibid, 
ib.— He pleads Not Guilty, ibid. 666.— 
Evidence against him, ibid. 668. — His 
Counsel object to the Evidence of one of 
the Witnesses against him that he is Particeps 
Criminis/ ibid, ib.— The Court overrule the 
Objection, ibid . 671 .—The King's Advocate's 
Address to the Inquest, ibid. 701. — He is 
found Guilty, and executed, ibid. 709.— His 
Dying Speech, ibid. 719.— Wodrow's Ac- 
count of this Case, ibid. 711. — ^Wodrow's 
Account of the Proceedings of the Council 
against him some years before, ibid. 650 
(note). — Burnet's Account of this Case, ibid. 
647 (note). — Entries in Fountainhall's De- 
cisions concerning it, ibid. 655 (note). 

BAILLIE, CapUin Thomas.— His Memorial 
to the Cojsimissioners and Governors of 
Greenwich Hospital, respecting certain 
abuses in the Hospital, 21 vol. 1.— His 
Letter to Lord Sandwich, then First Lord of 
the Admiralty, with his Memorial, ibid. 9. — 
Proceedings in the Court of lying's Bench on 
a Motion for a Criminal Information against 
him, for a Libel contained in the Memorial, 
18 Geo. 3, 1778, ibid. 10.— Mr. Bearcroft's 
Speech on showing cause against the Rule 
for a Criminal Information, ibid. 11. — Mr. 
Peckham's Speech on the same side, ibid. 
23. — Mr. Erskine's Speech on the same 
side, ibid. 31. — Speech of the Solicitor 
General in support of the Motion, ibid. 45. 
—Mr. Newnham's Speech on the same side, 
ibid. 57. — Mr. Macdonald's Speech on the 
same side, ibid. 61. — Lord Mansfield delivers 
the Judgment of the Court, discharging the 
Rule with Costs, ibid. 66.— Captain BailUe's 
Evidence before a Committee of the House 
of Lords, upon an Enquiry into the abuses 
at Greenwich Hospital, ibid. 76, 125, 128, 
190, 216, 229, 234, 247, 251, 379. 

]9A1RD|TK.oin«s. Se« M'Iare% Akxtaukr. 



BALDWIN, Sir John, Chief Justice of C. P., 
26 Hen. 8, 1 vol. 398. r 

BALDWIN, Sir Samuel, King's Serieant.-— 
His Speech for the Prosecution, on the Xrial 
of Ireland and others, for Treason, 7 vol. 
85. 

BALE, Sir John. See Hastings^ Henry. 

BALLARD, John. See Bahhigtoth AfUhany. 

BALMERINO, Arthur, Lord.— His Trial in 
the House of liOrds for High Treason, m 
being concerned in the Rebellion of ir45, 
20 Geo. 2, 1746, 18 voL 441. — See Kilmar- 
nock, WUliamy Earl of, 

BALMERINO, John, Lord.— His Trial in 
Scotland, for a libel, 10 Car. 1, 1634, 3 vol. 
592.— Observations on this Prosecution, 
from Laing's History of Scotland, ibid. ib. 
(note).— The Indictment against him, ibid- 
596.— The libel, ibid. 604.— Objections to 
the relevancy of the Indictment by the 
Defendant'sCoun8el,ibid.610.— AChallenge 

of a juror for partiality admitted, ibid. 690. 
— His Depositions before the Council, ibid. 
694.— He is found Guilty by a plurality of 
voices, and sentenced to death, out is par- 
doned by the King, ibid. 712.— Conduct of 
one of the Jurors, ibid. 594 (note). 

BALMERINOTH, Lord.— His Trial for High 
Treason at St. Andrew's, 7 Jac. 1, 1609, 
2 vol. 721*— Tlie Jury find him Guilty, ibid. 
724. — He receives a pardon, ibid. ib. 

BAMBRIDGE, Thomas, Warden of the 
Fleet,— Report of the Committee of the 
House of Commons, appointed to inquire 
into the state of Gaols, against him, 17 vol. 
297. — Resolutions of the House thereupon, 
ibid. 308. — The House resolve to address 
the King to direct the Attorney General to 
prosecute him, ibid. ib. — His Trial at the 
Old Bailey, for the Murder of Robert Castell, 
ibid. 383. — Evidence against him, ibid. 386. 
— He is acquitted, ibid. 395. — Account of 
the Proceedings in the King's Bench on an 
Appeal brought against him and Richard 
Corbett by Castelrs wife, ibid. ib. — ^Their 
Trial on the Appeal, 4 Geo. 2, 1730, ibid. 
397. — Speeches of the Counsel for the 
Appellant, ibid. ib. — Evidence for the 
Appellant, ibid. 403. — Serjeant Darnell's 
Speech for the Appellees, ibid. 430. — Ser- 
jeant Eyre's Speech for the Appellees, ibid. 
433. — Evidence for the Appellees, ibid. 
435. — Reply of the Appellant's Counsel, 
ibid. 450.— CShief Justice Raymond's Charge 
to the Jury, ibid. 452. — They are acquitted, 
ibid. 462. — Proceedings in the King's Bench 
on an application by him to be admitted to 
Bail upon a charge of Felony, ibid. 563. — At 
the Old Bailey Sessions the Recorder (Sir 
William Tliompson), being a member of the 
House of Commons, by ^rhom the Prosecu- 
tion was ordered, refuses to try him, 
ijbid, 565^— The Tri«A postponctd till th« 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



9 



next Sessions, \vhen it is again pat off, 
and the Prisoner is bailed, ibid. 571. — ^At 
the following Sessions the Trial is still 
further postponed, at the instance of the 
King*s Counsel, and his bail are continued, 
ibid. ib.—His Trial for Felony at the Old 
Bailey Sessions, 3 Geo. 2, 1729, ibid. 581. 
—Opening Speeches of the Counsel for the 
Prosecution, ibid. 583. — Evidence for the 
Prosecution, ibid. 589. — The Prisoner de- 
cUdcs making any Defence, ibid. 611. — 
Chief Justice Eyre's Charge to the Jury, 
ibid. 612, — ^Tlie Jury acquit hiro, ibid. 617. 
—Proceedings of a Committee of the House 
of Commons respecting a Charge made 
against Chief Justice Eyre, of having visited 
and supplied him with Money while in 
gaol, ibid. 619. See Huggim, John, 

BANBURY, Charles, Lord. See Knowks, 
Charles, 

BANCROFT, Richard, Archbishop of Canter- 
bury. — ^Articles of Complaint exhibited by 
him, in the name of the Clergy, against the 
Judges, 3 Jac. 1, 1605, 2 vol. 131. 

BANGOR, John Warren, Bishop of.— -His 
Trial at Shrewsbury, with Hugh Owen, John 
Roberts, John Williams, and Thomas Jones, 
for a Riot and Assault, 36 Geo. 3, 1790, 
26 vol. 463. — ^Abstract of the Indictment, 
ibid. ib. — Mr. Adam's Speech for the Prose- 
cution, ibid. 464.— Evidence for the Prose- 
cution, ibid. 479. — Mr. Erskine's Speech 
for the Defendants, ibid. 506. —Mr. Justice 
Heath's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 523.— The 
Jury acquit all the Defendants, ibid. 528. 

BANKES, Sir John, Attorney General.— His 
Argument for the King in the Case of Ship 
Money, 3 vol. 1014.— His Speech on the 
Trial of Thomas Harrison, for insulting Mr. 
Justice Hutton on the Bench, ibid. 1374. 

BANNANTYNE, John. See Green, Thomas, 

BARBOT, John.— His Trial in the Island of 
St. Christopher for the Murder of Matthew 
Mills, esq., by killing him in a Duel, 26 
Geo. 3, 1753, 18 vol. 1229.— The Indict- 
ment, ibid. ib. — He pleads Not Guilty, ,ibid. 
1231. — Speech of the Solicitor General for 
the Prosecution, ibid. 1235. — Evidence for 
the Prosecution, ibid. 1248. — ^The Prisoner's 
Defence, ibid. 1281* — Evidence for him, 
ibid. 1284. — ^The Prisoner's Summing-up of 
his Evidence, ibid. 1290. — Reply of the 
Solicitor General, ibid. 1296. — Charge of 

. the Court to the Jury, ibid. 1304.— -The 
Jury find him Guilty, ibid. 1317. — Sentence 
of Death is passed upon him, ibid. ib. — His 
Address to the Court after his Sentence, 
ibid. 1318.— He is executed, ibid. 1321. — 

, Account of him, ibid. ib. 

BARGENY, John, Lord. — Proceedings agaius 1 
him in Scotland for Treason, 32 Car. 2, 
1680, 11 vol. 65.— The Indictment, ibid, 
ib.— Th« Privy Council order him to be set 



at liberty on his giving surety for bis Appear- 
ance, ibid. 74. 

BARKER, Humphrey. See Sacheverell, Win, 

BARKSTEAD, Colonel John, 5 vol. 971. 
See Regicides, 

BARNARD, William.— His Trial at the Old 
Bailey for sending a threatening Letter, in 
a fictitious name, to Charles, Dcdce of Marl- 
borough, 31 Geo. 2, 1758, 19 vol. 815.— 
The Indictment, ibid. ib. — ^Serjeant Davy's 

. Speech for the Prosecution, ibid, ib.— Evi- 
dence of the Duke for the Prosecution, ibid. 
824. — Other Evidence for the Prosecution, 
ibid. 830.— Evidence for the Defence, ibid. 
833.— Serjeant Davy's Reply, ibidi 841.— 
The Jury acquit the Prisoner, ibid. 846. 

BARNARDISTON, Sir Samuel.— Proceedings 
in an Action by him against Sir William 
Soame, Sheriff of Suffolk, for a double Re- 
turn to a Writ for the Election of a Member 
of Parliament, 26 Car. 2, 1674, 6 vol. 1063. 
—The Record, ibid, ib— A Writ of Error 
is brought in the Exchequer Chamber, and 
the Judgment in the Court of King's Bench 
is reversed, ibid. 1070. — Reasons of Ellis 
and Atkins, Justices, for their opinion that 
the Judgment should be affirmed, ibid. ib. — 
Chief Justice North's Argument that tlie 
Judgment should be reversed, ibid. 1092. 
— He brings a Writ of Error in the House 
of Lords, ibid. 1117.— Roger North's His- 
tory of the motives for this Writ of Error, 
14 vol. 719 (note).— The Reversal is a^rmed 
in the House of Lords, ibid. 1119. — ^The 
Counsel who argued this Case for the De- 
fendant in the Court of King's Bench were 
afterwards made Judges, and decided the 
Case in the Exchequer Chamber, 14 vol. 
745.— His Trial for a scandalous and se- 
ditious Libel, 36 Car. 2, 1684, 9 vol. 1333. — 
The Indictment, ibid. 1336 (note).— Evi- 
dence against him, ibid. 1341. — The Chief 
Justice's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 1351. — 
The Jury find him Guilty, ibid. 1358.-*Pro 
ceedings on a Motion in arrest of Judgment, 
ibid. 1357^ — Mr. Williams*s Speech in sup- 
port of the Motion, ibid. 1358. — ^The Mo- 
tion is refused, ibid. 1367. — He is sentenced 
to pay a fine of 10,000/., ibid. 1369.— Mr. 
Emlyn's Remark upon the extravagance of 
this sentence, 1 vol. xxxvi. 

BARNES, Henry. See Green, Thomas, 

BARNEWELL, Robert. See Babington, 
Anthony,. 

BAROVERSE, Sir James. See BwUigh, Sir 
Simon, 

BARRINGTON, The Hon. Daines, Justice of 
the Great Session of the County of Denbigh, 
21 vol. 847.<— His Remark upon Lord Coke*s 
Parliamentary Conduct,- 3 vol. 81 (note). — 
His Observations upon the Punishment of 
the Pillory, 7 vol. 1209 (noteX 

BARTQN> £U«ahetb> the Holy Maid of KenU 



Xo 



OEi^AiiAL li^bSx t6 



—4 ¥bl. 881 (flotfe), 1^83. See Fkfier, John, 
Bithop of Bochester, 

BASrWtCK, Dr. Johhi— Proceedings in the 
Star Chaitiber against him for several Libels^ 
13 Car. 1, 1637, 3 vol.711. Sbq PtytinCy 
WUUam, 

BATEMAN^ Charles.—His Trial at the Old 
Bailejr for High Treason, t Jac. 1, 1685, 
11 tol. 467.— He pleads Not Ouil^, ibid. 
469<— ^The Indictment, ibid* ib. — He is 
found Guilty and executed, ibid. 474. — Sir 
John Hawles's Remarks upon his Trial, 
ibid^ 473. 

fiAt£$, Johii.— The Great Case of Imposi- 
tions, on ah Information in the Exchequer 
against him, 4 Jac. 1, 1606, ^ vol. 3f I. 

fiAtHtJftST, Charles.— Proceedings in the 
Hoiise of Lords, and in the tlouse of Com- 
mons on his Case, respecting the Right of 
Judicature iii the latter, ^ Anne, 11^04| 14 
vol. 889. 

BATHURST, Henry, King's Counsel*— His 
Speech for the Prosecution on the Trial of 
Mary Blandy, for the Murder df her father, 
18 ToL 1180«-^Hi8 Reply in the same Case, 
ibid. 11684 

fiATHtJRST, Henry, Earl, Lord Chancellor. 
— He is appointed Lord High Steward on 
the Trial of the Duchess of Kingston for 
Bigamy, 20 voL 358. 

BATTRAGH, Williata. See Chadwick, Thos. 

Baxter, Richard.— HIs Trial at Guildhall 
for a seditious Libel, 1 Jac. 2, 1685, 11 vol. 
493.r-Tlie Information, ibid.ib. — Jefferies's 
abusive treatment of his Counsel, ibid. 498. 
— Account of this Trial, from Fox''s History, 
ibid. 497 (note). — He is found Guilty, ibid. 
502.-^The Court fine him 500/. and order 
him to find security for seven years, ibid. ib. 

bayard. Colonel Nicholas*— -His Trial in 
ihe Province of New York for High Treason, 
14 Wm. 3, 1702, 14 vol. 471.— His Com- 
mitment by the Lieutenant Governor and 
the Council, ibid. 473. — Special Com- 
mission, to try him tod John Hutchins, ibid. 
476«-^C6nduCt df the Court respeotmg the 
Grand Jury, ibid. 477. — ^The Prisoners' 
Counsel move to quash the Indictment, 
eight of the nineteen Grand Jurors having 
been against finding the Bill, ibid. 478. — 
The Motion is refused, ibid. 486. — The In- 
dictment, ibid. 482. — He pleads Not Guilty, 
ibid. 483. — Evidence against him, ibid« 
487**— Mr. Nicholas Defence of him, ibid. 
495. — Mr. Emot's Speech for him, ibid. 498. 
—The Jury find him Guilty, ibid. 505.— His 
Counsel move in arrest of Judgment, ibid. 
606. — ^Tbe Court [overrule the Objections, 
ibid. 508, 515. — Sentence of Death is passed 
upon him, ibid. 516. — His Attainder was 
afterwards reversed, ibid. ib. 

BAYKBSi Jobnj Serjeatit-6t-Lftw*--His l^peeeh 



in Defence of Williflm Hales, oii his ¥tial 
for Forgery, 17 vol. 190. — His Speech for 
the Crown, in the Case of theQdo Warraiito 
to try the rights of the Election of Freetaen 
for the Port of Ne^ Romney, ibid. 825. 

BAYNTON, Sarah. See Swendsen, Huagen,-^ 
Her Trial, with John Hartwell and John 
Spurr, at the Queen's Befnch, for forcibly 
carrying away Pleasant Rawlins, and pro- 
curing her to be married to Haagen Swetid- 
sen, 1 Anne, 1702, 14 vol. 597.— They plead 
Not Guilty, ibid, ib.— The Counsel for the 
Proseeution opefi the Case, ibid, ibj — -Evi- 
dence against the Prisoners, ibid. 599. — 
Their Defence^ ibid. 610. — Evidetiee ia 
reply, ibid. 636.— Chief Justice Holt's 
Charge to the Jury, ibid. ib.-i-Tl}e Jury find 
Mrs* Baynton Guilty, but acquit HariweU 
and Spurr, ihid. 630v — Judgment of the 
Court upon Mrs. Baynton, ibid. 634. — tJpon 
her statifig herself to be with child, a Jtify 
of Matrons is impimelled, wlto return that 
she is quick with child, ibid^ ib.-^Shd is 
reprieved, ibid. ib< 

BEARCROFT, Edward^ Counsel, 21 Tdl. 
498, 22 vol. 183, 380, 791, 986, 24 vol. 338. 
His Speech in the Court of King's Bench on 
Shewing Cause against a Rule for a Criminal 
Information against Captain Baillie, 21 toI. 
11. — He is examined in the House of Lords 
respecting a negotiation between Captain 
Baillie and Lord Sandwich, for a compro- 
mise, ibid. 408.— His Speech for the Prose- 
cution on the Trial of the Dean of St. 
Asaph, ibid. 885. — His Speech in Defence 
of Bembridge, 22 vol. 49. — His Argument 
in support of a Motion for a new Trial' in 
Bembridge's Case, ibid. 77. 

BEASLEY, Richard. See Mmenger, Fetet, 

BEAUCHAMP, John. See Burleigh, Sir 
Simon. 

BEAUFORT, Henry, Bishop of Winchester 

Proceedings against him for Treason, 4 Hen. 
6, 1426, 1 vol. 267. — Articles of accusation 
preferred against him in Parliament by 
Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester, with his 
Answers tnereto, ibid. 270. — He is acquitted, 
ibid. ib. 

BECKETT, Thomas.— Impleaded by John 
Marshall, in the Archbishop^s Court, 9 Hen. 
2, 1163, 1 vol. l.-^Mannall removes the 
suit into the King's Court, and procures the 
King's Writ, requiring Beckett to answer 
there, ibid, ib.— Beckett sends an excuse, 
ibid. 2. — Accused of Treason in the Council, 
for not obeying the Kinsc's Writ, and con- 
demned, ibid. 3. — His Disputes with the 
King and Bishops thereupon, ibid. 5. — 
Another s^ccount of his Trial, by Quad- 
rilogus, ibid. 8.— He claims exemption 
from secular authority, and appeals to the 
Pope, ibid. 12. 

BEDFORD, George Netille, Duke of.---His 



THE STAfE TftlALS. 



Degradation fr6m th6 t'eerage in the iteign 
of Edward the 4th, ^i vol. 169. 

BEDFORD, Earl of;-— Proceeding^ in the Star 
Chamber, oh an Information against him, 
the Earl of Clare, the Earl of Somerset, Sir 
Robert Cotton, John Selden, Olirer St. 
John, and others, for publishing a scandalous 
and seditious Writing, 6 Car. 1, 1630, 3 vol. 
387. — Opinion as to the cause of this Pro- 
secution, ibid. ib. (note). — ^The Writing, ibid. 
389. — ^The Proceedings put an end to by 
the King, ibid. 397.--The Earl of Bedford's 
Answer to the Information, ibid. 398. 

BEDLE, Edward. See Mestenger, Peter, 

BEDLOW, William. — His Examinations, 
taken before a Committee of I/ords, appoint- 
ed to inquire into the Murder of Sir Ed- 
mondbury Godfrey, 6 vol. 1486. — His Ex- 
amination concerning the Popish Plot, taken 
at Bristol by Chief Justice North shortly before 
his death, ibid. 1493. — His Evidence on the 
Trial of Green and others, for the Murder 
of Sir Edmondbury Godfrey, 7 vol. 1 79. — His 
Evidence on the Trial of Samuel Atkins for 
being accessary to the Murder, ibid. 242. — 
His Evidence on the Trial of Whitebread 
and others for Treason, in being concerned 
in the Popish Plot, ibid, 344,—His Evidence 
on 'the Trial of Richard Langhorne, ibid. 
436. — His Evidence on the Trial of Sir 
George Wakeman, ibid. 631. 

BEGG, John.— His Trial at Dublin for High 
Treason in being concerned in the Irish 
Itisurrection, under a Special Commission of 
Oyer and Terminer, 43 Geo. 3, 1803, 28 vol. 
849. — The Indictment, ibid, ib.— Evidence 
for the Prosecution, ibid. 853. — Mr. Mac- 
Nally's Speech in his Defence, ibid. 860. — 
Evidence for the Prisoner, ibid. 864. — Mr. 
BalFs Speech on summing up the Evidence 
for the Prisoner, ibid. 868. — Reply of the 
Solicitor General, ibid. 877-— The Jury find 
him Guilty, ibid. 886. 

BELKNAP, Sir Robert, Chief Justice of C. P. 
— He is arrested for Treason, with Sir Roger 
Fulthorp, Sir John Carey, Sir John Holt, 
Sir William Burleigh, and John Locton, the 
King's Serjeant, while sitting in their places 
as Justices, 11 Ric. 2, 1388, 1 vol. 100.— 
They are charged with giving false answers 
to certain questions proposed to them by 
Richard II. respecting the validity of the 
Commission issued to Gloucester's Faction 
by Act of the Parliament, ibid. 106. — Belk- 
nap refuses to answer the Questions pro- 
posed to him until obliged, by the Duke of 
Ireland and the Earl of Suffolk to do so, 
ibidil06 (note). — His Exclamation on setting 
his Seal to the Answers, ibid. ib. — ^They are 
impeached by the Commons for signing the 
Answers, ibid. 119. — ^They plead that Ihey 
did so by constraint, ibid. ib. — ^Judgment 
is given against them to be drawn and 
banged^ ibid. 120. — At the intercession of 



11 



certain Lords their lives are spared, and 
they are banished for life to Ireland, ibkl. 
ib.^ — ^Lord Chancellor Ellesmere, in his argu- 
ment in the Case of the tostnati, says, that 
Belknap was banished in coflsequenee of 
the power of his enemies, and not the 
greatness of his offence, 2 vol. 677. — Re- 
marks upon ^this Case by Mr. St. John, in 
his Speech in the House of Lords against 
the Judges, for their conduct in the Case of 
Ship Moneyi ibid< 1276.— See TresiU^n, 
Robert. 

BELLAMY, Jerome. See Abmgton^ EduxiH* 

BELLASIS, John. See Stt^ord, William, 
Viscount, 

BELWOOD, Roger, Counsel, f toL 492, 
833, 887, 1166. 

BEMBRIDGE, Charles.— Proceedings on an 
Information filed against him by the Attorney 
General for a Misdemeanour, in fraudulently 
concealing Items in the Accountu <»f the 
Paymaster Getieral, 83 fc 24 G^o. 8, 1763, 
22 vol. 1. — Extracts from the Minutes of 
the Board of Treasury, telating to th^se 
Proceedings, ibid, ib* — Opitiion Of the 
Attorney and Solicitor General, advising the 
Prosecution of Bembridge, ibid. 14.-^The 
Information, ibid. 15. — Speech of the Solici- 
tor General for the Prosecution, ibid. 29. — 
Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 33.— 
Mr. Bearcroft's Speech for the Defendant, 
ibid. 49.— Evidence for the Defendant, ibid. 
61.— Reply of the Solicitor General, ibid. 
67. — Lord Mansfield's Charge to the Jury, ' 

ibid. 74 The Jury find him Guilty, ibid. 

77. — Proceedings on a Motion for a New 
Trial, and in Arrest of Judgment, ibid.ib. — 
Mr. Bearcroft*9 Argument on that occasion, 
ihidi ib.-^Mr. Scott's Argument on the 
same side, ibid. 90. — Mr. Erskine*s Argu- 
ment on the same side, ibid. 98. — Mr. 
Adam's Argument on the same side, ibid. 
112. — Argument of the Attorney General 
against the Motion for a New Trial, ibid. 
117. —Sir Thomas Davenport's Argument 
on the same side, ibid. 126. — Mr. Cowper's 
Argument on the same side^ ibid. 188* — Mr. 
Bearcroft's Reply, ibid. 138.— The Court 
refuse the Motion for a new Trial, and the 
Motion in Arrest of Judgment, ibid. 150. — 
Judgment of the Court upon him, ibid. 157. 

BENBOW, John. See Derln/, Jamds SfarUeyy 
Earl of. 

BENNETT, Henry. See Arlington^ Earl of. 

BENNETT, Sir John.— Proceedings in Par- 
liament against him for Bribery and Cor- 
ruption, 19 Jac. 1, 1621, 2 vol. 1145. — 
Charges against hitn, ibid. 1146. 

BENNETT) Ralph. See Saeheverellf WilHm. 

BENYON, George. — Proceedings in Parlia- 
ment against him for promoting a Petition 
from the City of London against the Ordi« 



12. 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



nance for the Militia, 18 Car. 1, 1642, 4 vol. 
141. — Articles of Impeachment against 
him, ibid. ib. — His Answer thereto, ibid. 
149. — Sentence against him, ibid. 151. 

fi£R£SFORD,Simonde,Kuight.— TheHouse 
of Lords pass Judgment of death upon him, 
at the suggestion of the King, for assisting 
Roger Mortimer, £arl of March, in his 
Treasons, 3 Edward 3, 1330, 1 vol. 54.— 
Record of the Judgment in this Case, 12 
vol. 1228. — ^Remarks upon this Case, 8 vol. 
236 (note). 

BERKELE, Thomas de. — Proceedings against 
him for the Murder of Edward 2nd, 1 vol. 
55.— Pleads Not Guilty, and puts himself 
on the Country, ibid. 56. — Acquitted by 
the Jury, ibid, ib.— His Case cited by Lord 
Hale as the only instance he ever knew of 
a Peer being tried by a Jury of the Country, 
12 vol. 1219 (note). 

BERKLEY, Robert, King's Seijeant.~His 

■ Argument in the King's Bench, on the 

l^turn of a Habeas Corpus sued out by 

AVilliam Stroud and others, in favour of tlie 

Validity of a commitment by certain Lords 

ofthe Privy Council, 3 vol. 244. 

BERKLEY, Sir Robert, Judge of K. B.— 
3 vol. 844. — His Argument in the Exchequer 
Chamber, in favour of Ship Money, 3 vol. 
1087. — Articles of Impeachment against 
him for his Judgment on that occasion, ibid. 
1283. 

BERNARDI, John, Major. — Proceedings 
against him and several other persons for 
being concerned in the Assassination Plot, 
8 Will. 3, 1696, 13 vol. 759.— His Life and 

' Adventures previous .to these Proceedings, 

. ibid . ib.— Particulars of his first acq^iaintance 
with Rookwood, ibid. 765.— A Reward is 
offered for |his apprehension, ibid. 766. — 
They are committed to Newgate, ibid. 767.— 
They apPty ^^^ their discharge, at a Session of 
Gaol Delivery, ibid. 768.— Several Acts of 
Parliament are passed to authorize their im- 
prisonment, ibid. 769, and (note). — Bernardi 
petitions Queen Anne for his liberty, without 

. success, ibid. 770.' — In the beginning of the 
Reign of George tlie 1st he and the others 
are brought into the Court of King's Bench 
by Habeas Corpus, and remanded, ibid. 
771. — Another Act of Parlianf\^nt is passed 
to continue tlieir Imprisonment during the 
King's pleasure, ibid. 772. — On the demise 
of George the 1st they are again brought 
into the Court of King's Bench by Habeas 
Corpus and remanded, ibid. 773. — ^Another 
Act of Parliament passed to continue their 
Imprisonment, ibid. 774. — ^They petition 
George the 2nd, ibid, ifc.— Bernardi s Peti- 
tions, ibid. 776.— His Wife's Petition, ibid. 
779. — He marries, and has 10 children 
during his confinement, ibid. 785. — He dies 
in Neweate at the age of 82, having been 

> eonfined about 40 years ibid. 788. 



BERRY, Henry.— See Greetiy Eohert. 

BERRY, John.— See Macdamd, Stephen. 

BERRY, Walter. — See Cdlender^ Jama 
Thompson. 

BERTIE, Vere, Baron of the Exchequer, 31 
Car. 2, 7 vol. 261. 

BERWICK, John.— His Trial for High Trea- 
son, in being concerned in the Rebellion of 
1745, 20 Geo. 2, 1746, 18 vol. 367.— He is 
found Guilty, ibid. 369.— -And executed, 
ibid. 370. 

BEST, William Draper, Serjeant at Law, 30 
vol., 966. — His Speech in tlie Court of Ad- 
miralty, in Defence of William Macfarlane, 
on his Trial for feloniously casting away the 
Brig Adventure, 28 vol. 286. — ^His Speech 
in Defence of Colonel Despard, on his Trial 
for High Treason, ibid. 434.— He is one of 
the Managers for the Commons on the Trial 
of the Impeachment of Lord Melville, 29 
vol. 606. — His Speech for the Prosecution, 
on the Trial of John Hatchard, for a Libel, 
32 vol. 685. 

BETHEL, Slingsby. See Pilkington, Thomas. — 
His Trial for an Assault on Robert Mason, and 

. for slanderous words, 33 Car. 2, 1681, 8 vol. 
747. — ^The Indictment,ibid. 748. — Evidence 
against him, ibid..749. — His Defence, ibid. 
762.— He is found Guilty, ibid. 758. — 
Judgment is arrested on the Count for 
.Slander, and he is fined five Marks for the 
Assault, ibid.ib. — Dryden's Character of him, 
ibid. 747 (note). 

BINNS, John. See (XCoigly, James.— His 
Trial at Warwick, for uttering seditious 
words, 37 Geo. 3, 1797, 26 vol. 595.— The 
Indictment, ibid, ib.— Mr. Perceval's Speech 
for the Prosecution, ibid. 598. — Evidence for 
the Prosecution, ibid. 602. — Mr. Romilly's 
Speech for the Defendant, ibid. 609. — Evi- 
dence for the Defendant, ibid. 622. — Mr. 
Perceval's Reply, ibid. 643. — Mr. Justice 
Ashhurst's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 649. — 
The Jufjr acquit him, ibid. 652. 

BIRD, James. — His Trial in Ireland, with 
Roger Hamill, Casiroir Delahoyde, Patrick 
Kenny, Bartholomew Walsh, Matthew Read, 
and Patrick Tieman, for conspiring to raise 
an Insurrection, 34 Geo. 3, 1794, 25 vol.749. 
— ^The Indictment, ibid. ib. — Evidence for 
the Prosecution, ibid. 751. — Mr. Curran's 
Speech in Defence of Bird, Hamill, and 
Delahoyde, ibid. 769. — Evidence for the 
Defence, ibid. 755. — Mr. Justice Downes 
charges^ the Jury, ibid. 781.— The Jury ac- 
quit all the Prisoners, ibid. 784. 

BLACK, David. — Proceedings against him 
and James Paterson, in Scotland, for Sedi- 
tion, and administering unlawful Oaths, 38 
Geo. 3, 1798, 26 vol. 1179.— The Indict- 
ment, ibid. ib. — Black's Declaration, ibid. 
1184.-*Paterson's Declaration, ibid. 1186. 
— Black is outlawed for not appearing,, ibid » 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



13 



1187. — Paterson is found Guilty, and sen- 
tenced to Transportation for five years^ ibid. 
1190. 

BLACKHEAD. See Spratt^ Dr. Thomas, 
Bi^ufp of Rochester. 

KLACKBURNE, Robert. See Bemardi, John, 

BLACKMORE, Sir Richard.-— Observations 
on his Style, 12 vol. 1299 (note). Extract 
from his History of the Assassination Plot, 
ibid. 1299. 

BLACKMORE, Robert. See Leach, Ihyden. 

BLACKSTONE, Sir William, Judge of C. P. 
^His Judgment, in the Court of Common 
Pleas, in the case of Brass Crosby, esq.. 
Lord Mayor of London, upon a commitment 
by the House of Commons, 8 vol. 36. — Lord 
£ilenborough*s Depreciation, and Lord Ers- 
kine's Vindication, of the Authority of his 
Commentaries, 20 vol. 798. 

BLACKWOOD, Robert. See Lowrky William, 

BLAGUE, William.— His Trial at the Old 
• Bailey, for High Treason, in being concerned 
in the Rye-House Plot, 35 Car. 2, 1683, 9 
vol. 653.--The Indictment, ibid. 637.— He 
is arraigned, with John Rouse, and pleads 
Not Guilty, ibid. 638.— Evidence against 
him, ibid. 654. — Jury acquit him, ibid. 666. 

BLAIR, Sir Adam. — ^Proceedings in Parlia- 
ment, against him and others, on an Im- 
peachment of High Treason, for dispersing 
a treasonable and seditious Paper, being a 
Declaration of James the 2nd, 1 and 2 Wil- 
liam and Mary, 1689—1690, 12 vol. 1207. 
—The Declaration is read, ibid. 1209. — 
Articles of Impeachment against them, ibid. 
1213. — ^The Articles are carried up to the 
House of Lords, ibid. 1217. — ^The Lords 
resolve to proceed with tlie Impeachment, 
ibid. 1230. — Answers to the Articles of Im- 
peachment, ibid. 1231. —They are held to 
bail by tiie House of Lords, ibid. 1234. 

BLAIR, Alexander. — Proceedings on an Assize 
of Error, against him and other Jurors, for a 
false Verdict, in acquitting a person indicted 
for Treason, 33 Car. 2, 1681, 11 vol. 75. — 
The Indictment, ibid, ib.— Objections to the 
Proceeding by the Advocates for the Pa- 
nels, ibid. 84.— Evidence against them, ibid. 
92. — ^Verdict of the Assize, ibid. 95. — Judg- 
ment against them, ibid. 99. — Fountain- 
hall's Account of this Proceeding, ibid. 100. 

BLAKE, John. — He is Impeached, with 
Thomas U8ke> of High Treason, for drawing 
up the Questions to which Belknap and the 
other Justices made answer, 11 Ric. 2, 1388, 
1 vol. 120.— They plead that they were of 
Counsel for the King, and what they did was 
by his command, ibid. 121.— They are found 
Guilty, and executed, ibid. ib. 

BLANDY, Mary.— Her Trial at Oxford for 
the Murder of her Father, 25 Geo. 2,;i752, 

18 Tol 1U7* Th« ^^dictmeat, ibid, ib*- 



She pleads Not Guilty, ibid. 11 19.-^Speeches 
of the Counsel for the Prosecution, ibid. 
1120. — Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 
1135. — ^The Prisoner's Defence, ibid. 1163. 
— Evidence for the Prisoner, ibid. 1164. — 
Mr. Baron Legge's Charge to the Jury, ibid, 
1 1 70.— The Jury find her Guilty, ibid. 1 187. 
^-Sentence of death is passed upon her, ibid. 
1188. — Account of her Conduct after Sen.* 
tence was passed, ibid. 1189. — ^Her Execu- 
tion, ibid. 1191. — Her Declaration at the 
place of Execution, ibid. 1193. 

BLENCOWE, Sir John, Judge of C. P. 4 Geo. 
1. — His Opinion in favour of the King's 
Prerogative, respecting the Marriage and 
Education of the Royal Family, 15 vol. 
1220. 

BLUNT, Sir Christopher.—His Trial, with Sir 
Charles Davis, Sir John Davis, Sir Gilly 
Merrick, and Henry Cuffe, for High Treason, 
43 Eliz. 1600, 1 vol. 1410.— The Indictment, 
ibid. 1416. — They inquire whether they may 
plead Not Guilty to a part, and confess tl^ 
residue, and are answered by the Court in 
the negative, ibid. 1410, 1417. — They plead 
Not Guilty, ibid, ib. — ^They are found Guilty, 
ibid. 1412, 1446. — ^Their Speeches before 
Judgment, ibid. 1447. — Chief Justice Pop- 
ham's Address, on pronouncing Sentence 
upon them, ibid. 1450. Sir C. Blunt and 
Sir C. Davis are beheaded, but the rest are 
executed at Tyburn, ibid. 1412. — ^Their 
Speeches at the place of Execution, ibid. ib. 

BOIG, James. See CargUl, Donald, 

BOLEYN, Anne, Queen of Henry the Eighth. 
— Her Trial, with her brother. Lord Roch- 
ford, for Treason, 28 Henry 8, 1536, 1 vol. 
409. — Observations on the different accounts 
of these Trials, ibid, ib.— Account of the 
Queen's Trial and Execution, from the Har- 
Ician Manuscripts, ibid. ib. — Causes of the 
King's dissatisfaction with her, ibid. 411. — 
Her conduct upon her Arrest, ibid, 413.-— 
Archbishop Cranmer's Letter to the King 
on her behalf, ibid. 415.— She is arraigned 
with the Lord Rochford, before their Peers, 
ibid. 417.— They are both found Guilty, and 
condemned to Death, ibid. 418. — Dispute 
respecting the Queen's Sentence, ibid, ib.— • 
Her Speech after her Condemnation, ibid. 
424. — ^Alleged Pre-contract between her 
and the Earl of Northumberland, ibid, ib.— 
The Earl of Northumberland denies such 
Pre-contract on his oath, ibid. 419, 426, 
434. — ^The Marriage between the King and 
Anne Boleyn declared null and void, ibid. 
419. — The Queen's last Letter to the King, 
ibid. 426. — Her Execution, ibid. 421. — 
Various Opinions respecting her, ibid, ib.— 
She was friendly to the Reformation, ibid. 
428. 

BOUNGBROKE, Henry, Lord Viscount.— 
Proceedings in Parliament, on an Impeach- 
ment and Act of Attainder against him, 1 and 
2 Geo, 1, 1715, 15 Yol, 993,— Artides of Im^' 



1 

I 

I 



14 



QENEJtAl4 INDEX TO 



peachqaentf ibi4- 094.*-Act of Attainder | 
passed, ibid. 1002. — He obtains a Pardon 
m>m Georg[e the First, ibid. 1003. — An Act 
of Parliament is passed^ enabling him to 
hold Lands, ibid. 1004, 

BOLRQN, Ilobert»-^Aecountof the Pamphlet 
published by him in 1680, by order of the 
Hqnse of Commons, entitled ** The Papist's 
Bloody Oath of Secrecy, and Litany of In- 
tercession for England ;" 7 vqI. 969 (note). 
His Evidence against Sir Thomas Gascoigne, 
on his Trial for High Treason, ibid. 970. — 
His Evidence on the Trial of Thomas Tbwing, 
and Mary Pfessicks, for High Treason, ibid. 
1164. 

BOLTON, John, See Crook, John, 

BOLTON, Sir Richard .—Lord Chancellor of 
Ireland, 16 Car. 1. See Jtatdiff^ Sir Oeorge* 

BOND, OUver.-r-His Trial at Dublin, under a 
Special Commission of Oyer and Terminer, 
for High Treason, in being concerned in 
the Irish Rebellion, 38 Geo. 3, 1798, 27 
vol. 523. — ^The Indictment, ibid. 527. — 
His Counsel move to postpone his Trial, 
on the ground that Statements tending 
to prejudice the Jury had appeared in the 
Newspapers, and that ' a material Witness 
vras absent, ibid. 531.^ — ^The Court refuse the 
Motion, ibid. 534.-^The Attorney GeneraKs 
Speech for the Prosecution, ibid. 536. — Evi- 
dence for the Prosecution, ibid. 542. Mr. 
Curraa's Speech in bis Defence, ibid. 574. — 
Evidence for the Prisoner, ibid. 579. — Evi- 
dence in Reply, for the Prosecution, ibid. 
586. — Mr. Ponsonby's Speech, on summing 
up the Evidence for the Prisoner, ibid. 588. 
— Mr. Saurin's Reply for the Prosecution, 
ibid. 594. — Mr. Justice Chamberlain's 
Charge to the Jury, ibid. 602.— The Jury 
find him Ouilty, ibid. 611,— Sentence is 
passed upon him. — ibid, ib« — He receives 
a conditional Pardon, ibid. 613.— Proceed- 
ings against him in 1793 by the Irish House 
of Xordsji for a Breach of Privilege, ibid, 523 
(note), 

BONIFACE, Archbishop of Canterbury.— 
Articuii Cleri, or Articles of Grievances, 
exhibited by him, on behalf of the Clergy of 
England, in the reign of Henry the ard, 2 
voLiai, 

BONNER, Edmund, Bishop of London.— Pro- 
ceedings against him for opposing the Re- 
formation, 1 and 3 Edw. 6, 1547—1550, 
1 vol. 631. -^Commissioners appointed by 
the King, to swear him to his Renunciation 
of the Pope, and his Obedience to the King, 
ibid. ib.-*The Commissioners deliver certain 
InjunctioBS and Homilies to him, which he 
receives with a Protestation that he will ob. 
MTVfl them, if they are not contrary to the law 
of the Church, ibid. ib. — He renounces this 
PffHeatation, ibid. 633.*-His Letter to the 
Bishop of Westminster, with the Order of the 
CorumII for the abolitiou of Candles, and 
^)m» SftBtth CtnoiMiteiy ibid» 635.*«p-His 



Letter to the same, with the Order f»r the 
abolition of Images, ibid. 637, I^etter from 
the King andCounciltohim, commanding the 
abolition of Masses at St. Paul's, ibid. 643. 
— His Letter to the Dean and Chapter of St. 
Paul's therewith, ibid. -ib. — Letter from the 
King and Council to him, charging him t9 
be more diligent in the use of the Common- 
Prayer Book within his Diocese, ibid. 647. — 
His Letter to the Deanand Chapter of St.Paul's 
thereupon, ibid. 648.— He is commanded 
to preach at Paul's Cross on a particular 
Sunday, and the heads of his Sermon are 
prescribed to him, ibid. 649. — He disregards 
this Injunction, and preaches in favour of 
Popery, ibid. 653. — Bill of Complaint against 
him, presented to the King by Hooper and 
Latimer, ibid. ib. — Commission to Cranmer, 
and others to examine him, ibid. 655.— His 
behaviour before the Commissioners, ibid. 
656.— Proceedings against him under the 
Commission, ibid. 658. — Sentence of Depri- 
vation passed upon him, ibid. 708.— He is 
committed to Prison, ibid. 710. — He appeals 
to the King, ibid. 712. — Restored to his 
Dignities by Queen Mary, ibid. 713. — His 
Conduct after his Restoration, ibid. ib. — His 
unfeeling behaviour to Cranmer, ibid. 804, 
809. 

BONNJiT, Major Slede.^His Trial, with 
several others, at theCourtof Vice-Admiralty, 
at Charlestown, in South Carolina, for Piracy, 
5 Geo. 1, 1718, 15 vol. 1231.— The Judge's 
Charge to the Grand Jury, ibid. 1232.— The 
Indictnient, ibid. 1241. — Bonnet escapes 
from Prison, and the others are tried with- 
out him, ibid. 1243. — ^Tlie Counsel for the 
Prosecution open the Case, ibid. 1242. — 
Evidence against them, ibid. 1249. — They 
are found Guilty, ibid. 1256% — ^Trials of 
other Prisoners belonging to the same Ship, 
ibid. ib. — Sentence of death is passed upon 
them,ibid. 1285. — Bonnet's Trial, ibid.1291. 
Evidence against him, ibid. ib. — He is found 
Guilty, ibid. 1297. — Sentence of death is 
passed upon him, ibid. 1298.— He is exe- 
cuted, ibid. 1302, 

BOOTLE, Thomas, Counsel, 15 vol 1331.-- 
His Speech in Defence of Richard Francklin, 
his Trial for publishing a seditious Libel^ 
17 vol. 654. 

BOOTH, Benjamin. See Walker, Thomas. 

BOROSKI, George. See Coningmorkf Charles 
John, Count, 

BOSGRAVE, James. See Camphn^ tldmmd. 

BOTHWELL, James, Eari,— His Trial for the 
Murder of Lord Darnley, 9 Eliz. 1567, 1 
vol. 901. — Commission from Mary, Queen 
of Scots, to try him, ibid. 903.— Summons 
indorsed thereon, ibid. 904. — Indictment 
against him, ibid. 905. — The Constable of 
Scotland claims cognisance of the Cause^ 
ibid. ib. — ^Letter of Lord Lennox to Mary, 
urging h«r mot to postpone the Trial; ibid. 



TP5 PTATE T^IM**. 



14 



907.-r-4nQtHer ItCHer from J^ord I^npoz to 
iki QMesQ} (Qh^rging Bothw^ll and oth^rs 
with the Murder, ibid. 908.— Tbc Jyry 
acquit him, ibid. 909.—- Bothwell offers to 
prpve his innoGeiuie by single Combat, ibid. 
910» — TheCliaUenge accepted, butBpthwell 
makes no reply, ibid. 911. — liis Flight, Im- 
pfisomaent, and Death, ibid, ib.—- Further 
Account of the Tfial, with Observations upon 
it and Bothwell, from Laing's History of 
Scotlaad, ibid. ib. 

BOUCHER, James.— Procei?dipg8 m the 
House of Coqninpps and in ^p Hou§e of 
liords relating to him, 9 APQe, 1704, 14 
ToL 937. His Trial at thQ Queen's Bench 
!Rar, for High Treason, ibifl, 983.— The jn- 
dictraents, ibid* ib.— 984, ^ni 983 (notie). 
lie pleads Guilty, ib^d, 985.T-TSentence of 
deatn is passed uppn him, ibid. 96Q. — He is 
r^priey^i ibid- 988, 

BOWLAND, William. See Cavmagh, Michael 

BOACTONwr-rMr.Selden say9, that the author- 
ity of BractOQ is of slight or no moment for 
direction in judgment of the law at the 
present day, 3 vol. 277. — Bracton and Fleta 
aiv» laid by Lord Holt, to be only ornaments 
of the law, and not authorities, 14 vol. 33. — 
Their authority asserted by some of the 
Judges in their Arguments respecting the 
King's Prerogative, in the Marriage and Edu- 
cation of tlie royal ftimily, 15 vol. 1206, 1 215. 

BBADBURN, Richard.— He pleads Guilty to 
an Indictment for High Treason, in being 
concerned ii) ^he Cato Street Plot, 1 Geo. 4, 
1820, 33 vol. 1544. — He receives a Pardon, 
on condition of being transported for life, 
ibid. 1566. 

BRADDON, Lawrence.— His Trial with Hugh 
Speke, for conspiring tq suborn Evidence, 
apd spreading false Reports, that the Earl of 
Essex was murdered by his Keepers, 36 
Car. 2, 1684, 9 vol. 1127. — ^The Information, 
ibid. ib. and 1129 (note). — The King's 
Counsel open the Case, ibid. 1130. — Evi- 
dence for the Prosecution, ibid. 1132. — The 
Defence, ibid. 1165. — Evidence for the De- 
fence, ibid. 1167. — Jefferies's intemperate 
behaviour towards their Counsel, ibid. 1177. 
— Evidence in reply for the Prosecution, 
ibid. 1198.— The Chief Justice's Charge to 
the Jury, ibid. 1205, — ^The Jury find Braddon 
Guilty generally, and Speke Guilty of all but 
the Subornation, ibid. 1218. — ^Their Counsel 
o^r to move in arrest of Judgment, but the 
Court refuse to hear them, ibid. ib. — ^Their 
Sentence, ibid. 1224. — Braddon's Vindica- 
tion of the Earl of Essex from Burnet's 
Charge of Self-Murder, ibid, 1229. 

BRAD6HAW, Dearing. See Walters, Ro^ 
land. 

BflADSHAW, Jame8.--His Trial for High 
Tl^MW^ in l^iQg ^ftftpeiBed in thf Rebel- 
lion of 1745, 20 Geo. 2, 1746, 18 voU 4X5. 



— l^vidlSB^e ^%^inBt him, i))id.'Htt7»^His 
Defence, ibid. 418^— He is found Quilty, 
ibid. 421.— Account of hi|P, ibid* ib. — H§ is 
executed;, ibid. 426. 

BRADSjHAW, John, Serjeant at Law.— Is 
assigned Counsel for John Lilburne, op his 
application to the House of Lords against 
the sentence of the Star-Chamber, 3 vol. 
1347.^Is chosen President of the High 
Coqrt q( Justice, for the Trial of Chadei tht 
First, 4 vol. 1056. — His Speech on pasting 
Sentence of Death upon CHarles the Fir^tty 
ibid. 1008. — Js chosen President of the High 
. Court pf Justice, for the Trial of James, Duke 
of Hamilton, ibid. 1156.— His De^th, and 
Whitelocke*s Account of him, ibid. 1)28 
(note). — ^He refuses to tsJce out a qew Copi- 
mission for his Office of Chief Justice of 
Chester upqn Cromwell's Usurpation, 5 vol. 
365 (note). — Lord Clarendon's Account of 
him, ibid. 1344.— Milton's Character of him, 
ibid. 1345. — He is attainted by Act of Par- 
liament, after his death, and his body dldn- 
terred and {langed, ibid. 1335. 

BRAMBRE, Nieholai. See IVenlian, Itobert. 
Appealed of High Treason, for forcibly re- 
sisting the Commissioners appoint^ by 
Parliament to order Public Amiirs, 11 Ric. 
2, 1388, 1 vol. 99. — He gives security to 
answer the Appeal, ibid* ib. — He 19 cc^l)e4 
upon to answer to the Appeal, t)ut desires 
time and Counsel, ibid. 114.— tWhigh (tre 
refused, ibid. ib. — He offefn tq pvpve j)is In- 
nocence by single Combat, ibid. ib. — ^The 
Parliament decide that Battle does not lie in 
an Appeal of Treason, ibid. 115. — He is 
drt^wn and hanged, ibid. 118. 

BRAMHALL, Dr. John, Bishop of Derry. 

See BatcUff, Sir George. 

BRAMSTONE, John, Serjeant at Law.--His 
Argument in the Court of King's Bench 
for Sir John Heveningham, on the return of 
a Habeas Corpus, sued out by hi?D, 
Sir Thomas Darnell, Sir John Corbet, Sir 
Walter Earl, and Sir Edmund {tampdeo» in 
order to determine the validity of their oom- 
mitment, by the special command of Uie 
King, 3 vol. 6. 

BRAMSTONE, Sir John, Lord Chief Justice 
of K. B , 3 vol. 716, 787, 813.— He was one 
of the Judges who signed the Opinion in 
favour of the Legality of Ship Money, 3 vol. 
844. His Arguments in the Exchequer- 
Chamber in favour of Ship«Mpney, ibid. 
1243. 

BRANDON, Gerard, Lord. See Gerwri of 
Brandon^ Lord, 

BRANDRETH, Jaremiah, alias John Coke, 
alias the Nottingham Captain. — His Trial 
for High Treason, in being ooneeraed in the 
Luddite Insurrection, under a Special Con- 
nissioD, at Derby, *7 Gee. 8. 18ir, 9% vol. 



16 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



' toroey-Generars Spaech for the Prosecution, 
ibid . 779. — Evidence for theCrown, ibid, 795. 
— Mr. Cross's Speech for the Prisoner, ibid. 
863. — Mr. Denman's Speech, on summing 
up the Evidence for the Prisoner, • ibid. 884. 
-*Iteplv of the Solicitor-General, ibid. 908. 
— Chief Baron Richards's Charge to the Jury, 
ibid. 926. — ^The Jury find the Prisoner Guilty, 
ibid. 956.-— He is executed, ibid. 1394. 

BRERETON, William. See ^brm, Henry; 
Boleyuy Anne, 

BREWSTER, Thouias.— His Trial with Simon 
Dover, and Nathan Brooks, for a Misdemea- 
nour, in publishing a Book called " Speeches 
and Prayers of some of the late King's 
Judges," and other seditious works, 15 Car. 
2, 1663, 6 voL 513. — Indictments against 
them, ibid. 517.— They all plead Not Guilty, 
ibid.ib. — Evidence sigatnst Brewster, ibid. 
541. — His Defence, ibid. 545. — Chief Jus- 
tice Hyde's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 547. 
He is tried upon a seoond indictment, ibid. 
549.— Evidence against Dover, ibid. 554. — 
His Defence, ibid. 558. — Chief Justice 
Hyde's Charge to the Jury, ibid. ib. — 
Evidence against Brooks, ibid. 559. — His 
Defence, ibid. 562. — ^They are all found 
Guilty, ibid. 563. — Sentence against them, 
ibid. 564. 

BRIDGMAN, Sir Orlando, Chief Baron of 
the Exchequer. — He was one of the Judges 
who met to consult upon the necessary 
Proceedings for the Trial of the Regicides, 
5 vol. 971. — His Charge to the Grand Jury 
assembled under the Special Commission, 
for the Trial of the Regicides, ibid. 988. — 
His Charges to the Jury on the several Trials 
of the Regicides, ibid. 1033, 1047, 1057, 
1069, 1073, 1115, 1174, 1184, 1193, 1206. 
— His Address to several of the convicted 
Regicides, on passing Judgment upon them, 
ibid. 1224. 

-, Chief Justice of 



C. P. 6 vol. 568, 769, 899. 

BRIELLAT, Thomas.— His Trial at the 
Clerkenwell Sessions for Seditious words, 
34 Geo.* 3, 1793, 22 vol. 909.— Abstract of 
the Indictment, ibid. ib. — Mr. Silvester's 
Speech for the Prosecution, ibid. 91 3. — Evi- 
dence for the Prosecution, ibid. 917. — Mr. 
Felix Vaughan's Speech for the Defendant, 
ibid. 929. — Evidence for the Defendant, ibid. 
942.— Mr. Silvester's Reply, ibid. 946.— He 
is found Guilty, ibid. 954.— The Sentence of 
the Court, ibid. ib. 

BRISTOL, George, Earl of. See Digby, 
George, XorJ.— Proceedings in the House of 
Conunons, respecting a Message alleged to 
have been conveyed by him from Sir Richard 
Temple to Charles the Second, 1 5 Car. 2, 1 663, 
6 vol. 283. — His Speech in his justification in 
the House of Commons, ibid. 285. — ^Resolu- 
tions of the House on that occasion, ibid. 
292t H9 charges liord Clarendon with Hi([h 



Treason, ibid. 3044— Lord Clarendon's Re* 
marks on his Character, 4 vol. 133 (note), 6 
vol. 304 (note). 

BRISTOL, John, Earl of. See Buckingham, 
George^ Dvke o/l— -Proceedings in Parliament 
against him for High Crimes and Misde-t 
meanours, 2 Car. 1, 1626, 2 vol. 1267. — ^His 
Correspondence with Lord Conway, ibid. 
1274.— Petitions the House of Lords, to 
mediate with the King to summon him to 
ParUament, ibid. 1276.— The King'i Letter 
to him thereupon, ibid. 1277. — He is supi- 
moned to Parliament, but receives a Com*- 
mand from the King not to attend, ibid. ib. 
— ^He petitions the House of Lords there« 
upon, ibidi ib.— The King desires the House 
of Lords to proceed against him, ibid. 1280. 
— ^Articles of Impeachment against him. ibid, 
1281.— His Defence, ibid. 1294.— He is 
allowed Counsel to plead for him, though 
the King remonstrates against it, ibid; 1298 
— 99, 1379. — His Answer to the charges 
against him, ibid. 1386.— The Parliament is 
abruptly dissolved, ibid. 1446. 

BRISTOW. See Campion, Edmund. 

BRITTON, Richard. See Denew, Nathaniel. 

BROADFOOT, Alexander.— His Trial at 
Bristol before Mr. Serjeant Foster, Recorder, 
for Murder, in killing one of a Press-gang, 
18 vol. 1323. — ^The Recorder directs the 
Jury to convict him of Manslaughter only, 
the Press-gang having exceeded their author- 
ity, ibid. 1324. — ^The Recorder's Argument, 
on giving his opinion, in this case, on the 
legality of Impressing Mariners, ibid. 1 326. 
See Pressing Seamen, 

BRODERICK, John, Counsel.— His Speech 
for the Prosecution, on the Trial of Richard 
Hathaway, for a Misdemeanour, in fraudu- 
lently pretending to be bewitched, 14 vol. 
643. — His Argument for the Defendant, in 
arrest of Judgment, in Tutchin's Case, ibid. 
1151. 

BRODWAY, Giles. See Fitzpatrick, Lau^ 
rence, 

BROMLEY, Sir Edward, Baron of the Ex- 
chequer, 4 Car. 1, 3 vol. 359. 

BROMLEY, Sir Thomas. — Chief Justice 
of K. B. — He presides at the Trial of Sir 
Nicholas Throckmorton, 1 Mary, 1 vol. 869, 

', Lord Chancellor, 27 



Eliz. 1 vol. 1114, 1166. 

BROMMICH, Andrew.— His Trial at Stafford 
for High Treason, under the Stat. 27 Eliz. c. 
2, for coming as a Seminary Priest into 
England, and remaining there, 31 Car. 2, 
1679, 7 vol. 715. — ^Indictment against him, 
to which he pleads Not Guilty, ioid. 721.-^ 
Evidence against him, ibid. 722.— He is 
found Guilty, -and sentenced to death, ibid, 
726 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



17 



BROOKE, George. See Markham, Sir Griffin. 

BROOKESBY, Bartholomew. See Markkam, 
Sir Gr^fiann 

BROOKES, Nathan. See Brewster^ Thomus. 

BROUGHAM, Henry, Counsel.— His Speech 
in Defence of the Editors of the Examiner, 
for a Libel, 31 vol. 380. — His Speech in 
Defence of Drakard, the Editor of the Stam- 
ford T^ews, for the publication of the same 
Libei, ibid. 509. 

BROWNE, Gunter. See Thanet^ Sackville, 
Earl of. 

BROWNE, Samuel, Counsel. — He sums up 
the Charge against Archbishop Laud, on his 
Impeachment in the House of Lords, 4 vol. 
576. — He replies to the Archbishop's 
Answer, ibid. 596. 

• — '• ' ^-^, Jiidge of a P'. 18 Car. 2, 

6 voU 769. 

BRUCKUE, John* See Green, Thomas. 

BRUNT, John Thomas.~His Trial at the Old 
.Bailey under a Special Commission, for 
High Treason, in being concerned in the 
Cato-Street Conspiracy, 1 Geo. 4, 1820, 33 
▼ol. 1177.— The Indictment, ibid. 697.— 
Speech of the Attorney General for the Pro- 
secution, ibid. 1181. — Evidence for the 
Prosecution, ibid. 1195. — Mr. Curwood*s 
Speech for the Prisoner, ibid. 1256. — Mr. 
Adolphus's Speech for the Prisoner, ibid. 
1272. — Reply of the Solicitor-General, ibid. 
1293. — Chief Baron Richards's Charge to 
the Jury, ibid. 1305. — ^The Jury find him 
Guilty, ibid. 1335. — His Speech on being 
called upon for Judgment, ibid. 1554. — ^He 
is executed, ibid. 1566. 

BUCCLEUGH, James, Duke of. SeeJion- 
mouthy James, Duke of, 

BUCKINGHAM, Edward Stafford, Duke of, 
Hereditary High Constable of England. — 
His Trial for High Treason, 13 Hen. 8, 1522, 
1 vol. 287. — Reference to Historians, who 
give an Account of this Trial, ibid. ib. — Sum- 
mary of the Charges against him, ibid. 289, 
293. — He is tried by his Peers before the Duke 
of Norfolk, Lord High Steward, ibid. 2^1, 
296. — He is found Guilty, and sentenced to 
Death, ibid. 291, 296. — ^He is beheaded, ibid. 
291, 297.— His Degradation from the Order 
of the Garter, ibid. 297.— By his Attainder 
the Office of High Constable reverted to the 

. Crown, and has ever since remained dormant, 
ibid. 298. 

BUCKINGHAM, George Villiers, Duke of. 
See Bristol, Earl of. — Omway, Lord. — 
Proceedings in Parliament against him for 
High Crimes and Misdemeanours, 2 Car. 1, 
1626, 2 vol. 1267.— Sir Robert Cotton's 
Speech in the House of Commons against 
him, ibid. ib. — ^The public feeling much 
excited against him, ibid. 1272. — Lord 
Bristol petitions the House of Lords to be 
VOL, XXXIV. 



heard in accusation of him, ibid. 1277. — 
The Commons resolve to proceedtagainsthim, 
ibid. 1280. — ^The House of Lords resolve to 
hear Lord BristoFs Charge against him, ibid. 
. 1281. — Articles of Impeachment preferred 
by Lord Bristol against him, ibid. 1287. — 
The King desires the House of Lords not 
to imprison him, ibid. 1293. — Ahicles of 
Impeachment against him by the Commons, 
ibid. 1307. — Speeches of the Managers of 
the House of Commons, enforcing the 
Articles of Impeachment, ibid. 1321. — ^Two 
of the Managers of the House of Commons 
committed to the Tower by the King, ibid. 
1371. — ^The King's Speech in his favour, 
ibid. 1372. — His Answer to the Articles of 
Impeachment, ibid. 1422. — ^The Parliament 
is abruptly dissolved, ibid. 1446. — Further 
proceedings against him in a subsequent 
Parliament, ibid. 1447, — HowelPs Letter of 
Advice to him, ibid. 1448.< — Archbishop 
Abbot's Account of his first Promotion, ibid. 
1478. 

BUCKINGHAM, George Villiers, Duke ^f. 
— Proceedings in the House of Commons 
against him, 25 Car. 2, 1674, 6 vol. 1033. — 
He desires to be heard by the House, ibid. 
1038. — His Speech to the House of Com- 
mons, ibid. 1039. — -Debate thereon, ibid. 
1040. — Questions put by the House to him, 
with his Answers, ibid. 1048. — Debate 
on his Answers, ibid. 1050. — ^The House 
resolve to address the King to remove him 
from his Employments and from his Coun- 
cils for ever, ibid. 1054. — Burnet's Account 
of him, ibid. 1033 (note). — Dryden and 
Pope*s Account of him, ibid. 1034 (note). 

BULLER, Francis, Counsel, 20 vol. 660, 
1240,1319. — His Argument for the Plain- 
tiff in Error, in the Case of Fabrigas v. 
Mostyn, 20 vol. 194. — His Reply in the 
same Case, ibid. 220. 

, Judge of K. B. 21 vol. 
687. — ^His Charge to the Jury on the Trial 
of Delamotte for High Treason, 21 vol. 808 . 

BULLER, Sir Francis, Bart. Judge of C. P.— 
He was one of the Judges who sat, under the 
Special Commission, on the Trial of Hardy 
and others, for High Treason, in 1794, 24 voL 
221, 238. — His Charge to the Grand Jury, 
. assembled under the Special Commission at 
Maidstone, for the Trial of O'Coigly and 
others for High Treason, 26 vol. 1192, — His 
Charge to the Jury in that Case, 27 vol. 125. 
— His [Address to O'Coigly on passing 
Sentence of Death upon him; ibid. 139. 

BULMBR, Sir John. See Constable^ Sir 
Robert. 

BURDETT, Sir Francis, Bart.— Reports of a 
Committee of the House of Commons, ap- 
pointed to investigate the legality of Pro- 
ceedings against him, for denying the power 
of that House to commit the people of Eng* 
land, 8 vol. 14. 

c 



19 



GENERAL INPEX TO 



BUEGH, Hubert de. Earl of Kent.— Artiqles 
of Accusationagainstbim by Henry the Third, 
with his Answers thereto, 1 vol. 1 3.— Matthew 
Paris says, that he satisfactorily proved his 
innocence ; but, to appease the Kin^^ he 
was adjudged to surrender to the King four 
of his Castles, ibid. 22. 

BURKE, £dmund.*"His Opinions on the 
question of Reform in Parliament, as quoted 
by Mr. Erskine, in his Speech for Hardy. — 
24 vol. 918.— His Chai*acter of Charles the 
Second, 8 vol. 970. 

BURLEIGH, Sir William. See Belknap, Sir 
Mobert. 

BURLEIGH, Sir Simon. See Tresilian, Sir 
JRoberL^Ue is impeached by the Commons, 
with John de Beauchamp^ James Baroverse, 
and John Salisbury, of Treason, 11 Ric. 2, 
1388, 1 vol. 121.— They are condemned and 
executed, ibid. 122, 123.— The Duke of 
Gloucester and others impeached for their 
conduct in the Prosecution of Sir Simon 
Burleigh, ibid. t28. 

BURN, James. See Greeny Thomas, 

BURNET, Dr. Gilbert, Bishop of Salisbury.— 
Proceedings against him in Scotland for 
High Treason, 3 Jac. 2, 1687, 11 vol. 1103. 
^-^Criminal Letters against him, ibid. ib. — 
His Answer thereto, ibid. 1114. — His Second 
Citation, ibid. 1118. — Fountainhall and 
Wodroiv*8 Notices of these Proceedings, ibid. 
1103 (note). — His Account of various Trials 
and Attainders in the Reign of Henry the 
Eighth, for OflTences relating principally to 
Religion, 1 vol. 469.-*-His Account of the 
Duke of Lauderdale*s Character, 6 vol. 1025 
(note).— His Narrative of the Circumstances 
attending the Disappearance and Death of Sir 
EdmondburyGodfrey,6 vol. 1410. —His Cha- 
racter of Titus Gates, ibid. 1407. — His Ac- 
count of the Proceedings against Lord Cla- 
rendon, ibid. 317. — Of the Fire of London, 
ibid. 807.— Of the Transaction out of which 
the Impeachment of Sir William Penn arose, 
ibid. 869 (note).— Of the Popish Plot, ibid. 
1405.— Of the Rye-House Plot, 9 vol. 491. 
•^Of the Trial and Execution of Lord 
William Russell, ibid. 505, 511.— His Evi- 
dence on behalf of Lord Russel, ibid. 622. 
—His Account of Algernon Sidney's Trial, 
ibid. 514. — Of the death of the Earl of Essex, 
ibid. 504. — Braddon's Charge of Misrepre- 
sentation against his Account of the Deatb of 
theEarl pf Essex, ibid. 1 229.— Of Chief Justice 
Jefferies, and of his Excesses on the Wes- 
tern Circuit after Monmouth's Rebellion, 
ibid. 936 (note), 10 vol. 555 (note). — His 
Evidence on Hampden's Trial, 9 vol. 1091 . — 
His Remarks on Dr. Oliver PlunkettU Case, 
8 vol. 447 (note).— His Account of the Pro« 
ceedings against the Earl of Argyle, in Scot- 
land, ibid. 843 (note).— Of the Proceedings 
against Hackston and Cargill, 10 vol. 850 
(note).— Of the Trials of Charnock, King, and 
Keyes, 1% vol, 1377 (note).-p.Hi« Account of 



the Causes which led to Harley's Reiinsm^ae 
from Administration in the Reign of Queen 
Anne, 14 vol. 1371 (noie).— His Character of 
Lord Holt, 1 5 vol . 1 4 (note).— His Account of 
the Proceedings against Dr. Sacheverell, ibid. 
7 (note).— His Reasons for voting in the 
House of Lords in favour of the 3ill ef 
Attainder against Sir John Fenwick, 1 3 vol. 
751. 

BURNETT, Mr., Advocate^His Speech for 
the Prosecution on tlie Trial of Fyshe Palnjer, 
for Sedition, 23 vol. 331. 

BURTON, Henry. See Prynne, William^ 

BURY, John.— Account of his Case, beinfr ^ 
question respecting the validity of a second 
Marriage, under which there was Issue^ 
the first Marriage having been dissolved »4>n 
account of Impotence, 2 vol. 849, 850 (note). 
— ^The second Marriage was adjudged void^ 
ibid. 850. 

BURY, Sir Thomas, Baron of the DcohecjuwPy 
9 Ann. 15 vol. 547. 

^ Lord Chief Baron of the 



Exchequer. — He delivers his Opinion in 
favour of the Prerogative of the Crown, 
respecting the Education and Marriage of ^e 
Royal Family, 15 vol. 122l» 

BUSBY, George.— His Trial at Derby for 
High Treason, under the Stat. 27 Eliz. c. 2, 
for remaining within the Realm, being a 
Romish Priest, 32 Car, 2, 1681, 8 vol. 525. 
— ^The Indictment, ibid. 626.—He pleads 
Not Guilty, ibid. 527.— Evidence against 
him, ibid. 529. — He contends that he is an 
Alien, but is referred to the Stat. 29 Car. 
2, c. 6. for the Naturalization of the Children 
of British Subjects^ born out of the Realm, 
during the Commonwealth, ibid, 534.«--Hie 
Defence, ibid. 544.^ Baron Street's Charge 
to the Jury, ibid. 547.-^ He is found Guilty^ 
but is reprieved, ibid. 550. 

BUSHELL, Edward.— He is fined 40 Marks, 
as one of the Jury who find the Verdict 
against the direction of the Court in the 
Case of Penn and Mead, and ordered to be 
imprisoned until the Fine is paid, 6 vol. 967. 
—Chief Justice Vaughan's Report of the 
Proceedings upon a Habeas Corpus sued 
out of the Court of Common Pleas by him 
and other Juroni, 22 Car. 2, 1670, ibid. 909. 
— ^The Court discharge them, ibid. 1020;— 
Mr. Ersktne's Observations on diis Case, in 
his Speeeh lor the Dean of St. Asaph, 21 vol. 
925. 

BU8HNELL, Walter.«-Pioceedings of the 
Commissioners, appointed bv Cromwell for 
ejecting scandalous and insufficient Ministers, 
against him, 8 Car. 1, 1656, 5 vol. 633.— 
Articles against him, ibid. 636* — His Ansijrer 
thereto, ibid. 640. 

SUTLER, Cbi^i, OmaA^ma Em&ida* 
tivA b^fgvQ « CiHBniited of ibe H^uie of 



THE STATE TRIALS, 



19 



Lordly appoioted to inquire into the Chsir^es 
made by Captain Baillie pf Misniana|(en)ent 
in the Affairs of Greenwich Hospital, 21 
vol. 340. 

BUTLER, alias Strickland, Mary.— Her Trial 
at the Old Bailey for Forgery, 11 William 
3, 1699, 13 vol. 1249.— The Indictment, 
ibid, ib.— She pleads Not Guilty, ibid. 1260. 
—Serjeant Wright opens the Case for the 
Prosecution, ibid. 1251, — Evidence against 
her, ibid. 1^53. — Evidence in her Defence 
as to her Character, ibid. 1269.-^ Lord 
Holt charges the Jury, Ibid. 1261. — She is 
found Guilty, and sentenced to pay a Fine 
of 500/.. ibid. 1262. 

BUTTLER, Edward, See Newbolt, Willutm. 

BYRNE, James.— His Trial at Dublin under 
a Special Commission of Oyer and Terminer, 
for High Treason in being concerned in the 
Irish Insurrection^ 43 Geo. 3, 1803, 28 to). 
805. — The Indictment, ibid. ib. — Evidence 
for the Prosecution, ibid. 810.^ — Mr. Hac- 
Nally*s Speech in his Defence, ibid. 815. 
— Evidence for the Prisoner, ibid. 822. — 
Mr. Bairs Speech on summing-up the 
Evidence for the Prisoner, ibid. 831. — 
Reply of the Solicitor General, ibid. 838. — 
The Jury find him Guiliy^ ibid. 849.— He is 
executed, ibid. 850. 

BYRNE, William.—His Trial by a Court 
Martial in Ireland, for Rebellion and Murder, 
39 Geo. 3, 27 vol. 1077. — Evidence against 
him, ibid. 1078. — Evidence for him, ibid. 
1101. — His Speecli in his Defence, ibid. 
1109. — The Courl convict him of Rebellion, 
but acquit him of Murder, ibid. 1123. — He 
is sentenced to Death, ibid. 1124, 

BYRNE, William Michael.—His Trial at 
Dublin for High Treason, in being con* 
cerned in the Irish Rebellion, 38 Geo. 3, 
I 1798, (27 vol. 455. — ^The Indictment, ibid. 
jb.—Tbe Attorney GeneraPs Speech for the 
Prosecution, ibid. 460.— Evidence for the 
Prosecution> ibid. 462. — Mr. Curran's Speech 
iu Defence of the Prisoner, ibid. 491. — Evi- 
dence for the Defence, ibid. 496.«^Mr. 
Bashe's Speech on summing-up the Evidence 
for the Prisoners, ibid. 504. — ^The Reply, 
ibid. ^06* — The Charge to the Jury, ibid. 
508.— The Jury ^nd him Guilty, ibid. 521. 
— Sentence is passed upon him, and he is 
executed, ibid. 522. 

BYRON, Wiilianh I/ord— Ills trial before 
the House of JUords, for the Murder of 
William Chaworth, esq. 5 Geo. 3^ 1T65, 
19 vol. 1177. — Commission creating the 
Earl of Northin^ton Lord High Steward, 
ibid. 1178. — Certiorari and Return thereto, 
containing the IndictmenL ibid. 1179. — The 
Lord High Steward's Address to him, on 
being brought to the Bar, ibid. 1182. — He 
pleads Not Guilty, ibid. 1183.— The Attor- 
ney Ganeral's Speecb for the Prosecution, 
ibid. ib.-^Evidi^c^ for the prpsecutioj?, ibid. 
%^9>9jrrffSi% SoUsitgr Qeparal s^^gm «§ the 



Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 1224. 
— Lord Pyron's Defence, ibid. 1227. — ^f he 
Lords acquit him of Murder, but find bim 
Guilty of Manslagghter, ibid. 1233.— He 
claims the benefit of the Statute, and is dis- 
charged, ibid. 1235. 

CALDERON, Luisa. See Pidon, Sir T/m. 

CALLENDER, Jamea Thompton.— Proceed* 
ings in the High Court of Justiciary, 
against him, Walter Berry, and James 
Robertson, for publishing a seditious Pam« 
phlet, 33 Geo. 3, 1793, 23 vol. 79.--The 
Indictment, ibid. 81.~-Callender is out- 
lawed for not appearing to answer, ibid. 83. 
— Second Indictment against Berry and 
Robertson, ibid. 84- — Interlocutor of Rele- 
vancy, ibid, 88. — ^The Jury find that Robert- 
son printed and published, and that Berry 
published only, the Pamphlet libelled, ibid. 
00. — Argument of the |Hiners Counsel that 
the Verdict amounts to an Acquittal, ibid. 
91. — Argument of the King's Advocate ou 
the other side, ibid. 95. — Reply of the 
Panel's Counsel, ibid. 103. — Judgment of 
the Court that the Verdict amounts to a 
Conviction, ibid. 113.*~Sentence of the 
Court upon them, ibid. 114. 

CALTHORPE, Charles, Counsel.— His Argu- 
ment in the Court of King's Bench for Sir 
John Corbet, on the Return of a Habeas 
Corpus sued out by him, Sir Thomas Dar- 
nell, Sir John Heveningham, Sir Walter 
Earl, and Sir Edmund Hampden, in order 
to try the legality of their Commitment by 
the Lords of the Council for refusing to 
lend upon the Commission of Loans, 3 Car* 
1, 1627, 3 vol. 19. — His Argument for Mr. 
Valentine, in the Court of King's Bench, in 
support of his Plea to the Jurisdiction of 
the Court to try an Information against him 
for seditious Speeches and Conduct in the 
House of Commons, 5 Car. 1, 1629, ibid. 
299. 

CALVERT, Doctor.— His Argument in the 
House of Lords for the Duchess -of King- 
ston, that the Sentence of the Ecclesiastical 
Court, annulling her first Marriage, is a 
conclusive Answer to the Cbai*ge of Bigamy 
against her, 16 Geo. 3, 1776, SO vol. 417, 
530. 

CALVIN, Robert. SsB PottmU. 

CAMBRIDGE^ Eari of. See Hamilton, JomeSi 
Duke of. 

CAMDEN, Charies, Lord, Chief Jn3tice of 
C. P» See PraU, CharlcM, 

CAMERON, Afigus.— Proceedings against 
him and James Menzies, in Scotland, for 
Sedition, Mobbing, and Rioting, 38 Geo. 3, 
1798, 2.6 vol. tl65.-*-The Indictment, ibid. 
Jb.-^CaBieron absconds, and the Lord Advo- 
cate vitfadrawa the Prosecution a^inst 
Meosief, ibid. 1173.-<-Tfaeir Declarations, 
JWd. U74^ 
C2 



20 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



CAMERON, Archibald, Dr — Proceedings 
against him in the Court of King's Bench, on 
his being brought up for Judgment ou an 
Attainder for High Treason, in being con- 
cerned in the Rebellion of 1745, 26 Geo. 
3, 1753, 19 vol. 733.— Account of hiro, 
ibid. ib. — ^Judgment given against him by 
the Chief Justice, ibid. 736. — His Execution, 
ibid. 738. — Papers delivered by him to his 

. Wife immediately before his Execution, ibid . 
739. — ^His Letter to his Son, written while 
under Sentence of Death, ibid. 743. — Ac- 

' count of his Behaviour previous to his Exe- 
cution, ibid. 744. — IVIr, Justice Foster's 
Account of his Case, ibid. 735. 

CAMERON, Richard, Founder of the Sect 
of Cameronians in Scotland. — Account of 
bis Life and Death, 10 vol. 865 (note). 

CAMPBELL V.HALL. See Grenada, Islandof. 

' CAMPBELL, Alexander Hume, Counsel.— 
His Argument for the Orown of the Special 
Verdict in Macdaniel's Case, 19 vol. 779. 

CAMPBELL, Colin, of Allangreig Proceed- 
ings against him in Scotland for High 
Treason, in being concerned in Argyle's 
Rebellion, 1 Jac. 2, 1686, 13 vol. 800. — 
Evidence against him, ibid. 801. — He is 
found Guilty, ibid. 802.— The Sentence of 
the Court upon him, ibid. 806. — Extracts 
from Fountainhall and Wodrow respecting 
these Proceedings, ibid. 787 (note). 

CAMPBiXL, Duncan, the Younger, of Allan- 
greig.---Proceedings against him in Scotland 
for High Treason, in being concerned in 
Areyle's Rebellion, 1 Jac. 2, 1686, 13 vol. 
"jntence of the Court upon him, ibid. 
806. — E5?Nracts from Fountainhall and 
Wodrow respecting these Proceedings, ibid. 
787 (note). 

CAMPBELL, Sir Duncan. — Proceedings 
against him, and other Heritors of the Shire 
of Argyle in Scotland, for High Treason, in 
being concerned in Argyle's Rebellion, 1 
Jac. 2, 1686, 13 vol. 787.— The Evidence, 
ibid. 795.— They are found Guilty and 
sentenced to Death, ibid. 799,— Extracts 
from Fountainhall and Wodrow respecting 
this Case, ibid. 787 (note).. 

CAMPBELL, Sir Hugh.-^Proceedi.ngs against 
him in Scotland for Treason, 36 Car. 2, 
1684, 10 vol. 919.— The Indictment, ibid. 
924.— His Speech after the Indictment is 
read, ibid. 931.— Debate on the Relevancy 
of the Indictment, ibid. 932.— The Court 
find the Indictment relevant, ibid. 961.— His 
Counsel object to some of the Witnesses, 
that they had previously revealed their testi- 
mony to the King's Advocates, and had 
admitted themselves to . be Accomplices 
, ibid. 962. — ^The Court overrule the Objeo- 
tion, ibid. 967.— ITie witnesses prove no 
Treason against him, and he is acquitted, 

ibid, M9,-^WQdrow'8 Accpwt Qf tb« Ev^^ 




deuce of the Witnesses, and of the conduct 
of the Court towards them, ibid, ib.r— Pro- 
ceedings against him in the Parliament of 
Scotland, ibid. 972. — Fountainhairs Account 
of this Case, ibid. 977. 

CAMPION, Edmund.— His Trial with Ralph 
Sherwin, James Bosgrave, Thomas Cottam, 
Robert Johnson Bristow, Luke Kirbie, 
and Henry Orton, for High Treason, in con- 
spiring to kill the Queen, and introduce 
Popery, 24 Eliz, 1581, 1 vol. 1049. — ^They 
plead Not Guilty, ibid. 1050. — Campion 
objects to being tried at the same time vfhh 
the others, ibid. ib. — His Address to the 
Jury, ibid. 1070.— They are all found Guilty, 
and Sentence is passed upon them, ibid. 
1071. — Account of Campion, ibid. 1072 
(note). — Their Examinations previous to 
their Trial, ibid. 1078. 

CAMPMAN, George. See Hendley, WVHam. 

CANNING, Elizabeth.— Her Evidence on the 
Trial of Mary Squires and Susannah Wells, 
for stealing from her person a Pair of Stays, 
19 vol. 262.— Her Trial for Perjury in her 
Evidence on that Trial, 27 Geo. 2, 1754, 
ibid. 283.— The Indictment, ibid. 285.— 
Mr. Davy's Speech for the Prosecution, ibid. 
298.— Mr. Willes's Speech for the Prose- ' 
cution, ibid. 311.— Evidence for the Prose- 
cution, ibid, 323.— Mr. Morton's Speech 
for the Defendant, ibid. 431.— Mr. Nares's 
Speech for the Defendant, ibid, 451. — Evi- 
dence for the Defence, ibid. 467.— Mr. 
Davy's Reply, ibid. 596— The Recorder's 
Charge to the Jury, ibid. 633.— The Jury 
return their Verdict, « Guilty of Perjury, but 
not wilful and corrupt," but on the Recorder's 
objecting to this Verdict, they find her Guilty 
generally, ibid. 669.— Some of the Jurymen 
make Affidavits that they consented to the 
Verdict by mistake, ibid. ib. 675. — Her 
Counsel move for a New Trial, which is 
refused by (he Court, ibid. 672.-^ueries 
proposed to Mr. Emlyn respecting this Case, 
with his Answers thereto, ibid. 670 (note). 
— ^The Recorder's Speech on passing Sen- 
tence of Transportation for Seven years upon 
her, ibid. 673. — She is transported pursuant 
to the Sentence, ibid. 680.— She is said to 
have died at Connecticut, in America* in 
1773, ibid. 1418. 

CAPEL, Arthur, Lord.— -Proceedings in Par- 
liament against him and Eight other Lords, 
for absenting themselves from the House of 
Lords, -contrary to an Order of the House, 
18 Car. 1, 1642, 4 vol, 1 76.— Sentence 
agamst them, ibid. 184.— He is taken at 
the Surrender of Colchester to Fairfax, ibid. 
1207.— Proceedings in the High Court of 
Justice against him, Lord Goring and Sir 
John Owen, for High Treason, in being 
taken in arms against the Parliament. 
1 Car. 2, 1649, ibid. 1195.— He escapes 
from the Tower, ibid. 1208, 1245.— He is dis- 

covered at Lambetb by ^ Watermati, Ibid, 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



21 



1209, 1246. — He pleads that Quarter was 
given him upon the Surrender of Colchester, 
ibid.1210.—- Sentence is pronounced against 
him, ibid. 1216.-^His Execution, ibid. 1230. 
—Bishop Morley's Account of the manner 
of his Death, ibid. 1236. —Crom well's 
Opinion of Lord Capet, ibid. 1246. — Lord 
Clarendon's Character of him, ibid. 1249. 

CAREW, John, 5 vol. 1004, 1048, 1237. See 
R^icitkt, 

CAREW, Sir Nicholas. — Attainted and exe- 
cuted for Treason, 30 Hen. 8, 1 vol. 481. 

CAREY, Sir John, Baron of the Exchequer, 
11 Ric. 2. — See Belknap, Sir Robert 

CARGILL, Donald.— His Trial with Walter 
Smith, James Boig, William Thompson, and 
William Coothill, at Edinburgh, for Treason, 
in taking Arms for the Covei^ant, 33 Car. 2, 
1681, 10 vol. 849.'^His Examination before 
the Council, ibid. 859 (note). — ^The Indict- 
ment, ibid. 850. — Evidence against them, 
ibid. 883. — ^They are found Guilty, ibid. 
890.— Their Sentence, ibid. 891.— Cargill's 
Behaviour at the place of Execution, and 
Dying Speech, ibid. ib« — Smith's Execution 
and Dying Speech, ibid. 895. — Boig*s 
Letter to his Brother after his Condemnation, 
ibid. 900. — Thompson's Dying Speech, ibid. 
902.— Coothiirs Dying Speech, ibid. 905. — 
Cargill's Excommunication of the King and 
other enemies of the Covenant, ibid. 872 
(note).— Wodrow's Account of this Case, 
ibid. 851 (note). 

CARLETON, Lord, Chief Justice of C. P. in 
Ireland. — His Charge to the Jury on the 
Trial of Henry and John Sheares for Trea- 
son, 27 vol. 385. 

CARNEGIE, James, of Finhaven.— His Trial 
at Edinburgh for the Murder of Charles, 
Earl of Strathmore, 2 Geo. 2, 1728, 17 vol. 
73.— The Indictment, ibid. ib. — Information 
for the Pursuers, ibid. 75. — Information for 
the Panel, ibid. 92.— The Court find the 
Libel reletunt to infer the pains of Law, ibid. 
134. — Evidence against him, ibid. 135. — 
The Assize find him Not Guilty, ibid. 150. 

CARNWARTH, Robert, Earl of. See JDer- 
wntwater, James, Earl of, 

CARR, Frances* See Somerset^ Frances, 
Omiess of, 

CARR, Henry.— His Trial for a Seditious 
Libel, 32 Car. 2, 1680, 7 vol. 1111.— The In- 
fonnation, ibid, ib.— He pleads Not Guilty, 
ibid. lli4.—:SerjeantJefFeries opens the Case 
against him, ibid. ib. — Evidence against him, 
ibid.1115, — Sir Francis Winnington's Speech 
in his Defence, ibid. 1 1 22.— Evidence for{him, 
ibid, ib.— The Recorder's Reply, ibid. 1124. 
^The Chief Justice's Charge to the Jury, 
ibid. 1125.— The Jary find him Guilty, ibid. 
1130. 

CARR, Robert. ^iSmers^.Babtfi^Earlof. 



CARRINGTGN, Nathan, 19 vol. 1029. See 
Semtre of Fapers, 

CARTE, Thomas:— Mr. Hargrave's Opinion 
of his History of England, 2 vol. 380. 

CARTER, Sir Lawrence, Baron of the Ex- 
chequer, 2 Geo. 2, 17 vol. 161, 309. 

CARTER, William. See Jackson, WUliam. 

CARTWRIGHT, John, Major.— His Evidence 
on Home Tooke's Trial for High Treason, 
25 vol. 325. 

CARTY, Patrick.— His Trial in Ireland for 
conspiring to murder the Earl of Carhamp- 
ton, 38 Geo. 3, 1797, 26 vol. 877.— The 
Indictment, ibid. 839. — Evidence for the 
Prosecution, ibid. 878.— Evidence for the 
Prisoner, ibid. 895. — ^The Jury find him 
Guilty, ibid. 900.— He receives Sentence of 
Death, and is executed, ibid. ib. 

CASSELLS, Robert. See Bemardi, John. 

CASTLE, John. — His Evidence on his Exami- 
nation in chief by Mr. Gumey, on Watson's 
Trial for High Treason, in 1817, 32 vol. 
214. — His Cross-examination by Mr. 
Wetherell, ibid. 284. 

CASTLEHAVEN, Mervin, Eari of. See 
Audley^ Mervin, Lord. 

CASTLEMAINE, Roger Palmer, Earl of.— 
His Trial at the bar of the Court of King's 
Bench for High Treason, 32 Car. 2, 1680, 
7 vol. 1067. — Indictment against him, ibid, 
ib.— The King's Counsel open the Case 
against him, ibid. 1069. —Gates's Evidence 
against him, ibid. 1070. — His Cross-exaoxi- 
nation of Gates, ibid. 1074. — He objects to 
the Evidence of Dangerfield, that he had 
been convicted of Felony, ibid. 1082, — ^After 
much discussion, and a message to require 
the Opinion of the Judges of the Court of 
Common Pleas, Dangerfield is sworn, ibid. 
1090. — Lord Castlemaine's Defence, ibid. 
1094. — He offers Evidence against Gates 
and Dangerfield, ibid, ib.— The Attorney 
Generars Reply, ibid. 1107.— The Chief 

- Justice charges the Jury, ibid. 1108.— He is 
acquitted, ibid. 1112. — He is examined as 
a Witness on Gates's Trial for Perjury, 10 
vol. 1175. — Proceedings in the House of 
Commons against him for High Treason, in 
going as an Ambassador to Rome, 1 Will, 
and Mary, 1689, 12 vol. 597. — His Speech 
in tlie House of Commons in his Defence, 
ibid. 601. — He is conimitted to the Tower 
by a Warrant of the House, ibid. 613. — He 
is afterwards bailed in the Court of King's 
Bench, ibid. 614. — Wei wood's Account of 
his Embassy to Rome, ibid. 597 (note). — 
Account of two Conversations between him 
and Dr. Thomas Smith, ibid. 602 (note). 

CATHARINE op ARRAGGN. See Henry 

tht Sth.' — Proceedings relating to the Disso.< 

lotion of the Marriage between her and 

■ Henry the Eighth^ 1 v<oU299.— She refuses 



lid 



GiMiAL fl^DEX TO 



' toenterupon aReligiott8life,ibid. 309.— Her 
Behayiour at the Trial of her Marriage, ibid. 

' 319.— She solicits the assistance of the 
Emperor, and appeals to the Pope, ibid. 
336-7. — The King's Behaviour towards her, 
ibid. 351.-^He sends to urge her to submit 
to the determination of four Temporal and 
four Spiritual Lords, which she refuses^ ibid. 

^ ib. — Sentence of Divorce pronounced against 
her, ibid. 358.-— Her Marriage with the King 

■ is declared void by Act of Parliament, ibid. 
364. — Her Answers to the Messengers sent 

- by the King to complain of her claiming the 
Title of Queen, ibid. 365-6.— Her Death) and 
Letter to the King, ibid. 368. 

CATLIN, Sir Robert, Chief Justice of K. B. 
14Elii.l vol. 957, 1043. 

CAVE, Ambrose* See Waiters, BdwIotuL 

CAVENAGH, Maurice. — His Trial with 
Edmund Poor and William Bowland, for 
stealing Cows in Ireland, 1 WilL and Mary, 
1689, 1^ vol. 629.— Evidence against them, 
ibid. ib. — Poor and Bowland are found 
Guilty, but CaVenagh is acquitted, ibid. 
630. — Sentence of Death is passed upon 
Bowland and Poor, ibid. 632. 

OELLIER, Elizabeth.— Her Trial for High 
Treason, in being concerned in the Meal- 
Tub Plot, 32 Car. 2, 1680, 7 vol. 1043.— 
The Indittment, ibid. ib. — Evidence against 
her, ibid. 1044. — She objects to the Evidence 
of Dangerfleld, that he bad been convicted 
of Felony, and other offences, ibid. 1049.— 
His Evidence is set aside, ibid. 1052.— The 
Jury acquit her, ibid. 1054.— Roger North's 
Account of her, and of this Trial, ibid. 1064. 
—Her Trial at the Old Bailey, in the same 
year, for publishing a Scandalous and Sedi- 
tious Libel, ibid. 1183.— The Indictment 
ibid. ib/^The same in Latin, ibid. 1213. 
• -^-Evidence against her, ibid. 1189.— Baron 
Weston'* Charge to the Jury, ibid. 1203. 
— Thtf July find her Guilty, ibid. 1208. 
-^Her Sentence, ibid* ib. 

CHADWICK, Thomas.— His Trial with Wil- 
ham Battragh, for High Treason, in being 
concerned in the Rebellion of 1745, 20 Geo. 
2, .1746, 18 vol. 359.— Evidence ag.ainst 

,fhem, ibid, ib.— The Jury find them Guilty, 
ibid. 364.— Chadwick is executed, ibid. ib. 

.r-Battragh is reprieved, ibid. 366. 

CflAMBERS, James. See Bernardi, John. 

CHAMBERS, Richard.— Proceedings against 

him in the Star-Chamber for Seditious 

Speeches before the Privy Coundl, 5 Car. l, 

•1629, 3 vol. 373.— He is fined 2,000/; and or- 

?dered tosabraithimself,ibid.375.— He refuses 

to sign the Submission, ibid, ib.— His Fine is 

. estr^ted into the Exchequeri ibid, 376.— 

.His Plea in the Exchequer, that the Fine was 

.imposed by the King and his Council, and 

.not by^hii Peers, according to Law, ibid. 

377.— The Attorney General moves the 



Court that the Plea may not be filed, 
ibid. 379. — He sues out a Habeas Corpus, 
but is remanded, ibid. 380. — He after- 
wards petitions the Long Pariiament for 
redress, ibid, ib.— He dies in poverty, ibid. 
383. 

CHARLES THE FIRST, King of England.— 
His Conduct in the Case of Lord Strafford, 

3 vol. I512.-He impeaches Lord fcim- 
bolton, and Five Members of the House of 
Commons, 4 vol. 83,— He orders the Im- 
peached Members to be delivered up to 
him, ibid. 86. — He goes himself to the House 
to demand them, ibid. 87.— His Speech to 
the House on that Occasion, ibid. 90. — His 
Trial for High Treason, before the High 
Court of Justice, 24 Car. l, 1649, 4 vol. 
989.— Sommaiy of the Debates in Parlia- 
ment which led to this Trial, ibid, ib.— Lord 
Clarendon's Account of the Debates in 
Pariiament, ibid. 991.-^Act of Pariiatoent 
creating the High Court of Justice i&t the 
Trial of the King, ibid . 1 045.— Arrangements 
for the conduct of the Trial, ibid. 1058.— 
Singular Conduct of Lady Fairfax at the 
commencement of the Trial, ibid. 1005, 
1067 (note). — The Trial commences, and 
the King is brought to the Bar, ibid, 993, 
1069.— Mr. Cook, Solicitor for the Common- 
wealth, opens the Charge against him, ibid. 
995, 1070.— The Charge, ibid. 1070.— -The 
King refuses to answer till he is satisfied of 
the Authority of the Court, ibid. 995, 1073, 
1074. — His Reasons against the Authority 
of the Court, ibid. 1085.— Codt moves for 
Judgment against the King upon his per- 
sisting in his refusal to answer, ibid. 1094. 
—Evidence produced against him, ibid. 
1101. — The King desires to be heard in his 
Defence before the Lords and Commons, 
ibid. 1006.— This is refused by the Court, 
ibid. 1007, 1126.— The Covrt resolve on 
a Sentence of Condemnation, and that it 
shall extend to Death, ibid. Ill 3.— The Lord 
President's Speech in passing ilie Sentence 
upon him, ibid. 1008.— The Sentence, ibid. 
1118.— Brutal Conduct of the Soldiers on 
his passing from the Court, ibid. 1128.— His 
Interview with his Children immediately 
before his Execution, ibid. 1130 {note)^-^ 
The Waixant for his Execution, ibid. 1133. 
—His Cbnduct when going to the Sfcaffold, 
ibid. 1132.~His Speech on the Scaffold, 
ibid. 1137.— His Execution^ ibid; 1141.— 
William Walker said to hate been thfe Exe- 
cutioner/ 5 tol. 1155 (note),— His Character, 

4 rol. 1144.— Mr. Fox's Remarks upon the 
Justice and Policy of. the Execution of 
Cbaries the First, ibid. 1145.— Anecdote re- 
specting a Letter from Charies to hit Queen 
intercepted by Cromwell and Ireton, ibid! 
1 152»— Singular Account of his Burial^ 5 vol* 

. 1339.— Remarks on the Eikon Baailike, ibid' 
1154. /^ 

CHi^ES tiE SECOND, King of Enilana. 
— Hjs unprincipled Conduct respecting Ee- 



titE STATE Trials. 



^ 



ligioB ddriDg the whole of his ReigD, 6 vol. 
30d (note.) — Oppressive character of the 
last Foor years of bis Reign, 8 vol. 242. — 
His unfeeling Speech on the remission of 
part of the Sentence against Lord William 
Rassel, 9 vol. 684 ^note). — Doubts respect- 
ing the authority on which this Anecdote 
rests, ibid. 685 (note). — Differing Opiniofas 
of t)r. Johnson and Mi*. JBurke on his Cha- 
racter, ibid. 910 (note). — Mr. Burke's Cha- 
iteief <yf him, ibid. 970. 

CfiARLTON, Sir Job, Judge of C. P. ^5 
Car. 2. — He was one of the Judges before 
whom William, Lord Kussel was tried, 9 
vol. 592. 

CHAKN£LL, Nathaniel. Se€ AicheverelL 
fniliam. 

CHARNOGR, John. See Abington, JEdward. 

CHA.RNOCK, ftobdrt and Anne; See Grey 
de Werk, Ford, Urd. 

CHARNOCK, Robert.--His Trial with Ed- 
wai'd Ring and Thomas Keyes at the Old 
Bailey for High Treason, in being con- 
cerned in the Assassination Plot, 8 Will. 3, 

^ 1696, 12 vol. 1377:— The Indictment, ibid. 
1379, 1386. — Charriock rfequires a copy of 
the Indictment and Counsel, which are re- 
fused, ibid. 1381.— Th6y plead Not Guilty, 
ibid. 1386; — Speeches of the King's Counsel 
ibMhe I^rosecutidn, ibid. i391. — Evidence 
for tbe Prosecution, ibid. 1 397. — Chamock*s 
Defence, ibid. lii^Sf.—King's Defence, ibid. 
1440.— Reyes's Defence, ibid. 1442.— Reply 
of the Solicitor Oeneral, ibid. 1443.— Lord 
Hdlt's Charge te the Jury, ibid; 1447.— 
They are found Guilty, ibid. 1455. — Judg- 
ment agaiiist thfem, ibid. 1461.— their Ene- 
cutioii, ibid. ib.-i-Papei-s delivered by them 
id thfe SherifF, ibid. 1462.— Burnet's Account 

. of these Trials^ ibid. 1377 (note). 

CHAWORTH, William; Bee B^m, William, 
Xorir, 19 vdl. 1177. 

CH£ETUAM> James. See Walker, Thomas. 

GllESHtRE, Johta, Serjednt-at-Ldw, 15 vol. 
1883, 16 Vol. 8, Ittol. 311. 

CHfetWYND, William.— His Trial at the 

. Old Bailey for the Murder of Mr. Thomas 
Ricketts, by stabbing him with a knife at 
School^ 17 Geo. 2, 1748, 18 vol* 289.— Evi- 
dence for. the Prosecution, ibid. 291.— The 
Counsel for the Prisoner contend that the 
facts proved do not amount to Murder, ibid. 
802. — Reply ai the Counsel for the Prose- 
eption, ibid» 309. — The Jury find a Special 

. Verdict at the suggestion of the Court, ibid. 
815.— Case laid before Sir John Strange by 
the friends of Mr. Ricketts, respecting the 
bringing an Appeal if the Prisoner procured 
a Pardon, . with his Opinion thereon, ibid. 
317* — Chetwynd*8 Petition for a Pardon, 
ibid. 820.— Report tff the Attorney and 

- SoUcit|»r General upon the Petiticxi, ibid. 
322««-The Pardon is granted, and be is 



discharged upon pleading it, ibid. 326.--^l1ic 
Court of King's Bench refuse to call upon 
him for Bail for his appearance in an Appeal, 
or for Good Behaviour, ibid. ib. 

CHICHESTER, Thomas, Bishop of.— He is 
impeached by the Commons -for urging the 
Judges to give false Answers to the Questions 
proposed to them by Richard the Second 
respecting the legality of the Commission 
to Gloucester's Faction, 11 Ric. 2, 1388, 1 
vol. 121. — He is found Guilty by the Lords, 
ibid. ib. — He is sentenced to Death, but on 
accbiint of his Dignity is only banishedj ibid. 
12d. 

CLARE, Eari of. See Bedford, Earl of. 

CLARE, Walter.— His Trial under a Special 
Coindiissioii of Oyer and Teiminer at 
Dublin for High Treason in being concerned 
in tbe Irish Insurrection, 48 Geo. 3, 1803, 
28 VOL 887.— The Indictment, ibid.ib.— 
thrideiice for the Prosecution, ibid. 891. -~ 
Mr. Mac-Nally's Speech fdr the Prisoner, 
ibid. 901. — Evidence for the Prisoner, ibid. 
908. — Mr. Mac-Nally*s Speech on sutnming- 
np the Evidence for the Prisoner, ibid. 914. 
— Reply of the Solicitor General, ibid. 918. 
—The Jury find him Guilty, ibid. 926.— He 
is sentenced, but respited, ibid. ib. 

CLARENCE, George, Duke of. Brother to 
Edward the Fourth. — His Attainder for High 
Treason, 18 Edw. 4, 1478, 1 vol. 275.— He is 
said to have been stifled in a Butt of Malmsey, 
ibid. ib. — He is accused by this Attainder 
of falsely laying Bastardy to Edward 4th, 
which was afterwards maintained by Richard, 
Duke of Gloucester, to the disherison of the 
King's sons, ibid. 276. 

CLARENDON, Edward Hyde, Earl of. Lord 
Chancellor. See Hyde, Edward. — Proceed- 
ings in Parliament against him for High 
Treason and other High Crimes and Misde- 
meanours, 15 Car. 2, 1663, 6 vol. 294. — 
Lord Bristol exhibits Articles against him 
in the House of Lords, ibid. 304.^— Tbe 
Judges deliver their Opinion that the Charges 
in the Articles do not amount to Treason, 
and that, by the Law of England, a Charge 
of High Treason cannot be originally exm 
hibited In the House of Lords by one Peer 
agaitist another, ibid. 312. — ^The Judges 
give their Reasons for their Opinion, ibid. 
813. — Resolutions of the Lords upon the 
Charge, ibid. 817. — Proceedings against 
him upon an Impeachment of High Treason 
and other Misdemeanours, 19 Car. 2, 1667, 
ibid. ib. — Debate in the House of Commons 
respecting his Impeachment, ibid. 323.— The 
Comnons appoint a Committee to arrange 
the Accusation into heads, and report to 
the iioufte, ibid. 330; — The Committee 
^deliver Articles of Accusation against him 
to the House, ibid, ib.-— Debates thereon, 
ibid. 334.— The Commons resolve to carir 
up a Charge against him to the House of 



1 



24 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



Lords, ibid. 350.— Mr. Seymour carries up 
the Charge to the Lords« ibid. ib. — Mr. 
Seymour's Speech on delivering the Charge, 
ibid. ib. 393. — The Articles exhibited against 
him, ibid. 395. — The Lords refuse to commit 
him on account of the generality of the 
Charge, ibid. 351. — Debates of the Com- 
mons thereupon, ibid. ib. — The Commons 
desire a Conference with the Lords, and 
Reasons are delivered for the generality of 
the Charge, ibid. 356.— The Lords still 
refuse to commit him until some special 
Treason is assigned, ibid. 358. — Tlte Com- 
mons desire a Free Conference on the 
Matter, in which the'Lords concur, ibid. ib. 
— Report of the Conference, ibid. 363.— 
The Lords still refuse to commit him, ibid. 
367.^Debates in the House of Commons 
thereon, ibid, ib.— rLord Clarendon with- 
draws beyond seas, ibid. 374.— His Petition 
and Address to the House of Lords, ibid. 
375. — Debates in the Commons upon this 
Pietition, ibid. 380. — Tlie Lords pass a Bill 
of Banishment against him, ibid. 385. — De- 
bates in the Commons upon the Bill, ibid, 
ib. — The Bill passes the Commons, ibid, 
3dO. — ^The bill for banishing him, ibid. 391. 
Protests against the Bill in the House of 
Lords, ibid. 392. — His own Remarks on 
these Proceedings, ibid, 393 (note). — His 
Answers to the Charges seriatim, ibid. 397. 
— Burnet's Account of these Proceedings 
against Lord Clarendon, ibid. 317. — Anec- 
dote related by Burnet of his averseness 
to Corruption, ibid. 331 (note). — He is 
appointed Lord High Steward on the Trial 
of Lord Mori ey for Murder, 18 Car. 2, 1666, 
ibid. 772. — His Character of Archbishop 
Laud, 4 vol. 603 (note). — His Character of 
Mr. Hampden, 3 vol. 825 (note). — His Ac- 
count of the effect of the Proceedings of 
Charles the First against the Five Members, 
4 vol. 83 (note). — His Account of the De- 
bates which led to the Trial of the King, 
ibid. 991 (note). — His Account of the 
Trials of the Duke of Hamilton, Lord Capel, 
and others, before the High Court of Justice, 
ibid. 1241. — His Character of Lord Capel, 
ibid. 1248.— His Account of the effect of 
the Judgment in favour of Ship-Money, 3 
vol. 1254 (note). 

CLARK, Robert, Baron of the Exchequer, 32 
Eliz. 1 vol. 1277. — He was one of the .Tudges 
who attended in the House of Lords on the 
Trial of the Earls of Essex and Southamp- 
ton, 43 Eiiz. 1600, 1 vol. 1334.— His Argu- 
ment in the Great Case of Impositions, in 
favour of the King's Prerogative of imposing 
Taxes by the mere Act of the Crown, 4 
Jac. 1, 1606, 2 vol. 382. 

CLARK, William. See Markfaniy Sir Griffin. 

CLARKE, William. See Gibbons, John. 

CLEMENT, Gregory, 5 vol. 1004, 1283. See 
Regicides. 

CLEMENT, William In nel. — Proceedings 



against him for a Contempt in publishing 
the Trials of Thistlewood and others, con- 
trary to an Order of the Court, 1 Geo. 4, 
1820, 33 vol. 1335.— The Court impose a 
Fine of 500/. upon him, ibid. 1565. 

CLENCHE, Dr. Andrew. See Harrismt 
Hejin/, Cole, John. — ^Trial of Henry Harrison 
for his Murder, 4 Will, and Mary, 1692, 
12 vol. 833.— Trial of John Cole for assist- 
ing in the same Murder, ibid. 875. 

CLERK, John, Advocate. — His Speech in de- 
fence of Alexander Maclaren, on his Trial 
in the High Court of Justiciary for Sedition, 
33 vol. 73. 

CLIFFORD, Henryy Counsel.— His Argu- 
ment for Benjamin Flower in the Court of 
King's Bench on the Return of a Habeas 
Corpus upon his Commitment by the House 
of Lords, 39 Geo. 3, 1799, 27 vol. 1025.— 
His Vindication of the Character of his 
Ancestor, Sir Thomaji Clififord, one of t|ie 
Cabal Ministers, from an Aspersion of Lord 
Kenyon's, ibid. 1065. — His Speedi in De- 
fence of the Editors of the Independent Whig 
for a Libel on Lord EUenborough, ibid. 1247. 

CLIFFORD, Sir Thomas. He was one of the 
Cabal Ministry, 27 vol. 1065. — ^Vindication 
of his Character from an Aspersion of Lord 
Kenyon's, ibid. ib. 

CLONMELL, Eari of. Chief Justice of K. B. 
in Ireland. — His Charge to the Jury on the 
Trial of William Jackson for Treason, 25 
vol. 870.— His Charge to the Jury on the 
Trial of Thomas Kennedy for High Treason^ 
in being concerned in the Rebellion of the 
Defenders, 26 vol. 383. — His Charge on the 
Trial of Patrick Hart, for the same Treason, 
ibid. 409. — His Address to the Grand Juries 
assembled under the Special Commission for 
the Trial of the Defenders in 1796, ibid. 425. 

CLOPTON, Sir Walter, Chief Justice of K. B. 
21 Ric..2,l vol.129. 

CLOTWORTHY,SirJohn. See HoUis, DenzU. 

COBBETT, William.— His Trial at West- 
minster on an ex-officio Information for 
Libels upon Lord Hardwicke, Lord Lieute- 
nant, and other high Officers of Ireland, 44 
Geo. 3, 1804, 29 vol. 1.— Counsel for the 
Prosecution and for the Defendant, ibid. ib. 
— ^The Information, ibid. 2. — Speech of the 
Attorney General for the Prosecution, ibid. 
21.— Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 36. 
Mr. Adam's Speech in his Defence, ibid. 37. 
—Lord Ellenborough's Charge to the Jury, 
ibid . 49.— The Jury find the Defendant Guilty, 
ibid. 54. — Trial of an Action brought against 
him by Mr. Plunkelt, when Solicitor Gene- 
ral for Ireland, for a Libel, 44 Geo. 3, 1804, 
ibid. 53. — The Declaration, ibid.ib. — Coun- 
sel for the Plaintiff and for the Defendant, 
ibid, ib.— Mr. Erskine's Speech for the Pro- 
secution, ibid. 61. — Evidence for the Prose- 
cution, ibid. 69.— Mr. Adam's Speech for 
the Defendant, ibid. 72. — Lord Ellen- 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



25 



borougb's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 78.^ — 
The Jury return a Verdict for the Plairitiff 
with 500/. Damages, ibid. 80. 

COBBY, John. See Jackson, William. - 

COBHAM, Sir John. See Gloucester^ Thomas, 
Dukev/. . - 

COBHAM, Lord.— 'His Trial and Examina- 
tion for Heresy before the Archbishop of 
Canterbury, 1 Hen. 5. 1413, 1 vol.226. — 
Application is made to the King for his Con- 
currence before Proceedings are taken 
against him, ibid. 227. — The King ad- 
monishes him, and then gives Authority to 
the Archbishop to proceed, ibid. ib.-^He 
is cited, and excommunicated for Contumacy 
in not appearing, ihid. 225.— His Confession 
of Faith, ibid. 229. — His Answers to the 
Archbishop respecting Transubstantiation, 
ibid. 233. — Respecting the Authority of 
Holy Church, ibid. 239. — Respecting Con- 
fession, ibid. 243. — Respecting Pilgrimage 
and the Worship of Images, ibid. 244. — 
His Condemnation, ibid. 245.— The Bishops 
counterfeit an Abjuration in his name, ibid. 
249. — He escapes from the Tower, ibid. 
253.—- He is hanged and burned, ibid. 254. 
— His Speech at his Execution, ibid. 256. — 
Record of the Proceedings against him, ibid, 
ib. — ^The forged Record of his Indictment 
and Outlawry for High Treason, ibid. 265. 
— Disputes between Protestant and Popish 
Writers about his Character, ibid. 256. 

COCHRANE, Sir John, of Ochiltree. See 
Loudoun, James, Earl of, 

COCKELL, William, Serjeant.at.Law.--His 
Speech for the Prosecution on the Trial of 
Joseph Hanson for a Misdemeanour in 
encouraging the Weavers of Manchester in 
a Conspiracy to raise the price of Wages, 
31 vol.11. 

CODLING, William.— His Trial with John 
Reid, William Macfarlane, and George 
Easterby, in the Admiralty Court, for felon- 
iously destroying the Brig Adventure on 
the High Seas in order to defraiid the Under- 
writers, 43 Geo. 3, 1802, 28 vol. 1T7. — Sir 
William Scott's Charge to the Grand Jury, 
ibid. 178. — ^Abstract of the Indictment, ibid. 
180. — Counsel for the Prosecution and for 
the Prisoners, ibid. 185. — Mr. Garrow's 
Speech for the Prosecution, ibid. ib. — Evi- 
dence for the Prosecution, ibid. 208. — De- 
fences of the Prisoners, ibid. 268. — Mr. 
Erskine's Argument for Easterby, that there 
was not Evidence, as against him, of any 
Offence within tlie Jurisdiction of the Court, 
ibid. 274. — Evidence for the Prisoners, ibid. 
301. — Lord Ellenborough's Charge to the 
Jury, ibid. 309.— The Jury find Codling, Mac- 
farlane, and Easterby Guilty, and acquitReid, 
ibid. 344. — Sir William Scott passes Sentence 
of Death upon Codling, ibia. ib. — Codling 
is executed, ibid. 345.-:- Easterby and Mao- 
fairlane are pardoned, ibid. ib. 



COKE, Arundel. See Woodbume, Edward, 

COKE, Sir Edward, Attorney General, 2 vol/ 
94. — He states the Charge against the Earls 
of Essex and Southampton, 1 vol. 1337.:— 
His Speech for tlie Prosecution on the Trial of 
Sir Cnristopher Blunt and others, ibid. 1420. 
— He conducts the Prosecution of Sir Walter 
Raleigh, 2 vol. 5. — His violent Behaviour on 
that occasion, ibid. 7, 9, 16, 20, 26. — His 
Speech for the Prosecution on the Trial of the 
Conspirators in the Powder Plot, ibid. 166. 

--— — — — Chief Justice of C. P. 6 Jac. 
1,^2 vol. 568, 770. 

— '• Chief Justice of K.~ B. 

2 vol. 1043. — He is one of the Commis- 
sioners for the Trial of the Murderers of Sir 
Thomas Overbury, 13 Jac. 1, 2 vol. 91 1, 952. 



His Speech in the Star- 

Chamber on the Proceedings against Mr. 
Wraynham for slandering Ix>rd Chancellor 
Beacon, 16 Jac. t, 1618, 2 vol. 1072.— His 
Speech in the House of. Commons against 
. Loans, 3 Car, 1, 1627, 3 vol. 63. His Ob- 
servations on the Judgment of the Court of 
King's Bench in Sir Thomas Darneirs Case, 
ibid. 68, 77. — He opens the Charge on he- 
half of the Commons on the Impeachment 
of Lord Treasurer Middlesex, 22 Jac. .1, 
1624, 2 vol. 1190. — His Argument at the 
Conference between the two Houses of Par- 
liament on the Liberty.of the Subject^ 3 vol. 
126i — He proposes . the Petition of Rights 
in the House of Commons, ibid. 188. — Mr. 
Hargrave's Developement of the Princjples 
upon which he supposes Sir Edward Cfoke 
to have proposed the Petition of Rights, 2 vol. 
374. — Mr. Barrington's Observations upon 
his Parliamentary conduct, 3 vol. 81 (note). 

COKE, John. See Brandreth, JeremioJi, 

COLE, John. See Harrison, Hcwy.— His 
.Trial at the Old Bailey for the Murder of 
Dr. Clenche, 4 Will, and Mary, i692, 12 
vol. 875. — ^The Jury acquit him, ibid. 884. 

COLEMAN, Edward.— His Trial at the Bar 
of the Court of King's Bench for High 
Treason in being concerned in the Popish 
Plot, 30 Car. 2, 1678, 7 vol. 1.— Indictment 
against him, ibid. 3,'--Speeches of the King's 
Counsel for the - Prosecution, ibid. .6. — '< 
Oates*s Evidence against him, ibid. .15^^ 

. Other Evidence against him, ibid. 30. — IjU,- 
Defence, ibid. 59. — Reply of the Soli'^irt -,^i 
General, ibid. 61.— Chief Justice F^iLt,««; 
Charge to the Jury, ibid. ^^—'Ihf^^^?^^^ 
him Guilty ibid 70.-Senten^^J^^^^^^^^ 
him, ibid. 72.— He is execut "»f' '" l" ;L" 
His conduct at the place.n^f if ,^^, ^^^'^'^ 
573.~Burnet:sAccour-**^*' ^ ^^^- ^^^- 
— BuBneVs Account. See Bertiardi, John* 

COLEPEPER,Wrhomas, Lord, Lo^d Rfeeper. 

COLLEDGE, Lord HigH Steward^ on th^ Trial 

for High Ti^^udjiey^ 3 vol. 404*— His Address 

Conspirac3*wlvfe Judges, id the Slar-Chamblf, 

I to the Circuits, directing them to 



^6 



GENERAL IStDEX TO 



8 vol. 549. — His Petitions to the King pre- 
• Viotii to the Trial, ibid, ib.— The iBdict- 
th^nty ibid. 5Ci7, — He desires some Papers, 
^hich had been takeh from him, to be re- 
stored before he pleads, which is denied by 
the Conn, ibid. 570.— He pleads Not Guilty, 
Ibid. 582. — his Solicitors are called upon to 
tji^itet for a Contempt in giving him the 
Papers, ibid. 584. — The Codrt refuse to re- 
tarn bim his Papers, but allow him to make 
tise of Some bf them for his Defence in the 
hftfkli of a third p^Hotiy ibidi 587.— The 
King's Counsel open the Charge, ibid* 588. 
•— Evidence against him, ibid. 591. — At the 
close ot the Case for the Crown he objects 
that there is no Evidence of a treasonable 
Conspiracy, but the Court overrule his Ob- 
jection, ibid. 619.— 'His Defence, ibid. 622. 
'^Etiledee ht bim, ibid. 626.--Oate8's £vi^ 
B^nee fbt him, ibid. 646.^— He sums tip the 
Btideiice fbr hh D«fenc6« Ibid. 675. — 
Eepljr of the King'ftZCodn^eli ibid. 694.— 
Chief Juitiee North's Charge to the Jury, 
ibidk ri(>>-The Jury find him Guilty^ ibid. 
714; — Setftence of death psissed upon him, 
. ibidi ibi— His Speech at the plac6 of £xe- 
dition, ibid. 717.— Sir John Hawles's Re- 
marks upon this Trial, ibid. 723.— AecOunts 
of this Trial by Burnet and other Historians, 
ibidi 549 (note). — Sir John Hawles says, 
thiit ** perhaps CoUedge made the best'De- 
fence ever made bv a Defendant upon a 
dUpttal Indictm^nt/^ 11 vol. 466^ 

COtiLIER, Jereiny. See Cook, Sluidrach. — 
tie was the Author of the Historical Dic- 
tionary and other learned works^ 13 vol. 411 
. (note). 

COLLIEKi Joseph. See Waiket, Thmaa. 

COLXiINSi Darby. See Oolding^ John. 

GDlIilNS, John. See Pole, Sir Geoffrey. 

COLLI^S, John. See 0W», John, 

COMPTON, Dr. Henry, Bishop of Oxford. 
See Seven Bishops. — Granger*s Account of 
him, ia vol. 188. 

GOMPTON, Dr. John, Bishop of London.— 
Proceedings against him by the Commis- 
sioners fdr Ecclesiastical Affairs for not sus- 
pending Dr. Sharp, Rector of St. Giles's, 2 
Jac. 3, 1686, 11 vol. 1123.— the King's 

9f «tter to him requiring him to suspend Dr. 

Th<4*':n, ibid. 1155. — His Answer, ibid. ib. — 

sla^tieaVoceedings against him by the Eccle- 
• tence of SC'Om mission ers, ibid. 1157. — Sen- 

^164. — Buril^~)ension passed against him, ibid. 

itigs^ ibid, i lilt's Acdduttt of these Proeeed- 

COjTYte, John,'^^^.®'^ . 
732, i4l2. ^eant-at-Law, 15 vol. 

CdkYKS, Sir. John, Baroriv 

3 Geo. 2, If vol. 570, ^'he Exchequer, 



CONJNGSBY, thomfts, Lord^-r ^ 

i» Parliament against him and \:^'?<^!«^**1SS ^^^^ , ^ , xx. . , l 

^ \ Sir Charles \ COOK, John, Counsel.— Hia Arffmuept in \\i9 



Porter, on animpe&ehment of High Treason, 
5 William and Mary, 1693, 12 vol. 1279,— 
Articles of Impeachment, ibid. ib. — The 
Lords resolve not to ptoeeed With the Itn* 
peachmant, ibid. 1284. 

CONINGSMARK, Charles John, Ccttttot.— 
His Trial with George Borosky, Christopher 
Vratz, and John Stem, for the Marder of 
Mr. Thynn, 34 Car. 2, 1682, 9 vol. 1. — Being 
Foreigners, an Interpreter is sworn to explain 
the Charge to them, ibid. 2« — ^The Indict- 
ment, ibid. 8. — ^They plead NotGy^ilty, and 
claim a Jury de medietate lingue, ibid. 8. — 
Sir Francis Withens's Speech for the Pro- 
secution, ibid. 15. — Evidence against them, 
ibid. 19. — Chief Justice Pemberton calls 
upon the Count for his Defence, and ex- 
plains to him the points of the Evidence for 
the. Prosecution which he has to answer, 
ibid. 59. — ^I'he Count addresses the Jory in 
French and Dutch, ibid. 62, dd.^The King's 
Counsel reply, ibid. 68. — Tl>e Chief Justice 
charges the Jury, ibid. 77. — The Jury acquit 
the Couiit, but find the others Guilty, ibid. 
80.— The Recorder passes Sentence of 
Death upon them, ibid. 81. — Their Execu- 
tion, ibid. 84. — Burnet's Account of their 
Conduct in prison, after their Condemnation, 
and at the place of Execution, ibid. 83* — 
Dr. Horneck's Account of their Conduct, 
ibid. 94. — Sir John Hawles's Remarks on 
this Trial, ibid. 125. — Reresby's Account of 
this Transaction, ibid. 1 (note), 

CONSTABLE, John. See Kfr%, Cotonet 
Richard, 

CONSTABLE, Sir Robert.— He is indicted 
for Treason, in being concerned in the Lin- 
colnshire Rebellion, with Sir John Bulmer 
and his Lady, Sir Francis Pigot, Sir Stephen 
Hamilton, Sir Thomas Piercy, Aske, and 
several others, in the reign of Henry the 
Eighth, 1 vol. 478.— They are foond Gtiihjr,' 
and executed, ibid. ib. — Lady Bulniet is 
burned in Sinithfldd, ibid. ib. 

CONWAY, lord. See Buckingham, GeorgCy 
Du/ceo/*.*<- Proceedings against him in Par- 
liament for High Crimes and Misdemea'* 
nours, 2 Car. 1, 1626, 2 vol. 1267.— His 
Correspondence with Lord Bristol, ibid. 
1274. — The House of Lords resolve to hear 
Lord Bristol's Charge against him, ibid. 
1281.— -Lord Bristors Articles of impeach- 
ment against him, ibid. 1290. — His Answer 
thereto, ibid. 1441.— rThe Parliament is 
abruptly dissolved, ibid. 1446. 

CONY, Mt— Ludlow's Account of his Case, 
5 vol. 935.— He refuses to pajr Taxes to 
Cromwell, and on the amodnt being taken 
violently from him, sues the Collector, ibid. 
936. — Cromivrell sends the Counsel who 
pleaded for him to the Toi/^er, ibid. ib.-^He 
compromises the Action, ibid. 937.— Lord 
Clarendon's Accoimt of thiij Cas6, ibid. ib. 



THE STAtE TRIALS. 



a 



House of liOrds in Support of Lilburae*s 
Claim for Reparation for the Sentence pass- 
ed upon him in the Star-Chamberi 13 Car. 
1,1637, 3 vol. 1352. 

-, Solicitor General to th6 Common- 



wealth. — Speech intended to have been 
f|>oken by him on the Trial of Charles the 
Ifirsty 4 vol. 1018. See Uegicidet, 

COOK, Peter.— ftis Trial at the Old Bailey for 
High Tt-eason in being toncenied in the 
Assassination Plot, 8 Will. 3,' 1696, 13 vol. 
311.— The Indictment, ibid. 345.--'riie At- 
torney General opens the Csise against him, 
ibid. 849. — Evidence agaitist him, ibid. 351. 
— Serjeant Darnairs Defence of him, ibid. 
356. — Evidence for him, ibid. 359.— Sit B, 
ShoWfet sumil up tb0 £videnc6 for the De- 
ftnce, ibid. 876.— The Solicitor General rte- 
plies^ ibid. 382.«-^Chief Justice Treby charges 
the Juiy, ibid. 386.--The Jury find him 
G«ilty, ibid. 894.--*-Sentence of death passed 
upon him, ibid. 395. — Pie is iifterwardi par- 
dotted) upon condition of his transporting 
. himself for Life, ibid» 397. — Extract of his 
Confessions and Examinations, ffom Dal- 
rymple's Memoirs, ibid. 898. 

COOK, Shadrach.— Proceedings against him, 
Jeremy Collier, and William Snatt, three 
Non-juring Clergymen, for publicly absolv- 
ing Sir William Parkyns, and Sir John 
Fnend, 8 Will. 3, 1696, 13 vol. 40^.— Bur- 
net's Account of this matter, ibid. ib. — Cook 
. and Snatt are committed to Newgate, and 
Collier absconds, ibid. 408. — Collier's De- 
fence of his conduct, ibid. ib. — A Declara- 
tion ol* the Archbishops and Bishops, on the 
subject, ibid. 41 1 . — Collier's further Defence 
of his Conduct, in consequence of the De- 
claration, ibid. 413. — Proceedings against 
Cook and Snatt in the King's Bench, ibid. 
420. — ^A Special Verdict was found, ibid. 
421. — Argument of the Special Verdict for 
the Defendants, ibid. 42t. 

C0OPER,-9ir Anthony Ashley. See Shaftes- 
biiryf Jjithorti/, Earl of. — He Sat as one of 
the Judges on the Trial of the Regicides, 
5Toi. 986. 

COOPER, Charles. See ThUtkwood, Arthur, 
*^He pleads Guilty to an Indictment for 
High Treason, in being concerned in the 
Cato-Street Conspiracy, 1 G^o. 4, 1820^ 33 
vol. 1544.'— He receives a Pardon, on con« 
dition. of being transported for life, ibid. 
1566. 

ettOTHlLL, William. See CargUl, Donald. 

COPLEY, Anthony. See Markham, Sir 
Griffin. 

COPLEY, John Singleton. — Serjeant at Law, 
. 82 vol. 765. — His Speech, on Summing up 
t the Evidence for the Defence, on Watson's 

Trial for HighT^^s^OB, 57 Geo. 3, 1817, 

32 vol. 499. 



COPLEY, Sir John Singleton, Solicitor-Gene- 
ral> 33 vol. 7ll« — His Reply for the Crown, 
on Thistlewood's Trial for Hig^h Treason, 1 
Geo. 4, 1820, 33 vol, 894ft^tiis Speeeh on 
opening the Case for the Prosecution^ on the 
Trial of Ings upon the same Indictment, 
ibid. 959.^ — His Reply for the Prosecution, 
on the Trial of Brunt on the same Indict- 
ment, ibid. 1293. 

CORBET, Miles, 5 vol. 1301. See Rt^ddei. 

CORBETT, Sir ifohn. See BarmU^ Sir 
Thorhas. 

CORBETT, Richard. See Bofnbridge, Thomat. 

CORKER, James,. See Anderson^ Lmet, 
Wakemafif Sir George^ 

CORNISH, Henry. I^e Femkjfi J^* ^^ 
kington, ThotnoM. 

CORNWALLIS, Charles, Lord.-llis trial in 
the Court of the Lord High Steward, for the 
Murder of Robert Clerk, 30 Car. 2. 1678,7 
vol. 143.— -He pleads Not tiuilty, ibid. 148, 
— ^The Attorney General's Speech for the 
Prosecution, ibid. 149. — He is acquitted, 
ibid. 157. — Sir Thomas Jones's Report of 
his Case, ibid. 143 (note). 

COSINj John, 1:)r.— Proceedings in PaHia^ 
ment against him, for introducing Popish 
Ceremonies, 16 Car. 1, 164a, 4 vOl. 22.*- 
Articles of Impeachment agaitlst him, ibid. 
23. — He vindicates himself by fais Answer, 
and the Lords dischafge hitn, upon hii giving 
Bail for his Appearance, ibid. 28.— AccoUUt 
of him, ibid. lb. (note). 

COTTAM^ Thomas. See Conxion, Edmund, 

COtTINGTON, Francis, Lord, Chahfcelloi' of 
the Exchequer.-^HiS Speech in the StAr- 
Chamber, on delivering his Opinion in favour 
of a severe Sentence on Henry Sherfield. for 
breaking a painted Wit^doW in a Church at 
Salisburv, 3 vol. 539 •— His Speech in the 
same Court, on delivering his Opitiidn 
respecting the pr6per Sentence to be passed 
on Prynhe, for publishing Histtio-mdiStiX| 
ibid. 574. 

COTTON, Edward. See Mateng^t Peter. 

COTTON, Sit Robert, See Bedford, Earl oj. 
— Proceedings in the Star-Chamber against 
him and others, for publishing a scanaalous 
and 'seditious Writing, 6 Car.l, 1631, 3 vol. 
387. — His Speech in the House of Commons 
against the Duke of Buckinghatn, ibid. 1^67. 
—His Account of Proceedings, in different 
Countries and kt different times, agaitist 
Ambassadors for Crimes, 5 vol. 495. 

COUNTER, James. See Bernardi^ J^n. 

COVENTRY, Thomas, Lord^ Loi:d Keeper, 
' — He was Lord Higl^ Steward, on the! Trial 
of Lord Audley^ 3 vol. 404.— Hi^ Addrtts 
to the Twelve Judges^ id Ui« Star«Chitmblry 
previous to the Circuits, directing them to 



as 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



explain in their Charges at the several 
Assizes, the nature and design of levying 
Ship-Money, 1635, ibid. 825.--His Address 
on a similar Occasion in the following year, 
ibid. 839. — He delivers his Opinion in the 
Star-Chamber in favour of a mild Sentence 
upon Henry Sherfield, for breaking a painted 
window in a Church at Salisbury, ibid. 559. 

COVENTRY, Thomas, Lord. See Norths 
ampton, Spencer ^ Earl of. — Proceedings 
against him and Eight other Peers, for ab- 
senting themselves from the House of Lords, 
contrary to an Order of the House, 1642, 4 
vol. 176. . . 

COWPER, Spencer, Counsel.— His Trial with 
Ellis Stephens, William Rogers, and John 
Marson, at Hertford Assizes, for the Murder 
of Sarah Stout, 11 Will. 3, 1699, 13 vol. 1105. 
— The Indictment, ibid. ib. — They plead Not 
Guilty, ibid. 1107.— Opening Speech of the 
Counsel for the Prosecution, ibid. 1109. — 
Evidence against them,ibid.l 1 1 2. — Evidence 
that Cowper was last in Company with the 
Deceased, ibid. ib. — Evidence of the finding 
of the Body, ibid. 1116 et seq.^ — Evidence 
of the Physicians who examined the Body, 
ibid. 1123, 1126, 1128, 1129, 1130.— Evi- 
dence of Physicians respecting the Floating 
of Dead Bodies, ibid. 1131 et seq. 1158, 
1160, 1162. — Evidence of Sailors on the same 
subject, ibid. 1134. — Evidence against Ste- 
phens, Rogers, and Marson, ibid. 1137.— 
Mr. Cowper's Defence, ibid. 1143.— Evi- 
dence for the Defence, ibid. 1151. — Evi- 
dence of the finding of the Body,* ibid. ib. — 
Evidence of Dr. Sloane, as to the immediate 
cause of Death from drowning, ibid. 1155. 
—Evidence of other medical Men , ibid .1157. 
Evidence to Mr. Cowper's Character, ibid. 
1179. — Marson's Defence, ibid. 1180. — 
Evidence for him, ibid. 1182. — Mr. Baron 
Hatseirs Charge to the Jury, ibid. 1187. — 
The Jury acquit them, ibid. 1190. — Papers 
written soon after the Trial relating to this 
Case, ibid. ib. — ^An Appeal is afterwards 
prosecuted against them, but the Writ not 
being returned within the lime of Limitation, 
it could not be proceeded with, ibid. 1192. 

COWPER, William, Counsel.— He is of 
Counsel for the Prosecution on the Trial of 
Charnock and others for High Treason, 8 
Will. 3, 1696, 12 vol. 1446.— He is also of 
Counsel for the Prosecution on the Trial of 
Lord Mohun for the Murder of Richard 
Coote, 13 vol. 1035. — His Speech in Reply 
for the Prosecution, on the Trial of Sir Wm. 
Parky ns for High Treason in being con- 
cerned in the Assassination Plot, ibid. 123. 
—His Speech in the House of Commons, in 
the Diebate upon the Case of Ashby and 
White, 14 vol. 755. 

COWPER, William, Lord, Lord Chancellor. 
— He preside^in the House of Lords, on the 
Trial of Dr. Sacheverell, 1710,15 vol. 36.— 
He is appointed Lord High ^Steward, upon 



the Trial of Lord Derwentwater and others 
for' High Treason, 171 6, ibid. 777. — Also on 
the Trial of Lord Wintoun, ibid. 816 — 
Also on the Trial of Robert, Earl of Oxford, 
ibid. 1050. 

CRANBURNE, Charles.— His Trial at West- 
minster for High Treason in being con- 
cerned in the Assassination Plot^ 8 Will.' 3, 
1696, 13 vol. 221. — ^The Indictment, ibid. 
139.— He pleads Not Guilty, ibid. 142. — 
The Attorney- General opens the Case 
against him, ibid. 241. — Evidence against 
him, ibid. 243. — Lord Holt's charge to the 
Jury, ibid. 263. — The Jury find him Guilty, 
ibid. 266. — Lord Holt's Address on passing 
Sentence upon him, ibid. 307. — His Execu- 
tion, ibid. 310. 

CRANMER, Thomas, Archbishop of Canter- 
bury. — His Letter to Henry the Eighth in be- 
half of A nne Boley n, 1 vol. 41 5. — His Letter in 
behalf of Cromwell, ibid. 435.— rFroceedings 
against him for Treason and Heresy, 2 Mary, 
3 Philip and Mary, 1554, 1556, ibid. 767.— 
He hesitates to sign the Will of Edward the 
Sixth, excluding Mary from the Succession, 
ibid. 769. — He is sent to the Tower, and afterr 
wards removed to Oxford, ibid. 771. — He is 
cited before Brooks, Bishop of Gloucester, 
and other Commissioners appointed by the 
Pope, ibid.772. — His Conduct, on appearing 
before them, ibid. 773. — Brooks's Oration 
to him, ibid. ib» — Cranmer's Answer there- 
to, ibid. 798. — Dr. Martin's Oration, ibid. 
779.— Cranmer's Confession of Faith, ibid. 
781. — Dr. Story's Oration, ibid. 784.-— Con- 
versation between him and Dr. Martin con- 
cerning the obligation of Oaths taken against 
the Pope's Jurisdiction, ibid. 786.— Inter- 
rogatories proposed to him, with his Answers 
thereto, ibid. 790. — Brooks's Oration at the 
close of the Examination, ibid. 792. — ^Cran- 
mer's answer to the objection concerning 
his Marriage, and the Bondage of his Chil- 
dren, ibid. 801. — ^The Commissioners cite 
him to appear at Rome within 80 days, ibid. 
802. — His Letter to the Queen, after this 
Citation, ibid. 823. — A new Commission 
from the Pope, executed by Thurlby, Bishop 
of Ely, and Bonner, Bishop of London, ibid. 
837. — They proceed to degrade him, ibid. 
804. — Bonner's brutal Conduct to him, ibid, 
ib. — He appeals to the next General Council, 
ibid. ib. — His Instructions for drawing the 
Form of his Appeal, ibid. 833.— The Bishop 
of Ely refuses to admit the Appeal, ibid. 809 
— He is imprisoned for three years, ibid. 810. 
— Means taken to induce him to recant, ibid, 
ib. — He subscribes a Recantation, ibid. 812. 
Dr. Cole appointed to preach a funeral 
Sermon forhiro,ibid, 8 13.--Cranmer brought 
into the Church to hear the Sermon, ibid. 
815. — His Grief and Bepentance during the 
Sermon, 817, 857. — Being called upon to 
repeat his Recantation, he renounces it, 
ibid. 818. — ^He is taken from the Church to 
the Stake, and burned, ibid. 821 .-^His mag- 



The state trials. 



29 



naoimous Conduct at the Stake, ibid. 860.-— 
Dr. Taylor's Letter to him, ibid. 836. — Mr. 
Whiston's Inquiry into the Evidence of his 
Aecantation, ibid. 844. — Mr. Strype's Ac- 
count of his Death, ibid. 855. 

CRANSTOUN, Geoiye, Advocate.— His Ar- 
gument in the High Court of Justiciary, 
against the Relevancy of the Indictment 
against Wm. Edgar for administering un- 
lawful Oaths, 57 Geo. 3, 1817, 33 vol. 150. 
— His Argument against the Relevancy of 
the Indictment on the Trial of M'Kinley for 
a similar Offence, ibid. 282. 

CRAWFOORD, Alexander. See Oraham, 
John, 

CRAWFOORD, John. See Geddes, James. 

CRAWLEY, Sir Francis, Judge of C. P.— He 
is one of the Judges who sign the Opinion 
in favour of Ship-Money, 3 vol. 844. — His 
Argument in the Exchequer Chamber, on 
giving his Judgment in favour of Ship- 
Money, ibid. 1078. 

CREIGHTON, Robert. See Stmquhar, Lord. 

CREW, Sir Randolf, Lord Chief Justice of 
K. B. 1624. — He is removed from the Bench 
for discouraging Loan-Money, 3 vol. 1 (note). 
— Mr. HoUis's Panegyric upon him in the 
House of Lords, ibid. 1296. 

CREW, Sir Thomas, King's Serjeant, 7 Car. 1, 
3 vol. 408. 

CRISPE and DALMAHOY.— Their Case re- 
ported from the Loi'ds* Journals, 6 vol. 
1144. 

CROFTS, Sir George. See Foh, Sir Geqffr^. 

CROKE, Sir George, Justice of K. B. 2 vol. 
952, 911, 3 vol. 295.— Justice of C. P. 3 
vol. 359, 844,— Sir John Finch admits that" 
Croke signed the Opinion in favour of 
Sbip-Money, merely for conformity to the 
Judgment of the Majority of the Judges, 

- 4 vol, 6. — His Argument for Mr. Hamp- 
den, in the Case of Ship-Money 3 vol. 
1127. — Anecdote related by Whitelocke, 
respecting his delivering his Opinion against 
the King in the Case of Ship-Money, 6 vol. 
906 (note). 

.CROKE, Sir. John, King^s Serjeant, 4 Jac 1. 

* — ^His Speech on opening the Case for the 
Crown, on. the Trial of Garnet for being 

• concerned in the Gunpowder Plot, .2 vol. 
i ,21.7. 

CROMERTIE, George, Earl of. See XiT- 
mamocky WiVkany Earl of 

CROMWELL, Thomas, Earl of Essex.— Pro- 
ceedings against him for Treason, Heresy, 
and other Offences, 33 Hen. 8, 1541. 1 vol. 
433. — ^He is attainted in Parliament, ibid. 
434. — Cranmer writes to the King on hi9 
1:>ehalf, ibid. 435.— His Speech ana Prayer, 

ou tbQ Scaffold, ibid, 437^«*^me account of 



his Life, ibid. 438.-rHe was said to be the 
First man who promoted Attainders, 13 vol. 
726. 

CROMWELL, Oliver (Protector).— Trial of 
Miles Sindercoroc, for conspiring to kill him, 
8 Car. 2, 1657, 5 vol. 841. — Remarks on the 
Administration of Justice during his Protec- 
torate, ibid. 935. — His Speech on taking 
away the Great Seal from the Commissioners 
Whitelocke and Widdrington, ibid. 939. — 
Instances of his illegally committing per- 
sons to Prison, ibid. 940.— His Merit, in pro- 
viding for the due Administration of Justice 
during the Protectorate, ibid. 944. — Singular 
Account of his Burial, ibid. 1339. 

CRONE, Matthew. — Proceedings against him 
for High Treason. 2 Will, and Mary, 1690, 
12 vol. 1237.— The Jury find him Guilty, 
after being enclosed a whole night, ibid. 
1239.— His Exception in arrest of Judgment, 
ibid. 1240, 1243.— Sentence of Death is 
passed upon him, ibid. 1244. — He appears 
to have been afterwards pardoned, ibid. 
1243. 

CROOK, John.— His Trial with Isaac Grey, 
and John Bolton, for refusing to take the 
Oath of Allegiance, 14 Car. 2, 1662, 6 vol. 
201. — Crook is brought to the Bar at the 
Old Bailey, and required by the Court to take 
the Oath, ibid. 205. — tie refuses to answer 
this Requisition, ibid. 206. — Indictment 
against them, ibid. 212 (note). — Crook hesi- 
tates to plead, ibid. 213. — He pleads Not 
Guilty, ibid. 220.— Grey is required to take 
the Oath, ibid. ib. — He desires time to con- 
sider, ibid. 221. — Grey and Bolton plead 
Not Guilty, ibid. 222. — They are found 
Guilty, and Sentence of Prsmunire is passed 
upon them, ibid. 226. 

CROSBY.— His Trial in the Court of King's 
Bench for High Treason, 7 Will. 3, 1695, 
12 vol. 1291. — Lord Rajrmond's Rq)ort of 
his Case, ibid. ib. — Report of his Case, 
from Owen Wynne's MSS. ibid, ib.-— The 
Jury acquit him, ibid. 1298, 

CROSBY, Brass, Esq. Lord Mayor of London. 
— His Case upon a Commitment by the 
House of Commons for a Breach of Privi- 
lege, 11 Geo. 3, 1771, 19 vol. 1137.— He 
moves the Court of Common Pleas for a 
Writ of Habeas Corpus, ibid. ib. — Serjeant 
Glynne's Argument for his Discharge, ibid. 
1138.— Serjeant Jephson's Argument on the 
same side, ibid. I143.-T-Judgment of the 
Court that he be remanded, ibid. 1146. . 

CROSS, John, Counsel. — ^His Speech for 
Jeremiah Brandreth, on his Trial for: High 
Treason in being concerned in the Luddite 
Insurrection, 32 vol. 863. — His. Speech in 
Defence of William Turner, on his Trial for 
the same Treason, ibid. 1046.-«-His Speech 
in Defence of Isaac Ludlam, fQf the same 
Treason, ibid. 1217, 



00 



GENERAL INI>EX TO 



CEOSSFIELD, Robert Thomas.— HU Trial 
at tbe Old Bailov for High Treason, 36 Geo. 
3, 1796, 26 vol. 1.— The Indictment, ibid. 
2. — Counsel for the Prosecution and for the 
Prisot}«r;ibid. 7, 8.«-Speech of tbe Attorney 
General for the Prosecution, ibid. 11. — Evi- 
dence for the Prosecution, ibid. 25. — Mr. 
Adam's Speech for the Defence, ibid; 91. — 
Bvidence for tbe Defence, ibid. 126.-~Mr. 
Gnmey's Bpeech on summing up the Evi- 
dence for the Defence, ibid. 146. — ^Tbe At- 
torney Generars Reply, ibid. 168. — Chief 
Justice £yre*s Charge to the Jury, ibid. 190. 
—•The Jury acquit him, ibid. 233. 

CUFFE, Henry. See Blunt, Sir Chmt<^her. 

CULLEN, Robert, Advocate.— His Speech in 
Defence of David Downie, on his Trial fo^ 
High Treason in the Court of Justiciary, 

34 vol. 121. 

CULLENDER, Rosc^Her Trial with Amy 
Duny, at Bury St. Edmond's, for Witch- 
craft, before Lord Hale, 17 Car* 2, 1665, 
6 vol. 687. — Efidence against them, ibid, 
ib. — Lord Hale*s Charge to the Jury, ibid. 
700.— The Jury find them Guilty, ibid. 701. 
They are executed, ibid. 703. 

CURLL, Edmund .—His Case in the Court of 
King's Bench, on a motion in arrest of Judg- 
ment on a Conviction for publishing an ob- 
scene Libel, 1 Geo. 2, 1727, 17 vol. 153. — 
Argument of his Counsel in arrest of Judg- 
ment, ibid. ib. — Argument of the Attorney- 
General in answer, ibid. 154, — ^The Court 
give Judgment against him, ibid. 160. 

CURRAN, John Philpott, 26 vol. 841.— His 
Speech in Defence of Hamilton Rowan, 22 
vol. 1066. — His Speech in Defence of Bird, 

35 vol. 769.-— His Speech in Defence of 
James Weldon, 26 vol. 264 — His Speech in 
Defence of Peter Finerty, ibid. 964.— His 
Speech in Defence of Finney, ibid. 1099. — 
His Speech, on summing up the Evidence for 
the Prisoners, in the Case of Henry and John 

. Sheares,37 vol.364.— PeculiarCircumstances 
Attending the delivery of this Speech, ibid. 363 
(note). — His Speech in Defence of M'Cann, 
ibid. 491. — His Speech in Defence of Oliver 
Bond, ibid. 574. — His Speech for James 
Napper Tandy, ibid. 1205.-- His Speech for 
the Piaintiif in the Case of Hevcy against 
Sirr, 28 vol. 2. — His Speech in Defence of 
Kirwan,ibid.786. — His Speech in Defence of 
Felix Rourke,ibid. 945. — His Speech in De- 
fence of Killen and M'Cann, ibid. 1006. 
-^His Argument for Mr. Justice Johnson's 
Discharge upon a Habeas Corpus in the 
Court cJ King's Bench in Ireland, 29 vol. 
134.— His Argument, upon a similar Habeas 
Corpus in th^ Court of Exchequer in Ireland, 
ibid* 336. 

CURTIS, Jane.— Her Trial for a Libel on 
liord Chief Justice Scroggs, 33 Car. 3, 1680, 
7 vol. 059»«<*IShe confesses the Indictment, 
ibid, ib* 



CURTIS, Richard.— His Case, on a Trial for 
Murder, in the year 1756, reported by J4r. 
Justice Foster, 15 vol. 742 (note), 

CURWOOD, John, Counsel.— His Speech in 
Defence of Thistlewood, for High Treason, 
in being concerned in the Cato-Street Con? 
spiracy, 33 vol. 830,— His Speeches in De- 
fence of other Prisoners, tried upon the same 
Indictment, ibid. 1055, 1356, 1410. 

CUTHELL, John.— His Trial for publishing 
a Seditious Libel, 39 Geo. 3, 1799, 27 vol. 
641. —The Indictment, ibid, ib.— The At- 
torney GeneraVs Speech for the Prosecution, 
ibid. 654.— Mr. Enskine's Speech for the 
Defendant, ibid. 655. — Lord Kenyon's 
Charge to the Jury, ibid. 673.— The Jury 
find him Guilty, ibid. 676.— His Affidavit in 
mitigation of Punishment, ibid. 677. — He ie 
sentenced to pay a fine of 30 Marks, and 
discharged, ibid. 680. 

DACRES, William, Lord.— His Trial by his 
Peers for High Treason, 27 Hen. 8. 1535, I 
vqI. 407. — Reason for inserting his Trial io 
the Collection, ibid, ib.— He is acquitted by 
the Lords, ibid. 408.— Expressions of popu- 
lar^atisfaction at his Acquittal, ibid. ib. 

DALGLEISH, George. See Damlej/, Henry, 
Lord, — His Deposition, respecting the 
Murder of Lord Darnley, 1 vol. 919. — His 
Trial in Scotland, with several others, for 
being concerned in the Murder, 9 Elis. 1567', 
ibid. 926. — He is convicted, and sentenced 
to Death, ibid. 927.— His Confession, ibid. 
928. 

DALLAS, Robert, Counsel, 22 vol. 331, 30 
vol. 1.— His Speech for. the Prisoners, on 
the Trial of O'Coigly and others for High 
Treason, 37 vol. 53. — His Speech in Defence 
of John and Michael Hedges, on their Trial 
for a Fraud on Government, committed in 
the Woolwich Dock Yard, 28 vol. 1386. — 
His Speech in Defence of Governor PLcton, 
on his Trial for a Misdemeanour in order- 
ing the Torture to be applied to Luisa Cal* 
deron, at Trinidad, 3© vol. 467.— His Argu- 
ment in Support of a Eule for a new Trial 
in that Case, ibid. 756.— Hb Speech^ for 
Governor Picton on the Second Trial, ibid. 
818. — His Speech in Defence of Alexander 
Davison, for a Fraud upon Government m 
the purchase of Military Stores, 31 vol. 136. 
— His Speech in mitigation of Punishment 
in the same Case, ibid. 336. — His Speech in 
Defence of Valentine Jones, for Frauds in 
the Administration pf his OiSce as Commif- 
sary General of the Forces in the West Indict, 
ibid, 293.— His Speech for Mr. Jones, in 
mitigation of Punishment, 33 ToU 1575t 

DALLAS, Sir Robert, Judge of C. P. 33 Tol. 
765. His Charge to the Jury, on the Trial 
of William Turner for High Treason in 
being concerned in the Luddite I^stirrectSon, 
ibid, noi. 



tHE STATi TRIALS. 



OAIXA3, Sir Uo\>eti, Chief JusUce of C. P. 
33 vol. 711.— His Charge to the Jury on the 
Trial of IngSy for High Treason, in being 
eoBcerned in theCato-Street Plot, ibid. 1 1 85. 

DALMAHOY. 8^ C^. 

DALRYMPLE, Sir James, of Stair. See 
Monmouth, Jamet, Duke of. 

DALRYMPLE, Sir John. — Founlainhairs 
Account of a curioos litigation between him 
and Grahame of Claverhouse (afterwards 
Viscount Dundee), H vol* 945. 

DAMMAREE^ Daniel.— His Trial for High 
Treason in levyinc^ war against the Queen, 
under pretence of pulling down Meeting- 
HoQses, 9 Anne, 1710, 15 vol. 521.— The 
Indictment, ibid. 524.*-He pleads Not 
Guilty, ibid. 584.— The Queen's Counsel 
open the Case for the Prosecution, ibid. 549. 
— rEvidence against him, ibid. 552. — Mr. 
Whittaker and Serjeant Darnell's Defence 
of him, ibid. 562,'-«Evidence for the Defence, 
ibid, 566.— Mr. Whittal^er sums up the 
£videDce for the Defence, ibid. 584.-— Chief 
Justice Parker's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 
596.— The Jury find him Guilty, ibid. 611. 
— Sentence of Death is passed upon him, 
ibid. 612. — He is pardoned, ibid. 614. — Mr. 
Xuders'i Observations upon the Law of 
Treason in the Article of Levying war, as laid 
down in this Case, ibid. 523 (note). 

DAMPIEJEt, Henry, Counsel, 22 vol. 823, 25 
-vol. 5. 

DANBY, Thomas, Earl of. See (hbome, 
Sir TibiTuu.-r^Proceedings in Parliament 
against him, on an Impeachment of High 
Treason and other high Crimes and Mis- | 
demeanours, 30 Car. 2, 1 Jac. 2, 1678- 
t686, 11 vol. 599.— Sir John Reresby's Ac- 
count of the circumstances which led to 
these Proceedings, ibid. 601 (note).-— Sir 
William Temple's Account of his Fall, ibid. 
01Q (note). — Notice of these Proceedings in 
Algernon Sidney's Letters, ibid. 611 (uote). 
— ^Roger North's Account of them, ibid. 614 
(note).-— Articles of Impeachment against 
bioi, ibid. 621. — His Speech in the House of 
Lords, upon the Articles being read, ibid. 
627. — Debate in the House of Lords, respect- 
ing his Commitment, ibid. 631.-— Defence of 
I^ord Danby, in a Letter to a Metpber of the 
House of Commons, ibid. 634. — Answer to 
the Defence, ibid. 654. — ^The EarFs Ueply 
to this Answer, ibid. 677.T-Sir Robert 
Howard's AccouiH of the Revenue, as left 
by the Earl, ibid. 693.-- The Earl's Answer 
t9 Sir Rob«rt Howard, ibid, 709.«- Debates 
in th^ House of Commons respectins the 
{mpeachment, ibid, f 24.-*The King informs 
ParUainent, that he bad granted him a Pardon, 
ihid* 735,<— Debates in the House of Com- 
mons thereon, ibid, ib.-* Th# l^Vn Plea to 
th^ Aniolef of Impeachment, ibid. 764. — 
Copy of tbt mng'^ Pai^on, ibid, 766^De- 
Mil k thfl SouM gf CflWttoai cm the 



$i 



validity of the Pardon, ibid. 773.— Tbf 
Commons resolve that no Counsel shall be 
allowed to plead in support of the Pardon, 
ibid. 807. — ^The King prorogues the Parlia- 
ment, ibid. 830. — Proceedings in the King's 
Bench, upon the Earl of Danby's AppUcatioa 
to be admitted to Bail, ibid. 881.— ^e 
Coutt bail him, ibid. 871. — He was all«r^ 
wards successively created by King William, 
Marquis of Carmarthen and Duke of Leeds, 
13 vol. 1263 (note). — As Marquis of Car- 
marthen, he was President of the Council, 
and Lord High Steward on the first TiM of 
Charles Lord Mohun for Mnrderi 12 vol. 
953. — Proceedings in Parliament against 
him, when Duke of Leeds, for High Crii|aes 
and Misdemeanours, 7 Will. 3, 169M701, 
13 vol. 1263. — The Commons resolve to im- 
peach him, ibid. 1265. — ^Tbe Duke's Speech 
in the House of Lords, ibid, ib.— >tiis Speech 
in the House of Commons, ibid. 1266.— 
Articles of Impeachment against him, ibid. 
1269. — His Answer thereto, ibid. 1270. — 
The Commons are unable to proceed with 
the Impeachment, on account of the Absence 
of a material Witness, ibid. 1271* — No iur- 
ther Proceedings being taken by the Com* 
mons, the House of Lords dismiss the 
Impeachment, ibid. 1274. 

DANGERFIELD, Thomas.— His Evidence 
on the Trial of Knox and Lane, for a Con- 
spiracy to scandalize Oates and Bedlow, T 
vol. 790. — His Evidence on the Trial of 
Lord Castlemaine for Treason, in being 
concerned in the Meal-Tub Plot, ibid. 1090. 
— He is rejected as a Witness on the Trial of 
Elizabeth Cellicr, ibid. 1052.— Short Ac- 
count of his Trial, for a Libel upon James 
the Second, when Duke of York, 1 1 vol. 503 
(note). — ^Trial of Robert Frances for the 
Murder of Dangerfield, ibid. 503. 

DANIEL, William, Judge of C. P. 6 Jac. 1, 
2 vol. 576. 

DARBEY, Leonard. See Morrii, Jo^t. 

DARCY, Lord. — He is tried by his Peers, con- 
victed, and executed, for joining the Rebel* 
lion in the North, in the Reign of Henry the 
Eighth, 1 vol. 478. 

DARNELL, Jolm, Counsel. — He is assigned 
as Counsel for the Earl of Castlemaine, on his 
Trial for High Treason, in being concerned 
in the Meal-Tub Plot, 32 Car. 2, 1680, f 
vol. 1084. — His Defence of John Giles, for 
attempting to Murder, Mr. Arnold, ibidw 
1144. 

' '— *• Stijeanlt %t lAWr«<-<'Hii is 

assigned Counsel for Peter Cook, on his 
Trial for High Treason, 8 Will. 3, 1696^ i^ 
vol. 313. 



■'■', Klng*8 Serjeant, 13 vol. 
1063, 14 vol. 534, 561, 1100.— He is of 
Counsel for the Prosecution, on the Trial of 
Denew and othars lor a Conspiracy and 
Aiauilt^ 8 ^e, 1704^ 14 ?qI* 909» 



9^ 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



DARNELL, John, Counsel. — He defends 
Dammaree and others on their several Trials 
for High Treason 9 Ann, 1710, 15 vol. 587, 
627, 665. 

-, Serjeant at Law, 15 vol. 



1412, 16 vol. 750, 17 vol. 804.— His Argu- 
ment for the Crown of the Special Verdict 
in Major Oneby's Case, for Murder, 17 vol. 
38. — He defends Hales on his Trial for 
Forgery, i Ceo. 2, 1728, ibid. 198.— He de- 
fends Bambridge and Corbett on their Trial 
on an Appeal of Murder, ibid. 430. 

[CORNELL, Sir Thomas. — ^Proceedings on the 
Habeas Corpus brought by him, Sir John 
Corbett, Sir Walter Earl, Sir John Heven- 
ingham, and Sir Edmund Hampden, at the 
King's Bench, Westminster, 3 Car. 1, 1627, 
3 vol. 1 ^-;-He is imprisoned with many others, 
for refusing to lend on the Commission of 
Loans, ibid. 2. — ^The Return to the Habeas 
Corpus, ibid. 3. — Serjeant Bramston's Ar- 
-gument for Sir J. Heveniugham, ibid. 6. — Mr. 
Noye's Argument for Sir Walter Earl, ibid. 
11.^— Mr. Selden's Argument for Sir E. 
Hampden^ ibid. 16.— Mr. Calthorpe's Argu- 
ment for Sir John Corbet, ibid. 19. — ^The 

' Attorney General's Answer, ibid. 32. — ^The 
Resolution of the Court, that they should be 
remanded, delivered by the Chief Justice, ibid . 

. 51 . — They remain in Custody three Months, 

' and are then released by the King's Order, 
and are elected in the next Parliament, ibid. 
59. — Sir Edward Coke's Observations on 
the Judgment in this Case, ibid. 68, 77. — 

' Debates in Parliament on the Principle of 
the Judgment in this Case, ibid. 59. — Con- 
ference between the two Houses of Parlia- 
ment on this Question, ibid. 83. — Mr. Lit- 
tleton's Argument at the Confei'ence against 
the Judgment, ibid. 85. — Mr. Selden's Ar- 
gument, ibid. 94.-^Sir Edward Coke's Ar- 
gument, ibid. 126. — ^The Attorney General's 
Reply, ibid. 133. — ^The House of Lords call 
upon the Judges to answer for their Judg- 
ment in this Case, ibid. 160. — Answers of 
the Judges, in which they disclaim having 
given any Judgment on the Principle sup- 
posed to be implied in this Case, ibid. 161. 

•DARNLEY, Henry, Lord. See Botkwetl^ James 
Earl of, — Depositions of William Powrie, 
George Dalgleish, John Hay, and John 
Hepburn, respecting his Murder, 1 vol. 915. 
— ^Their Trial and Sentence for the same, 
ibid. 926. — Deposition of Nicholas Hubert, 
alias Paris, respecting the Murder, ibid. 931 . 
—Confession of the Laird of Ormistoun, 
respecting the same, ibid. 944. 

DAUNCEY, Philip, Counsel.— His Speech 
in Defence of Colonel Draper, for a libel 

J arising out of Governor Picton's Prosecution, 
30 vol. 1005. 

DAVENPORT, Humphrey, King's Seijeant. 
— His Argument in the Court of King's 
^encb| ia fctYOttr of the legality of the Com- 



mitment of Mr. Stroud and cHhers, by the 
King, 3 vol. 250. 

DAVENPORT, Sir Humphrey, Chief Baron 
of the Exchequer. — He joins in the Answer 
given by the Judges to Charles the First 
in favour of the legalityjof Ship-Money, 3 
vol. 844. — His Argument in the Excliequer 
Chamber against Ship-Money, ibid. 1202. 

DAVENPORT, Thomas, Counsel.— He is of 
Counsel for Mr. Wilkes, on his Application 
to the Court of King's Bench to be admitted 
to Bail, 19 vol. 1080. 

Sir Thomas, King's Counsel. 

He is one of the Counsel for the Prosecution, 
on the Trial of Bembridge for Misconduct 
as a Clerk in the Pay-Office, 22 vol. 33.— 
His Argument in the Court of King's Bench 
against the Motion for a new Trial in that 
Case, ibid. 126. — Curious Anecdote respect- 
ing him, 28 vol.819. 

DAVENTRY, Heneage Finch, Baron of. Lord 
Chancellor. — ^He is appointed Lord High 
Steward on the Trial of Lord Stafford, 7 vol. 
1291, 1295.— His Address to Lord Stafford, 
on passing Sentence on that occasion, ibid. 
1555. See Finch, Heneage, 

DAVERS, Sir Charles. See Blunt, Sir Chris- 
topher. 

DAVIDSON, William. — His Trial with 
Richard Tidd, at the Old Bailey, for High 
Treason in beiug concerned in the Cato- 
Street Conspiracy, 1 Geo, 4, 1820, 33. vol. 
1337.— The Indictment, ibid. 607.— Mr. 
Gurney's Speech for the Prosecution, ibid. 
1341. — Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 
1351.— Mr. Curwood's Speech for the Pri- 
soners, ibid. 1419. — Evidence for the Pri- 
soners, ibid. 1434.— Mr. Adolphus's Speech 
for the Prisoners, ibid. 1441. — Davidson's 
Speech for himself, ibid. 1458. — Tidd's 
Defence of himself, ibid. 1464. — Reply of 
the Attorney General, ibid. 1466.— Mr. 
Baron Garrow's Charge to tlie Jury, ibid. 
1481. — The Jury find both the Prisoners 
Guilty, ibid. 1542. — Davidson's Speech, on 
being called upon for Judgment, ibid. 1548. 
— ^They are both executed, ibid. 1566. 

DAVIS, Sir John. See Bhmt, Sir Christopher. 

DAVIS, Sir John, King's Serjeant, 2 vol. 952. 
— His Argument for the Crown, in the 
Great Case of Impositions, in favour of the 
King's unlimited Prerogative ' of imposing 
Taxes and Duties, 2 vol. 399. 

DAVISON, Alexander.— His Trial at West- 
minster, for defrauding Government in the 
purchase of Military Stores, by means of false 
Vouchers, 49 Geo. 3, 1808-1809, 31 vol. 99. 
— Abstract of the Information, ibid, ib.— 
Speech of the Attorney General for the Pro- 
secution, ibid. 103^ — Evidence for the" Pro- 
secution, ibid. 116. — Mr. Dallas's Speech 

for the DefendsAt, ibid. 136«^£vid9nQe for 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



33 



the Defendant, ibid. 163.— Reply of the At- 
torney General, ibid. 194. -Lord Ellen- 
borough's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 205. — 
The Jury find him Guilty, ibid. 219.~Pro- 
ceedings on his being brought up for Judg- 
ment, ibid. ib. — Mr. Dallas's Speech in 
mitigation of Punishment,ibid. 226. — Speech 
of the Attorney General in aggravation, ibid. 
237. — Sentence of the Court, ibid. 247. 

DAVISON, William.— He is appointed a 
Commissioner for the Trial and Examination 
of Mary, Queen of Scots, 28 Eliz. 1586, 1 
▼ol. 1167. — Proceedings against him in the 
Slar-Chamber for Misprision and Contempt, 
in delivering Queen Elizabeth's Warrant for 
the Execution of Mary, Queen of Scots, 
without her privity, ibid. 1229.— He is sen- 
tenced to pay 10,P00 Marks, and be impri- 
soned during the Queen's pleasure, ibid. 
1234.— Another Account of the Proceedings, 
ibid. 1241. — His own Account of his Con- 
duct, ibid. 1239 (note). 

DAVY, William, Serjeant at Law, 19 vol. 280, 
705, 815, 20 vol. 1240, 1285, 1319.— His 
Argument for the Prisoners, in the Case of 
Macdaniel and others, 19 vol. 790.— His Ar- 
gument against the Discharge of Somraersett, 
the Negro, 20 vol. 76.— His Speech for the 
Defendant, in the Case of Fabrigas v. 

' Mostyn, ibid. 99. 

DAWSON, James.— Account of his Trial and 
Execution, for High Treascn, in being con- 
cerned in the Rebellion of 1745, 18 vol. 374 
(note).— Pathetic. Occurrence at his Execu- 

. tion, ibid. 375. 

DAWSON, Joseph.— His Trial with Edward 
Forseith, William May, William Bishop, 
James Lewis, and John Sparkes, in the Ad- 

• miralty Court, for Felony and Piracy, 8 
Will. 3, 1696, 13 vol. 451.— Dawson pleads 
Guilty to the Indictment, ibid. 452.— The 
rest are acquitted, contrary to the Opinion of 
the Court,ibid.453.— They are committed 
upon other Charges, ibid. ib. — Sir Charles 
Hedges's Charge to the Grand Jury, upon 
another Indictment being preferred, ibid. 
454._The Second Indictment, ibid. 458.— 
Dawson confesses it, the others plead Not 
Guilty, ibid. 459.— Evidence for the Crown, 
ibid.461.— Their Defence, ibid. 472.— Reply 

. of the Solicitor^Gcneral, ibid. . 477.— Lord 
Holt's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 478. 
— The Jury find them Guilty, ibid. 481.— 
They are afterwards tried and convicted on 
two other Indictments, ibid. 482.— They are 
sentenced to be hanged, and are executed, 
ibid. 484. 

DEACON, Thomas Theodorus.— His Trial for 
High Treason, in being concerned in the 
Rebellion of 1745, 20 Geo. 2, 1746, 18 vol. 
365.— He is found Guilty, 366— And exe- 
cuted, ibid. 368. — His Speech at the place 
of ;&[ecutioDy ibid. 390. 

DEAGLB, John. See JPUkingtm, Thomas, 
VOL. XXXIV, 



DE BRUCE, William.— His Sentence for in- 
sulting one of the Judges while sming on 
the Bench, 34 Ed w. 1, 3 vol. 1376. 

DEE, Mr., Counsel. — He is assigned of 
Counsel for Dr. Sacheverell, 15 vol. 36. 

DE GREY, William, Solicitor General.— His 
Argument for the Plaintiffs in Error, in the 
Case of Leach against Money and others, 
19 vol. 1012.— His Reply in the same Case, 
ibid. ib. — His Speech in the House of Lords, 
on the Trial of Lord Byron, for the Murder 
of Mr. Chaworth, ibid. 1224. 

■ Attorney General, 19 

vol. 1079. 

■ Sir William, Chief Justice of 

. C. P. 20 vol. 1285.— He delivers the Judg- 
ment of the Court in the Case of Brass 
Crosby, 19 vol. 1146.— Also on a Motion for 
a new Trial, in the Case of Fabrigas v. 
Mostyn, 20 vol.175. 

DE HARTLEY, Constantine. See Golding, 
John, 

DELAHOY, Casimir. See Bird, Jama, 

DELAMERE, Henry, Lord .—His Trial in the 
Court of the Lord High Steward, for High 
Treason, 1 Jac. 2, 1686, 11 vol. 509. Ac- 
count of him, ibid. (note). — Sir John 
Reresby's Account of this Trial, ibid. 513 
(qote). — ^The Indictment, ibid. 516. — He 
pleads that he ought to be tried by the Peers 
in Parliament, and not in the Court of the 
Lord High Steward, ibid. 519.— The Plea is 
overruled, ibid. 526. — He pleads Not Guilty, 
ibid, ib.— The Lord High Steward's Charge 
to the Peers, ibid. ib. — ^The King's Counsel 
open the Case against him, ibid. 328. — Evi- 
dence against him, ibid. 531 .—The Lord High 
.Steward, after consulting the Judges, refuses 
to adjourn the Court tilltheTrial is.tinished, 
ibid. 562.— His Defence, ibid. 564. — Evi- 
dence in Support of his Defence, ibid. 566. 
—Reply of ihe King's Counsel, ibid. 586. — 
The Lord High Steward's Charge to the Peers, 
ibid. 592. — He is acquitted, ibid. 593. • 

DE LA MOTTE, Francis Henry.— His Trial 
for High Treason, in giving Information to 
France, 21 Geo. 3, 1781, 21 vol. 687.— The 
Indictment, ibid. ib. — ^Counsel for the Crown 
and for the Prisoner, ibid. 708. — The Attorney 
Generars Speech for the Prosecution, ibid, ib. 
—Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 718.—' 
Mr. Peckham*s Speech for the Prisoner, ibid. 
767.— Evidence for the Defence, ibid. 790. 
— Speech of the Solicitor General in Reply, 
ibid. 794. — Mr. Justice Buller's Charge to 
the Jury, ibid. 808, — The Jury find him 
' Guilty, ibid. 814. — Mr. Justice Buller passes 
Sentence upon him, ibid. ib. 

DE LA POLE, Michael. See Suffolk, Earl of. 

DE LA POLE, William. See Suffolk, Duke of. 

DENEW, Nathaniel.— His Trial with John 
Merriam and Richard Britton, at the Queen's 
Bench Bar, for a Conspiracy to assault 
William Colepeper, Esq. 2 Anne, 1704, H 





9i 



OE^iFjiM, fNDE3j; TO 



vp), 805. — The Indictment, ibid. 896. — Sev- 
j^ant Parnell opens the Case for t^e P^se- 
cution, ibid. 903. — Mr. Colepeper's Evi- 
dence against them, ibid. 905. — Other Evi- 
dence against them, ibid. 916. — Speech of 
the Counsel for the Defendants, ibid. 925. 
-!— Evidence for the Defence, ibid. 929.-^ 
Merriam is acquitted generally; Brittoin is 
acquitted of the Conspiracy and Assault, 
but found Guilty pf the rest of the Indict- 
ment; Denew is acquitted of the Con- 
spiracy, but is found Guilty of the rest of 
the Indictment, ibid. 936>-^DeQew is fined 
200 Marks, a^d Qrittaa 100/. ibid. 938. 

DENHAM, Sir John, Baron of the Exchequer, 
4 Car. 1, 3 vol. 359, 401, 844.— He delivers 
bis Opinion in the Exchequer Chamber 
against Ship Money, 3 vol. 1201. 

pENHOLME, William. — Proceedings in 
Scotland against him and others for being 
concerned in Argyle's Rebellion, 1 Jac. 2, 
1685, 11vol. 987. 

DENISON, Sir Thomas, Judge pf K. R. 20 
Geo. 2, 18 vol. 329. 

PENMAN, Thomas, Counsel.— His Speech on 
summing up the Evidence in Defence of 
Brandreth,on hisTrial for High Treason, 32 
vol. 884. — His Speech in Defence of Turner, 
on his Trial for High Treason, ibid. 1059. — 
His Speech in Pefence of Isaac Ludlam for 
the same Treason, ibid. 1226. 

BENTON, Alexander, Counsel*— rHis Argu- 
ment foi' the Discharge of several persons 
brought into the Court of King's Bench by 
Habeas Corpus, having been committed by 
the House of Commons for commencing 
Actions in contravention of the Decision of 
that House, in the Case of Ashby against 
White, 14 vol. 852.—The House of Com- 
mons resolve that by pleading in that Case, 
he is guilty of a Breach of Privilege, ibid. 
809. — The House order him to be taJcen into 
the Custody of the Serjeant at Arms, ibid.ib. 
—A Writ of Habeas Corpus, returnable be- 
fore tVe Lord Keeper, is served on the Serjeant 
at Arms, ibid. 817. 

DERBY.— Report of his Case on a Habeas 
Ojorpus, upon a Commitment by the Secretary 
of ^te, in the Reign of Queen Anne, 19 
vol. 1014 (note). 

BERBY, Henry, Earl of.— He is created Lord 
High Stevirard on the Trial of Philip Howard, 
Earl of Arundel, for High Treason, 31 EHz. 
1589,1 vpl. 1259. "^ 

DERBY, James Stanley, £arl of.— Proceed- 
ings against him, Sir timothy Fethcirston- 
haugh, and Captain John Benbow, before a 
Court-Martial, for High Treason, 3 Car. 2, 
1651, 5 vol. 293. — Ix)rd Clarendon's Ac- 
count of the Earl of Dlerby, ibid, ib, (note). 
— ^They are found Guilty, and Sentence of 
Dlealjh is passed upon them, ibid. 296. — The 
jfearl of Derby*s Speech and Conduct upon 
the Scjaffol^s ^^^^* ^^* ^9^i dlS.-r-l^is 



Funeral Sermon by Dr. Qre^i^i ibid. 3D|« — 
His liCtter to Iretbn, in Ansvrer to his. p^m- 
moi)s of the Isle of Ma^n, ibi4. 32Q, — xiis * 
Declaration respecting his determination to 
hold the Isle of Man for the King, ibi4- ib. \ 
'- — Sentence asiaipst Sir T. !^etherstonhaugh 
and Captain Benbow, ibid,^ll.— £xf^ut?on 
of Sir T. Fetherstonhanghy ibid. ib. 

DERING, Sir Edward .-^Proceedings ag«iDst 
him on an Impeachment, by the Houf^ of 
ComVnons, for High Crimeii and Misdem^a- 
nonm, ip contriving apd presenting the I^ent- 
ish Petition, 18 Car. 1, 1642, 4 vol. 151.— , 
tie escapes from the Custody of the Ser- 
jeant at Arms, ibid. 153.r— ^rtic)es of im- 
peachment against him, ibid. 154. 

DERWENTWATER, James, Earl oi— Pro- 
ceedings ia Parliament against him, with 
William Lord Widdrington, William' Earl of 
Nithisdale, Robert Earl of Carnwath, 
WilHara Viscount Kenmure, and William 
Lord Nairn, upon an Impeachment for High 
Treason, 2 Geo. 1, 1716, 15 yol. 761.— Mr, 
Lecbmere's Speech in the Hous.e of Condons 
on the Motion for their Impeacbipejity ij^id. 
ib. — Articles of Jmpeachment carried up to 
the House of Lords, ibid. 770. — Thp Articles 
of Impeachment, ibid. 779.-— Lor4 Derwept- 
vt^ater's Answer, plea4iQg.puilty to the Ar- 
ticles, ibid. 784. — Lord Widdringtoin's 
Answer, also pleading Guilty, ibid. 786.— 
Lord Nithisdale's Answer, also pleading 
Guilty, 788. — The others plead Guilty, ibid. 
790. — ^Tbe Lord High Steward passee Sen- 
tence upon them, ibid. 796.— The Loids 
Widdrington, Camwath, and Nairn, are re- 
prieved and afterwards pardloped, ibid. 8,0^* 
-rThe others are ordered for Execution, ibid, 
ib. — Lord Nithisdale escapes, ibid. ib.-rLord 
Derwentwater's Speech from th,e Sca^old, 
ibid. ib.~t/>rd Kenmure*s Letter toa Noble- 
man the day before his Execution, ibid. Q^S. 
—His pxecutiojQ, ibid. 806. 

DESPARD, Edward Marcus.^His Trial at 
Newington for High Treason, under a Special 
Commission of Oyer and Terminer, 43 
Geo. 3, 1803, 28 vol. 345.— Lord Ellenbo- 
rough's Charge to the Grand Jury, ibid. 347. 
— The Indictment, ibid. 359.— *The Attorney 
General's Speech for the Prosecution, ibid. 
363. — Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 
886.— Mr. Serjeant Best's Speech in his De- 
fence, ibid. 434. — Evidence for the Prisoner, 
ibid. 460. — Mr. Gumey's Spefcb on sum- 
ming up the Evidence for the Prisoner^ ibid. 
462. — Reply of the Solicitor General, ibid. 
469.— Lord Ellenborough's Charge to tiie 
Jury, ibid. 485. — ^The Jury find Um Guilty, 
but recommend bim tp Mercy, ibid. 5^4.--* 
iLord Elienborough passes Sentence of Death 
upon him and several others, tried ijinder the 
same Commission, ibid. 525.^ — He is exe- 
cutcijiy ibid. 52^. 

DESPENSER, Hugh, and Ht^ Le, Fater 
and S9^,--J«denlj^Bg.Qf Copfe^er^ ijf t(^ 






TH? STATU TRIALS. 



3& 



%l9 !^4 B^i»n5 ^fpim them. 13 Edw, 2, 
1^0^ 1 vol. 23.— Article^ of Qiarge against 
Hi^f ibid. 24. — Av^ard qf 3api«h!Tient and 
Blsh^nsoi) 9gai|isi therp, ibid. 27. — Act of 
Qrace for all Felonies and IVansgressions 
comipitted Ibiy \he Earls a^d Batons in the 
Pco9ecatiQp of t{ieni^ il^id. 28, — Award of 
B^ui^hq^ept against tdeBespenser^ repealed, 
upon their Petitiops, ihid. SQ. — iiord paeon's 
Remarks upon the Charge against them, 2 
v«l. 599. — Despenser, the Father, is taken l>y 
Queen Isabel, and banged, 1 vol. 36. — De- 
fpensep, thq Son, taken, ibid. ib.-^Sii Wm. 
Tmssel'^ Address to hina in passing Sen- 
tence, ibid. ib. — He is a\so banged, ibid. 38. 
— Proceedings in Parliament in the Reign 
of Edward the Third, and Richard theSeeond, 
respecting the Exile and Disherison of the 
Despensers, ibid. ib. 

pWBREVX, Jqj>i[^.— pisTrial befrre a Court 
IKartlai ip f relan^y for Rebellion, 40 Qeo. 3, 
1799-1800, 27 vol, 1137 —Evidence against 
hr^ib;id- ib. — llvidepceforthe Pefence,ibid. 
1 1 55. — The Prisoner's Speech on his Defence, 
ibid. 1179.— He i§ sentenced to Transporta- 
tion for J.ife, ibid, ^190. 

DEVONSHIRE, Wtlliam, Earl oi-mProeeed- 
ittga against him in the Kin§% Benek for 
assanlting Cofonel Culpepper in thd King's 
Palace^ 3 Jac. 2, 1697, 11 vol. 1353.-r^The 
InformatioI^ ibid. ib. (B9te).— He pleads his 
Pnvilege in abatement, ibid. 1 3^4. -r-. His Plea, 
ibid. 1355 (note).— The Court avermle his 
Plea, and b« confesses the Information, ibid. 
1 3 j^T.— Sentence of the Court, ibid. ib.-r— J^ir- 
guments against the Legality oi these Pvocaed- 
ings, it»d. ib>— Proceedings in the Hause of 
Lords In bis Case, aftettheRtTolution, ibid. 
1367. 

PJQBY, Sir Everard.-.-Pe i^ arraigned at West- 
mister for fiigh Treasop^ io being concern- 
ed in the Powder Plot, 3 J[ac. 1, 1606, 2 vol. 
187. — He confesses, the Indictment, ibid. ib. 
— Judgment passed upon him, ibid. 194. — 
His Execution, ibid. 215. 

DI6BY, George, Lord. See Bti^ol, GtorgCy 
Marl of, — Proceedings again&t him for High 
Ti^asoo, 17 Car. 1, 1642, 4 voL 133.— Ar- 
ticles of Impeachment against bim,ibid. 138. 
— Lord Clarendon's Character of him, ibid. 
1^ (note). — Further Accovnt of hjun, ibid. 
139 (note> 

DINGLEY, Thomas. See Fvrtescuey Sir 

DISNEY, William.— His Ttial-, under a Spe- 
cial Commission at Southwack, for High 
Treason, in publkhing a traitorous Deafera^ 
tion at the time of the Duke of Moomouth's 
Rebellion, 1 Jac. 2, 1685;, 11 xo\. 465.— He 
is conTicted and executed, ibid. 46^. — 
Account of his Behaviour at the place of 
Execution, ibid. 467. 

PODP, Saq^D^l, Counsel. —His Speech in De- 
fence of Dr. Sachevet^.to,th(?3^^WJ^ Article 



of Impeachment^ If vol, 292. — His Speech 
upon the Third Article, ibid. 818.-^His 
Speech upon the Fourth Article, ibid. S44. 

t)ODDERIDGE, Siv John, Judge of K. B. 
3 vqI. 359.— He i^ one of the Commissioners 
for the Trial of the Murderers of Sir Thomas 
Overbury, 14 Jac. 1^ 1616, ^ vol. 952.— |Ie 
is one of the Judges to v^hom \\^e Case of 
Archbishop Abbot, for accidentally killing 
lord Zoucn*s Keepf r, was referred By Janaes 
the First, ibid. 11 61 .'-His Ansvrer in ^e 
Hous^ of X^rd^^ when questioned fbr his 
Judgment in the Court of King's Bench, in 
the Case of Sir Thomas DarneU, 3 vol. 103. 

DODDJNGTON, Mr.-rHis Speech on opep^ 
ing the Evidence on one of the Article^ of 
Impeachment against Lord Chancellor Mac« 
clesfield, 16 vol. 822. 

DOLBEN, Sir WilUam, King% Seijeaat, and 
Recorder of London. — He opens the Indict* 
ment on the Trial of the E^trl of Pembrokf 
in the House of Lords, for Miirder, 6 vol. 
1321. — He is called as a Witness on one of 
theTria^ls ojf Gates fox P^juryy 10 v«i, 1172. 

DOLBEN, Sir WilKam, Judge of K. B. 1^ voL 

172, 233, 261, 706, 830, 869, 964, HS^T, 8 
vo^. 250„ 457, 502, 9 vol. 127, 11 vol. OTl. 
— His Charge to the Jury on the Trial of 
Thomas Thwin^ and Mary Pressicksy for 
Tres^spn, J voK 1177.— Bunwt says, that he 
was dismissed from his Office in coiKsequence 
of his not being clearly for the Crown in the 
Ca^e of the Qiio Warranto against the City 
of t^on^on, 8 vol. 1 039 (note). 

DONNELLY, Thomas.— Hi» Trial vrhh Nicho- 
ias Farrell, Laurence Begley, and Michael 
Kelly, at Dublin, tnder a Special Commission 
% High Treason in If^eing con^eriped in ^l^e 
Iri^h Insiij^iseotions 43 Geo* 3^1803, 2^ voh 
1069.— Th^ Jndicl^ften^ ibid- ib.— Evidence 
against them, ibid. 1075L.-T-ldr. Mac NaUy's 
Speech in thieic De$ence> i>idi- 1085. — Evi-^ 
deoee los the Prisonei;s, ibid. 1Q91. — The 
iufy, t^d them Guilty, ibid. 10197. — l^bey are 
executed^ ibid.. 1Q9S. 

DQRAN, Jxjseph.— His Tr^l at Dublin, undet 
a Special Commission of Oyer and Terminer^ 
for High Treason, in being copcerned in. the 
Irish Insurrection, 43 Geo. 3, 1803, 26. vol. 
1041.— The Indictment, ibid. 1042,— Evi- 
d^i^ce for the Prosecution, ibid. 1045.— Mr. 
Mac Nally's Speech for the Prisoner, ibid. 
1053.-T-Evidence for the Pci^pjti/^i^ ibijDl. 
1055. — He is acquitted^ ibidc 1970. 

DQRMER, Robert, Counsel, 7 vol. 96f.— 
He states the Case for the Prosecution, on 
the trial of Eli2aJ)eth Cellier, for a Lib^l, 7 
vol. 1188. 

DORSET, Edvcf^d, Earl of.— His Speech in 

the Sltar-Chamber, Qn delivering his gpinion 

respecting (he Sentence upon Prynne,. for 

publishing Hi3trio^mastiX| 3 vol* ^$2.— -Bis 

P2' 



J 



36 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



Panegyric upon Henrietta Maria, Queen of 
Cbaries the Firsts ibid. 584. 

DOUGLAS, Niel.— His Trial in the High 
Court of Justiciary in Scotland, for Sedition, 
57 Geo. 3, 1817, 33 vol. 633.— The Indict- 
ment, ibid. ib. — Interlocutor of Relevancy, 
ibid. 637. — Evidence for the Prosecution, 
ibid. 638. — Evidence for the Panel, ibid. 
661. — ^The Solicitor General declines press- 
ing for a Conviction, but urges the Jury to 
find a Verdict of Not Proven, ibid. 673. — 
Mr. Jeffrey contends for a Verdict of Not 
Guilty, ibid. 677. — The Jury unanimously 
find him Not Guilty, ibid. 681. 

DOVER, Henry, Eari of. See Northampton, 
Spencer, Earl of, 

DOVER, Simon. See Brewster, Edward. 

DOWNES, John, 5 vol. 1005, 1210. See 
Regicides, 

DOWNES, William, Chief Justice of K. B. in 
Ireland. — His Argument on delivering his 
Judgment in the Case of Judge Johnson, 29 
vol. 202. — ^His Charge to the Grand Jury 
assembled under a Special Commission in 
the County of Sligo in Ireland, for the Trial 
of the Threshers, 30 vol. 1. — ^His Argument 
on delivering the Judgment of the Court 
against the Plea in Abatement, in the Case 
of Dr. Sheridan, 31 vol.611. — His Charge 
to the Jury on the Trial of Dr. Sheridan, for 
a Misdemeanour, under the Irish Conven- 
tion Act, in attending the Election of a 
Member in an Assembly of Roman Catho- 
lics, ibid. 745. — His Charge on the Trial of 
Thomas Kirwan,for a similar Misdemeanour, 

. ibid. 909.— His Charge to the Jury on the 
Trial of Hugh Fitzpatrick, for a Libel upon 
the Duke of Richmond, ibid. 1229. 

DOWNIE, David.— His Trial at Edinburgh, 
for High Treason, under a Special Commis- 
sion of Oyer and Terminer, 34 Geo. 3, 1794, 
24 vol. 1 . — Counsel for the Crown and for the 
Prisoner, ibid. ib. — ^Abstract of the Indict- 
ment, ibid. 3. — Speech of the Lord Advocate 
for the Prosecution, ibid. 6. — Evidence for the 
Prosecution, ibid. 19. — Mr. CuUen's Speech 
in his Defence, ibid. 121. — Mr. Anstruther's 
Reply for the Prosecution, ibid. 167. — ^The 
Court sum up the Evidence, ibid. 186. — ^The 
Jury find him Guilty, but recommend him to 
Mercy, ibid. 192. — ^The Lord Presidentpasses 
Sentence upon him and Robert Watt, ibid. 
197.— He is afterwards pardoned, ibid. 200. 

DRAKARD, John.— His Trial upon an Ex- 
officio Information at Lincoln, for a Seditious 
Libel, published in the Stamford News, 51 
Geo. 3, 1811, 31 vol. 495.— The Indict- 
ment, ibid, 536.— Mr. Clarke's Speech for 
the Prosecution, ibid. ib. — Mr. Brougham's 
Speech for the Defendant, ibid. 509. — Mr. 
Cflarke's Reply, ibid. 529.— Mr. Baron 
Wood's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 533.— The 
Jury find the Defendant Guilty, ibid. 536. 

DRAKB| Williamt^ProceediDgs on an Im-' 



peachment against him for pubKshing a 
seditious Pamphlet, 12 Car. 2, 1660, 5 vol. 
1363. — He is called before the House of 
Commons, and confesses that he was the 
Author, ibid. 1364. — ^The Impeachoienty 
ibid. 1366.— The Lords order him to be 
apprehended and prosecuted by the Attorney 
General, but no further Proceedings sdem 
to have been taken against him, ibid. 1368. 

DRAPER, Edward Alured.— Proceedings 
against him upon an Information in the 
Court of King s Bench, for publishing cer- 
tain Libels upon the Right Honourable John 
Sullivan, arising out of the Proceedings 
against Governor Piclon, 46-48 Geo. 3, 
1806-1807, 30 vol.959. — Mr.Garrow moves 
for a Criminal Information against him, ibid. 
ib. — A Rule to show. Cause is granted, ibid. 
966.— Serjeant Best shows Cause, ibid, ib* 
^-The Rule for a Criminal InfoAnation is 
made absolute, ibid. 977. — ^The Information, 
ibid . 980. — Trial of the Information, ibid. 990. 
— Counsel for the Prosecution and for the 
Defendant, ibid. ib. — Speech of Sir V.Gibbs, 
• Attorney General, for the Prosecution, ibid. ib. 
—Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 996. — 
Mr. Dauncey's Speech for the Defence, ibid. 
1005.— Evidence for the Defendant, ibid. 
1017. — Reply of the Attorney General, ibid. 
1022. — Lord Ellenborough's Charge to the 
Jury, ibidi 1024.— The Jury find the De- 
fendant Guilty, ibid. 1029. — ^An Application 
for a New Trial is made, and refused by the 
Court, ibid. ib. — ^Affidavits on behalf of the 
Defendant on the Motion for Judgment, 
ibid. 1031. — Affidavits for the Prosecution, 
ibid. 1096. — Mr. Daunce/s Speech in 
Mitigation of Punishment, ibid. 1040. — ^The 
Attorney General's Speecli in Aggravation, 
ibid. 1045. — Mr. Garrow's Speech on the 
same side, ibid. 1053.— Judgment of the 
Court, ibid. 1060. — Proceedings against him 
in the Court of King's Bench for a Libel on 
William Fullarton, Esq. deceased, ibid. 1063. 
— The Indictment, ibid. 1347. — He suffers 
Judgment by default, ibid. 1063. — Affidavits 
for the Prosecution on his being brought up 
for Judgment, ibid. 1365.'-Affidavitsfor the 
Defendant, ibid. 1063. — ^Additional Affida- 
vits for the Prosecution, ibid. 1089. — Mr. 
Garrow's Speech in Aggravation of Punish^ 
ment, ibid. 1118. — Mr. Nolan's Speech on 
the same side, ibid. — 1122.— The Court dis- 
charge the Defendant upon his own Recog- 
nizance to appear and receive Judgment 
when called upon, ibid. 1128. 

DREWRIE, Robert.— His Trial at the Old 
Bailey for High Treason upon the Statute 
of Elizabeth, for returning into England as 
a Popish Priest, 5 Jac. 1, 1607, 2 vol. 358. 
— He pleads Not Guilty, ibid. 360.— The 
Jury find him Guilty, ibid. 362.— He offers 
to take the Oath of Allegiance, ibid. 365.— 
But afterwards refuses it, ibid. 367. — ^Judg- 
ment passed against him, ibidt 369. — His 
Execution, ibid, 370. 



T HE STATE TRIALS. 



07 



DRU^TMOND, H. Home, AdTocate.— His 
Speech ia Reply to the Objections to the 
Aelevancy of the lodictmeDt on the Trial 
of William £dgar, for Administering unlaw* 
ful Oaths, 33 vol. 169.— His Speech in 
Reply to similar Objections in the Case of 
M«Kinley, ibid. 329, 

DUCK, Arthur. See Rea, Lord. 

DUDLEY, Sir Andrew. See Gates, Sir John. 

DUDLEY, Edmund. See Empson, Sir Thos, 

DUFFIN, Patrick William.— His Trial with 
Thomas Lloyd, for a Conspiracy to escape 
from theFleet^ and a Seditious Libel, 33 
Geo. 3, 1792, 22 vol. 317. — Evidence for 
the Prosecution, ibid. 320. — Mr. Lloyd's 
Defence. of himself, ibid. 326. — ^They are 
both found Guilty, ibid. 356.-^Lloyd stands 
in the Pillory, ibid. 357. 

DUNCAN, Alison.— His Trial at Edinburgh 
with Neil Reidpath and Robert Mitchell for 
Mobbing and Rioting in resistance of the 
Militia Act, 37 Geo. 3, 1797, 26 vol. 827.— 
The Indictment, ibid. ib. — ^The Jury find 
them Not Guilty, and they are discharged, 
ibid. 840. 

DUNCOMBE, Charles.— His Trial at the Bar 
of the Court of King's Bench for a Fraud in 
the execution of his office as Cashier oi the 
Excise, 11 Will. 3, 1699, 13 vol. 1061.— The 
Attorney General opens the Case for the 
Prosecution, ibid. 1063. — Evidence against 
him, ibid. ib. — Speeches of his Counsel in his 
Defence, ibid. 1076. — Evidence for him, 
ibid. 1087. — He is acquitted, ibid. 1106. 

BUND AS, James.— Proceedings against him 
in the Court of Justiciary in Scotland for 
Leasing-making and Sedition in receiving a 
Medal, with a head of the Pretender and a 
Seditious Inscription, into the Collection of 
the Faculty of Advocates in Edinburgh, 10 
Anne, 1712, 15 vol. 715.— The Libels 
against him, ibid. 716. — Debate upon their 
Relevancy, ibid. 725. — The Court find the 
Libels relevant, ibid. 727. — ^The Diet is 
afterwards deserted, ibid. ib. 

DUNDAS, Robert, Lord Advocate, 35 Geo. 
3.— His Speech for the Prosecution on the 
Trial of William Skirving for Sedition, 23 
vol. 536. — His Speech for the Prosecution 
on the Trial of Maurice Margaret for Sedi- 
tion, ibid. 679. — His Speech for the Prose- 
cution on the Trial of Sir Archibald Gordon 
Kinloch for the Murder of his Brother, 25 
vol. 968. — His Speech for the Prosecution 
on the Trial of George Mealmaker for Ad- 
ministering unlawful Oaths, 26 vol. 1158. — 
He was afterwards Lord Chief Baron of the 
Eicbequer in Scotland, 25 vol. 968 (note). 

DUNDEE, John Grahame, of Claverhouse, 
Viscount.'"— Proceedings in the Parliament 
of Scotland against him and others for High 
Treason, 2 Will, and Mary, 1690, 13 vol. 
817.— Rtcairn's Epitaph upon him^ ibid. 



ib. (note). — Correspondence between him 
and Lord Strathuaver, ibid. 818 (note).— 
Fountaiuhall's Account of a curious Litiga« 
tion between him and Sir John Dalrymple, 
11 vol. 945. 

DUNN, James. — His Trial in Ireland for 
conspiring to murder the Earl of Carhamp^ 
ton, 37 Geo. 3, 1797, 26 vol. 839.— The 
Indictment, ibid, ib.— Speech of the Attorney 
General for the Prosecution, ibid. 842. — 
Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 846. — 
Evidence for the Prisoner, ibid. 866. — Mr. 
Justice Boyd's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 871. 
—The Jury find him Guilty, ibid. 878.— He 
receives sentence of Death, and is executed, 
ibid. 900. 

DUNNING, John, Counsel, 20 vol. 1285, Jil vol. 
708 .-^His Argument in ^le Duchess of King- 
ston's Case, that a Sentence of the Ecclesias- 
tical Court, annulling her first Marriage, is 
not a conclusive answer to the Charge of* 
Bigamy, 20 vol. 481.— -He is one of the 
Counsel for the Prosecution in the Case of 
Lord George Gordon, 21 vol. 498. — His 
Speech for the Madras Council, ibid. 1139. 
— His Argument, in the Case of Leach and 
Money, against the power of the Secretary 
of State to commit for Libel, 19 vol. 1020. 

DUNY, Amy. See Cullender, jRose. 

DYER, Sir James, Chief Justice of C, P, 14 
Eliz. 1 vol. 957. 

EADON, John. See Luddites. 

EARBERRY, . —Report of his Case on 

a Prosecution for a seditious Libel, 1732, 
20 vol. 853. 

EARL, Sir Walter. See Darnell, Sir Thomas. 

EARLES, John. See Messenger, Peter. 

EASTERBY, George. See Codling, William. 

EATON, Daniel Isaac— His Trial at the Old 
Bailey for publishing the Second Part of 
Paine's Rights of Man, 33 Geo. 3, 1793, 
22 vol. 753. — The Indictment, ibid. ib. — 
Counsel for the Prosecution and for the De- 
fendant, ibid. 756. — Mr. Garrow's Speech for 
the Prosecution, ibid. 757.— Evidence for the 
Prosecution, ibid. 766. — Mr. Felix Vaughan's 
Speech for the Defendant, ibid. 767.— The 
Recorder's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 778.— 
The Jury find him Guilty of publishing, but 
not with a criminal intention, ibid. 780. — 
After some discussion, this Verdict is record- 
ed, ibid. 781. — ^The Defendant's Remarks on 
this Case, ibid. 782.— His Trial in the Court 
of King's Bench on an Ex-officio Information 
for publishing Paine's " Letter to the Ad- 
dressers on the late Proclamation," ibid. 785. 
—The Information, ibid. ib. — Counsel for the 
Prosecution and for the Defendant, ibid 791. 
— Speech of the Attorney General for the Pro- 
secution, ibid. ib. — Evidence for the Prosecu- 
tion, ibid. 797.— Mr. Felix Vaughan's Speech 
{qx the Defendant, ibid. 800.— Reply of ih« 



dl» 



GtNlSRAL INbEX t6 



Attorney General, ibid. 813. — ^The Jury find 
ft Verdict of Guilty of publishing, ibid. 82S.— 
The Attorney General mores, in the ensuing 
Term, to have the Verdict entered accordiiu? 
to its legal import, ibid. ib. — A Rule to shew 
cause is granted, but no furthet Proceedings 
are taken in this or the preceding Case, ibid, 
ib.— His trial at theOld Bailey for publishing 
ft seditious Libel, 34 Geo. ^, 1794, iZ vol. 
1013.— The Indictment, ibid. 1014.— Coun- 
sel for the Prosecution and for the Defendant, 
ibid. ib.--Mr. Fielding's Speech for the Pro- 
secution, ibid. lOlt. — Evidence for the Pro- 
secution, ibid. 1030.— Mr. Gumey's Speech 
in his Defeticc, ibid. 1031.— Summing-up of 
the Recorder, ibid. 1047.— The July acquit 
him« ibid. 1054.— Hi* Trial in the Court of 
Kinff's Inchon ftn&K-ofiScio Information for 
publiriiiog ft blasphemous libel, 52 Geo 3, 
1812) 31 y<4. 927*— Speech of the Attorney 
Geoeral for the Prosecution, ibid. 928. — 
Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 934. — 
Baton's Defence of himself, ibid. 938.— The 
Jury find him Guilty, ibid. 950.— Mr. Prince 
Smith's Address to the Court in Mitigation 
of Punishment, on his being brought up for 
Judgment, ibid. 953.— The Court sentence 
him to 18 Months Imprisonment, and to 
stand in the Pillory, ibid. 958. 

EDGAR, William. — Proceedings against him 
in the Coutt of Justiciary in Edinburgh for 
Administering unlawful Oatlis, 57 Geo. 3. 
1817, 33 vol. 145.— *The Indictment, ibid, 
ib. — Mr. Crftnstouto'i Argument ibr the 
Panel against the Relevancy of the Indict- 
ment, ibid. 150. — Mr. Drummond's Argu- 
ment for the Prosecution, ibid. 169.-^Argu- 
ment of the Solicitor General on the same 
side, ibid. 175. — Mr. Clerk*s Argument in 
Reply for the Panel, ibid. 187.— The Court 
direct Informations upon the Relevancy of 
tfie Indictment, ibid. 202. — Second Indfict- 
tneUt ig^nst him, ibid* ib.-*-Mr. CraUstoun's 
Argument, that it is not competent for the 
Court to proceed on a second Indictment 
for the same offence, until the first is desert- 
ed, ibid. 207.— ^Mr. Drummond's Argument 
in support of the Proceeding, ibid. 214. — 
Mr. Clerk's Reply, ibid. 217.— A majority 
of the Court repel the Objection, but agree 
to give forther time to the Panel, ibid. 222. 
—Mr. Drommond's Argument against Mr. 
Cranstoun*s Objection, that it is not compe- 
tent to serve a Second Indictment, during 
the pendency of the First, ibid. 244.^Mr. 
Clerk's Argument in Reply, ibid. 255.— The 
Court decide against the Objection, ibid. 274. 

3£DMONSTON, Patrick. See StiHmg, James. 

EDWARD THE SECOND, King of England. 
— Proceedings relating to his Deposition, 
20 Edw. 2, 1327, 1 vol.47.— He is prevailed 
itpon to resign the Crown to his Son, ibid. 49. 
—He is murdered at Berkeley Castle, ibid. 50. 

EDWA&D t«E SIXTH, King of EngUird.-- 
His WiH, 1 ▼<^. 754.--»Rapin's AeceuM of 



the Circumstances under which it was made, 
ibid. 761. 
EDWARDS, Susannah. See tb^d, Temm 

EG AN, James. See Macdmkli Stephen* 

EGERTON, Thomas, Solicitor General, 24 
Eliz. 1 vol. 1051, 1281, l3224^His Speech 
for the Crown upon the Inquisition held 
upon the Death of Henry Piercy, Earl of 
Northumberland, 1 vol. 1120* 

' — n . - .i, ■ ^ Attorney General^ 1 iroL 



1327. 



-, Lord Keeper. See 



EUetmere^ Tiftoimu, Lord. — ^His Deolaration 
respecting the tumult at the house of the 
Earl of Essex, on his being sent to faidi by 
Queen EUEabeth, 1 vol. 1840. 

ELDER, John.— Proceedings against him and 
William Stewart at Edinburgh for Sedition^ 
33 Geo. 3, 1793, 23 vol. 25.--the tndict- 
ment, ibid. ib. — Steivart is outlawed for 
not appearing, ibid. 32. — No forther Pro- 
ceedings appear to have been taken against 
Elder, ibid. 34. 

ELLENBOROUGH, Edward, Loid, Chief 
Justice of K. B. See Law^ Edwurd* — 20 voL 
546, 30 vol. 538, 863, 1024.->His Charge 
to the Jury on the Trial of Codling and 
others, in the Court of Admiralty, for casting 
away a Ship with intent to defraud the 
Under-writers, 28 voh 309.— His Charg« to 
the Grand Jury, assembled under a Special 
Commission for the Trial of Colonel Despard 
for High Treason, ibid. 347. — His Charge 
to the Jury on that Trial, ibid. 485. — His 
Address to Colonel Despard on parsing 
Sentence upon him, ibid. 525.'-His Charge 
to the Jury on the Trial of Pc?ltier for a Libel 
on Buonaparte, when First Consul of the 
French Republic, ibid. 616. — His Charge to 
the Jury on the Trial of Michael and John 
Hedges for a Conspiracy to defraud ^he 
Government by false Vouchers for Work 
done in Woolwich Dock -yard, ibid. 1408. — 
His Charge to the Jury on the Trial of an 
Action brought by Mr. Plunkett, when 
Solicitor Genera] in Ireland, against William 
Cobbett, for a Libel, 29 vol. 78.-^llis Charge 
to the Jury on the Trial of Mr. Justice 
Johnson for a Libel, ibid. 498. — His Charge 
to the Jury on the Trial of Alexander Davi- 
6on» for defrauding Government by means 
of false Vouchers, 31 vol. 205.— His Charge 
to the Jury on the Trial of Valentine Jones, 
for Frauds on the Government, committed 
by him, while Commissary General of the 
Forces in the West Indies, ibid. 321. — His 
. Charge to the Jury on the Trial of Lambert 
and Perry for a Libel on George the Tliird 
in the Morning Chronicle, ibid. 363. — His 
Charge to the Jury on the Trial of John and 
Leigh Hunt for a Libel in the Examiner, 
ibid. 408. — His Charge to the Jury on the 
Trial of Daniel Isaac Eaton, for publishing 
a blflsplieifrogs libel, il»id . H9.-^His Charge 



THE STATE TRtALS. 



3d 



lo (te Jntf om tfa6 Tfial of James Watson 
ftir High Tteasotj, ibid; 578. 

ELLtS, Richard, it toI. 821. See New 

£LL£SM£R£, Thomas, Lord^ Lord ChaD- 
ceUor. See EgerUmy Thomas, — His Argu- 
ment In the £xcheqaer Chamber in the 
Case of Ae Postnati, 2 voK 659. — He is 
sp'fiointed Lord High Steward fbr the Trials 
of the Barl aiid CdunteSs of Sbrewsbuty 
for Ae Murder of Sir Thomas OTerbury, 
ibid. 952, ^68. 

ELUdrrt, Bdniund, ISl vol. 645. See Gra^ 
Aon, SB' JRkhard, 

BLLIOTTj Sir John. — Proceedings against 
him, Deiizil HoIHsv and Benjamin Valentine, 
apon an Inferraation agaibst them for sedi- 
tious Sp^ecbe^ in Parliament, 5 Car. 1, 
1629, 8 Tbh 29d.— The Information^ ibid. 
320.— Their several Pleas, ibid. 324.— The 
Attorney Gene|'al*s Demurrer to the Pleas, 
ibid. 3^7.-^Jddgment of Respondeat Ouster, 
ibid; 328.-^udginent against them for hot 
pleading in chief, ibid. 829.— Writ of Error 
brought by Holiisj ibid. 331.— Judgment 
teversed in the House of Lords, ibid. 333. 
— Arguments of their Counsel upon their 
Pl^aS to the Jurisdiction, ibid. 295.— The 
Attohiey General's Reply, ibid. 304.— The 
Judgment of the Court for the Crown, ibid. 
306:— Resolutions of the House of Com- 
tQo'n8in164i respecting these Proceedings, 
ibid; 310. — The Commons resolve that the 
Jodgnient in this Case was illegal and a 
breach (^f their privileges, ibid: 319. 

ELLIS, Sir William, Judge of a P. 26 Car. 
2. — ^His Argument in the Exchequer Cham- 
ber for affirming the Judgment of the Court 
of Ring's Bench in the Case of Barnardiston 
sgaindt Sodmes^ 6 vol. 1070. 

ELWES, Sir iervis.— His trial as actessary 
before the fact to the Murder of Sir Thomas 
Overbury, 13 Jac. 1, 1615, 2 vol. 935.— He 
is fouiid Guilty, and executed^ ibid; 942. 

BMttJf, Soilomi Counsel.— His Preface to 
the Second Edition of the State Trials, 1 vol. 
nii.^^His Opinion upon the Queries sub- 
mitted to him respecting the Case of Eliza- 
beth Canning, 19 vol. 670 (note). 

EMMET, Robert. -His 'Trial at Dublin for 
High Treason, under a Special Commission 
of Oyer and Terminer, 43 Geo. 3, 1803, 28 
▼ol. 1097. — ^The Indictment, ibid. 1098. — 
Speech of the Attorney General for the Pro- 
secution, ibid. 1111. — Evidence for the Pro- 
secution^ ibid. 1130. — The Prisoner directs 
bis Coun^ei to make no Speech to the Jury, 
and to call no Witnesses, ibid. 1157. — Mr. 
Plunkett's Reply, ibid. 1158.— Lord Nor- 
btity's Charge tb the Jury^ ibid* 1168.-^The 
Jury find hitn Guilty^ ibid. 1171— His Ad- 
^fHs on being called on for Judgment, ibid. 
ib.--He is executed, ibid. 1178. — Extract 



« 

respecting him from ''The Life of Mr. 
Curran by his Son,'' ibid. 1097 (note). 

iMPSON, Sir Thomas. — Mr. Hargtave's 
Notice of a common Errot amongst Histo- 
rians respecting the Attainder of Einpson 
and Diudley, 1 vol. 283.— Petitions againfj*t 
hinoi and Dudley presented to Henry the 
Eighth upon his Accession, ibid 285. — ^They 
are called before the Council, ibid. ib. — Einp- 
son's Speech to the Council, ibid, ib.-^ Ac- 
count of the Charge against them, ibid^ 286. 
—They are both committed to. the To Wet, 
ibid. ib.^-Account df Empsoti's Origin, ibifl. 
ib.— They are both indicted for Constrttctlve 
Treason, found Guilty, and attainted, ibid. 
287.— They ar6 afterwards beheaded, % 
virtue (jff a Special Writ from the King, ibid. 
588.— Dudley's Attaihder afterwards re- 
versed in Parliament, ibid. ib. 

ENTICK, John^ 19 vol. 1029^ See Seigute bf 
Papers: 

ESTlfcK and CARRINGTON, i9 vol. 10219. 
See Seizure of Papers. 

ERSKINE, The Honourable Thomas, Colinsel. 
— His Speech on shewing cause against a 
Rule for a Criminal Information against 
Captain . Thomas Baillie, for publishing 
Libels on the Directors of Greenwich Hos- 
pital, 21 voL 31 J — His Speech in Defence 

• of Lord George Gordon, for High Treason, 
in being concerned in the No-Popery Riots 
in 1780, ibid. 587. — His Speech on shewing 
cause against the Motion for putting off the 
Trial of Dr. Shipley, Dean of St. Asaph, 
ibid. 859. — His Speech in Defence of the 
Dean of St. Asaph, on his Trial for publish- 
ing Sir William Jones's Dialogue on Grovem- 
ment, ibid. 898.— His Speech in the Court 
of King's Bench on moving fbf a New Trial 
in that Case, ibid. 956. — His Speech in sup- 
port of the Rule for a new Trial, ibid. 971. 
— His Speech in the Court of King's Bench 
for the Council of Madras^ in Mitigation of 
Punishment, ibid. 1259. — His Argument ;n 
support of a Motion for a new Trial in the 
Case of Bembridge, convicted of misconduct 
as a Clerk in the Pay Office, 22 vol. 98 — 
His Speech in Defence of John Stockdale, 
for a Libel on the House of Commons, ibid. 
252. — ^Remarks of the Edinburgh Review 
upon this Speech, ibid. ib. (note). — His 
Speech in Defence of Thomas Paine, on his 
Prosecution for publishing the Second Part 
of the " Rights of Man," ibid. 410.— His 
Speech in Defence of John Frost for Sedi- 
tious W^ords, ibid. 488. — His Speech in De- 
fence of Perry, Lambert, and Gray, for pub- 
lishing in the Morning Chronicle an Address 
of the Derby Society for Historical Informa- 
tion, ibid. 995. — ^His Speech for the De-« 
fbndants on the Trial of Thomas Walker and 
others, for a treasonable Conspiracy, 23 vol. 
1103.— His Speech in Defence of Thomas 
Hardy, for High Treason, 24 vol. 877. — 
His Speech in Defence of Home Tooke, for 



40 



General index to 



High Treason, 25 vol. 257. — His Speech on 
summing up the Evidence for the Defence 
on Stone's Tri^l for High Treason, ibid. 
1370. — His Speech in Defence of the Bishop 
of Bangor, for a Riot and Assault, 26 vol. 
506. — His Speech for the Prosecution on 
the Trial of Williams for Blasphemy, ibid. 
,660. — His Reply in the same Case, ibid. 
696.— His Letter to the Editor of the State 
Trials, explaining his motives for returning 
bis Retainer for the Prosecution, in VVilliams*s 
Case, ibid. 714 (note). — His Evidence on 
the Trial of O'Coigly and others for High 
Treason, 27 vol. 38. — His Speech in Defence 
of Lord Thanet, for a Riot and Rescue, ibid. 
868. — His Letter to a Gentleman of the Bar 
in Ireland, on the power of .Courts of Justice 
to commit for Contempts, ibid. 1019. — His 
Speech for John Vint and others, for pub- 
lishing a Libel on the Emperor of Russia 
in the Courier, ibid. 630. — His Speech in 
Defence of Cuthell, for publishing a Sedi- 
tious Pamphlet, written by Gilbert Wake- 
field, ibid 655. —His Argument for one of 
the Prisoners in Codling's Case, for destroy- 
ing a Vessel at sea, with intent to defraud 
the Underwriters, 28 vol. 274. — His Speech 
for the Prosecution on the Trial of Michael 
and John Hedges, for Frauds in Woolwich 
Dock-yard, ibid. 1326. — He was one of the 
Counsel for the Prosecution on the Trial of 
William Cobbett, for a Libel on the Lord 
Lieutenant of Ireland, 29 vol.1. — His Speech 
for the Plaintiff in the Case of Plunkett 
against Cobbett, for a Libel, ibid. 61.— -His 
Speech for the Plaintiff in the Case of Troy 
V, Symonds, for a Libel in the Anti-Jacobin 
Review, ibid. 505. 

Thomas, Lord, Lord Chancellor. 



— He presides in the House of Lords on the 
Trial of Lord Melville, 29 vol. 607. 



Thomas, Lord, 30 vol. 1344. 



ESSEX, Arthur, Earl of. — Burnet's Account 
of his implication in the Rye-House Plot, 
9 vol. 491. — His Account of his Death, and 
of the Suspicions entertained respecting it, 
ibid. 504, 513.— Coroner's Inquest held upon 
his Body, ibid. 1132. — Trial of Braddon and 
Spake, on a Charge of suborning Evidence, 
to prove that he was murdered by his 
Keepers, ibid. 1127. — Braddon's Arguments 
and Statements in Vindication of him from 
Burnet's Charge of Self-murder, ibid. 1229. 
— Opinions of several Histcrians respecting 
his Death, ibid. ib. (note).— Committee of 
Lords appointed after the Revolution to 
inquire into the circumstances of his Death, 
ibid. 1260. — Substance of the Depositions 
before the Committee, ibid. 1262. 

ESSEX, Frances Howard, Countess of. — Pro- 
ceedings- between her and Robert, Earl of 
Essex, her Husband, in a Cause of Divorce, 
11 Jac. 1, 1613, 2 vol. 785.— -Weldon's Ac- 
count of this Prpceeding, ibid. ib. ^note).— 



Lady Essex's Libel, ibid, ib.— The Earl's 
Answer thereto, ibid. 787. — Depositions in 
the Cause, ibid. 788. — Archbishop Abbot's 
Reasons against the Divorce, ibid. 794. — 
The King's Answer thereto, ibid. 798. — A 
Jury of Matrons impaneled to examine the 
Countess, ibid. 802. — Entry thereof, Ibid, . 
ib. — Sentence of Dissolution pronounced, 
ibid. 804.— The Countess marries the £arl 
of Somerset, ibid. ib. — Memorial of this 
Case by Archbishop Abbot, ibid. 805.-r- 
Speech intended to have been spoken thy 
Archbishop Abbot in this Case, ibid. 844.— 
The King's Letter to the Archbishop re- 
specting the Decision in thisCase, ibid. 860. 
— Her Trial by her Peers for the Murder of 
Sir Thomas Overbury, 14 Jac. 1, 1616, ibid. 
951.— She pleads Guilty, ibid. 954.— She is 
condemned to be hanged, ibid. 957.-^ 
Speech intended to have been spoken by 
Sir Francis Bacon, had . she pleaded Not 
Guilty, ibid. ib. — She is pardoned, ibid. 
1005. 

ESSEX, Robert, Earl of.— Trial of him, and 
Henry, Earl of Southampton, in the House 
of Lords, at Westminster, for High Treason, 
43 Eliz. 1600, 1 vol. 1333.— They plead 
Not Guilty, ibid. 1336.— The Eari of Essex 
inquires if he might challenge any of his 
Peers, and is answered in the negative, ibid. 
1335.— Sir Edward Coke (Attorney General) 
states the Charge, ibid. 1237.— They are 
both found Guilty, ibid. 1356. — Judgment 
of Death against them, ibid. 1357. — The 
Earl of Essex is ordered for Execution, but 
the Earl of Southampton is reprieved, ibid. 
1358. — Account of the Execution of the 
Earl of Essex, ibid. 1359. — Expressions 
said to have been used by Sir Walter 
Raleigh respecting him before his Execu- 
tion, 2 vol. 44. 

ESSEX, Robert, Eari of, 2 vol. 785. See 
Essex, Frances Howard, Countess of. 

EVIOT, Peter. See Gowrie, Earl of. 

EXETER, Marquis of.— He is tried with Lord 
Montacute, by his Peers, for Treason in 
uttering Seditious words, 30 Hen. 8, 1538, 
1 vol. 479. — ^They are found Guilty, and 
Judgment is passed upon them, ibid. ib. 

EXMEW, William. See Middlemore, Hrnn^ 

phry. 

* 

EYRE, Sir Giles, Judge of K. B. 4 Will, and 
Mary, 12 vol. 1244. — He is summoned with 
Lord Holt to the House of Lords^ to answer 
fcjr the Judgment of the Court of King's 
Bench in Caseof ChariesKnowles, claiming 
to be Lord Banbury. 12 vol. 1179 (note). — 
His Speech in the House of Lords on that 
Occasion, ibid. 1180 (note). 

EYRE, Giles, Seijeant-at-Law, 4 Geo. 2, 18 
vol. 387. — His Speech for Bambridge and 
Cqrbett, on an Appeal of Murder, 17 vol, 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



41 



433^ — His Argument of the Special Verdict 
in Major Oneb/s Case, for Murder, ibid. 39. 

EYRE, James^ Recorder of London, 1 9 vol .1154. 

Sir James, Chief Justice of C. P. — 

His Charge to the Grand Jury at the Old 
Bailey, assembled under a Special Commis^ 
sion for the Trial of Treasons in 1794, 24 
Tol. 200. — Strictures upon this Charge, 
ibid. 210 (note). — His Chargd to the Jury 
on the Trial of Thomas Hardy for High 
Treason, ibid. 1293. — His Charge to the 
Juiy on the Trial of Home Tooke, 25 vol. 
555.--His Charge to the Jury on the Trial 
of Crossfield for High Treason, 26 vol. 190. 

£YR£, Robert, Solicitor General, 9 Anne, 
15 vol. 655. — His Speech in Reply for the 
House of Commons, on the Impeachment 
of Dr. Sacheverel, 15 vol. 396. 

Sir Robert, Chief Justice of C. P. — 

Proceedings of a Committee of the House of 
Commons upon a Charge against him of 
having visited Thomas Bambridge, and sup- 
plied him with Money, while in Prison by 
virtue of a Commitment by the House, 17 
vol. 619. — His Charge to the Jury on the 
Trial of Bambridge for Felony, ibid. 612. 

EYRE, Sir Samuel, Judge of K. B. 7 Will. 3, 
12 vol. 1291.-13 vol 139, 451. 



FABRIGAS, Anthony. — Proceedings in an 
Action of Trespass for false Imprisonment and 
Banishment, brought by him against Lieute- 
nant-General Mostyn, Governor of Minorca, 
14 Geo. 3, 1773-74, 20 vol. 81.— Counsel for 
the Plaintiff and for the Defendant, ibid . ib. — 
Statement of the Pleadings in the Writ of 
Error afterwards brought, ibid. 184. — Ser- 
jeant Glynn's Speech for the Plaintiff, ibid. 
85.— Evidence for the Plaintiff, ibid. 92 — 
Serjeant Davy's Speech for the Defendant, 
ibid. 99. — Evidence for the Defendant, ibid. 
118. — Serjeant Glynn's Reply, ibid. 146. — 
Mr. Justice Gould's Charge to the Jury, 
ibid. 161. — ^The Jury return a Verdict for 
the Plaintiff, with 3,000/ Damages, ibid. 
175. — Proceedings on a Motion for a new 
Trial, ibid. ib. — Lord Chief Justice DeGrey 
delivers the Judgment of the Court against 
a new Trial, ibid. ib. — A Writ of Error is 
brought in the Court of King's Bench upon 
a Bill of Exceptions, ibid. 183.— Record of 
the Proceedings in Error, ibid. ib. — The 
Bill of Exceptions, ibid. 189. — Assignment 
of Errors thereon, ibid. 193. — Mr. BuUer's 
Argument for the Plaintiff in Error, ibid. 
194. — Mr. Peckham's Argument for the De- 
fendant in Error, ibid. 207. — Mr BuUer's 
Reply, ibid. 220. — ^The Judgment of the 
Court delivered by Lord Manstield, that the 
Judgment of the Court below be affirmed, 
ibid. 226. 

FAGG, Sir John. — ^Proceedings in Parliament 
on an Appeal in the House of I^ords by Dr. 
Shirley, against biro apd other JNJembers of 



the House of Commons, 27 Car. 2, 1675, 
6 vol. 1121. — ^He is ordered by the House 
of Lords to put in his Answer to a Petition 
preferred against him by Dr. Shirley, ibid, 
lb. — He petitions the House of Commons 
thereupon, ibid. 1122. — Dr. Shirley is sent 
for by the Commons to answer for a Breach 
of Privilege, in prosecuting a Suit by Peti- 
tion of Appeal in the House of Lords 
against a Member of the House of Com- 
mons, ibid. 1128. — The Commons resolve 
that the Appeal is a Breach of their Privi- 
leges, ibid. 1133.— The Commons order 
that Sir John Fagg be sent to the Tower for 
a Breach of Privilege in appearing and 
answering to Dr. Shirley's Appeal, ibid. 
1 147. — Resolutions of the Commons in sup- 
port of Sir John Fagg, ibid. 1166.— The 
Parliament is prorogued, ibid. 1170.— Dr. 
Shirley renews his Appeal the next Session, 
ibid. ib. — ^The Earl of Shaftesbury's Speech 
on the Debate respecting the appointment 
of a day for hearing the Appeal, ioid. 1171. 
—The Lords appoint a day for hearing the 
Appeal, ibid. 1181. — ^The Commons again 
resolve that the Appeal is a Breach of their 
Privileges, ibid. ib. — The Dispute is ended by 
another Prorogation ofParliament, ibid. 11 86. 

FAIRFAX, Lady. — ^Her singular Conduct at 
the commencement of the Trial of Charles 
the First, 4 vol. 1005, 1067 (note). 

PARREL, Richard. See Metsenger^ Peter, 

FARWELL, John. See Thompson, NatfumieL 

FAULCONER, Richard.— His Trial for Per- 
jury, at the Bar of the Upper Bench, 5 Car. 
2, 1653, 5 vol. 323.— Account of the Circum- 
stances which gave occasion to this Trial, 
ibid. ib. — ^The Indictment, ibid. 335. — ^The 
Indictment is found by the Grand Jury, ibid. 
337. — ^The first Indictment is withdrawn, on 
accountof a defect, and a Second is preferred 
and found, ibid. 345.— He pleads Not Guilty, 
ibid. 347. — A Trial at Bar ordered, ibid. ib. 
— Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 348.— 
Evidence of his general bad Character given, 
ibid. 354. — Evidence in his Defence, ibid. 
356.— Reply on behalf of the Prosecution, 
ibid. 361. — He is found Guilty, ibid. 365. 

FAWKES, Guy. See WinUr, Robert. 

FAZAKERLY,Thomas, Counsel.— HisSpeech 
in Defence of Richard Francklin, for a 
Seditious Libel in the Craftsman, 17 vol. 649. 

FIELDING, Robert.- His Trial at the Old 
Bailey for Bigamy, in marrying the Duchess 
ofCleveland, his former Wife beingstill alive, 
5 Anne 1706, 14 vol. 1327.— Tlie Indictment, 
ibid . 1328.— He pleads Not Guilty, ibid. ib. 
— ^The Counsel for the Crown open the Case, 
ibid. 1329. — Evidence against him, ibid. 
1332.— His Defence, ibid. 1351.— Evidence 
in support of his Defence, ibid. 1352. — Reply 
of the Counsel for the Crown, ibid. 1358. — 
Mr. Justice Powel's Charge to the Jury, 



4i 



GfelJfeftAL tNbfeX TO 



ibid. )362.-^'Ilie Jury find him Guilty, ibid. 
1368. — Hie obtains the Queen's Warrant to 
suspend the Execution of his Sentence, ibid, 
ib. — Proceedings , in Doctors' Commons 
against biro, ibid. i36p. — Definitive Sen- 
tence, annulling the Marriage yirith the 
Duchess of Cieveiandi ibid. 1370. 

F£LL, Margaret. See Crook, John, — Proceed- 
ingk dgaibst htir for refUsitig the Oath of 
Obedience, 16 Cflti^. H, 1664, 6 vol. 132^.— 
Sh« neAi^bs to take the Oath tvhfen it is ten- 
dered W hir by a Judge of Assize, ibid. 633. 
^She is ibdibted for her refiiisal, ibid. 636. 
—The Jury find her Giiiily, ibid. 640.— The 
Court pass Judgment of rremunire against 
herj ibid. 641. 

FfetTdN, John.— His Execution for High 
Treason, in 8ettin|; up a traitorous Bull on 
uie GaU of the fiishbp of London, 13 Eliz. 
1570, 1 Tol. 1085. 

PBLTONj Johtti— Proceedings agairiit hini for 
ih^ Miirder of the Duke of Buckingham, 4 
Car. 1, 1628, 3 ¥dl. 369.— He confesses the 
Indictment, and is hangfed, ibid. 87i; — ^The 
Judges refuse to order his hand to be cut off, 
ibid. ib. 

FENNER, Edward, Judge of K. B. 84 Eliz; 
1 Tol. 1815, 133^ 2 rol: 576. 

FENWICfe, Johil. Sfee WhUebread, thomas. 

FENWiCKi Sir Jdhn, Baronet.— Proceedings 
in Parliament agdinst him upon a Bill of 
Attainder for High Treason, 8 Will, 3, 1696, 
13 i6i. 537.— He is brought to ihfe JHLouse of 
Comhions, ibid. 539.— The Housd resolve 
id bribg in a Bill of Attainder against him, 
ibid. 542. ^-^The house resolve, upon Debate, 
that triien brought to the Bar, the Serjeant at 
Aims shall stand by him at the Bar with the 
Mace, ibid. 546. — He is brbught to the Bar, 
ibid. ib.--^The Bill of Attainder is read to 
him, ibid. 547.— Serjeant Gblild and the 
Recorder doen the Evidence agdinst him, 
ibid. 548. — His Counsel object to the pro- 
duction of Evidence against him to prove 
his Guilt generally, ibid. 552. — After Debate, 
the Hctuse resolve th^t he shall be allowed 
fUrthet timfe to yirodUce his Witnesses, and 
that he ilatne them, ibid. 575. — The House 
also resolve that the King*s Counsel may 
j^rbdtib^ Evidence 16 pi-ove his Giiilt getier- 
ally, ibid. 576. — Evidence against him, ibid. 
5^0.-^liis Counsel Object to Evideiice, that 
Lady Fenwick tampered with one of the 
"Witnesses against him, ibid. 581. — I'he 
Hoiise, after Debate, resolve to receive the 
Evidence, ibid. 588. — His Letter to his Wife, 
on being arrested, ibid. 627 (note). — Sir 
Thomas Powis*s Speech in his Defence, ibid. 
631 . — Sir B. Shower's Speech in his Defence, 
ibidi 640.— Reply of Serjeant Gould and the 

' Recoirder, ibid. 646. — Debate in the House 
of Commons oti the Second Iteading of the 
flill Qf Attainder, ibid, 659.— the Bill is 
cotnniitted, ibid. 712.— t)ebate on the Third 



Readibgi ibid, ib.— the Bill is read ^a third 
time in the House of Commons, ibid. 749. 
— Prbclsedingsupbn it in the House dt Lords; 
ibid. 750.— Bishop Biimet's Reasons for 
voting in favour of the Bill> ibid. 751. — ^The 
Bill passes the Hovsfe of Lords by a majority 
of Seve.n, ibid. 755.— ^Prc^testasainstit, ibid. 
756. — Paper delivered hy Sir John Eenivi<^ 
to the Sheriff^ at the place of Execution, ibid. 
757. — ^Watrant for bia Execution^ ibid. 756. 
—He is executed, ibid* 768. 

FEftGtSSdN, ftbbert, Cou6sM. Sefe I%ph^t, 
^kville, Ehtt q/:- fiis trial with Lbtd 
Thanet and others fbr k Riot in the Cdilrt 
of Justice! 27 vol. 821.~t^H^ ;8 fcm^d GtiiltjTi 
ibid. 941 .^Sentence of the Court upon biln, 
ibid. 952. — His. Observations updn his df^n 
Case, and the points of Law ariaing upon the 
Information, ibid. 958. — His Evidence on 
the Ttial ot Hardy for High treasoti, H vol. 
Ib97. 

FERNLEY, John.— His Trial with ^iTilliam 
Ring, Elizabeth Gaunt^ ahd Henry Cornish, 
at the Old Baily, for High Trfeasdn, in har« 

^ bouring Traitors after Monihouth's Rebel- 
lion, 1 Jac. 2, 1685^ 11 Vol; 381.— The 
several Indictments, ibid. 383. — Tliey . all 

glead Not Guilty, ibid. 384, 410.— Trial of 
Ling, ibid. 390.— Trial of Fernley, ibid. 398. 
—Ring and Fernley are both found Guilty, 
ibid. 410.— Triai of Elizabeth Gaunt, ibid. 
413.— She is foimd Guilty, ibid. 441.— trial 
of Cornish, ibid. 421.— He is found Guilty, 
ibid. 448. — Sentence passed upon theln, 
ibid. ib. — Fernley arid Ring arfe reprieved, 
ibid. 450.-^ornish*s Execution, ibid. 451. 
—Elizabeth Gaunt's Execution, ibid. 452.— 
BUrnet's Account of her Trial, ibid. 300 
(note). — Act of P^irliaraent after the Revo- 
lution^ reversing the Attainder of Cornish, 
ibid. 454.— Sir John Hatvles*s Remarks upon 
Corni:Jh's Trial, ibid. 455. 

FERON, Robert. See Ball, a Secular Prksl. 

FERRERS, Lawrence, Earl.- His Trial be- 
fore the House of Lords, for the Mutder of 
John Johnson, 33 Geb. 2^ 1760, 19 vol. 8&5. 
— Commission to Lord Henley to b^ Lord 
High Steward, ibid. 887. — Certiorari to re- 
move the Indictment, with thetleturn to the 
same, ibid. 888. -The Indicttiient, ibid. fl91 . 
— The Lord High Steward's Addresii to the 
Prisoner, Ibid. 892, — He pleads Not Guilty, 
ibid. 893.— The Attorney General opens the 
■Case for the Prosecution, ibid. 895. — Evi 
ddnce ibr (he Pi*0sebuti6n, ibid. 902. — His 
Defence, ibid. 922.- -Evidence for the De- 
fence, ibid. 923. — He desires that a Written 
Defence may be read, ibid. 944. — Reply of 
Mr. Yorke, the Solicitor feeneril, for the 
Prosecution, ibid. ^45. — ^i'he Lords uudni- 
mously find him Guilty, ibid. 956.-^Spfeech 
of the Lord High Steward, on prtmottneing 
Judgment of Death upon him» ibid* 058.— 
Mr. Justice Foster's Report of .IHe Reasons 
of the Answers given by the Judges to the 



*rHfe StAtE TfetALS. 



I» 



Questions proposed to them, respecting this 
Trial, ibid. 960. — Account of the Execution 
of Lord Ferrers, ibid. 973. — ^Lord Emkine's 
Remarks upon the Case of Lord Ferrers, in 
his Defence of Hadiield, 37 yoI. 1324. 

FETHEBSTONHAUGH, Sir Timothy. See 
Derhyy Jrnnts Donley ^ Eari cf^ 

FIELD, Theophilus, Dr. Bishop of LlandafF. 
•^Proceedings in Parliament against him, 
for Bribery and Corruption, 18 and 19 Jac. 
1, 162Q, 2 vol. 1088. — Particulars of the 
Charges against him, ibid. 1116. — ^The Con- 
sideration of the Charge is referred to Arch- 
bishop Abbot, ibid. 1118. — Characteristic 
Letter from the Bishop to the Duke of Buck- 
ingham, ibid. 11 19.-*- After these Proceed- 
ings, he was successively Bishop of St. 
David's and Hereford, ibid. 1089 (note). 

FIEKNES, Nathanael, Colonel.— His Trial by 
a Countil of Wat, for Cowardice, in surrent 
d^rin^ the Cit/ and Castle of Bristol, 19 
Car. 1, 1643, 4 vt>l. 185.— He is accused by 
Mr. Prynn and Mr. Walker, ibid, ib.— Mr. 
Prynn contends that the Trial should be 
open, ibid. 186.— The Court determine the 
contrary, ibid, 190.— Articles of Impeach- 
ment against hitn, ibid. ib.-^His Answer 
thereto, ibid. 194. — The Prosecutors proceed 
to prove the Articles, ibid. 205.-^His De- 
fence, with Mr. Prynn's Replies to the 
several points thereof, ibid. 225. — ^The 
Council find him Ouilty, and sentence him 
to death, ibid. 297.-* ue appeals to Parlia- 
ment, and is afterwards pardoned, ibid. 298. 
—Precedents of Prosecutions for Cowardice, 
referred to by Mr. Prynn, ibid. ib. 

-^NCH, Sir Heneage, Solicitor General, 12 
Car. 2, 6 vol. 971, 6 vol. 229. — His Speech 
for the Prosecution, on the Trial of Colonel 
Harrison, the Regicide, 5 vol. 1011. --His 
Speech in the House of Commons, in the 
Debate upon the Proceedings against Lord 
Clarendon, 6 vol. 328. — His Speech in the 
House of Lords, on Summing up the Evi- 
dence against Lord Morley, on his Trial for 
Murder, ibid. 778. — His Argument for the 
Crown, in the Great Case of Monopolies, 
10 vol. 405. 

-, Lord, afterwards Baron 



Daventry and Earl of Nottingham. — He 
presides in the House of Lords as Lord High 
Steward, on the Trial of the Earl of Pem- 
broke, for Murder. 6 vol. 1317. — Also on 
the Trial of Lord Cornwallis, for Murder, 7 
vol. 143. 

-, Lord, Baron of Da- 



ventry, Lord Chancellor. — He presides as 
Lord High Steward on the Trial of Lord 
Stafford, 7 vol. 1295. 

FINCH, Sir Heneage, Solicitor General, 34 
Car. 2, 9 vol. 690, 10 vol. 567, 1092*— His 
Argument for the Crown in the Case of the 
Quo Warranto against the City of Londoui 



8 vol. 1087i — His Speech on sumtaing up 
the Evidence for the Prosecution, oh the 
Trial of Lord William Russel, 9 vol. 625.— 
His Speech on summing up the Evidence 
for the Prosecution on the Trial olf Algernon 
Sidney, ibid. 880. — His Speech in Reply 
for the Prosecution on the Tri&l of Lord 
Delamere. for High Treason, 11 vol. 586,— 
His Speecn in Reply for the Prosecution on 
the First Trial of Gates, for Perjury, io vol. 
Ii99. — His iSpeech in Reply^ on Oates*s 
Second Trial, ibid. 1291. 

FINCH, Sir John, Speaker of the HoUte of 
Commons. — He is held forcibly in the Chair, 
While the Hou^^ t>f Cothnion^ pass c6Hain 
Resolutions, 3 vol. ^^^^--^^His Speech tO the 
Kitog, on delivering the Answer of the Com- 
mons to several Messages. coiiVeyed to them 
during tlie Debates bn the LibeHy of tlie 
Subject, ibid. 165. 



' ' . ' ■ ■ - - ^ • » Chief Justice «f G* P; 3 
vol. 717, 810.— His Speeeh in the Star- 
Chamber, on delivering his Gpiniod respect- 
ing the Punishment to be infiieted on Dr. 
Williams, Bishop of Lincoln, for speaking 
scandalous Words of the Governments ibid. 
785. — He was one of the Judges who sigiied 
the Opinion in favour of Ship-Money)- ibid. 
844. — His Argument in the Exchequer 
Chamber, in favour of Ship-Money^ ibid. 
1216. See Finchf John, Lord. 

-^ John, Lord, Baron Fprdwich, Lord 



Keeper.— Proceedings in Parliament acainst 
him for High Treason^ 16 Car. 1^ 1640, 
4 vol. L — He petitions to be admitted to 
speak for himself in the House of Com- 
mons, which is granted, ibid.ib.^His Speech 
on that Occasion^ ibid. ib. — His Explanation 
of his conduct in refusing to put a question, 
when Speaker of the House of Commons, 
ibid. 3* — His Account of the means by which 
the Opinion of the Judges was obtained, in 
the Case of Ship-Money, ibid. 4. —He says 
that Croke and Hutton signed that Opinion 
only for Conformity, ibid. 6.— His Account 
of his Argument in the Case of Ship-Money, 
ibid. ib. — He is voted a Traitor by th(2 Com- 
mons, and they resolve to impeach him of 
High Treason, ibid. 9. — He escapes into 
Holland, ibid. 10. — His Letter to the Lord 
Chamberlain from thence, ibid. ib. — ^Articles 
of Impeachment againt him, ibid. 11. — They 
are presented to the Lords, ibid. 15. — The 
Lords require him to appear and answer, 
but he does not surrender, ibid. 18. — At the 
Restoration, he was one of the Commis- 
sioners for the Trial of the Regicides, 5 vol. 
986 (note). 

FINERTY, Pelef.— His Trial in Ireland, for 
publishing a Seditious Libel. 38 Geo. 3, 1797^ 
26 vol. 901 .— NarraiiVe of thd circumstanced 
which gave rise to this Trial, ibid. ib. — The 
Indictment, ibid. 92d.-^Speeich of the At^ 
torney General for the Prosecution, ibid. 
927.-— EviddDce for the Prdsdcution, ibid. 



44 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



935.— Mr. Fletcher's Speech for the Defend- 
ant, ibid. 951. — Evidence for the Defendant, 
ibid. 961. — Mr. Curran's Speech, on Sum- 
ming up the Evidence for the Defendant, 
ibid. 964. — Mr. Prime Serjeant's Reply, 
ibid. 992. — Mr, Justice Downes's Charge to 
the Jury, ibid. 1003. — The Jury find him 
Guilty, ibid. 1008. — His Address to the 
Court on being brought up for Judgment, 
ibid. 1009. — Mr. Justice Downes passes the 
Sentence of the Court upon him, ibid. 1011. 
—Account of the Proceedings against Wm. 
Orr, out of which this Prosecution arose, 
ibid. 906. 

FINNEY, Patrick.— His Trial in Ireland, for 
High Treason, 38 Geo. 3, 1798, 26 vol. 1019. 
— The Indictment, ibid. ib. — Mr. Curran 
moves on his behalf to postpone the Trial^ 
ibid. 1030. — The Court refuse the motion, 
ibid. 1037. — Speech of the Attorney General 
for the Prosecution, ibid. 1045. — Evidence 
for the Prosecution, ibid. 1053. — Mr. Mac 
Nally's Speech for the Prisoner, ibid: 1078. 
' — Evidence for the Prisoner, ibid. 1091. — 
Mr. Curran's Speech on summing up the 
Evidence for the Prisoner, ibid. 1099. — 
Reply of the Solicitor General, ibid. 1113. — 
Mr. Justice Chamberlain's Charge to the 
Jury,ibid. 1122. — Mr. Baron Smith's Charge, 
ibid. 1128. — ^The Jury acquit the Prisoner, 
ibid. 1132. 

FISHER, John, Bishop of Rochester. — His 
' Trial for High Treason, in denying the King's 
Supremacy, 26 Hen. 8> 1535, 1 vol. 395. — 
Account of his previous Prosecutions, one of 
which was for Misprision of Treason, in con- 
cealing the predictions of Elizabeth Barton, 
the Holy Maid of Kent, against the King, 
ibid. ib. — Character of the Report of this 
Trial, ibid. 397. — ^Names of his Judges, ibid, 
ib. — ^Tlie Indictment read, ibid. 399. — Pleads 
Not Guilty, ibid. ib. — Mr. Rich's Evidence, 
and the Bishop's Answer to it, ibid. ib. — He 
states that his Opinion against the King's 
Supremacy was given in the way of counsel 
upon the King's demanding it, ibid. 400. 
—The Jury find him Guilty, and the 
Court pass Judgment of Death against 
him, ibid. 402. — Anecdote respecting his 
cheerfulness after his Trial, ibid. 403. — His 
Conversation with the Lieutenant of the 
Tower, when informed that the Order for his 
Execution was arrived, ibid. 404. — His 
anxiety respecting his dress on the day of 
Execution, ibid. 405. — His conduct at his 
Execution, ibid. 474.— Anecdote related of 
Henry the Eighth, when told of the Pope's 
intention to send the Bishop a Cardinal's 
hat, ibid. 408. — Burnet's Account of his 
Trial, Execution, and Character, ibid. 473. 

FITZALAN, Thomas, Archbishop of Canter- 
bury — His Impeachment by the Commons, 
for High Treason, in advising and procuring 
the Commission to the Duke of Gloucester's 
Fwtiop, 21 Rio. 2a 1397, t vol. 1^3,— He is 



banished, and his Temporalities forfeited to 
the King, ibid. 124. 

FITZGERALD, Thomas Judkin.— Proceed- 
ings on the Trial of an Action in Ireland, 
brought ag^nst him by Mr. Wright, for 
Assault and Battery, 39 Geo. 3, 1799> 27 
vol. 759. — Evidence for the Plaintiff, ibid, 
ib. — The Defence, ibid. 763. — Evidence 
for the Defence, ibid. 764. — ^The Jury find a 
Verdict for the Plaintiff, with £500 Damages^ 
ibid. 766.— Proceedings in the Irish House 
of Commons on his Petition for Indemnity, 
ibid. 766. 

FITZHARRIS, Edward. — Proceedings in 
Parliament against him, upon an Impeach- 
ment for High Treason, in being concerned 
in the Popish Plot, 33 Car. 2, 1681, 8 vol. 
223. — His Examination, ibid. ib.r— The Com- 
mons resolve to impeach him, ibid. 227.— 
The Lords refuse to proceed upon the Im- 
peachment, ibid. 23 1.<— Pretext for their 
refusal supplied by Lord Nottingham, ibid« 
23 (note). — Debate in the House of Com- 
mons thereupon, ibid. 232. — ^Their Resolu- 
tions upon the subject, ibid. 236. — The Par- 
liament is dissolved before any further 
Proceedings can be taken, ibid. 242. — Pro- 
ceedings against him in the King's Bench, 
on an Indictment for High Treason, in the 
same year, ibid. 243. — ^The Grand Jury 
require the Opinion of the Court, whether 
they can lawfully find a Bill against biro, 
pending his Impeachment in Parliament, 
ibid. 247. — ^The Court inform them that they 
are not to take notice of the Impeachment, 
ibid. 249. — He pleads the pendency of the 
Impeachment in Abatement, ibid. 251. — 
Counsel are assigned him, ibid. 252. — ^The 
Attorney General demurs to the Plea, ibid. 
272. — ^Arguments for the Demurrer, ibid. 
281. — ^Arguments of the Prisoner's Counsel 
in support of the Plea, ibid. 282. — Reply of 
the King's Counsel, ibid. 311.— The Court, 
without giving their Reasons, give Judgment 
against the Plea, Dolben Justice dubitante, 
ibid. 326. — He pleads Not Guilty, ibid. 327. 
—His Trial upon the Plea of Not Guilty, at 
the Bar of the Court of King's Bench, ibid. 
330. — The Court refuse to examine him, 
respecting the Murder of Sir E. Godfrey, 
ibid. 331. — Substance of the Indictment, 
ibid. 336. — The King's Counsel open the 
Case against him, ibid. 339. — Evidence 
against him, ibid. 342. — Evidence for him, 
ibid. 363. — His Defence, ibid. 377.— Reply 
of the King's Counsel, ibid. 379. — Chief 
Justice Pemberton's Charge to the Juiy, 
ibid. 385.— The Jury find him Guilty, 
ibid. 391. — Judgment of Treason passed 
upon him, ibid. 392. — Writs of Execution 
against him, ibid. 393. — ^His Execution, ibid. 
394. — His Declaration while under Sentence 
of Death, ibid. 396. — A Narrative of bis 
Conversation in the Tower with Dr. Haw- 
kiD8| ibid. 399,— Strict! *«» upon this Nar« 



TH£ STATE TRIALS. 



4iS 



ntive, ibid. 411. — Remarks upon bis Trial 
by Sir John HaWles, ibid. 425. 

FITZHERBERT, Sir Antbony, Justice of 
C. P. 26 Hen. 8, 1 vol. 398. 

FITZ-JAMES, Sir John, Chief Justice of 
R. B. 26 Hen. 8, 1 vol. 387. — He was one 
of the Judges who presided at the Trial of 
John Fisher, Bishop of Rochester, for High 
Treason, in denying the King's Supremacy, 
1 vol. 398. 

FUZPATRICK, Hugh.— His Trial at the Bar 
of the Court of King's Bench in Ireland, 
upon an Ex-officio information for a Libel 
upon the Duke of Richmond, Lord Lieuten- 
ant, 53 Geo. 3, 1813, 31 vol. 1169.— The In- 
formation, ibid. ib. — Speech of the Attorney 
Genera] for the Prosecution, ibid. 1173.— 
Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 1185. — 
Mr. Burrows's Speech for the Defendant, ibid. 
1188. — Evidence for the Defendant, ibid. 
1205. — Reply of the Solicitor General, ibid. 
121 1 . — Chief Justice Downes's Charge to the 
Jury, ibid. 1229.— The Jury find the De- 
fendant Guilty, ibid. 1234. — Proceedings on 
an Application to the Court to set aside the 
Verdict, ibid. ib. — The Motion is refused, 
ibid. ib. — On a Notice of an intended Appli- 
cation to arrest the Judgment, the Defend- 
ant is admitted to Bail, ibid. 1241; 

FTTZPATRICK, Laurence. See Audley, 
Mervin, Lord. — ^Trials of him, and Giles 
Brodway, at the Bar of the King's Bench, 
for Rape and Sodomy, 7 Car. 1, 1631> 3 vol. 
419.— They are both found Guilty, ibid. 420. 
—Letter from the Judges to the Lord Keeper, 
respecting their Execution, ibid. ib. — ^They 
confess their Guilt at the place of Execution, 
ibid. 421. 

FLEETWOOD, George, 5 vol. 1005. See 
Regicides. 

FLEMING, Sir ThoAas, Chief Baron of the 
Exchequer, 3 Jac. 1, 2 vol. 159.— His Argu- 
ment in the Great Case of Impositions, 2 
vol. 387. 

, Chief Justice of 
K. B. 10 Jac. 1, 2 vol. 770. 

FLETA. See Bracton. 

FLETCHER, Andrew, of Saltoun. See Mm- 
mouthy James, Duke o/i— Mr» Laing's Account 
of him, 11 vol. 1049 (note). 

FLETCHER, George.— His Trial for High 
Treason, in being concerned in the Rebel- 
lion of 1745, 20 Geo. 2, 1746, 18 vol. 353. 
—Evidence against him, ibid. ib. — His De- 
fence, ibid. 357.— The Jury find him Guilty, 
ibid. 358. — He is executed, ibid. ib. 

FLOWER, Benjamin. — Proceedings on his 
Commitment by the House of Lords, for a 
Breach of Privilege, in publishing a libel 
on the Bishop of Llandaif, 39 Geo. 3, 1799, 
27 vol. 985.— Preface to this Case, ibid. ib. 
— Order of the House of Lords for bringing 
him to the Bar, ibid« 1001 .—His Speech io 



the House of Lords, on being brought to the 
Bar, ibid. 1004. — Debate in the House, 
upon the Punishment to be inflicted upon 
him, ibid 1012. — He is committed to New- 
gate for Six Months, and until he pays a Fine 
of £100, ibid. 1016.— Mr. Clifibrd moves 
the Court of King^s Bench on his behalf, for 
a Habeas Corpus, ibid. 1021. — ^The Court 
grant the Writ, ibid. 1023.— Mr. Clifford's 
Argument in the Court of King's Bench, for 
his discharge upon the Return to the Habeas 
Corpus, ibid. 1025. — ^The Court refuse to 
discharge him, ibid. 1062. — Mr. Clifford's 
Postcript to this Case, ibid. 1065. — ^The 
Bishop of Llandaff's Notice of the Proceed- 
ings azainst Flower, in the Anecdotes of his 
Life, ibid. 1005 (note). 

FLOYDE, Edward.— Proceedings in Parlia- 
ment against him, for scandalizing the 
Princess Palatine and her Husband, 19 Jac. 
1, 1621, 2 vol. 1153. — Sentence of the House 
of Commons against him, ibid. ib. — Discus- 
sions between the Lords and Commons 
respecting a power of Judicature in the 
latter, ibid. 1155. — Proceediugs against him 
in the House of Lords, ibid. 11 57.— The At- 
torney GeneraVs Charge, ibid, ib.— Floyde's 
Answer, ibid. 1158. — He is found Guilty, 
and sentenced by the Lords, ibid. 1159. — 
Extracts from the Oxford Debate^, and the 
Parliamentary Journals, respecting these 
Proceedings, 8 vol. 92. 

FOGG, Christopher. See Kirkby, Colonel 
Richard, 

FORD, John, Counsel.— His Speech for the 
Defendant, on the Trial of John Owen, for a 
Libel, 18 vol. 1223. — His Argument for Lord 
Lovat, on his Trial for High Treason, in 
Support of an Objection to the Admissibility 
of the Evidence of Murray of Broughton 
against him, ibid. 614. 

FORD, William. See Messenger, Peter. 

FORDWICH, Lord, ^ee Finch, John, Lord. 

FORREST, an Observant Friar.— He was 
hanged and burned, in the Reign of Henry 
the Eighth, for denying the King's Supremacy, 
and holding heretical Opinions, 1 vol. 478. 

FORRESTER, Alexander, Counsel. — His 
Argument for Lord Lovat, in Support of an 
Objection to the Admissibility of the Evi- 
dence of Murrny of Broughton against 
him, 18 vol. 611. 

FORSEITH, Edward. See Dawson, Joseph. 

FORTESCUE, Sir Adrian.— He was attainted 
and executed, "With Thomas Dingley and 
Robert Granceter, in the Reign'of Henry the 
Eighth, for denying the King's Supremacy, 
1 vol. 482. 

FORTESCUE, Sir John. See Aland, Sir John 
Fortescue, 

FORTESCUE, Sir John. See Goodwin, Sir 
Francis. 

FORTESCUE. Sir John, Chief Justice, of 
England aua tord ChaQcellor,^ChiefJu9« 



40 



©FNiBAt INDEX f6 



iiQfi Fi|K*i in W» Aigumwt ia feTonr of 

Stip-MonQy., d^njea tliat Forte^due wa» ever 
Lonl Cbsncellor, 3 vol. 122^. 

FOSTER. James.— His Account of the beha- 
viour or Lord Kilmarnock from the time of 
his Trial until his Ei^eciition, 18 vol. 503. 

yOSTEB. Midi^el, Co!jQ^^l,r^A<jcoum of a 
Tract upqp the Ecclesiastical L^w of J^ng- 
Is^lt^y ifritten by hin^ before h^ beoafse a 
Judg^y ^ vol. 157 (note). 



-——, Serjeant at taw, and Re- 
corder gf Bristol. — His Argument in favour 
of the legality of Pre^ssing Seamen, contained 
m his Charg? to the Jury on the Trial of 
Alexander Broadfobt^ for Murder, 18 vol. 
1326.— His Charge to the Jury on the Trial 
of Captain Goodere and Matthew Mahony, 
for theMurderof his Brother, Sir John Dinely 
Goodere, 17 vol. 1067.— His Charge to the 
Jury on the Trial of Charles White for the 
same Murder, ibid. 1089. — ^His Address to 
Qoodere, Mahony, and White, on passing 
Sentence of Death upon them, ibid. 1091. 

-, Sir Michael, Judge of K. B. 20 Geo. 



2.— His Arguipent on delivering his Judg- 
mei^tin the Case of the Kinlochs, respecting 
^he power of the Coi^rt to discharge a Jury 
in capital Cases, 18 vol. 40Tr-^His Charge 
to the Grand Jury, assembled under a Spepial 
Commission at Chichester, for the Trial of 
certain Smugglers for the Murder of Wm. 
Chater ftnd Daniel Gaily, ibid. 1069. — His 
Charge to the Jury on that Trial, ibid. 1106. 
— His, Report of Francis Tqwnley's Case, 
ibid* 329.T-His Heport of Deacon-s Case, 
ibid. 3^6. — His Report of John Berwick's 
Cf»s^, ibid* 369. — His Report of Alexander 
Mac prowther's Case, ibid, 392.— -His 
Report of the C^e of the Kinlochs, ibid. 
896.— His Report QfSir John Wedderburn's 
Ca^e, ibi4. 42T. — His. Report of Charies 
Ratcfiffe's Case, ibid. 429.— ^is Report of 
-^neas Macdonald's Case, ibid. 857. — His 
Aocount of the steps taken preparatory to 
the Trials of the Rebels in 1745, 18 vol. 829. 
—His Report of Dr. Cameron's Case, 19, vol. 
735. — Hip Report of the Judgment of the 
Court in Iftacdaniers Case, ibid. 801. 

FOSTER, Sir Robert, Chief Justice of K. B. 
13 Gar. 2, 6 vol. 74, 205.— He persuades 
Charles the Second to sign the Warrant for 
the Execution of Sir Henry Vane, notwith- 
af%Q4ii^ the Petitions of both Houses of 
parliament on hia behalf, 6 ypl. 188. 

FOUNTAINHALL, Lord.— His Notice of the 
Case of William Iiowrie, of Blackwood, 9 
vol. 1021. — Extracts from his " Decisions '' 
respecting the Case of Robert Baillie, of 
Jemswoqd, 10 vol, 05^ (note).— His Notice 
of Spreuirs Case for Treason, ibid. 727 
(note) — Extracts from liis '^ Decisions ^' 
respecting the Proceedings against Sir Hugh 
Campbell of Cesnock, for Treason, ibi^. 977. 
i^Kxtracis res|)ectin^ the C^se of the Earl 



qf iQudoMfP, forTi^^sop, ibii, J»4lc— |Iis 
Account of th^ proqe^ings against th? Fife- 
shire Heritors for absentine ihemselvQ^ frooi 
the King's Host, 11 vol. 40. — ^His Nari^tive 
of the Case of Charles, Earl of Lauderdale, 
and others, foi officii Malversatioivs re^pepl- 
ing the Mint of Scotland, ibid. 157.— rflis 
Account of the Proceedings in an A^zq of 
^rr<>r ^gainst Alexander Blair an4 oljier 
Jurprs for returning a false Verdict, ibid. 
100. — His Account of the Pypo^edings 
against the Lanarkshire Men for peing CQ%- 
cerned in the Rebellion at Bothwell Bridge, 
ibid. 245 (note). — His Account of the t*ro- 
ceedings against Arcl^er and others for 
Treason, ibid. 889 (note). — His ApcouBt of 
a curious Litigation between Sir John Dai- 
ry i^ple and Grahame of Claverhouse, it>id. 
946.— -His Notice of the Trial of David 
Mowbray for a Tumult in Burgh, ibid. 1003 
(note).— -His Account of the Proceedings in 
Scotland against persons who co-operated 
with the Duke ot Monmouth's Rebellion, 
ibid. 1023 (note). — ^His Account of the pro- 
ceedings against Dr. Gilbert Burnet, ibid. 
1 103 (note). — His Account of the Case of 
John Love and others for Rebellion and 
Treason, 12 vol. 568. — His Remarjts on the 
Ca&e of John Renwick, ibid. 585. — His 
Notice of the Case of the Campbells of Allan- 
greig, 13 vol. 787 (note^.— His Particulars 
tespecting th^ Qkse. of Pa^id RsMllie f^^r 
defaming, the DvJce of Queen^ib^ri^y vskd the 
Marquist of Anpandale, 14 vol^ 1055, 

FQWKE, J[oseph and Fraocis. See Jjfif^o* 
comar, 

FOWLIS, Sir I>avid.~-PraceediBg^ in^ the 
Star-Chambex against him, Su Thotiey^ l^y- 
ton, and Henry Fowlis, fer oppos.tn^ the 
King's Service, and traducing l^is Oikef s> of 
State, 9 Car. 1, 1633, 3 vol. 585— This 
Prosecution was promoted by Lord Went- 
worth, afterwards Lord Strafford, ibid. ib. — 
Information against them, ibid. ib. — ^Their 
Answer^ ibid. 590. — Sentence against Sir 
David and Henry Fowlis, ibid. 59 1. — 
Sic Thomas Layton is dismissed, ibid. 592. 
— Sir D. Fowlis and Sir Thoijiias Layton, 
were afterwards material \Yitnesses against 
Lord Strafford on his Trial, ibid. 1422. 

FOWLIS, Henry, ^ee Fowlis^ Sir David. 

FOX, Charles James. — His Evidence, on the 
Trial of Home Tooke for High Treasp.n, 25 
yol. 370. — His Remarks on the Popish Plot, 
extracted from his Historical Work, 6 vol. 
1403. — His Remarks upon the Executibo of 
Charles the First, 4 vol. 1145. — Hia Remarks 
on the mode of estimating the degree of 
Credit due ta the Peclarations of XXying 
Men, 11 vol. 885. 

yO.X, George. See Crook, John, — Proceed- 
ipgs against him for refusing the. Oath of 
Obedience, 16 Car. 2, 1,664^ 6 vol. 629.— 
He refusegi th^ Os^th, ibid. 634. -^Judgment 



agaii^ hini is uri)^^ on fudefj^ct in ^he 
)^ic|mep|9 ibid. 644.-^Tl^e Oath is tender- 
ed to bifn ^ain, i^pd op his rQ^usal to t^ke 
it, I, n^w Ti^^i^tO^^Q^ ^ PF^ferred against 
t^ff^^ ibid. 64IL 

FOX, Somerset. Seo Oerftord, ^/afta. 

FEAVp£;S, BQ^rt.-rrHis Trial m |he Old 
Q^ilej for th^ Murder of Thpma9 Danger- 
fift)4, 1 JaQ. J}, 1685, U Tpl. 503,— He is 
found pujUy, ^l(i(l< 505.— If i^ Spee<}h at the 
)))aQe of Exeicijtiqni il^id- 507. 

FRAl^CIA, Francis.-^fiis Trial at the Old 
BailejF for High Treason in conapiring to 
levy war against the King in favour of the 
Prgtefider, 3 Geo. 1, 1717, 15 yol. ^97.— 
The Indictment, ibid. 90^.— Opening 
Speeches of the Counsel for the Prosecution, 
imd. 803.-?-£Tidence ior the Prosecution, 
ibid. &13.-7T-Mr. Horace Walpole's Bvidence, 
ibid. 915.'TrrHi^ Itefenc^, ibid» Q60.-^£vi- 
depce in support of the Defence, ibid* 961. — 
Bcp^y of Uiie Cxuinsel for the Prosecution, 

. ibid. 975.-«r-The Chief Baron Buiy charges 
the Jury» ibid. 985.^— The Jury acquit him, 
ibid.ddC 

FRANCIS, Ph»ip.r-His Evidence on Hardy's 
Trial for High Treason,' 24 vol. 1104. 

FRANCRLIN, Richard.— His Trial at West- 
minster for rublishing a $editipus Libel in 
Ihe praftsptt^n, 5 Qeo. 3^ 1731, 17 vol. 625. 
rr-Oj^euing Speeches of the Counsel for the 
Prosecution, ibid, ib, — !Evidpnc,e for the 
Prosecution, ibid. 636. — Mr. Fazakerly's 
Speech in his Defence, ibid. 649.'^Mr. 
sootle's Speech on the same side, ibid. 654. 
— Evidence for the Defence, ibid. 660. — 
The Attorney General's Reply, ibid. 664.^- 
Chief Justice Raymond's Charge to the 
Jery, ibid. 671. — ^Tbe Jury find him Guilty, 
ibid. 676. — He is sentenced to pay a Fine 
of 100/. and find Security for seven years, 
^d. ib. — Proceedings on a Motion to set 
aside the Verdict, 22 vol. 972 (note). 

FRANKLIN, Jaro.es,— -His Trial, as an Acces- 
sary before the Fact, to the Murder of Sir 
Thomas Overbury, 13 Jac. 1, 161 5, 2 vol.947. 
— He is fouiid Giiiity, and executed, il?i4. 948. 

Fa^SER, Charles, Lord.^Amot's Abridg- 
ment of his Trial in Scotland for High 
Treason, in proclaiming the Pretender as 
Ijivful King; 1693^ 15 vol. 727. 

FRASpR, Thomas.*^Proceedings in Scotland 
against him. Captain Simon Fraser, after- 
f a(4s the cejlebrated Simon, Lord Lovat^ 
and others for Treason and other Criwes, 
10 Will. 3, If 9fe, 14 vol. 349.--Criminal 
Letters .^inist thepo,^ Jbid. ib. — Witnesses 
against them, ibid. 3^4.— The Asfize find 
them Guilty, ibid. 372. — Sentence of Death 
f r^Doniced, ibid. 373.-r^Amot says, that this 
IS the only instance of a Trial before the 
CQyi^jt of Justiciary in the absence of the 
ity accused since the Revolutiori; ibid. 

>i|ii Remaps u^on this Trial^ ibi(J. ^b. 



FMSER^WiUiaii^. ^^^^^ybtff'tm^Ale^0l(l4er. 
FREEMAN, Richard. See BUkmgiim, Z!|fw. 






FREIJfP, Sir John. See Porlcyns, Sir WiRfgrn. 
Cook, iSMrac&.-^His Trial at the Old 
Bailey for High Treason in corispiring to pro- 
cure and assist in an Invasion from France, 
8 Will. 3, 1696, 13 vol. 1.— The Indictment, 
ibid. 3.^He pleads Not Guilty, ibid. &-^ 
The Attorney General's Opening ^peech 
fqr fhe Pro^ecutipn, ibjd. 12.-^Evide]^ce 
for the Prosecution, ibid. 18.; — He objects 
xq the Evidence of Papists agaipsit l^m, 
bi^t the Objection is overruled, ibid. 32, 
43. — Evidence for him, ibid. ^2.— fhe 
Solicitor (GeneraVs RepljS i^jd. 48l— :Lprd 
Holt's Charge \o the -Jury, ibid. 55, — 
He i^ found' Guilty, ibid. 63.— And sen- 
tenced to Death, il)id, 64.— Paper deliveired 
by hin^ to the Sheriff at his Execution; ibid. 
136. — An Account of what passed at his 
Execution, ibid. 406. 

FREND, William.— Proceedings ip tbf Uni- 
versity of Car^bridge, ^d iii th^ Coi|rt of 
King's Bench respecting him, for publish- 
ing a Scandalous Pamphlet^, 33 and 34 O.eo. 
3, 1793-1794, ?2 vol. 523.— He is cited to 
appear in the Vice- Cl^ancellor*s Court, ibid. 
526. — Proceedings in ttle Vice-Chancellor's 
Court, ibid. 527.— Articles of Accusation, 
ibid. 530. — Evidence called hy the Pro- 
moter, ibid. 535.— The Promoter sums up 
the Eifidenc^, ib^<l, ^p4,'-r■^r. Ffepd^ 
Speech in his Defence, ibid. 571.— Tlie 
Promoter's Reply, ibid. 621. -^The Court 
find him Guilty, aai recjuire him to retract, 
ibid. 625. — He refuses to sign a Recanta- 
tion, ibid. 630,— -The Vice-Chancellor's 
Spei^ch on delivering the Sentence of the 
Court, ibid. 631. — Sentence of Banishment 
passed upon him, ibid. 640. — Mr. Frend 
appeals to ihe Court of Delegate^, ibid. 641. 
— Proceedings in the Court of Delegates, 
ibid. 642. — Mr. Frend states his Causes of 
Appeal, ibid. 65T.— The Court of Delegates 
confirm the Proceedings in the Vice-Chan- 
cellor's Court, ibid. 670. — Proceedings in 
the Court of King's Bench, upon an appli- 
cation by Mr. Frend for a Mandamus, ibid. 
677.— The Court of King's Bench refuse a 
Mandamus, ibid. 690. — Mr. Frend's Ac 
count of the Grounds on which his Applica- 
tion to the Court of King's Bench was 
founded, ibid. 701. — ^Proceedings of Jesus 
College, Cambridge, against him, ibid. 733. 
— ^The Master and Fellows resolve to re- 
move him from the College, ibid. 737.-r-ile 
appeals to the Visitor, ibid. 738.^— Answer 
of the Master and Fellows to ^e Appeal, 
ibid. 740.— Mr, Frend's Reply thereto, ibid, 
746.— The Visitor dismisses (he Appeal, 
ibid. 751. — Mr. Frend applies to the Court 
of King's Bench for a Mandamus to the 
Visitor, ibid. 752.— The Application is re- 
fused, ibid. 753. 

FJRXyH, jQlmt— PxQQeedinfs pn a Ch^e of 



46 



GENEkAL Index to 



High Treason against htm for throwing a 
Stone at the King, 30 Geo. 3, 1790, 22 vol. 
307. — Counsel for the Prosecution and for 
the Prisoner, ibid. 309. — A Jury is sworn to 
try whether he is sane, ibid. 311. — Evidence 
of his Insanity, ibid. 312.— The Jury find 
him Insane^ ibid. 318. 

FROISSART.-His Narrative of Tresilian's 
Apprehension, 1 vol. 116 (note). 

FROST, John.— His Trial in the Court of 
King's Bench for Seditious Words, 33 Geo. 
3, 1793, 22 vol. 471.— The Indictment, ibid, 
ib.— Speech of the Attorney General for 
the Prosecution, ibid. 474. — Evidence for 
the Prosecution, ibid. 482.— Mr. Erskine's 
Speech in his Defence, ibid. 488. — ^The At- 
torney General's Reply, ibid. 509. —Lord 
Kenyon*s Charge to the Jury, ibid. 514. — 
The Jury find him Guilty, ibid. 519.— Judg- 
ment of the Court upon him, ibid. ib. 

DULLER, WiUiam.— His Trial at the Guild- 
hall of London, for publishing a Scandalous 
L.ibel, 1 Anne, 1702, 14 vol.517.— Proceed- 
ings in Parliament which gave occasion to 
this Trial, ibid. ib. — The Indictment, ibid. 
526 (note). — Evidence against him, ibid. 
533. — He is found Guilty, ibid. 536. 

FULTHORPE, Sir Roger, Judge of C. P. 
See Belkrtap, Sir Robert, 

GAGE, Robert. See Ahington, Edward. 

GARDINER, Stephen, Bishop of Winchester. 
— Proceedings against him for opposing the 
Reformation, 5 Edw. 6, 1551, 1 vol. 551. 
— Charges against him, ibid. ib. — He is 
sent to the Fleet, ibid. 554.— His Letter 
respecting the destruction of Images at 
Portsmouth, ibid. ib. — His Abuse of the 
Lollards, ibid. 555.— ^His Defence of the 
Worship of Images, ibid. ib. — His Corres- 
pondence with the Lord Protector respect- 
ing the Suppression of the Reformation, ibid. 
557. — He defends the observance of Lent, 
ibid. 567. — ^He contends for the King's dis- 
pensing Power, ibid. 583. — Articles pro- 
posed to him, with his Answers thereto, 
ibid. 602. — ^Letter from the King and Coun- 
cil, commanding him to subscribe certain 
Articles, acknowledging the King's Supre- 
macy, ibid. 621. — He subscribes to these 
Articles, ibid. 623. — Other Articles, con- 
taining a general Submission to the King, 
proposed to him, ibid. 624. — He refuses to 
sign the Submission absolutely, and the 
other Articles whilst in prison, ibid. 626. — 
His Benefices are sequestered, ibid. 627. — 
He is called before the Archbishop of 
Canterbury and other Commissioners, and 
certain other Articles are proposed to him, 
ibid. 628. — The Commissioners remove 
him from his Bishoprick by a definitive 
sentence, ibid« ib. — ^He protests against the 
Sentence, ibid. 629. — On the Accession of 
Mary he is made Lord Chancellor, and re- 



stored to his Bishoprick, ibid. 632. — ^He 
was a man of Learning, ibid. ib. — His con- 
versation with Sir James Hales, on his ap- 
pearance in Westminster Hall to take the 
Oath as Judge of C. P. on the Accessidn of 
Queen Mary, ibid. 714. 

GARDINER, Sir Thomas, Recorder of Lon« 
don. — He was one of Lord Strafford's 
Counsel, 3 vol. 1472.— He was also assigned 
of Counsel for Sir Edward Herbert, on his 
Impeachment for High Crimes and Misde- 
meanours, 4 vol. 127. — Articles of Impeach* 
roent against him, 18 Car. 1, 1642, ibid. 
167. 

GARLAND, Augustine, 5 voL 1005, 1215. 
^See Regicides, 

GARNET, Henry.— His Trial at Westminster 
for High Treason in being concerned in the 
Gunpowder Plot, 4 Jac. 1, 1606, 2 vol. 217. 
— Sir Edward Coke opens the Charge against 
him, ibid. 219. — Gramet's Defence, ibid. 
233. — He says that he knew of the Plot 
only from Auricular Confession, ibid. 241. — 
The Attorney General replies, ibid. 245. — 
The Earl of Nortliampton's Address to 
Garnet, ibid. 247, 259. — Garnet excuses 
himself that his only Knowledge of the Plot 
was derived from Sacramental Confession, 
which he was bound not to disclose, ibid. 
255.— The Jury find him Guilty, ibid. 259. 
— Judgment against him, ibid. 355. — His 
Execution, ibid. ib. 

GARROW, William, Counsel, 22 vol. 309, 
756, 24 vol. 238, 25 vol. 1155, 26 vol. 
8, 1218, 27 vol. 821, 28 vol. 356, 529, 
29 vol. 1, 423, 30 vol. 990, 31 vol. 83, 
121. — His Speech for the Prosecution on 
the Trial of Codling and others, for destroy- 
ing the Brig Adventure, 28 vol. 185. — His 
Speech for the Defendant in the Case of 
Troy V, Symonds, for a Libel in the Anti- 
jacobin Review, 29 vol. 519. — His Speech 
for the Prosecution on the Trial of Governor 
Picton for a Misdemeanour in inflicting the 
Torture upon Luisa Calderon, in the Island 
of Trinidad, ibid. 451. — His Speech for the 
Prosecution on the second Trial of Governor 
Picton, ibid. 805. — His Speech in Reply in 
the same Case, ibid. 849. 

, Sir William, Attorney General.— 

His Speech for the Defendant on Hatchard's 
Trial for a Libel, published in a Report of 
the African Institution, 32 vol. 698. 

' , Baron of the Exche- 

quer. — Ilis Charge to the Jury on the Trial 
of Davidson and Tidd for High Treason, in 
being concerned in the Cato-street Con* 
spiracy, 33 vol. 1481. 

GASCGIGNE, Sir Bernard. See Lmu, iSr 
Charles, 

GASCGIGNE, Sir Thomas.— His Trial at the 
Bar of the Court of King's Bench for High 
Treason, in being concerned in the Popikh 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



49 



Plot, 32 Car. 2, 1680, 7 vol. 959.— The 
Indictment, ibid. 960.^— He pleads Not 
dniltjr, ibid. 963.-^The King's Counsel open 
the Case, ibid. 967. — Bolron's Evidence 
against him, ibid. 970. — Further Evidence 
against him, ibid. 999. — Evidence for him, 
ibid. 1011. — The King's Counsel reply, ibid. 
1032. — Mr. Justice Jones's Charge to the 
Jury, ibid. 1036. — ^The Jury acquit him, ibid. 
1044. — Account of Bolron, and of the cir- 
cumstances which led to his accusation of 
Sir T. Gascoigne, ibid. 974 (note). 

GATES, Sir John. — He is condemned and 
executed, vnth Sir Andrew Dudley, Sir 
Henry Gates, and Sir Thomas Palmer, for 
High Treason in maintaining the title of 
Lady Jane Grey to the Crown, 2 Mary, 1554, 
1 vol. 767. 

GAUNT, Elizabeth. See Fendey, John. 

GAVESTON, Piers.— Proceedings in Parlia- 
ment against him in the reigns of Edward 
the First and Edward the Second, 1 vol. 21. — 
Ordinance of Banishment against him, ibid. 
22. — He is put to death by the Earl of 
Warwick, ibid. 24. 

GAWDY, Francis, Queen's Serjeant, 28 Eliz. 
1 vol. 1173, 1233. 

, Judge of K. B. 1 Jac. 1, 
— He was one of the Judges on the Trial of 
Sir Walter Raleigh at Winchester, 2 vol. 1. 

GAWDY, Sir Thomas, Judge of K. B. 28 
Eliz. 1 vol. 1251, 1315, 1334.— He was one 
of the Commissioners appointed to try 
Mary, Queen of Scots, 1 vol. 1167. 

GAYRE, Sir John, Lord Mayor of London. — 
Proceedings against him and other Members 
of the Corporation of London, for encourag- 
ing tumults against the House of Commons, 
23 Car. 1, 1647, 4 vol. 959. — An Account 
of the Events which immediately preceded 
these Proceedings, ibid. ib. — Articles of 
Impeachment delivered against them, ibid. 
980. — ^Tbe Proceedings against them are 
discontinued, ibid. ^3. 

GEDDES, James.— His Trial with John 
Crawfoord at Edinburgh, for drinking the 
health of the Pretender, and cursing the 
King, 1 Geo. 1, 1715, 17 vol. 799. 

GERARD of Brandon, J^rd. -— Narcissus 
Luttrell's Account of his Trial for High 
Treason in being concerned in the Rye-House 
Plot, 1685, 10 vol. 1414. — Remarks upon this 
Trial in Mr. Attwood's Review of Chief 
Justice Herbert's Account of the Authorities 
in law upon which the Judgment of the 
Court in Sir Edward Hales's Case was 
founded, 11 vol. 1305. — He was afterwards 
Earl of Macclesfield, and is supposed 
to have been the Husband of the celebrated 
Countess of Macclesfield, the Mother of 

. Savage, the Poet, ibid. ib. 

GERPLARO, John.— His Trial before the 
High Court of Justice, vrith Peter Vowell 
VOIi,XXXXV, 



and Somerset Fox, for High Treason in 
conspiring to murder the Protector, -^6 Car. 
2, 1654, 5 vol. 517. — Fox pleads Guilty, 
ibid. 522. — Gerhard and Vowell plead Not 
Guilty, ibid. ib. — The Attorney-General 
opens the Charge against them, ibid. ib. — 
Evidence against them, -ibid* 524. — ^They 
are found Guilty, apd sentenced to be 
hanged, ibid. 531. — Fox is reprieved, ibid, 
ib.— Execution of Gerhard, ibid, ib— ^ 
Vowell's Speech on the Scaffold, ibid^ 5)37. 

GERRALD, Joseph.— His Trial at Edinburgh 
for Sedition in being a Member of an un- 
lawful Assembly, 34 Geo. ^, 1794, 23 vol. 803. 
— He applies to the Court to assign him 
Counsel, which is done, ibid, ib, — He objects 
to the Lord Justice Clerk sitting on the Bench 
during his Trial, on the ground of certain Ex- 
pressions charged to have been used by him, 
ibid. 808. — ^The Court overrule the Objec- 
tion, ibid. 809.— The Indictment, ibid. 814. 
— Mr. GilUes's Argument against its Rele- 
vancy, ibid. 827.— Mr. Montgomery's Argu- 
ment in support of its Relevancy, ibid. 853. 
— Argument of the Solicitor General on the 
same side, ibid. 865. — Mr. Laing's Argu- 
ment in Reply, ibid. 869. — The Court de- 
cide that the Indictment is relevant, ibid. 
889. — Gerrald objects to one of the Jury 
that he had said, ** he would condemn any 
Member of the British Convention," ibid. 
899. — The Objection is overruled, ibid. ib. 
— He objects to another Juror that, he is 
Tailor to the King, ibid. 902.— The Objec* 
tion is overruled, ibid. 903. — Evidence for 
the Crown, ibid.ib. — Speech of the Solicitor 
General for the Prosecution, ibid. 933. — Mr. 
Gerrald's Speech in his Defence, ibid. 947. 
— The Court sum up the Evidence, ibid. 
997.— The Jury find him Guilty, ibid. 1002. 
— Mr. Gillies objects to the Verdict, ibid. 
1003. — ^The Court overrule the Objection, 
ibid. 1005. — He is sentenced to Transporta* 
tion for Fourteen years, ibid. 1007. — He dies 
soon after his arrival in New Holland, ibid. 
14J2. 

GIBBON, John. See New Romney. 

GIBBONS, John.— His Trial before the High 
Court of Justice, foe High Treason in plot- 
ting against the Commonwealth in corres- 
dondence with Charles the Second, 3 Car. 2, 
1651, 5 vol. 267. — He petitions for Counsel, 
but is refiised, ibid. 269. — He pleads Not 
Guilty, ibid. ib. — Substance of the Charge 
against him, ibid. ib. — ^The Evidence against 
him, ibid. 270. — His Defence, ibid. 274. — 
Sentence of Death passed upon him, ibid. 
285.— ^His Execution, ibid. ib. 

GIBBONS,*John.— His Trial with William 
Clarke and Thoriias Greville, for Perjury in 
their Evidence on the Trial of Mary Squires 
and Susannah Wells, 26 Geo. 2, 1753, 19 
vol. 275. — The Indictment against Gibbons, 
ibid. 277. — ^They are acquitted ftfr want of 
ProsecutioDjibid, 280, SeeCanrnVigi^taa^Aj 
£ 



50 



GENERAL INDEX t6 



OIBBSy NathlmioL See I^nge, Thomt, 

OIBBS^ Vicatt) Counsel^ STtoL 831.>— 96 vol. 
185.-^His Defence of Winterbotham for 
preaching a Seditious Sermon. 22 vol. 638. 
•^His Speech in Defence of Hardy, $4 vol. 
111d.^Hi« Speech in Defence of Home 
Tooke, 25 vol. 449. 

Sit Vicaiy, Solicitor General, 29 vol. 



423. 



- Attomev General^ 31 vol. 



81, 103, ft54, 369.— His Speech for the Pro- 

aecntioii on the Trial of Colonel Draper for 

a Libel, 30 vol. 990.-->His Speech for the 

Prosecution on the Trial of the Editors of 

' the Independent Whig for a Libel contained 

in Certain Strictares upon a Trial in the 

Adttiralty Court, ibid. 1156.^HiB Speech 

£oi the Prosecution on the Trial of the same 

persons for a Libel on Lord EUenboroogh, 

ibid. 1224. 

GIFFORD, Sir Robert, Solicitor General— 
' His Spejch in Reply on Watson*8 Trial for 
High Treason, 32 voK 536.— His Speech in 
Reply on the Trial of Brandreth for High 
Treason, ibid. 908. — His Speech for the 
Prosecution in Tumer^s Case for High 
Treason, ibid. 964. — His Reply in Ludlam*s 
Case, ibid. 1253.— His Speech for the Pro- 
secution in Weightman's Case, ibid. 1308. 

iiiii nm i M 1 1 1 ■ ■! ■ -■ Attorney General. — 



■MaBMi 



His Speech for the Proaecution on the Trial 
of liiistlewood for Treason in being con- 
certied in the Cato-Street Plot» 33 toU 716. 
--•Hia Reply for the Prosecution, on the 
Trial of Ings for the same Treason, ibid. 
im..^His Speech for the Prosecution, on 
Brunt's Trial for the same Treason, ibid. 
1181/M.His Reply for the Prosecution, on 
the Trial of Davidson and Tidd for the same 
Treason, ibid. 1466. 

GILBERT, Jeffery, Chief Baron of the 
Exchequer in Ireland. — Proceedings of the 
Irish House of Lords against him, John 
Pocklington, Esq., and Sir John St. Leger, 
Rniffht, Barons of the Exchequer in Ireland, 
for disobedience to an Order of the House, 
5 Geo. 1, 1719, 15 vol. 130 1. —Petition of 
the Sheriff of Kildare to the House of Lords, 
ibid, ib.— Report of a Committee of the 
Lords thereon, ibid. 1304. — Resolutions of 
the House upon the Report, ibid. 1314. 

GILCHRIST^ James.— He pleads Guilty to 
an Indictment for High Treason in being 
coQMraed In the Cato-Street Conspiracy, 
33 vol. 1541»-^He is pardoned on condition 
of being transported for Ufe, ibid. 1566. 

GILES, John.-^His Trial at the Old Bailey 
for assaulting and attempting to nrarder 
John Arnold, esq. 32 Car. 2^ 1680, 7 vol. 
1129.— The Indictment, ibid. 1130.— The 
Counsel for 4he Prosecution open the Case 
against him, ibid. 1131. — ^Mr. Arnold's Evi- 
deneei ibid. 1 1 35. — Further Endenoe against 
iMtti ibid. 1198.-*|iia D^eace^ ibid. 1144. 



>->»£Yidence in support of his Defence^ iMd. 
1145^— Jeffdries, the Recorder, chargea the 
Jury, ibid. 1152.— He is found Guilfcy, ibid. 
1159.— His Sentence^ ibid. ib. 

GILLIES, Adam, Advocate.— His Argument 
against the Relevancy of the Indictment 
against Joseph Gerrald on hi^ Trial for 
Sedition in the High Court of Justiciary, 
23 vol. 827. 

" Lord of Session, 33 vol. 
14. — HisArgumenton delivering his Opinion 
against the Relevancy of the Indictnaent in 
the Case of M*Kinley for Administering 
Unlavrfol Oaths, 33 vol. 502. 

GLANVILLE, John» Serjeant-at-LaW*— His 
Speech at a Conference between the Lords 
and Commons respecting the Liberty of the 
Subject, 3 vol. 200. 

GLANVILLE, Ranulph de, Chief Justice of 
England^ temp. Hen. 2. — His Work said by 
Mr* Selden to be of slight or no authority 
for direction in judgment of the laW| 8 toI. 
277. 

GLEN, George. See Green, Captain Thomas, 

GLENNAN, Andrew.~His Trial in Ireland, 
with several others, for a Conspiracy to kill 
John Hanlon, 36 Geo. 3, 1796, 26 vol. 437. 
—The Indictment, ibid. 438.— Speech of the 
Attorney General for the Prosecutioft, ibid. 
439« -Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 
442.— Mr. M'Nally's Speech for the Defend- 
ants, ibid. 454. — The Jury find them all 
Guilty, eicepting two, ibid. 457. — Lord 
Cloomeirs Address on passing Sentence 
upon those convicted, ibid. ib. 

GLOCESTER, Thomas, Duke of. See 2Ve- 
si/ian, jRo6er^.— *He is impeached^ with 
Richard Earl of Arundel Thomas, Earl of 
Warwick, Thomas Mortimer, and Sir John 
Cobham for High Treason in compelling 
Richard the Second to make the' Commission 
to tlie Council of Thirteen, and for convict- 
ing and executing Sir Simon Burleigh, 21 
Ric. 2, 1397, 1 vol. 125.— The Eari of 
Arundel pleads a special and general Pardon 
from the King but is convicted and sen- 
tenced to Death, ibid. 130.— The Duke of 
Glocester, though dead, convicted, and his 
Castles declared forfeited to the King, ibid, 
ib. — ^His Confession, ibid. 131. — John Hall-^ 
Confession of the manner of his Death, ibid. 
163.-^The Eari of Warwick is convicted, 
and banished for life to the Isle of Mao, 
ibid* 134. — Thomas Mortimer makes his 
escape^ ibid, ib* — Sir John Cofalmm pleads, 
as to the Commission, that all he did in 
relation to it was by the King^s licence, and 
vnth respect to Sir Simon Burkigh, that he 
was told by those then in power, 4at what 
he did was accordhig to the King's wish, 
ibid. 135*— He is convicted, and banished 
to the Isle of Jersey, ibid. 136. 

OIiYNNi J«ilD^ C9asati««>^H4» was ^lie of Ae 






THfi STATE T&IAXS. 



•eat of th« £ari of Stntford, 3 vol, 1421. 

»■ ■■ ■ Recorder of London. See 

HoQiSf t>enzU. — Proceedings against hiro^ 
Denzil HoUis, and several other persons on 
a Ckargo preferred against them by the 

. Army, 23 Car. 1, 1647, 4 vol. 857. 

Seijeant-at-LaW| 5 toI. 518, 



6 fol. 82« 229. 



h*mm 



Chief Justice of tho Upper 



fiends 8 Car. 2, 1657, 5 vol. 841« 

King's Ancient Serjeant. — He 




: 

I onens the Indictment on the Trial of Lord 
F Morley in the House of Lords for Murder, 
18 Car. 2, 1666, 6 vol. 776. 

GLYNN, John, Seneant at Law.-*-Hi8 Speech 
in Defence of John Almon, for publishing 
Jantus'8 Letter to the King, 20 vol. 831."— 
His Speech in Defence of John Miller, for 
re^pristing the same Letter, ibid. 878. — His 
Speech for the Plaintiff in the Case of Fabri- 
gas V. Mostyn, ibid. 85. — His Reply in the 
Mme Cue, ibid. 146 

GODFREY, Sir Edmondbury. See Atkins, 
iSsmue/.— Burnet*s Narrative of the Circuto- 
itances of his Disappearance and Death, 6 
vol. 1410, — Trial of Green and others for 
murdering him, 7 vol. 159. — Evidence re- 
specting uie state of his body when found, 
8 vol. 1378,1 389» 

GOLDING, Johtt««i^Proceeding8 against him 
and others for Piracy, though acting under 
a Commission from James the Second, 12 
voL 1269.-~>Dr. Oldish's Argument that 
they were not Pirates, ibid. ib. — They are 
tried and condemned, ibid. 1275. — ^Their 
Petition to the House of Peers, ibid. ib. 

GOLDWELL, Thomas. See Pole^ Cardinal, 

GOODENOUGH, Richard. See FUkingion, 
Thomai, , 

GOODERE, Captain Samuel.-*-His Trial with 
Matthew Mahony at the Bristol Gaol De- 
tivery, before Mr. Serjeant Foster, Recorder, 
for the Murder of Sir John Dinely Goodere, 
Bart. 14 Geo. 9, 1741, 17 vol. 1003.— The 
lodiotment, ibid. ib. — ^They plead Not Guilty, 
ibid. 1005. — Mr. Vernon's Speech for the 
Prosecution, ibid. 1009. — ^The Witnesses are 
ordered to withdraw, at the suggestion of the 
Prisoner's Counsel, ibid. 1015. — Evidence 
for the Prosecution, ibid. 1016.«-*Mahony's 
Confesnon before the Magistrates, ibid. 
1053. — Evidence for the Prisoner Goodere, 
ibid. 1057. — Reply of the Counsel for the 
l^rosecution, ibid. 1064.— The Recorder's 
Charge to the Junr, ibid. 1067.-^The Jury 
ind them both Guilty, ibid. 1079. — Sentence 
is passed upon them, ibid. 1090« — ^They are 
executed, ibid. 1094. 

GOODMAN, Dr. God^, Biihop of Glo- 



GOODMAN, JoKo, a Seoiinuy Piie9t.<* 
ceediB^i in Parliament rtspectbg the Kii 
Reprieval of him, after he h%d been capitd ^ 
convicted of High Treason, in remaining 
within the realm under the authority of the 
Pope> 1 6 Car. 1 , 1641, 4 vol. 59.— The King's 
Reasons for reprieving him, ibid^ 60.— I^ 
Remonstrance of both Houses of Parliament 
thereupon, ibid, ib.*— The King agrees to 
leave him at their disposal, ibid, 62.—- Good- 
man's Petition to the King to be left to the 
disposal of the Parliament, ibid. 64. 

GOODWIN, Sir Francis,*-The Case betwetn 
him and Sir John Portescue, relative to a 
return of Members to serve in Parliamont 
for the Count]^ of Bucks, 1 James 1, 1604, 
2 vol. 91.-*-Dispute between the Kiuj^ and 
the House of Commons, respecting his Re- 
turn, ibid. 94. — He writes a Letter to the 
Speaker and voluntarily vacates his Seat, 
ibid. 112. 

GORDON, Lord George.— His Trial in the 
Court of King's Bench at Westminster for 
High Treason, in having promoted the No, 
Popery Riots i n 1 780, 21 Geo. 3, 1 781 , 21 vol. 
485.— •The Indictment, ibid. 494. — Counsel 
for the prosecution and for the Prisoner, ibid. 
498. — Speech of the Attorney General for the 

^ Prosecution,ibid.499. — Evidence for the Pro-^ 
secution, ibid. 511. ^-Mr. Kenyon's Speech 
for the Prisoner, ibid. 546. — Evidence for 
the Defence, ibid. 562, — Mr. Erskine's 
Speech on summing up the Evidence for the 
Defonce, ibid. 587.--The Reply of the 
Solicitor General, ibid. 621.— 'Lord Mans- 
field's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 644.-"-The 
Jury find him Not Guilty, ibid. 647.^His 
Trial on an Ex-officio Information, for a 
Libel upon the Judges and the Administia- 
tionofthe Law, 27 Geo. 3, 1787, 22 vol. 
175.— -The Information, ibid. ib.^-'Cottnsel 
for the Prosecution, ibid. 183.—The Attor* 
ney General's Speech for the Prosecution, 
ibid. ib. — Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 
187.— The Libel, ibid. 189.— Lord George 
Gordon's Speech in his Defence, ibid. 196* 
—The Jury find him Guilty, ibid. 209.— 
Trial and Conviction of Thos. Wilkins, for 
printing the same Libel, ibid, ib, — Wilkins is 
pardoned, ibid. 231.— Trial of Lord George 
Gordon for a Libel on the Queen of France, 
and the French Ambassador, ibid. 213. — 
The Information, ibid. 214.— Speech of the 
Attorney General for the Prosecution, ibid. 
221. — Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 
226.— He is found Guilty, ibid. 231.7^ 
Judgment of the Court upon bioi^ ibid. ib. 
—His extravagantConduct on being brourii^ 
into Court t9 give security for his good Be-* 
faaviour at the expiration of his imprison- 
ment, ibid. 235.-— Being unable to procure 
Bail for his good Behaviour, he is remanded 
to Prison, and remains there till his death, 
ibid. 236.— Mr. Burke's Notice of him, ibid « 
1253. 

GOBDOH^SuMMtt^WiUJMiy wtA 4Jiz^ 

£ 2 



52 



GENERAL INDlEX TO 



ander. -* Pi^eedings against them and 
others, in Scotland for Treason, 312 Car. 2, 
1680| 11 vol. 45. — ^The Indictment, ibid. ib. 
— Evidence against them, ibid. Gl.— They are 
found Guilty, and Sentence is passed upon 
them, ibid. 64.-nThe Council order Alexander 
Gordon to be put to the Torture, ibid. 51 
(note). 

GORING, Lord. See Holland, Earl of.—Ue 

was created a Peer by Charles the first in 

1628 with the title of Lord Goring, and in 

1644 he was advanced to the Earldom of 

• Norwich, 4 vol. 1 198 (note). 

GOULD, Henry, King's Serjeant.— He con- 
ducts the Evidence for the Crown in the 
' House of Commons, on the Bill of Attainder 
ag^ainst Sir John Fenwick, 13 vol. 546. 

Sir Henry, Judge of the Queen's 



Bench, 2 Ann, 14 vol. 852. 

GOULD, Sir Henry, Judge of C. P. 14 Geo. 3. 
— His- Charge to the Jury in the Case of 
• Fabrigas v. Mostyn, 20 voU.161. 

GOWRIE, John, Earl of. — ^Proceedings in the 
Scottish Parliament respecting him, Alex. 
Kuthven his Brother, Henry Ruthven, Hugh 
Moncrief, and Peter Eviott, for an attempt 
to murder James the First, 42 Eliz. 1600, 1 
vol. 1359. — ^The Ruthvens, Moncrief, and 
Eviott, are summoned, but do not appear, 
ibid. 1361. — Depositions of Witnesses re- 
specting the Transaction, ibid. 1363. — ^The 
Earl of Gowrie and Alexander Ruthven, his 
Brother, declared by the Parliament to have 
been guilty of High Treason, their Estates are 
confiscated, and their Bodies ordered to be 
hanged, drawn, and quartered, ibid. 1381. — 
The othiers adjudged guilty of Treason, and 
their property confiscated, ibid. 1383. — Ac- 
c6unt of the Gowrie Conspiracy, from Lord 
Somers*s Tracts, ibid. ib. 

GRAHAM, John.— His Trial in Scotland 
with Alexander Crawfoord, and Wm. Hogg, 
for drinking the Pretender's health, 1 Geo. 1, 
1715, 17 vol. 1. — The Indictment, ibid. ib. 
—Crawfoord confesses the Indictment, ibid. 
3. — Information for the King'sAdvocate, ibid . 

. 4. — Information for Graham, ibid. 16. — ^Tlae 
Court find the Libel relevant to infer an 
arbitrary punishment, ibid. 26.— The Assize 
find the Libel against Graham and Hogg 

. Not Proven, and against Crawfoord Proven, 
on bis own Confession, ibid. 29. — ^The Court 
fine Crawfoord 50/. ibid. 30. 

GRAHAME, John, of Claverhouse. See 
Dundee, Viscount, 

GRAHME, Sir Richard, Baronet, Viscount 
Preston in Scotland.— His Trial with John 
Ashton and Edmund Elliott, at the Old 
Bailey for High Treason in conspiring to 
overthrowthe Government, 2 Will, and Mary, 
1691, 12 vol. 645.— The Indictment, ibid. 

' 646. — ^Lord Preston, on his Arraignment, 
objects that he is a Peer of England, ibid. 

- ^58.«i-Tb^ Court oyerrule the objectioa on 



' his not being able to produce his Patent; ibid. 
656. — ^The Court deny him a Copy of the 
Indictment, ibid. 658.— He pleads Not 
Guilty, ibid. 665.— Ashton and Elliot, also 
plead Not Guilty, ibid. 666.— Tbey elect to 
be tried severally, ibid. 673. — ^The Solicitor 
General (Somers) opens the Case against 
Lord Preston, ibid. 678. — ^Evidence against 
him, ibid. 685. — His Defence, ibid. 726. 
— Lord Holt's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 
730.*— Chief Justice PoUexfen addresses 
the Jury, ibid. 741. — ^The Jury find him 
Guilty, ibid. 745.— Ashton's Trial, ibid. 747. 
— Serjeant Thompson opens the Case, ibid. 
749.— Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 
752.— His Defence, ibid. 788.— He calls 
Evidence to his religious Character, ibid. 
792. — Serjeant Thompson's Reply, ibid. 
800.— Lord Holt's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 
803. — Chief Justice Pollexfen's Address 
to the Jury, ibid. 810. — He is found Guilty, 
ibid. 813. — ^Judgment of Treason is passed 
upon them, ibid. 816. — Lord Preston is 
pardoned, but Ashton is executed, ibid. 817. 
— Paper deliver&d by Ashton to the Sheriff 
at the place of Execution, ibid. ib. — ^Pro- 
ceedings in the House of Lords upon Lord 
Preston's Claim of Peerage, ibid. 744 (note). 

GRANCETER, Robert. See Fortetcue, Sir 
Adrian, 

GRANT, John. See Winier, fiobert 

GRAY, James. See Perry, James, 

GREAVES, John. See SachevereU, William* 

GREAVES, William. See SachevereU, William. 

GREEN, Robert. See SachevereU, WiUiam, 

GREEN, Robert.— His Trial with Henry 
Berry, and Lawrence Hill, at the bar of the 
Court of King's Bench, for the Murder of 
Sir Edmondbury Godfrey, 31. Car. 2, 1679, 
7 vol. 159. — Indictment against them, ibid, 
ib.— They plead Not Guilty, ibid. 160.— 
Speeches of the Counsel for the Prosecu- 
tion, ibid. 162. — Evidence against them, 
ibid. 167. — Praunce's Evidence, ibid. 169. — 
Evidence for them, ibid. 195. — ^The Attorney 
General's Reply, ibid. 210. — Chief Justice 
Scroggs's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 213.^ 
The Jury find them Guilty, ibid. 220.— Sen- 
tence of Death passed upon them, ibid.. 222. 
— ^Their conduct at the place of Executioo, 
ibid. 226. — ^They all declare their Innocence, 
ibid. ib. — Account of their behaviour in 
Newgate, ibid. 577.— Praunce is afterwards 
convicted of Perjury in his Evidence in this 
Case, ibid. 228 (note). 

GREEN, Captain Thomas.— His Trial, with 
several of his Crew, at the High Court of 
Admiralty of Scotland, for Piracy and 
Murder, 4 Anne, 1705, 14 vol. 1199.— The 
Indictment, ibid. 1211. — Defences proponed 
by the Panel's Counsel, with the Pursuer's 
Answers thereto, ibid. 1223.-T'Peremptory 
Defences proponed fgjr. the Pan^i ibidt 



THE- STATE TRIALS. 



fi» 



1242.— The Court repel the Defences/ ibid. 
1259. — ^Evidence against the Panels, ibid. 
1 26 1 . — Speech of the Ad vocatefor thePursuer, 
ibid. 1272. — ^Verdict of Assize against the 
Panels, ibid. 1281. — Sentence is passed 
upon them^ ibid. 1283. — Green is executed, 
ibid. 1284. — ^Confessions and Declarations 
made by some of Green's Crew, ibid, ib.-— 
Account of the Objections made by the 
Panels to the Witnesses, ibid. 1291. — 
Paper published after Green*s Execution, 
detailing the Circumstances discovered since 
the Trial, by which the testimony of the 
Witnesses against him was invalidated, ibid. 
1294. — Allusion to this Case by Duncan 
Forbes, Lord Advocate, in a Speech in the 
House of Commons, in 1736, ibid. 1311. — 
Aniot's Account of this Case, and its origin, 
ibid. 1199 (note). 

GREEN, William. See Messenger, Peter. 

GREGG, William, — Proceedings against him^ 
at the Old Bailey for High Treason, in cor- 
responding with France, 6 Anne, 1708, 14 
vol. 1371.— Burnet's Account of these Pro- 
ceedings, and the Circumstances from which 
they arose, ibid. ib. (note). — He pleads 
Guilty, and Sentence of Death is passed 
upon him, ibid. 1375. — ^Proceedings in the 
House of Lords upon his Conviction^ ibid. 
1376. — ^Letter from the Ordinary of New- 
gate respecting his conduct and conversa- 
tions while under sentence of Death, ibid. 
1389. — Paper delivered by him to the 
Sheriffs at the place of Execution, ibid. 1391 . 
—Swift's Notices of Gregg's Case, ibid. 
1394. 

GREGORY, George. See Sacheverell, William. 

GREGORY, William, Baron of the Exchequer, 
32 Car. 2, 7 vol. 1527, 8 vol. 515, 11 vol. 
440. — He is examined as a Witness for the 
Defendant on Oates's Trial for Perjury, 10 
vol. 1170. 

GREVILLE, Thomas. See Gibbons, John. 

GREY, Henry, Duke of Suffolk. See Suffolk, 
Dukeqf, 

GREY, Isaac. See Crook, John. 

GREY, Lady Jane. — ^Proceedings against her 
for High Treason in assuming the Crown, 
1 Mary, 1553, 1 vol, 715. — She is appoint- 
ed ^to succeed Edward the Sixth by his Will, 
and a Deed of Settlement made with the 
consent of the Nobility, ibid. 717. — She is 
proclaimed Queen, ibid. ib. — ^Mary's Letter 
to the Council, asserting her Title, ibid, ib.— 
Their Answer, ibid. 719. — ^The Council for- 
sake Lady Jane Grey and proclaim Mary, 
ibid. 721. — She is imprisoned in the Tower, 
ibid. 722. — Conversation between her and 
Feckenham, ibid. 723. — Her Letter to her 
Fatiier just before her Execution, ibid. 725. 
—Her Letter to her Sister, written at the end 
of a Greek Testament, ibid. 726.— She is 
behead^,^ ibid. 729.— Ker Behaviour upon 



the Scaffold, ibid, 727.— Account of her 
Education, ibid. 730. — ^Anecdote related of 
her, in Somers's Tracts, ibid. 737. — Account 
of her from the Biographia Britannica, ibid. 
731. — ^The Instrument by which she was 
proclaimed Queen, setting forth the .reasons 
for her Claim, ibid. 739. 

GREY, Lord Leonard.— His Trial at West- 
minster for High Treason, 33 Hen. 8, 154t, 
1 vol* 439. —Articles of Accusation against 
him, ibid. 441, 442, 444.r-'Being an Irish. 
Peer, he is tried by a Common Jury, ibid. 
443.— He confesses the Indictment, and is 
beheaded, ibid. 444. 

GREY, of Ruthen, Charies, Lord. . See Norths 
ampton, Spencer, Earl of, 

GREY DE WERK, Ford, Lord. See Pilkmg' 
ton, Thomas. — His Trial with Robert Char« 
nock, Anne Chamock, David Jones, Francis 
Jones, and Rebecca Jones, on an Informa- 
tion by the Attorney Geperal for a Con- 
spiracy to run away with Lady Henrietta 
Berkeley, 34 Car. 2, 1682, 9 vol. 127.— The 
Information, ibid. 129 (note).— The King's 
Counsel open the Charge, ibid. 132.-— Evi- 
dence for the Prosecution, ibid. 135. — Mr* 
Williams's Defence of them, ibid. 159.— 
Lord Grey's Speech for himself, ibid. 164. 
— ^Lady Henrietta Berkeley is permitted to 
give Evidence for the Defendants, ibid. 173* 
— Chief Justice Pemberton's Address to the 
Jury,ibid. 178.— Itis admitted by the King's^ 
Counsel that there is no Evidence against 
Rebecca Jones, ibid. 183.— They are all 
found Guilty except her, but the matt^ is 
compromised, ana no Judgment is entered, 
ibid. 186.— Lord Grey's History of the Rye- 
House Plot, and of Monmouth's Rebellion, 
ibid. 359. — His Letter to James the Second, 
confessing his participation in them, ibid..ib. 
—His Evidence on the Trial of Lord Dela- 
mere, 11 vol. 538.— He gives his Vote in the 
House of Lords for the conviction of Lord 
Stafford, 7 vol. 1552.— Remarks upon his 
Character, 9 vol. 361. 

GRIFFIN, Lord.— Account of his Case on an 
Award of Execution against him after Out- 
lawry for High Treason, 19 vol. 736 (note). 

GRIMSTONE, Sir Harbottle.— His Speech 
against Archbishop Laud in the House of 
Commons, 4 vol. 317.— He was one of the 
Commissioners for the Trial of the Regicides, 
5 vol. 986.— He was Speaker of the House 
of Commons at the time of the Restoration, 
ibid. 959.— His Speech in the House of 
Commons in the Debate on the Earl of 
Danby's pleading a Pardon from the King 
to an Impeachment, 11 vol. 784. 

GRINDALL, Edmund, Archbishop of Canter- 
bury. See &icA«?ere//, Dr.— His Letter to the 
Lords of the Council, decliaingto obey the Cir- 
cular recommending the Suppression of Pro*, 
phesiying, 15 vol. 317,— Remarks on his con- 
duct resjpectin^ hi^ Refusal to suppress ^^<k 



M 



OSKEftAL IKDE!E fO 



|4ifpif»iWA.428^»^iU0D«uito<!Bsduiiwter 

0itOS£; Naftkv SegeaiU at Lav^ 20 vol 1240, 
91vol.md. 

Ml SirT^ash, Jtid|e«fK.B.SOTol. 1169. 

— ^He was one of uie Judgfes on Hardy's 
Xnal for iXigb Treasoo, 24 toL 221 . 

CaiOVE, John. See B^foiuZ, ffiStom. 

OUBN£Y, Joha, Counsd, 22 vol. 757, 791, 
913,^ vol. 185. — Bis Speech in Defence of 
£i^D, for pnblbhioig a seditious libel^ 23 
vol. 1031. — He was «Be of the Assistant 
Counsel for the Prisoner, on Hardy's Trial, 
24 vol. 238. — His Speech on summing up 
the Evidence for the Defence, on the Trial 
«f CroM&eld Sor High Tjneason, 26 vol. 146. 
—His Speech in Ddenoe of Bia&s, on his 
Trial witb Arthw OXiSoiiiior aad others for, 

> BaghTHtaMn, 27 voU 1 < — ^He was of Counsel 
for Governor WslX, on his Tital for Muider, 
tt wsAm Q4s — ^His Speech on summing upthe 
Evidence £or the Defenee of Cokinel jDes- 
paid, 410 his Triai for High Treason, ibid. 
4^2. 

■ ■ ■ King's Counsel. — ^He was 

One of the Counsel for the Prosecution on 
the Trial of the Persons concerned in the 
Cato Street Plot, 33 vol. 711.— His opening 
Speech lor the Prosecution on the Trial of 
Davidson and Tidd for High Treason, in 
being concerned in that Plot, ibid. 1341. 

GURNET, Sir Ricbard,Lopd Mayor ofLondon. 
—Proceedings by the House of Commons 
against him for High Crimes and Misde- 
meanours, 18 Car. 1, 1642, 4 vol. 159. — 
Articles of Impeachment against him, ibid. 
ib. — His Answer thereto, ibid. 163, 164. — 
He is committed to the Tower, ibid. 163 . — He 
refuses to appoint a Deputy Lord Mayor,ibid . 
164. — The Aldermen refuse to elect a Locum 
Tenens,ibid.ib.— Sentence against him,ibid. 
165. — He refuses to deliver the Sword of 
OflBce, but it is taken from him, ibid. 166. — 
Xord Clarendon's Commendation of him, 
ibid, 159 (note).— Lord Clarendon's Remarks 
on these Proceedings, ibid. 161 (note). 

aUENEY, William de.— Judgment is given 
in Parliament against him and William de 
Ocle, for the Murder of Edward the Second, 
1 vol. 56« — Record of the Judgment against 
them, 13 vol. 1229. 

OYBBON, Mr.— His Speech as one of the 
Managers for the Commons, in support 
of some of the Articles of Impeachment 
against Lord Chancellor Macclesfield, 16 
vol. 924. 

HACKER, Francis, 5 toL 1005, 1176, 1286. 
See Bigwidei. 

PACKSTOUN, David.— His Trial at Edin- 

• burgh for Treason and the Murder of Arch- 

Wlhop SJiarp, Z^ Gar. 2^ 1680, 19 yol. 791. 



^-The Indictment^ ibid, ib.— 'Evidence 
against him, ibid. 926.— His Exsmination 
before the Pri^nr Council, ibid. 631 CM|o). 
—He is found Guilty, ibid. $43.<^His Sen- 
tence, ibid, ib.— His Conduct at the place ol 
Execution, ibid. 649. — ^His Account of the 
rencounter at Air^s Moss, and what befel 
him afterwards, ibid. 634 (note). — Burnet's 
Account of his Execution, ibid. 850 (note). 

HADFIELD, James.— His Trial at the Bar oi 
the Court of King's B&Kh for High Treason, 
in shooting at t^ King, 4^ Geo. 8, 1600, 
27 voL 1281.^ — Counsel for the Prosecution 
and for (he Prisoner, ibid, ib.— The Indict- 
nent, ibid. 1283. — ^Tbe Attorney General's 
Speech for the Prosecution, ibid. 126C*- 
Evideace for the Prosecution, ibid. 1293.— 
Mr. Erskine's Speech for the Pmoaer, ibid. 
1307« — Evidence for the Prisoner, ibid* 
1330. — The Attorney General consents to a 
venlict of Acquittal upon the Evidence d 
the Prisoner's Insanity, ibid. 1354. 

HAGGART, Mr. Advocate.— His Argument 
for the Panel in the Debate on the Relevancy, 
on the Trial of Fyshe PaUner for Sedition, 23 
vol. 255. 

HAIGH, James. SeeLuddket. 

HAINES, George. See Green, Captain 
Thomas, 

HAKEWILL, WilUam, Counsel.— His Argu- 
ment in the House of Commons againat the 
Power of the Crown to impose Arbitrary 
Taxes, 2 vol. 407. 

HALE, Matthew, Counsel, 5 vol. 425. — He is 
appointed one of Archbishop Laud's Counsd 
on his Trial, 4 vol. 337. — Heme's Speech on 
behalf of Laud said to have been written by 
Hale, ibid. 577. — He was of Counsel for 
Macguire on his Trial for High Treason, 
ibid. 702. — And for James, Duke of HamiU 
ton, ibid. 1156. — He argues the Exceptions 
to the Charge of High Treason in Love's 
Case, 5 vol. 211. — ^He subscribes the En- 
gagement to the Commonwealth, ibid, ih, 
6 vol. 128 (note). 

————— Judge of C. P. during the 
Commonwealth, 5 vol. 945 (ncte).— He ii 
requii*ed by Cromwell to preside on the Trial 
of Colonel Penruddock. ibid. 767 (note).— 
His Conduct on discovering that Cromwell 
h^d caused a Jury to be packed, in a Cause 
to be tried before him, ibid. 938.-^Bumet's 
Account of the Reasons which induced him 
to accept a Commission from Cromwell, ibid. 
946. 

■ ' ■ Serjeant at Law. — He was 

one of the Commissioners for the Trial of the 
Regicides, 5 vol. 986. —His Motion in the 
House of Commons during the discussions 
respecting the Restoration, for a Committee 
to look into the propositions made to Charles 
the First, at the treaty of Newport, in order 
that from them the Propositions tp b? spn^ to 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



6a 



Cbtries the Second migbt be toned^ ibid. 
909. 



Sir Matthew, Ckief Baron of the £x- 

cbequ^r, 6 yol. 769.— Trial of the Suffolk 
Witches before him> 6 vol. 647.— He avows 
his belief in Witchcraft, ibid. 700. — He 
dissents from the Opinion of the Judges iii 
the Case of Messenger, ibid. 899. — His 
reesons for his Dissent, ibid. 911 (note). - 
His Charge to the Jury on the Trial of Ro- 
bert Hawkins for Larceny, ibid. 948. — Ex- 
tract from an unpublished Tract written by 
him, containing bis Opinion against the right 
of the Crown, by the Law of England, to tax 
the Subject without the consent of Parlia- 
nenty 2 vol. 379. 

HALES, Sir Christopher, Attorney General, 
25 Hen. 8, 1 vol. 389. 

HALES, Sir Edward, BaroneL— Proceedings 
against him for neglecting to take the Oaths 
of Supremacy and AUegianoe, 2 Jac. 2, 1686, 
11 vol. 1165. — Qui tarn Declaration against 
him on the Stat* 25 Car. 2, c. 2. ibid. ib. — 
He pleads a dispensation from the King, ibid. 
1178.--ThePlsuntiff demurs to his Plea, ibid. 
1186. — Argument in support of the De- 
murrer, ibid. 1187. — Arguments for theDe- 
fendant, ibid. 1192. — Burnet's Remarks on 
the Arguments at the Bar in this Case, ibid. 
1199 (note).— Judgment is given for the 
Defendant with the concurrence of all the 
Judges, except Baron Street, ibid. 1197. — 
Burnet's Notice of these Proceedings, ibid. 
1199 (note).— Chief Justice Herbert's Ac- 
count of the Authorities upon which the 
Judgment of the Court in this Case was 
founded, ibid. 1251. — Sir Hobert Atkins's 
Animadversions upon Chief Justice Herbert's 
Account, ibid. 1267.— -Mr. Attwood's Ob- 
servations thereon, ibid. 1280. — Sir Robert 
Atkins's Enquiry into the King'fi Dispensing 
Power, ibid. 1200. — Sir Edward Hales was 
Lieutenant of the Tower at the time of the 
Trial of the Seven Bishops, 12 vol. 192.— 
He is mentioned as a Prisoner in the Tower 
after the Revolution, ibid. 597. 

HALES, Sir James, Judge of C. P. 1 Mary, 
16 vol. 831.*-He refuses to sivn the Order 
for the Succession of Lady Jane Grey, 1 
vol. 717. — Conversation between him and 
Lord Chancellor Gardiner on his appearance 
in Westminster Hall to take his Oath as 
Judge, on the accession of Queen Mary, ibid. 
714.— Proceedings against him for charging 
a Jnry at the Quarter Sessions with Inaict- 
ments upon the Statutes of Henrv the Eighth 
in favour of the Reformation, 1 Mary, 1553, 
ibid. ib. 715. — He is committed to Prison 
and attempts to kill himself, ibid. 714. — 
He recants and afterwards drowns himself, 
ibid. ib. 

HALES, WilUam.— HisTrial at the Old Bailey 
for forging a Promissory Note, 2 iQeo. 2, 

iraa, n rol. t?l,— TM lnd;ctn^nt, J^d. 



16ft.— 'The Conniel for the Proseention open 
their Case, ibid. 164.— Evidence for the 
Prosecution, ibid. 171.— The Defence, ibid. 
198«-— Mr. Justice Page's Charge to the Jury, 
ibid. 203.— He is found Guilty, ibid. 209.^ 
His Trial at the Old Bailey for forgipg 
several other Notes and Indorsements, 3 
Geo. 2, 1729, ibid. ib. — Evidence for the 
Prosecution, ibid. 213. — Chief Baron Pen- 
gelly's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 219. — His 
Trial by the same Jurv for obtainin|^ Money 
by false Tokens, ibid. 227. — He is found 
Guilty on both charges, ibid. 228. — His Trial 
with Thomas Kinnersley at the same Old 
Bailey Sessions for forcing a Note of hand, 
ibid. 229.— Evidence for the Prosecution, 
ibid. 232.— Hales's Defence, ibid. 240.^— 
Kinnersley's Defence, ibid. 241. — Evidence 
for Kinnersley, ibid, 244. — Chief Baron 
Pengelly's Charge to the Jury^ ibid. 250* — 
The Jury find them both Gulltyi ibid. 264.<— 
Hales's Trial by the same Jury on another 
Indictment for obtaining Money by false 
Tokens, ibid. 265,— He is found Guilty, ibid. 
268. — His Trial with Thomas Kinnendey at 
the same Sessions, for forging another 
Promissory Note, ibid. 267. — Mr. Justice 
Reynolds's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 280. — 
They are both found Guilty, ibid. 2BT,^— 
Hales's Trial at tlie same Sessions for ano- 
ther Forgery, ibid. ib. — He is found Guilty, 
ibid. 295.— The Counsel for the Prosecution 
press for a corporal Punishment beyond the 
Pillory and Imprisonment, ibid, 295.— Sen- 
tence passed upon both Defendants, ibid. 296. 

HALFORD, Sir Richard, See Sattingi, 
Henry, 

HALIFAX, Charles, Lord. See SmerSf John, 
Lord, 

HALL, a Secular Priest.— He is tried with 
Robert Feron for Treason, in denying the 
King's Supremacy, in the Reign of Henry 
the Eighth, 1 vol. 472.— Hall is hanged, and 
Feron receives a Pardon, ibid. 473. 

HALL, John.— Proceedings against him for 
the Murder of Thomas, Duke of Glocester, 1 
Hen. 4, 1399, 1 vol. 161,— His Confesfsion, 
ibid. 163.— He is condemned and executed, 
ibid. 164. 

HALL Dr. Joseph, Bishop of Norwich. See 
Iwdve Bishopt. 

H ALTON, Lord. Set Maiiland Cfiarkt. 

HALYBURTON, Alexander.— His Trial with 
William Fraser in Scotland, for High Treason, 
in surprising a King's Fortress and holding 
it against the Government, 4 Wm. and Mary, 
1692, 13 vol. 831.— The^ Indictment, ibid. 
ib.^The Evidence againlt them| ibid, 835. 
-^They are found Guilty and sentenced to 
Death, ibid, 841. 

HAMILLy Roger, See Bird, Jama* 
HAJJIJUTON, 4n4revyCott|iHl,--»ii Sf9§9\^ 



56 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



in Defence of Peter Zenp^er on his Trial at 
New York, for a Libel upon the. Government 
there, 17 vol. 696. — The Corporation of New 
York present him with the Freedom of the 
City for his Defence on this occasion, ibid. 
726. 

HAMILTON, James, Duke of, and Earl of 
Cambridge. — His Trial for High Treason 
before the High Court of Justice, 1 Car. 2, 
1649, 4 vol. 1155. — The Charge against him 
is for levying war against the Parliament, 
ibid. ib. — He pleads, 1st, that he acted under 
the Command of the supreme authority in 
Scotland : 2nd, that he was an Alien : 3rd, 
that he had surrendered himself in war 
upon Articles of Capitulation promising 
Quarter,ibid. ib. — Counsel are assigned him, 
ibid. 1156, — Jividence in support of his 
Pleas, ibid. 1157.— His Speech in support of 
his Pleas, ibid. 1161. — Summary of the Ar- 
guments of his Counsel, ibid. 1162. — Argu- 
ments of the Counsel for the Commonwealth, 
ibid. 1165.— Mr. SceeVs Argument against 
the Pleas, ibid. 11 67.— The Court give Judg- 
ment against the Pleas, ibid. 1187. — Sen- 
tence of Death is passed upon him, ibid. 
1188.— His Address to his Friends previously 
to his being taken to the place of Execution, 
ibid. ib. — His Speech on the Scaffold, ibid. 
1191.— His Execution, ibid. 1193. 

HAMILTON, Robert, Advocate.— His Speech 
in Defence of Robert Watt, on his Trial in 
Edinburgh for High Treason, under a Special 
Commission of Oyer and Terminer, 34 Geo. 
3, 1794, 23 vol. 1328.— His Argument on a 
Motion in arrest of Judgment in the same 
Case, 24 vol. 192. 

HAMILTON, Sir Stephen. See Constable, Sir 
Robert. 

HAMMOND, John. See Jackson, William, 

HAMPDEN, Sir Edmund. See Darnell, Sir 
Thomfis, 

HAMPDEN, John. See Kimbolton, Edward, 
XoTf/.—proceedings in the Exchequer in the 
Great Case of Ship-Money, 13 Car.l, 1637, 
3 vol. 825. — Lord Clarendon's Character of 
him, ibid. ib. (note). 

HAMPDEN, John.— His Trial at the Bar of 
the Court of King's Bench for a seditious 
and treasonable conspiracy, 36 Car. 2, 1684, 
9 vol. 1053. — He was Grandson of the cele- 
brated Hampden, ibid. 49 3. »— Burnet's Ac- 
count of him, ibid. ib. — The Indictment, ibid. 
1053, 1056 (note).— He pleads Not Guilty, 
ibid. 1056. — His Counsel challenge a Juror 
because he holds an office under the Crown, 
ibid. 1057. — Chief Justice Jefferies decides 
that this is no ground of Challenge, ibid. 
1059. — ^The King's Counsel open the Case 
against him, ibid. 1061. — ^The Duke ofMon- 
roouth is called as a Witness against him, 
but docs not appear, ibid, '1063. — Lord 
Ho\?w4'% £videaQj&4 ibidv t064*— Qth^r 



Evidence against him, ibid. 1073. — ^Tha 
Record of Sidney's Attainder is offered in 
Evidence, ibid. 1078. — Mr. Williams's 
Speech in his Defence, ibid. ib. — Evidence 
for the Defence, ibid. 1086. — ^Evidence of 
Lord Howard's Declarations respecting the^ 
Conspiracy, ibid. ib. — Evidence of Lord 
Howard's holding irreligious Opinions ten--^ 
dered, and refused by the Court, ibid. 1103. — 
The Chief Justice's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 
1104.— The Jury find him Guilty, ibid. 1 124. 
— He is sentenced to pay a Fine of 40,000/. 
ibid. 1126.— His Trial at the Old Bailey for 
High Treason, 1 Jac. 2, 1685, 11 vol. 479. \ 
—The Indictment, ibid. 485. — He pleads' 
Guilty, ibid. 482. — Sentence is passed upon ' 
him, but he is afterwards pardoned upon 
making a Submission, ibid. 484. — About ten 
years afterwards he commits Suicide, ibid, 
ib. — His Examination by a Committee of 
the House of Lords appointed in 1689 to 
inquire, who were the Advisers and Prosecu- 
tors of the Murders of Lord William Russel, 
Colonel Sidney, and others, 9 vol. 954. 

HANSON, Joseph. — His Trial at Lancaster 
for a Misdemeanour, in encouraging the 
Weavers of Manchester in a Conspiracy to 
raise their Wages, 49 Geo. 3, 1809, 31 vol. 
1. — Counsel for the Prosecution and for the 
Defendant, ibid. ib. — ^The Indictmentyiibid. 
2. — Mr. Serjeant Cockell's Speech for the 
Prosecution, ibid. 5. — Evidence for the Pro- 
secution, ibid. 11. — Mr. Raine's Speech for 
the Defendant, ibid. 27. — Evidence for the 

. Defendant, ibid. 42. — Mr. Seijt. Cockell's 
Reply, ibid. 68. — Mr. Justice Le Blanc's 
Charge to the Jury, ibid. 77. — The Jury find 
him Guilty, ibid. 81. — Proceedings in the 
Court of King's Bench on his being brought 
up for Judgment, ibid. ib. — Sentence of the 
Court, ibid. 97. 

HARCOURT, Sir Simon, Solicitor General, 
1 Ann, 14 vol. 989, 1100. — ^His Speech for 
the Prosecution on the Trial of Plaagen 
Swendsen, for forcibly carrying away Mrs. 
Pleasant Rawlins, 14 vol. 361. — His Speech 
in the House of Commons on the great Case 
of Ashby and White, ibid. 740. 

. — His Speech for 
Dr. Sacheverell on the Trial of his Impeach- 
ment in the House pf Lords, 15 vol. 196. 

HARCOURT,' William. See Whitbread, 
Thomas, 

HARDWICKE, Philip, Lord, Chief Justice of 
K. B. 10 Geo. 2, 17 vol. 845, 

Lord Chancellor. — 



He is appointed Lord High Steward upon 
the Trial of the Earls of Kilniamock and 
Cromertic and Lord Balmerino for High 
Treason, 18 vol. 449. — His Address on pass- 
ing Judgment upon them, ibid. 497. — He is 
appointed Lord High Steward for the Tri^ 
of Lord Lovat, ibid. 541.r-Uia Addre» 
QQ,pasain|; Jad^m^nt upon Uid^ ibi4% Q93^ 



THE STATE TRIALS- 



57 



H ARDY, John.*— His Trial at Edinburgh for 
Treason, in uttering seditious expressions 
against the King and GoTemment, 4 Jac. 2, 
1688, 12 vol. 585.— The Indictment, ibid, 
ib.-— The Court decide that the expressions 
libelled do not infer the Crime of Treason, 
ibid. 596. 

HARDY, Thomas.— His Trial for High Trea- 
son at the Old Bailey, under a Special Com- 
mission of Oyer and Terminer, 35 Geo. 3, 
1794, 24 vol. 199.--List of the Grand Jury, 
ibid. 200. — Chief Justice Eyre's Charge to 
them, ibid, ib.— Strictures on this Charge, 
ibid. 210 (note).--The Grand Jury return a 
trae Bill against him and twelve others, ibid. 
211 .—The Indictment, ibid .224.— List of the 
Counsel employed on both sides, ibid. 238. 
—Hardy's Arraignment, ibid. 240, 1405.— 
Speech of the Attorney General (Sir John 
Scott) for the Prosecution, ibid. 241. — Evi- 
dence for the Prosecution, ibid. 370. — ^Dis- 
cussion of the propriety of separating the 
Jury on a proposal tor an Adjournment, ibid. 
414. — ^The Jury are provided with beds at 
the Old Bailey, and the Court adjourns till 
the next morning, ibid. 418. — ^The second 
night the Jury, with the consent of Counsel 
on both sides, sleep at a Tavern, ibid. 572. 
—Mr. i^kine's Speech for the Prisoner, 
ibid. 877. — Evidence for the Prisoner, ibid. 
971.— Mr. Gibbs's Speech for the Prisoner 
at the Close of the Evidence for the Defence, 
ibid. 1112.— Reply of the Solicitor General 
(Sir John Mitford), ibid. 1167.— Chief Jus- 
tice Eyre's Summing up to the Jury, ibid. 
1293.— The Jury acquit him, ibid. 1384. 

HARGRAVE, Francis, Counsel.— His Argu- 
ment against the legality of Slavery, in the 
Case of James Sommersett the Negro, 20 
vol. 23. — His Argument for the Defendant 
in the Case of the Island of Grenada, ibid. 
293. — His Preface to the Fourth Edition of 
the State Trials, 1 vol. xlvii.— His Preface 
to the 11th Volume of the Fourth Edition of 
the State Trials, ibid. li. 

HARLEY, Edward. See HoUis, DenzU. 

BARLEY, Robert, Speaker of the House of 
Commons. See Oxford and Mortimer^ Earl of, 
— GreggyWiUiam, — His Speech in the House 
of Commons on opening the Debate on the 
Great Case of Ashby and White, 14 vol. 703. 
—His Speech in the Debate on that Case, 
ibid. 753. — Burnet's Account of his retire- 
ment from the Ministry of Queen Anne, ibid. 
1371 (note). 

HARRINGTON, James.— He is accused of 
being concerned in a Conspiracy against the 
Government with the Fifth Monarchy Men, 
6 vol. 114 (note). — His Examination in the 
Tower by Lord Lauderdale, Sir George 
Carteret and Sir Edward Walker, ibid. 115 
(note). — Anecdote respecting Cromwell's 
Seizure, of hi^ Oceana, as related by Mr. 
Ec^ii^t iJik hk Speech in Dofi^noe qf ?aine^ 



22 vol. 469. — Mr, Erskine*8 Allusion to his 
Pedigree, ibid. 468. 

HARRIS, Benjamin.— His Trial for selling a 
Seditious Libel, 32 Car. 2, 1680, 7 vol. 925. 
—Evidence against him, ibid. 928. — His 
Counsel object that there is no malice proved, 
ibid. ib. — ^The Court decide that this is un- 
necessary, ibid. 930. — Chief Justice Scroggs's 
Charge to the Jury, ibid. 929. — The Jury 
return a Verdict of '' Guilty of selling the 
Book," which the Court refuse to receive, 
ibid. 931.— -The Juiy find him Guilty gener- 
ally, ibid, ib.— The Chief Justice rebukes the 
Jury for their hesitation, ibid. ib. — Sentence 
passed upon him, ibid. 932. 

HARRIS, — Doctor of Civil Law.— His Argu- 
ment on the Trial of the Duchess of Kingston 
for Bigamy, that a Sentence of the Ecclesias- 
tical Court, annulling her former Marriage, 
was not a conclusive Answer to the Charge^ 
20 voL 494. 

HARRISON, Henry.— His Trial at the Old 
Bailey for the Murder of Dr. Clenche, - 4 
Will, and Mary, 1692, 12 vol. 833.— The 
Indictment, ibid. ib. — He pleads Not Guilty, 
ibid. 834. — Evidence against him, ibid. 839. 
— His Defence, ibid. 853. — Evidence in his 
Defence, ibid. 854. — Evidence in reply, 
ibid. 860.->Lord Holt's Charge to the 
Jury, ibid. 864.^The Jury find him Guilty, 
ibid. 871. — Sentence of Death is passed 
upon him, ibid. ib. — His Behaviour at the 
place of Execution, ibid. 872. 

HARRISON, John.— He pleads Guilty to an 
Indictment for High Treason, in being con- 
cerned in the Cato Street Conspiracy, 33 
vol. 1544. — ^He is pardoned on condition of 
being transported tor Life, ibid. 1566. 

HARRISON, Thomas, 5 vol. 998, 1008. 1230. 
See Regicides, — Burnet's Account of his 
Character, 5 vol. 1008 (note). 

HARRISON, Thomas, Clerk.— His Trial in 
the King's Bench for insulting Mr. Justice 
Hutton, while sitting on the Bench of the 
Court of Common Pleas, 14 Car. 1, 1638, 3 
vol. 1369.— The Indictment, ibid. ib. 1371 
(note). — His Examination, in which he con- 
fesses and justifies the Offence, ibid. 1373. — 
Speech of the Attorney General for the Prose- 
cution, ibid. 1 374. — The Defendant's Speech 
tor himself, ibid. 1378.— He is found Guilty, 
ibid. 1376, 1380.— His Sentence, ibid. ib. — 
Mr. Justice Hutton afterwards recovers 
10,000/. against him in an Action, ibid. 1376, 
1381. 

HARRISON, William.— Narrative of his sin- 
gular Disappearance, and of the Trial and 
Execution of the Perry s for his supposed 
Murder in the year 1660, 14 vol. 1312. 

HARSNET, Samuel, Bishop of. Norwich.— 
Proceedings in Parliament against him for 
Extortion, and other Misdemeanours,. 22 
Jac. 1, 1624^ a vol. 11^59^.— Report Q? the 



58 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



Oharges against him, ibid, ib.— His Answer 
thereto, ibid. 1255.-^Tbe House of Lords 
refer the matter to the High Commission, 
but nothing more is heard of it, ibid. 1258. 

HART, John Harriott, 30 vol. 1131. See 
WhUcy Henry. 

HART, Patrick.--<His Trial in Ireland for 
High Treason, in acting with a Treasonable 
Association called Defenders, 36 Geo. 3, 
1796, 26 vol. 387.— Speech of the Solicitor 
General for the Prosecution, ibid, ib.— £yi- 
. dence for the Prosecution, ibid. 393. — Mr. 
Lysaght's Speech for the Defence, ibid. 397. 
— Evidence fpr the Defence, ibid. 401. — Mr. 
Mac Nally's Speech on Summing up the 
Evidence for the Defence, ibid. ib. — Lord 
Clonmell's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 409. — 
Mr. Justice Chamberlain's Charge, ibid. 414. 
— The Jury find him Guilty, ibid. 419. — 
Lord Clonmell's Address on passing Sen- 
tence upon him and Kennedy, ibid. 420. — 
Hart is executed, ibid. 438. 

HARTLEY, William. %^q Luddites. > 

HARTWELL, John. See Baynton, Sarah. 

HARVEY, Edmund, 5 vol. 1005, 1176. See 
Begicides, 

HARVEY, Sir Francis, Judge of C» P, 4 Car. 
1, 3 vol, 359. 

HASLERIG, Sir Arthur. SeeKimbolt(m,Edumrd, 
Lord, — ^His Speech in the House of Com- 
mons in vindication of himself from the 
Articles of Treason preferred against him by 
Charles the First, 4 vol. 95. 

HASTINGS, Henry.— Articles of Impeach- 
roent exhibited by the Commons against 
him. Sir Richard Halford, Sir John Bale, and 
John Pate, for raising Forces against the 
Parliament, 18 Car. 1, 1642, 4 vol. 171. — 
It does not appear that the Parties impeach- 
ed ever put m an Answer to these Articles, 
or that any further Proceedings were had 
upon them, ibid. 174. 

HASTINGS, Warren, Governor General of 
Bengal. — ^Trialof Maha Rajah Nundocomar, 
and others, for a Conspiracy to charge him 
with Bribery and other Offences, 20 vol. 
1077.— His Evidence on that Trial, ibid. 
1179. — His Evidence on a Trial of the same 

S arsons for a similar Conspiracy against Mr. 
arwell, ibid. 1200.— Trial of John Stock- 
dale for publishing '^ A Review of the prin- 
cipal Charges against him,'' 22 vol. 237. 

HATCHARD, John.— His Trial at West- 
minster for a libel on the Aides-de-Camp 
of the Governor of Antigua, and on the 
Grand Jury of that Island, published in the 
Tenth Report of the Directors of the African 
Institution, 57 Geo. 3, 1817, 32 vol. 673.— 
Counsel for the Prosecution and for the De- 
fcndantjibid. ib.— The Indictment, ibid . 674. 
—Mr. Seijeant Best's Speech for the Prose- 
jmtion, ibW. 965,— Evidence for the Prose- 



cution, ibid.' 691. — ^The Attorney General's 
Speech for the Defendant, ibid. 698. — ^Mr. 
Justice Abbott's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 
713.— The Jury find the Defendant Gailty, 
ibid. 718. — Affidavits on behalf of the De- 
fendant on his being brought up for Judg- 
ment, ibid. 719. — Mr. Scarlett's Speech in 
Mitigation of Punishment, ibid. 735. — Mr. 
Serjeant Best's Speech in Aggravation, ibid. 
741-^ttdgment of the Court that the De* 
fendant pay a Fine of 100/. ibid. 752. 

HATHAWAY, Richard.— His Trial at the 
Surrey Assizes for a Cheat, in pretending to 
be bewitched, 1 Anne, 1702, 14 vol. 639. — 
The Information, ibid. ib. 641 (note).— The 
Counsel for the Prosecution open the Case, 
ibid. 642. — Evidence against him, ibid. 648. 
—-Serjeant Jenner's Defence of him, ibid. 
668. — Evidence for the Defence, ibid. 669. 
— ^Lord Holt's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 683. 
— The Jury find him Guilty, ibid. 690. — He 
is sentenced to pay a Fine of 100 Marks, to 
stand three times on the Pillory, to be whip- 
ped, and kept to hard labour for half a year, 
ibid. 639 (note).— Record of the Judgment 
against him, ibid, ib.— His Trial at the same 
Assizes with Thomas Wellini^, Elizabeth his 
Wife, and Elizabeth Willoughby, for a Riot 
and Assault, ibid. 689. — ^The Information, 
ibid. ib. (note). — ^They plead Not Guilty, 
ibid. 691. — Evidence against them, ibid. 692. 
— ^They are all found Guilty, ibid. 696.— 
Their Sentence, ibid. 639 (note). 

HATSELL, Sir Henry, Baron of the Exche- 
quer, 11 Will. 3, 13 vol. 943, 1108, 14 vol. 
134. — His Charge to the Jury on the Trial 
of Spencer Cowper, and others^ for the Murder 
of Sarah Stout, 13 vol. 1187. 

HATTON, Sir Christopher, 1 vol. 1095, 1114. 
— He was one of the Commissioners for the 
Trial of Mary, Queen of Scots, 1 vol. 1167. 

HAVERSHAM, John, Lord.— Proceedings 
against him for Words derogatory of the 
House of Commons, spoken at a Conference 
between the Houses of Parliament, 14 vol. 
292. — His Answer to the Charge exhibited 
against bim by the Commons, ibid. 313.— 
The Charge is dismissed by the House of 
Lords for want of Prosecution by the Com- 
mons, ibid. 322. — His Speech on Dr. Sache- 
verell'sTrial, 15 vol. 475. 

HAWKINS, Robert.— His Trial at the Assizes 
at Aylesbury for Larceny, 21 Car. 2, 1669, 
6 vol. 921. — ^The Indictment, ibid. ib. — He 
pleads Not Guilty, ibid. 922. — Evidence for 
the Prosecution, ibid. 924.— His Defence, 
ibid. 937.-— Evidence in support of the De- 
fence, ibid. 943.— Lord Chief Baron Hale's 
Charge to the Jury, ibid, 948. — The Jury 
acquit him, ibid. 952. 

HAWLES, John, Counsel, 12 vol. 1297.— He 
is assigned for Counsel to CoUedge, on his 
Trial for High Treason, 8 vol. 561.— He is 
one pf Lord Mohun's Counsel, on his Trial 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



Ar the Harder of Mr. MountibTd, 12 toI. 
1016. 

-Sir John, Solicitor General, 7 Will. 



69 



3, 12 vol. 1367, 13 vol. 149, 461, 14 vol. 
151, 532. — His Speech on summing up the 
£?id6Dce for the Crown on the Trial of 
Chamock, King, and Keyes for High Trea- 
lOD, 13 tdL 1 443.— -His Speech for the Crown 
on the Trial of Sir WilUam Freind for High 
TreascHi, 13 vol. 46. — His Speech for the 
Crown on the Trial of Sir William Parkyns 
for High Treason, ihid. 119.— His Speech 
in the House of Commons in faTour of the 
Bill of Attainder against Sir John Fenwick, 
ibid. 664. 

His Speech in the House 



of Commons in the Debate on the Great 
Case of Ashby and White, 14 vol. 724.--His 
Speech in support of one of the Articles of 
ImpeadiaieDt against Dr. Sachevereli, 15 
vol. 116.--HiB Remarks upon Fitahkrris's 
Trial, 8 ▼01.425.— On Colledge's Trial, ibid. 
723^—0(1 the Earl of Shaftesbury's Grand 
Jury, ibid. 835.--On Connt Coningsmark's 
Trial, 9 vol. 126.->On Lord Russel's Trial, 
ibid. 794. — On Algernon Sidney's Trial, 
ibid. 999. — On the Award of Execution 
against Sir Thomas Armstrong, 10 vol. 123. 
--On Bateman's Trial, 11 vol. 473.— On 
Coniish's Trial, ibid. 455.--OnMr. Wilmer's 
Writ of De Homine replegiando, and the 
Quo Warranto against tne City of London, 
8 vol. 1347. 

HATES, Joseph.--His Trial at the King's 
Bench for High Treason in corresponding 
with Sir Thomas Armstrong, an outlawed 
Traitor, 36 Car. 2, 1684, 10 vol 307.— The 
lodictroent, ibid. 309 (note). — Evidence 
against him, ibid. 311. — ^He contends that 
the Treason charged is proved to have been 
committed abroad, and therefore that he 
onght to have been indicted under the 
Sutute 35 Hen. 8, c. 2, ibid. 814.--The 
Court refuse to allow him Counsel, and 
overrule the Objection, ibid. 314. — His 
Defence, ibid. 316. — Chief Justice Jefferies's 
Charge to the Jury, ibid. 318. — The Jury 
aoquit him, ibid. 320. — Accounts of this 
Case by Burnet and Luttrell, ibid. 307 (note). 

HAY, John. See Damley, Henry, Lord, — ^^His 
Deposition respecting the Murder of Lord 
Damley, Husband to Mary, Queen of Scots, 
1 vol. 921. 

HEARIiE, John. See Henu, John. 

HEATH, Mary.— Her Evidence for the De- 
fendant on the Trial of an Action of Eject- 
ment, at the Bar of the Court of Exchequer 
in Ireland, between James Annesley and 
Richard, Earl of Anglesea, 17 vol. 1289. — 
Her Trial for Perjury in her Evidence on 
that Occasion, 18 vol. 1.— She applies for 
the postponement of her Trial, ibid. ib. — 
The Trial is postponed, ibid. 7.— Proceed- 
ings against a party for forcibly detaining 



one of her Witnesses, ibid. ib.^The Prose- 
cutors apply to postpone the Trial, ibid. 23. 
—This IS refused by the Court, ibid. 38. — 
The Indictment, ibid. 46.-'Speech of the 
Counsel for the Prosecution, ibid. 50. — 
Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 53. — 
Speech of the Counsel for the Defendant, 
ibid. 136. — Evidence for the Defence, ibid. 
139. — Mr. Justice Bletanerhasset's Charge 
to the Jury, ibid. 189. — Chief Justice Mar- 
lay's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 194. — ^The 
Jury find her Not Guilty, ibid. 196. 

HEATH, John, Esq. Judge of C. P., 21 vol. 
687, 815, 22 vol. 309, 23 vol. 1055, 26 vol. 
1198.— -His Charge to the Jury on the Trial 
of the Bishop of Bangor and others for a 
Riot, 26 vol. 523* — His Evidence on the 
Trial of Lord Thanet and others for a Blot, 
27 vol. 847. 

HEATH, Robert, Seijeant.at.Law, 3 yoL 1371. 

Sir Robert, Attorney General, 7 Car. 

1, 3 vol. 405. — His Argument in the Court 
of King's Bench against the Discharge of 
Sir Thomas Darnell and others, committed 
by the Ring for refusing to lend unon Com- 
missions of Loans, 3 vol. 30.— -His Ubjections 
to the Arguments of the House of Commons 
at a Conference with the House of Lords 
upon the Liberty of the Subject, ibid. 133. 
— ^His Argument in the Court of King's 
Bench against the Discharge of William 
Stroud and others, committed by the King 
for their conduct in Parliament, ibid. 280. — 
His Argument in the jsame Court in the 
Case of Sir John Elliott and others, in sup- 
port of the Jurisdiction of the Court to take 
Cognizance of Offences supposed to be 
committed in Parliament, ibid. 304. 



Chief Justice of C. P. 8 

Car. 1 . — His Speech on delivering his Opinion 
in the Star Chamber respecting the Sentence 
to be passed upon Henry Sherfield, for 
breaking a painted Window in a Church at 
Salisbury, 3 vol. 541. 

HEDGES, Michael.--His Trial with John 
Hedges, in the Court of King's Bench, for 
Fraud in their Offices as Cler^ in the Doclc 
Yard at Woolwich, 44 Geo. 3, 1803, 28 voU 
1315. — The Information, ibid. ib. — Mr. 
Erskine's Speech for the Prosecution, ibid. 
1326. — Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid« 
1341. — Mr. Dallas's Speech in their De- 
fence, ibid. 1386. — Evidence for the De- 
fendants, ibid. 1402. — Lord EUenborough'a 
Charge to the Jury, ibid. 1408.--The Jury 
find them Guilty, ibid. 1429.— Proceedings 
on their being brought up for Judgment| 
ibid* ib. — Sentence of the Court, ibid. 1334 

HEDGES, Mr.— His Speech as one of thf 
Managers for the House of Commons on th^ 
Trial of the Impeachment of Lord Chancelloj 
Macclesfield, in support of ^Qme pf th^ 
Articles, 16 vol 929, i 



ee 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



HENDLEY, WiUiam.--His Trial with several 
others for a Conspiracy tp defraud, under 
pretence of collecting Money for Charities, 
4 Geo. 1, 1719, 15 vol. 1407.--The Indict- 
ment, ibid. 1409. — ^The Jury find him Guilty, 
ibid. 1414.— Letter from the Judge, Sir L. 
Fowis, to the Lord Chancellor, on occasion 
of this Trial, ibid. ib. 

HENLEY, Robert, Lord, Keeper of the Great 
Seal, 33 Geo. 2. See Northingtfmy Bobert, 
Earl of. — He is appointed Lord Hi);[h Steward 
on tfie Trial of Lord Ferrers for Murder, 
19 vol. 887, 

HENRIETTA MARIA, Queen to Charies the 
First. — ^The Earl of Dorset's Encomium upon 
her in the Star Chamber, 3 vol. 584. 

HENRY THE FOURTH, King of France.— 
His Speech on behalf of the Jesuits, 7 vol. 
536. 

HENRY THE EIGHTH, King of England. 
— Proceedings relating to the dissolution 
of the Marriage between him and Catha- 
rine of Arragon, 19 Hen. 8, 1528, 1 
vol. 299. — His scruples respecting the 
Marriage, ibid. ib. — He solicits from the 
Pope a Commission to Cardinal Wolsey 
to try the validity of the Mamage, ibid. 
301. — ^The Pope grants a Commission to 
Cardinals Wolsey and Campejus, ibid. 
304. — Campejus attempts to persuade the 
Queen to enter upon a religious life, which 
she refuses to do, ibid. 309.J^The Emperor 
disapproves of the Divorce, ibid. ib. — The 
People being discontented with the proposed 
Divorce, the King dismisses Anne Boleyn 
from. Court, ibid. 314. — He charges Wolsey 
and Campejus to proceed with the Commis- 
sion, ibid. 317. — ^The Commission is opened, 
ibid. ib. — ^The Queen appears to protest 
against the Proceedings, but refuses to ap- 
pear to answer, ibid. 319. — ^The fiull and 
Breve of Pope Julius the Second, authorizing 
the Marriage, ibid. 320, 322. — Objections to 
the Bull and Breve, ibid. 310, 324.— Wit- 
nesses examined, ibid. 325.— Letters from 
Pope Julius the Second to the King, ibid. 
330. — ^The King's Protest against the Mar- 
riage, before its consummation, ibid. 332. — 
The Evidence is closed, and a day appointed 
for concluding the Trial, ibid. 333. — In- 
hibition of further Proceedings by the Pope, 
and his Letter to the King thereupon, ibid. 
337. — ^The Pope offers him a Dispensation 
to have two Wives, ibid. 341. — His Procla- 
mation against procuring Bulls from Rome, 
ibid. 342. — Declaration of the House of 
Lords to the Pope respecting his Marriage, 
ibid. ib. — ^The Pope's Answer thereto, ibid. 
345. — ^The Commons disapprove (he Mar- 
riage, ibid. 351.— The King's Behaviour to 
the Queen, ibid, ib, — ^The Pope's Letter to 
the King, urging him to take his Queen 
again, ibid. 353. — A Motion made in the 
Commons to the same effect, ibid. 355. — 
Vl^on vj^hi^ch the King re^manjs the Speaker, 



ibid, ib.— The King determines to proceed 
with the Divorce without the authority, of 
the Pope, ibid. 357. — Sentence of Divorce, 
ibid. 358. — ^The King proceeded against at 
Rome, ibid. 360. — ^The Pope's Sentence 
against him, ibid. 363. — ^The Marriage witK 
Queen Catharine declared Void by Act of 
Parliament, ibid. 364. — His Conduct when 
informed of the Execution of Sir Thomas 
More, ibid. 396. — ^Anecdote related of him 
when told of the Pope's intention to send 
the Bishop of Rochester a Cardinal's hat, 
ibid. 408.— Remarks on the severities prac- 
tised by him against the Papists, ibid. 469. 
—His Book against Luther written with his 
own pen, ibid. 476. — Proceedings against 
various persons during his reign for denying 
the Supremacy, ibid. 469. — His Will, ibid. 
743. 

HENRY, PRINCE op WALES, Son of James 
the First. — Accounts by several Historians 
of the Suspicions which existed of his having 
been poisoned, 2 vol. 1001 (note).— Report 
of the examination of his Body after his 
Death, ibid. ib. 

HENSEY, Florence.— His Trial for High 
Treason in maintaining a treasonable Cor- 
respondence with the King's Enemies, 32 
Geo. 2, 1758, 19 vol. 1341. — ^His Arraign- 
ment, ibid. ib. — Evidence for the Prosecu- 
tion, ibid. 1356. — The Defence, ibid. 1375. 
— ^The Jury find him Guiltv, ibid. 1345. — 
His Address on being called upon to receive 
Judgment, ibid. ib. — Lord Mansfield passes 
Sentence upon him, ibid. 1348. — A more 
circumstantial Account of his Trial, ibid. ib. 
He was pardoned, ibid. 1382. 

HEPBURN, John. See Darrdeyf Hemy^ Lord. 
— His Deposition respecting the Murder of 
Lord Darnley, Husband of Mary, Queen of 
Scots, 1 vol. 923. 

HERBERT, Edward, Counsel.— He was of 
Counsel for the Prosecution in the Proceed- 
ings in the Star Chamber against Prynne, 
Bastwick, and Burton, for several l2bels^ 
13 Car. 1, 3 vol. 719. 

— — — Sir Edward, Attorney General, 
1 7 Car. 1 . — He delivers Articles of Impeach- 
ment in the House of Lords against Lord 
Kimbolton and the Five Members, 4 vol. 83. 
— He is examined by the Comntons respect- 
ing his share in the Accusation of the Five 
Members, ibid. 102. — Proceedings against 
him on an Impeachment by the Commons, 
for High Crimes and Misdemeanours, in 
advising and delivering the Articles against 
the Five Members, 17 Car. 1, 1642, ibid. 
120. — Articles of Impeachment, ibid, ib.— 
His Answer thereto, ibid. 121. — Letter from 
the King to the Lord Keeper, declaring that 
the Attorney General did not advise or con- 
trive the obnoxious Articles, ibid. 123.—- 
Serjeant Wylde enforces the Impeachment 
for the Commons against him^i ibid. 124»— 
His Coun^^l sqnt to the T!awex for not b^ing 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



61 



prepared to pleady and others assigned him, 
ibid. 127. — ^Their Argament for him, ibid. 
128. — Sentence against him, ibid. 129.— 
Lord Clarendon's Account of this Proceed- 
iDgyibid. 130. 

HERBERT, Sir Edward, Chief Justice of 
K. B., 1 Jac. 2, 11 vol. 1324.— He delivers 
the Opinion of the Judges on the Question 
proposed to them in Lord Delamere's Case, 
whether the Court of the Lord High Steward 
can be adjourned during a Trial, 11 vol. 561. 
— ^He delivers the Opinion of the Court of 
Ring's Bench, in the Case of Sir Edward 
Hales, in favour of the King's Dispensing 
Power, ibid. 1195. — ^His Account of the 
Authorities in law upon which the Judg- 
ment of the Court in Sir Edward Hales's 
Case was founded, ibid. 1251. — Sir Robert 
Atkins's Answer thereto, ibid. 1267. — Mr. 
Attwood's Strictures thereon, ibid. 1280. — 
Burnet's Character of him, ibid. 11 95 (note). 

' Chief Justice of 



. C. P., 4 Jac. 2, 12 vol. 124.— He was son 
of the Sir Edward Herbert who was Attorney 
General in the Reign of Charles the First, 
11 vol. 1314. 

HERNE, John, Counsel.- -His Defence of 
Heniy Sherfield, on an Information in the 
Star Chamber, for breaking a painted Win- 
dow in a Church, 3 vol. 520. — ^His Defence 
of Prynne, on his Trial in the Star Chamber 
for writing "Histrio-mastix,"ibid.573. — He is 
appointed ono of Archbishop Laud's Coun- 
sel, 4 vol. 337. — His Speech in Defence of 
Laud, ibid. 577. — His Interview with Laud 
in the Tower immediately before his Execu- 

• tion, ibid. 586 (note). 

HERTFORD, Edward, Marquis of.— -Account 
. of his Restoration to the Title of Duke of 
Somerset, 1 vol. 526. 

HEVENINGHAM, Sir John. See DameU, 
Sir Thoma$» 

HEVENINGHAM, William, 5 vol. 1000, 
1219, 1229. See Regicides. 

HEVEY, John. — Proceedings in the Court of 
King's Bench in Ireland on the Trial of an 
Action of Assault and False Imprisonment, 
brought by him against Charles Henry Sirr, 
42 Geo. 3, 1802, 28 vol. 1.— Mr. Curran's 
' Speech for the Plaintiff, ibid. 2. — Evidence 
' for the Plaintiff, ibid. 13.— Mr. Fletcher's 
' Speech for the Defendant, ibid. 19. — Evi- 
dence for the Defendant, ibid. 26. — Mr. 
Barrington's Reply, ibid. 34. — Lord Kil- 
warden's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 47. — ^The 
Jhry return a Verdict for the Plaintiff, with 
' 150/. damages, ibid. 50. 

HEWETT, Dr. John.— His Trial before the 
High Court of Justice for Treason in hold- 

. ing traitorous Correspondence with Charles 
the Second, 10 Car. 2, 1658, 5 vol. 883.— . 

• The Charge against him, ibid« 884. — ^He 

- besiUtes to plead, ibid^ 89^«--^Fte^ and 



Demurrer intended to have been tendered to 
the Court, ibid. . 895.— Judgment against 
him, ibid. 928.— His Execution, ibid, 930. 

HEY, James. See Luddites, 
HEY, Job. See LuddUes. 

HEYWOOD, Samuel, Seijeant-at-Law^-^His 
Historical Account of the Judges in the 
Reigns of Charles the Second and James 
the Second, 12 vol. 257 (note). 

HICKFORD, Robert.— His Arraignment for 
High Treason, 14 Eliz. 1571, 1 vol. 1041.— 
He pleads Guilty to the Indictiyent, ibid. 
1044. — Chief Justice Catlin's Address to 
him on passing Judgment, ibid. 1044. 

HILLIARD, John. See Pole, CarcUnaL 

HILL, James. See Aitken, James. 

HILL, John. See Luddites, 

HILL, Laurence. See Green, Bobert, 

HIND, James. See Tonge, Thomas. 

HINDE, James. See AUken, James, 

HOADLEY, Dr. Benjamin, Bishop of Here- 
ford. — His Remarks upon Bishop Atter- 
bury's Defence at the Bar of the House of 
Lords, 16 vol. 664 (note). 

HOBART, Sir Henry, Chief Justice of C. P. 
14 Jac. 1, 2 vol. 952, 1042, 1161.— His 
Speech in thA^tar Chamber, on giving his 
Opinion respecting the sentence on Mr. 
Wraynham, for slandering Lord Chancellor 
Bacon, 2 vol. 1077. 

HOBART, Sir Miles. See Stroud, WUliam. 

HOE, John. See SachevereU, William, 

HOGG, William. See Graham, John. 

H0L60RNE, Robert, Counsel.— His Speech 
for Prynne, on his Trial in the Star Chamber 
for publishing "Histrio-mastix," 3 vol. 572. — 
His Argument for Mr. Hampden in the 
Great Case of Ship Money, ibid. 963. 

HOLLAND, Earl of. — Proceedings in the 
High Court of Justice against him, the Earl 
of Norwich, Lord Capel, and Sir John Owen 
for High Treason in bearing arms against 
the Commonwealth, 1 Car. 2, 1649, 4 vol. 
1195. — Lord Clarendon's Account of Lord 
Holland, ibid. 1196 (note). — ^Lord Capel 
escapes from the Tower, ibid. 1208, 1245. — 
He is discovered at Lambeth by a Water- 
man, ibid. 1209, 1246. — He pleads that 
Quarter was g^veu him when he was taken, 
ibid. li^lO. — Sir John Owen pleads Not 
Guilty, ibid. ib. — Lord Holland pleads that 
Quarter was given him when he was taken, 
ibid. 1215. — Sentence of Death pronounced 
against all of them, ibid. 1216. — ^The Earl 

. of Norwich is reprieved, ibid « 121 7. — Exe- 
cution of Lord Holland, ibid. 1218.-r-Exe^ 
cution of Lord Capel, ibid. 1230. — Bishop 
Morley's Account of the manner of Lor4 



ds 



GENSRAL INDEX TO 



Captrt deatfay iM. 1386.*-€roinweirs 
Omnion of Lord Cftpel^ ibid. 134a.-^Lord 
Clarendon's Charaeter of him^ ibid* 1249. 

HOLLIS, DeDziU See Elliott, Sir John. 
EimboiUon, Edwardf Lorii.— Proceedinffs in the 
Coart of King's Bench against hiniy Sir John 
Elliott^ and Benjamin Valentine, for sedi- 
tious Speeches in the House of Commons, 
and for forcibly detaining the Speaker in 
the Chair after a Motion for an Adjourn- 
ment, 5 Car. 1, 1629, 3 vol. 293.— He is 
one of the Five Members accused of Treason 
in the House of Commons hy Charles the 
First, A^\. 83. — His Speech on deliveriug 
the Articles of Impeacnment against the 
Nine Lotds for departing from Parliament 
without leave, ibid. 178. — He Aocuses Arch- 
bishop Laud of Treason, by order of the 
Commons, ibid. 318. — Proceedings against 
him and Mr. Wbitelocke, for a Breach of 
Trust reposed in them by the Parliament, 
in an Embassy to the Ring, 21 Car. 1, 1645, 
ibid. 754.*— Particulars of the Charge against 
them, ibid. 755.— Mr. Whitelocke's Defence, 
ibid. 757. — ^The Charge is referred by the 
House of Commons to a Committee, ibid. 
759.-*They are examined separately by the 
House, ibid. 764. — The House acquit them, 
ibid. 766. — Proceedings against him, Sir 
Philip Stapleton, Sir William Lewis, Sir 
John Clotworthy, Sir William Waller, Sir 
John Maynard, Major-general Edward Mas- 
sey, John Glynn, Recorder of London, 
Walter Long, Edward Harley, and Anthony 
Nicholl (the Eleven Members), on a Charge 
preferred against them by the Army, 23 Car. 
1, 1647, ibidi 857. — Lord Clarendon's Ac- 
count of the Oricin of these Proceedings, 
ibid. ib. (note). — ^The Charge against them, 
ibid. 867. — ^Their Answer thereto, ibid. 882. 
— Votes of the House of Commons respect- 
ing them, ibid. 913. — These Votes are re- 
scinded, ibid. 920. — Articles of Impeach- 
ment against Sir John Maynard carried up 
in the House of Lords, ibid. 914. — He re- 
fuses to kneel at the Bar, upon which he is 
fined, ibid. 918.:— The Eleven Members 
petition for leave to withdraw beyond Sea, 
which is granted them, ibid. 910.-— Hollis 
sits as Judge on the Trial of the Regicides, 
5 vol. 986 (note). — His Address to Harrison, 
the Regicide, on his Trial, ibid. 1028. 

HOLLIS, Sir John.—Ptoceedings in the Star- 
Chamber against him, Sir John Wentworth, 
and Mr. Lumsden for traducing the Admi- 
nistration of Justice, 13 Jac. 1, 1615, 2 vol. 
1021.— Their Sentences, ibid. 1034. 

MOLLIS^ Thomas Brand.— His Trial with 
General Smith, upon Informations filed by 
the Attorney General by the Order of the 
House of Commons, for Bribery at the 
Hindon Election, 16 Geo. 3, 177^, 20 vol. 
1225. — Resolutions of the House of Com- 
mons, ibid. ib. — ^The Information against 
Ganml toidi, ibid« i88n<-CouQ»el for 



the Prosecution and for the Defendant, il 
1240<— Evidence for the Prosecution against 
him, ibid, ib.— The Jury find him Guilty, 
ibid. 1266.— Trial of Mr. HoUis, ibid. 1269. 
— Counsel for the Prosecution and for the 
Defendant, ibid, ib.— Evidence aaainst him, 
ibid, ib.— He is found Guiltv, ibid. l281. — 
They are brought up for Judgment, ibid. ib. 
—Their Sentence, ibid. 1283, 

HOLLOWAY, .—His Case upon an 

Indictment for Murder, and a Special Verdict 
found, 18 vol« 302 (note). 

HOLLOWAY, James. — Proceedings against 
him in the Court of King's Bench on an 
Outlawry for High Treason, 36 Car. 2, 1684, 
10 vol. 1. — He is brought to the Bar by 
Habeas Corpus, ibid. 2.— A Rule for Bxe- 
cution granted, ibid. 5. — He petitions Ihe 
Ring for Mercy, ibid. 6.— His Execution, 
ibid. 7. — ^The Paper delivered by him to the 
Sheriffs at the place of execution, ibid. 14.— 
His Confession, or Narrative, delivered by^ 
him to Mr. Secretary Jenkins, ibid. 18. — 
Bumet*s Account of him, ibid. 1 (note)* 

HOLLOWAY, Richard, Serjeant-at-Law.— 
He is one of the Counsel for the Prosecution 
on the Trial of CoUedge, 8 vol. 591. 



' ' Sir Richard, Judge of K. B. 85 

Car.2, 9 vol. 867, 10 vol. 45, 151, 1101 His 

Argument on delivering bis Opinion ifo the 
Great Case of Monopolies, 10 vol. 516.< — 
After the Revolution he is ordered to iq>pear 
in the House of Commons to Answer for iin« 
posing an exorbitant Fine in the Case of 
the Earl of Devonshire, 11 vol. 1368.— He 
was one of the Judges of the King's Bench 
at the Trial of the Seven Bishops, 12 vol. 
189. — Account of his Appointment and Re« 
moval, extracted from Mr. Serjeant Hey- 
wood's Historical Account of the Judges 
under the House of Stuart, ibid. 263 (note). 

HOLT, Daniel. — Proceedings against him for 
publishing two Seditious Libels, 33 & 34 
Geo. 3, 1793, 22 vol. 1189.— The Informa- 
tion in one of the Cases, ibid. 1 199. — ^He is 
found Guilty upon both Prosecutions, ibid. 
1191, 1203.— Proceedings in the Court of 
King's Bench upon an Application for a 
New Trial, ibid. 1203, 1206 (note).— Mr. 
Erskiue*s Argument in support of the Motion, 
ibid. 1209. — The Court refuse the Applica- 
tion, ibid. 1233.— Judgment of the Court 
upon him, ibid. 1235. 

HOLT, Sir John, Judge of C.P. 11 Rtc. 2* 
See BeOcnap^ Sir Robert. 

HOLT, John, Counsel, 7 vol. 931, 959, 1131, 
8 vol. 749, 9 vol. 128, 241, 324, 10 vol. 40. 
— His Defence of John Lane, upon an In« 
dictment for a Conspiracy to scandalize the 
Witnesses for the Popish Plot, 7 vol. 808, fcc. 
—He is appointed Counsel for several of the 
Five Popish Lords, ibid. 1248, 1260.— His 
ArguntDt in support of i^id Willian Avs^ 



TttE STATE TRIALi 



6i 



8eU'« Challenge of a Juror for not having a 
forty-shillingFreeboldi 9 vol, 58f. — His Ar- 
gument for the East India Company in the 
Great Case of Monopolies, 10 vol. 371. — His 
Argument for the Defendant in the Case of 
the £arl of Macclesfield against Starkey, 
ibid. 1851. 

■ ■ Sir John, King's Serjeant, 12 vol. 125. 

Chief Justice of K. B. 12 vol. 

946, 13 vol. 478, 1103, 1261, 14 vol. 533, 
990. — His Charge to the Jury on the Trial 
of Sir Richard Grahme rotherwise called 
Lord Preston), and others for High Treason, 
12 vol. 730. — ^His Charge on the Trial of 
Harriaoti, for the Murder of Dr. Clenche, 
ibid. 864» — ^His Charge on the Trial of 
Chartiock, King, and Keyes, for High Trea- 
son, ibid« f447.—He is examined by a Com- 
mittee of the House of Lords respecting his 
Judgment in the Court of King's Bench, in 
the Case of Charles Knowles, claiming to 
be Earl of Banbury, ibid. 1179 (note).— He 
is heard in the House of Lords when the 
Committee deliver their Report, ibid. 1182 
(note).-~-His Charge to the Jury on the Trial 
ef Sir John Friend, 13 vol. 55. — His Charge 
on the Trial of Sir William Parkyns, ibid. 
126. — His Charge on the Trial of Ambrose 
Rookwood, ibid. 213.— His Charge on the 
Trial of Charles Cranburne, ibid. 263. — His 
Ch'^rge on the Trial of Robert Lowick, ibid. 
303. — His Address to Alexander Knightley, 
on passing SentCiCe of Death upon him, 
ibid. 403. — His Charge to the Jury on the 
Trial of Haagen Swendsen for forcibly 
abducing Mrs. Pleasant Rawlins, 14 vol. 
392. — His Charge to the Jury on Tutchin's 
Trial for a Libel on the Government, ibid. 
1125. — His Argument in the Exchequer 
Chamber in the Banker's Case, ibid, 29. — 
He dissents from the opinion of the other 
Judges of the Court of King's Bench in the 
Great Case of Ashby and White, ibid. 779. 
—He died during the Trial of Dr. Sacheve- 
rell, and was succeeded by Serjeant Parker, 
15 vol. 14 (note). — Burnet's Character of 
him, ibid. ib. 

HONE, William.— His Trial for High Treason 
in being concerned in the Rye-House Plot, 
35 Car. 2, 1683, 9 vol. 571.— The Indict- 
ment, ibid. ib. — He pleads Not Guilty, ibid. 
572. — Evidence against him, ibid. 574. — 
He is found Guilty, ibid. 578. — His Sentence, 
ibid. 668.— His Execution, ibid. ib. 

HOOPER, John, Bishop of Worcester and 
Gloucester. — ^Bill of Complaint against Bon- 
ner, Bishop of London, presented to Edward 
the Sixth by him and Latimer, 1 vol. 653* 

HORNBY, Joseph. See Banker's Case. 

HOPE, Charles, Advocate.— His Speech in 
defence of Sir Archibald Gordon Kinloch, 
01^ bis Trial in Scotland for the Murder of 
bit Biodier^ %6 ?ol« n^i-^^<i wai after- 



wards Lord President of the Court of Se8« 
sion, ibid. ib. 

HORNE, John. See Tookcy John Uwne. 

HORSPALL, William.— Trial of Mellon and 
others for his Murder, 31 vol. 997. See 
Luddites. 

HOTHAM, Sir Beauiqont, Baron of the Ex- 
chequer, 30 Geo. 3, 22 vol. 30^.— -His Charge 
to the Jury on the Trial of James Aitken, 
otherwise called John the Painter, for setting 
Fire to a Rope*House in the Portsmouth 
Dock -Yard, 20 vol. 1348. — He was one of 
the Judges who presided at Hardy's Trial 
for High Treason, 24 vol. 221. 

HOUGHTON, John.— Proceedings against 
him, Augustin Webster, Robert Laurence, 
and Richard Reynolds, for denying the 
Ring's Supremacy, 27 Hen. 8, 1535, 1 vol. 
472. — ^They are condemned and executed, 
ibid. ib. 

HOUGHTON, Robert, Judge of R. B. 14 Jac. 
1, 8 vol. 952. 

HOWARD, Catharine, Queen Consort of 
Henry the Eighth. — Proceedings against her 
for Incontinency, 33 Hen. 8, 1542, 1 vol. 
445. — Particulars of her Misconduct, ibid . 
ib. — Bill of Attainder brought in against 
her, ibid. 449. — She confesses her Guilt, and 
is beheaded, ibid. 451-2. 

HOWARD of Charlton, Charles, Lord. See 
Northampton^ Spencer Earl qf» 

HOWARD, Lady Fra nces « See Essex, Frances 

Howard, Countess of, 

HOWARD of Escrick, William, Lord.—His 
Evidence on the Trial of Edward Pittharris, 
8 vol. 370. — His Information to the King 
respecting the Rye-House Plot, 9 vol. 430. 
— Burnet s Account of his Apprehension 
and Confession, ibid. 593. — His Evidence 
on the Trial of Lord William Russel, ibid. 
602. — His Evidence on the Trial of Algernon 
Sidney, ibid. 849. — His Evidence on the 
Trial of John Hampden, ibid. 1065. — His 
Evidence on the Trial of Lord Delamere, 
11 vol. 531. — He gives his Vote in the 
House of Lords for the Conviction of Lord 
Stafford, 7 vol. 1552. — Evidence respecting 
him given by Burnett and others on the 
Trial of Hampden, 9 vol. 1086. — Evidence 
tendered on that Trial of his holding irre- 
ligious Opinions, ibid. 1103. 

HOWLEY Henry.— His Trial, under a Spe- 
cial Commission, at Dublin for High Tlrea* 
son in being concerned in the Irish Insur- 
rection, 43 Geo. 3,1803,28 vol. 1183.— The 
Indictment, ibid. ib. — Evidence for the 'Pro- 
secution, ibid. 1191.— The Jury find him 
Guilty, ibid. 1213.— He is executed, ibid. 
1214. 

HUBERT, Nicholas (otherwise called Paris)* 
Se« Donc/ey^ Bmy, lMrd.^liis PepoMtion 



64 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



respecting the Murder of Henry, Lord 
Damley, Husband of Mary, Queen of Scots^ 
1 vol. 931. 

HUDSON, William, Counsel.— He opens the 
Information in the Star Chamber against 
Prynhe, for writing " Histrio-mastix," 3 vol. 
562. — ^The House of Commons resolve that 
he is guilty of a Breach of Privilege in sub- 
scribing the Information in th^ Star Cham- 
. ber against Sir John Elliott and others, for 
matters done by them in Parliament, ibid. 
311. — ^Lord Mansfield's Notice of his Treatise 
on the Star Chamber, 19 vol. 1002. 

HUDSON, William.— His Trial at the Old 
Bailey for Seditious Words, 34 Geo. 3, 
1793, 22 vol. 1019. — Circumstances from 
which this Prosecution arose, ibid. ib. — 
Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 1021. — 

. The Jury find him Guilty, ibid. 1032.— His 

. Sentence, ibid. ib. 

HUGGINS, John. See Bambridge, Ih)mas.^ 
Report of the Committee of the House of 
Commons appointed in 1729 to enquire into 
the state of Gaols in this Kingdom, 17 vol. 
297. — Resolutions of the House thereupon, 
ibid. 308. — ^The House resolve to address 
the King to direct the Attorney General to 
prosecute Huggins for Misconduct in his 
Office of Warden of the Fleet, ibid, ib.— His 
Trial at the Old Bailey for the Murder of 
Edward Arne by his ill-treatment of him, 
when a Prisoner in the Fleet, 3 Geo. 2, 
1729, ibid. 309. — He pleads Not Guilty, 
ibid. 310. — Speeches of the Counsel for the 
Prosecution, ibid. 311. — Evidence for the 
Prosecution, ibid. 314. — His Defence, ibid. 
330. — Mr. Justice Page*s Charge to the 
Jury, ibid. 354. — ^Tbe Jury find a Special 
Verdict, ibid. 368. — Judgment of the Court 
of King's Bench that the facts found by the 
Special Verdict amount to an Acquittal of 
Murder, ibid. 370. 

HUME, David. — Mr. Hargrave's Opinion of 
his History of England, 2 vol. 380. — Mr. 
Laing's Exposure of his wilful Mis-statement 
of facts respecting Charles the First's hearing 
the preparations for his Scafibld on the night 
before his Execution, 4 vol. 1136 (note). — 
Mr. Fox's Opinion of him as an Historian, 
ibid. ib. 

HUNGERFORD, John, Counsel, 16 vol. 18, 
698. — His Defence of trancia for High 
Treason in corresponding with the French 
Government, for the purpose of bringing in 
the Pretender, 15 vol. 965. — His Speech 
in Defence of Christopher Layer, on his 

. Trial for High Treason in levying war for 
the purpose of bringing in the Pretender, 
1 6 vol. 233.— His Defence of John Matthews, 
on his Trial for High Treason in printing a 

. Pamphlet asserting the Pretender's title, 
15 vol. 1359. 

HUNGERFORD, Lord.—He is attainted and 
exccut94 for hf^rbouhng a Traitor^ and en- 



couraging the use of Magic against the . 
King, and also for Sodomy, 32 Hen. 8, 1540, 1 
1 vol. 485. 

HUNT, John.— His Trial with Leigh Hunt, 
at Westminster, for a Seditious Libel in the 
Examiner, 51 Geo. 3, 1811, 31 vol. 367. — 
The Attorney General's Speech for the Pro- 
secution, ibid. 369. — Evidence for the Pro-' 
secution, ibid. 375. — Mr. Brougham's Sjlieech 
for the Defendants, ibid. 380. — Reply of 
the Attorney General, ibid. 401. — Lord 
Ellenborough's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 
408. — The Jury acquit the Defendants, ibid. 
414. 

HURLY, Patrick.- His Trial at the King's 
Bench Bar in Ireland upon two Indict- 
ments, one for Perjury, and the other for 
Conspiracy to cheat the County of Clare, 
13 Will. 3, 1701, 14 vol. 377.— He is charged 
with both Indictments at once, ibid. ib. — 
The Case for the Prosecution opened, ibid. 
378. — Evidence against him, ibid. 379.— 
Justice Coolers Charge to the Jury, ibid. 
435. — He is found Guilty on both Indict- 
ments, ibid. 445.— For the Peijury the 
Court sentence him to pay a Fine of 100/. 
ibid. 446. 

HUSSEY, Sir William, Chief Justice of K. B. 
1 Hen. 7. — He petitions the King not to 
require the extra-judicial Opinions of the 
Judges respecting Humphrey Stafford, as they 
expected the Case to come judicially before 
them in Court, 2 vol. 880. 

HUTCHINS, John. See Bayard, Colonel 
Nicholas, 

HUTCHINSON, Charles. See SadievereU, 
William. 

HUTTON, Sir Richard, Judge of C. P. 4 Car. 
1, 3 vol. 359. — His Argument for Mr. 
Hampden, in the Case of Ship-Money, ibid. 
1191. — He says, that his private Opinion 
was always against the legality of Ship- 
Money, and that he signed the Opinion of 
the Judges in favour of it only for con- 
formity, ibid. 1198. — Sir John Finch con- 
firms this Statement, 4 vol. 6. — Proceedings 
against Thomas Harrison, for insulting him 
on the Bench, 3 vol. 1369. 

HYDE, Edward. See Clarendon, Edward, 
Earl o/".— -His Speech to the House of Lords 
against the Juages, for their Conduct in 
the Case of Ship-money, 3 vol. 1282. — He 
assists in conducting the Impeachment of 
Lord Keeper Finch, 4 vol. 15. 

HYDE, Sir Nicholas, Chief Justice of K. B. 
4 Car. 1, 3 vol. 359, 374, 401, 419.— He 
succeeded Sir Randolf Crewe in the office 
of Chief Justice, 3 vol. 1 (note). — His Answer 
in the House of Lords, o(ft being questioned 
respecting his Judgment in the Court of 
King^s Bench, on the Return of the Habeas 
Corpus brought by Sir Thorns^ Darnell mi 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



«ff 



others, imprisoned for refusing to subscribe 
to the Commission of Loans, ibid. 163. 

HYDE, Sir Robert, Chief Justice of K. B. 15 
Car. 2, 6 vol. 515, — His Charge to the Jury 
on the Trial of ^fewster and others for pub* 
lishing the Speeches and Prayers of the 
Regicides, ibid. 547. — His cruel and illegal 
treatment of Benjamin Keach, on his Trial 
for a Libel, ibid. 702, 708. — He was the 
Judge who tried and passed Sentence upon 
the Perrys, for the supposed Murder of 
Mr. Harrison, 14 vof. 1319. 

IMPEY, Sir Elijah, Chief Justice of the Su- 
preme Court of Judicature in Bengal. — His 
Charge to the Jury on the Trial of Nundo- 
comar for Forgery,* 20 vol. 1063. — His Ar- 
gument in the Supreme Court of Judicature 
in Bengal, on refusing a Motion to quash an 
Indictment for Conspiracy against a Native 
Prince, on the ground of his being an Am- 
bassador, ibid. 1119. See Nundocomar. 

IN6S, James.— His Trial at the Old Bailey 
for High Treason, in being concerned in the 
Cato-Street Conspiracy, 1 Geo. 4, 1820, 33 
vol. 957.— The Indictment, ibid. 697. — 
Speech of the Solicitor General for the Pro- 
secution, ibid. 959. — Evidence for the Pro- 
secution, ibid. 972. — ^Mr. Curwood's Speech 
for the Prisoner, ibid. 1055. — Evidence for 
the Prisoner, ibid. 1074. — ^Mr. Adolphus's 
Speech on summing up the Evidence for 
the Prisoner, ibid. 1079.— The Prisoner's 
Defence of himself, ibid. 1108.— The At- 
torney General's Reply, ibid. 1111. — Chief 
Justice Dallas's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 
1135.— The Jury find him Guilty, ibid. 1176. 
—His Speech on being called upon for 
Judgment, ibid. 1451. — He is executed, 
ibid. 1566. 

IRELAND, WUliam.— His Trial with Thomas 
Pickering and John Grove for High Treason 
in being concerned in the Popish Plot, 30 
Car. 2, 1678, 7 vol. 79.— They are put on 
their Trial vrith Whitebread and Fen wick, 
and plead Not Guilty, ibid. 80. — Speeches 
of the King's Counsel, ibid. 84.-^Oates's 
Evidence against them, ibid. 91. — Other 
Evidence against them, ibid. 106. — The 
Court discharge the Jury of Whitebread and 
Fenwick, there being only one Witness 
against them, and proceed against the others, 
ibid. 120. — Evidence in their Defence, ibid. 
122. — Chief Justice Scroggs's Charge to 
the Jury, ibid. 130. — ^lliey are found Guilty, 
ibid. 136.— -Sentence is passed upon them, 
ibid. 138. — Execution of Ireland and Grove, 
ibid. 142, 574. — ^Pickering is respited, but 
is afterwards executed, ibid. 144. — Burnet's 
Account of this Trial, 6 vol. 1420. 

IVY, Lady Theodosia.— Trial of an Action of 
Ejectment brought against her for the re- 
covery of an Estate at Shadwell, 36 Car. 2, 
1684, 10 vol. 555. — Evidence for the Lessor 
of the Plaintiff, ibid. 556r-Speeche8 of the 
VOL. XXXIV, 



Defendant's Counsel, ibid. 561.*— Evidence 
for the Defendant, ibid. 566 .^-Evidence in 
Reply, ibid. 608. — Discovery of a Forgery of 
some of the Defendant's documentary Evi- 
dence, ibid. 616. — Chief Justice Jemries's 
Charge to the Jury, ibid. 631.— fThe Jury 
find a Verdict for the Plaintiff, ibid. 645. — 
i^e is afterwards prosecuted for forging some 
of the Deeds produced by her on this Trial, 
ibid. ib. — ^The Information against her, ibid, 
ib. — Chief Justice Jefferies's Remarks upon 
this Case on Gates's Trial for Perjury, ibid. 
' 1145. 

JACKSON, Samuel. See talker, Thomat, 

JACKSON, William.— His Trial with William 
Carter, Benjamin Tapner, Jo^n Cobby, John 
Hammond, Richard Mills, senior, ^and 
Richard Mills, juMor, for the Murder of 
William Gaily and Daniel Chater, under a 
Special Commission, at Chichester, 22 Geo. 
2, 1749, 18 vol. 1069. — Mr. Justice Foster's 
Charge to the Grand Jury, ibid. ib. — ^The 
Indictment for the Murder of Chater, ibid. 
1073.— The Indictment for the Murder of 
Gaily, ibid. .1075. — Opening Speeches of 
the Counsel for the Prosecution on the first 
Indictment, ibid. 1078. — Evidence fbr the 
Prosecution thereon, ibid. 1090. — Defences 
of the Prisoners, ibid. 1105. — ^Mr. Justice 
Foster's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 1106. — 
The Jury find them Guilty of the Murder of 
Chater, ibid. 1107. — ^Trial of Jackson and 
Carter, on the Second Indictment, for the 
Murder of Gaily, ibid. ib. — They are found 
Guilty, ibid. 1111. — Sentence of Death is 
passed upon them, ibid. ib. — ^Their conduct 
previous to their Execution, ibid. 1113. 

JACKSON, William, Rev.— His Trial in Ire- 
land for High Treason, in corresponding 
with France, and attempting to promote an 
Insurrection in Ireland, 34 & 35 Geo. 3, 
1794, 1795, 25 vol. 783.— The Indictment, 
ibid. 785. — Counsel for the Prosecution and 
for the Prisoner, ibid. 803.— The Attorney 
GeneraFs Speech for the Prosecution, ibid. 
805. — Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 
815. — Mr. Curran's Speech in his Defence, 
ibid. 849. — Mr. Ponsonby*s Speech on the 
same side, ibid. 859. — Mr. Prime Serieant's 
Reply, ibid. 863. — Lord Clonmeirs Charge 
to the Jury, ibid. 870. — The Jury find him 
Guilty, ibid. 882. — Objections made in 
arrest of Judgment, ibid. 883. — ^The Prisoner 
dies in Court before Judgment is passed 
upon him, ibid. 889. — Coroner's Inquisition 
held upon his. body, ibid. 890. 

JAMES, John.^His Trial at the Bar of the 
Court of King's Bench for High Treason, in 
being concerned in the Insurrection under 
the Fifth Monarchy Men, 13 Car. 2, 1661, 
6 vol. 67.— Account of his Apprehension, 
ibid, ib.— His Arraignment, ibid. 74.— Sub- 
stance of the Indictment, ibid. ib. — He 
pleads Not Guilty, ibid. 75. — ^ijeant 



m 



GE)}£&AL tNDEt tO 



nlyttg and Sk Utolhy ^haet open \he 
ClMtf^ ugaiiMt bMl, iM. TV.-^Evidehce 
«M«M him) ibid. 77.-^HIb Speech in his 
»e!hwee, $%ld. 80.— ^eply of tlie King's 
CiMtise), ihfd. 9ft.*--The iurj fiad hita 
O^iny, ibM. 84.— His Wife'i Ap>plttoftlioti to 
the Kifi^ OB his Mvalf, ibid. 85.— JtHlg- 
ftelil ftgaifiA htiki> ibid. 88.— His Behatiour 
<a«l4iKf his Ittprise ft tt c nt, ibM. 8d.-^liis 
OdBdmrt tte Ihe ScftMd, ibid. 98. 

JAMES THs FIRST> Ki^ of EngkwL Aee 
Goime, t/oAn, £ar/ of*.— Proceedings ift the 
Scotch Parliament against persons supposed 
to be concenied in the Gowrie Conspiracy, 1 
Tdi. 1359.»— Hfe Anstrer to the Atgnftients of 
AitihbiiAfoii Abbot against the Divorce of the 
fiarland Owntess of fissez> 8 vol. Y08»^^IIis 
Sietter to A.rchbishop Abbot reftpecdog ibe 
INiirtra^ iMd. 060. — Paper, iia his liaiid- 
wfMmgf diaciissHig wfaeoier the Faieto in 
FeNttham's Case advounted to Treason, ibid. 
€Tf« — HisSpeecb ie the House of JUMds ap- 
Utoving of tile Proceediiifpi against SirOiles 
Mbmfyenon, ibid. 1126;-->>Wits0aNi Account 
<)€ thedttonmstttncesiof ^l>eath, Nvith BlaHtop 
&eMKtt's Note theteon, ibid. 1320 (note). 

4AM£S TBE SECOND, Kiiigx)f EngloAd.— 
His iBstracttons to the Judges^ previously 
. to tfieir going on their Circnits^ lo support 
the Dedaivttioa for Liberty of Conscieace, 
ta vol* 160 (nete>.-^Baf net's Acooant t)f 
jhis inhuman Coudoet, ia personally aittend- 
ing, vrhen Dutoe of York, the application of 
the toitttre in Scotland, 6 vol. 1222 (uot^). 

JANS, >obti. See Afiglesea, JUdiard, Sari^. 

JAY and TOPtiAM.^'-^Voceddings ki Pailia- 
nent respecting that Case, 1 Will, and Maiy, 
1689, 12 vol. 821. 

Jlr¥KftflfiS, i5irC5eoTge, ^Recorder of London, 
7 vol. 8, ICr, 312, 60^, '769, 842, ^08, 959, 
l056, 1061, lice.— His Address to Richard 
Langbom, on passing Sentence of Death 
Upon him, on his Conviction for High Trea- 
son, tn being concerned in the Popish JPIot, 
7 Vd. 487. — His Speech for the Prosecution 
bn tbe Trial of Francis Smith, for publishing 
libellous 'Observations upon the condnct of 
some of the Trials relating to the Popish 
Plot, ibid. 933.— His Violent Condudt to the 
Grand jury for not finding a IPrue Bill 
against Smith, ibid. 042. — ^His Speech for 
the Prosecution on the Trial of Henry Carr, 
for publishing a similar Libel, ibid. 1114. — 
Particulars r^ated by Roger North respect- 
ing his resignation of th6 ReCordership, 8 
toi» 217 (note). 

King^s Serjeant, 8 



I ■ ll I H> *l 



«*.— 



rihMi 



v6l. 458, 363 (note), 9 vol. 128, 237, 301, 
!524, 573, 640, 653. — His Argument for the 
Cfown against the Plea to the Jurisdiction 
in Pitzharris^s Case, 8 vol. 322. — He was 
one df the Counsel for the Prosecution on 
tr^ thai or LoM V^ilK«& ftnsj^^l, 9 teA. 383. 



Kittg^aSeijeaiil>alid 
Justice of Chester, 35 Car. 2, 10 voL 1^34. 

Chief Justicfe of 

K. B. 35 Car. 2, 10 vol. 3, 31^, 358, 555.— 

Burnett Notices o|' hiifl, and bis Account 

of his Excesses on the Special Commisston 

in the West of England, siter Monmouth's 

Rebellion, 9 vol. 936 (note), 10 vol. 555 

(note).-^His Charge to the Jury on the trial 

of Algewion Sidney, ibid. 888. — His Chaige 

to the Jury on the Trial of John Hampden, 

ibid. 1104. — His intemperate Conduct to 

Counsel on the Trial of Braddon and Spefce, 

ibid. 1177.--Hi8 Charge to the Jui^ in that 

Case^ ibid. 1203^-His Charge on the Trial 

of Sir Samuel Barnardiston for Libel, ibid. 

135L— His Abuse of Sidney and Russel in 

that Charge. ilMd. 1353.— His Charge on 

the Trial of William Sacheverell and olhe^, 

for a Riot at Nottingham, 10 vol. 92. — ^His 

conduct on the Motion for Execution against 

Sir Thomas Armstrong, Ibid. 109. — Mr. 

Erskine^s Allnsion to his Coadwet in tiitt 

Case^ in his Defence of Hardy, 24 vcA, 944. 

^-Hte Chai«e to the Jury on the THnl^f Ae 

Actiou^fS(^«d«lnaMagnatniii> by&ellnke 

of Yoik«gainstOates,10vd.l 40;-*4ikChaige 

t>n the Trial of RosewoU, ibid. e37«»His Ar- 

goflsent OB giving Judgment for the EastMia 

Company in the Great Case tof Mondpolss, 

ibid. 619.— His Charge iko the Jniy on the 

Triai of an Acition of Ejoctment against die 

Lady rvy, ibid. 69l>^HiB Conduct to 0mm- 

tel on that Trial, ibid. 626.-->-H«b Chaige on 

Oates's first trial ibr Perjury, iiMd. 1210^ 

His Charge on Oates's teoond IHal ler Per- 

JUiy, ibid. 1298. 

' * George, Lord, Baron of Wem, 

Chief Justice of K. B.— His indecent Con- 
duct towards a Witness for the JProsecutioo, 
on the Trial of Lady Alice Lisle, 11 vol. 
338, 346.— His Charge to die Jury in that 
Case, iWd. 362.— His Abuse of Counsel on 
the Trial of Richard Baxter, ibid. 498.— 
His Cruelties in the West of England, after 
Monmouth^ Rebellion, ibid. 802 (note). 

Lord Chancellor, 1 



lAtM^B. 



wtamtiJkm 



Jac, 2, 11 vol. 1157> 1324.— He is appointed 
Lord High Steward on the Trial of l^rd 
DMamere, ibid. 512.— Mr, Fox's Aecoant 
of him, 10 vol. 555 (note)*- Foslter says, 
that tie wa9> perhaps, the vvorst Judge that 
ever disgraccNl Westminster-Hafi, 11 vol. 
371 (note).-^eijeant Ditvy says, that, irith 
all his faalts, he was always esteeiued a 
great Law3rer, Id vol. 611.— Remafrk npon 
his Titles> 11 voU 381 (note). 

JEFFERYS, Elizabeth. See .Skwi, io^ 

JEFFREY, Frnneis, Advocate^ 33 vol. 633.-- 
His Speech in Defence of Thomas Baiv^, 
on bis Triai in Scodand, for Seditioi> ^^ 
vol. 88i 



TH& STATE TEIAL& 



JEKYXXi Sir J<»8epb> Kiog'i Serjeant, 15 vol. 
904^-^Hi8 Speech ia the House of Com- 
mons in the Debate on the great Case of 
Ashby and White, 14 vol. 476.— His Speech 
on I>r. Saohevereirs Trial in Support of the 
Principles <rfthe Revolution, 15 vol. 95.— 
His Speech in support of the Impeachment 
of the Earl of Wintoun, ibid, 830»— He is 
sppcMoled one of the Managers for the 
Hotite of Comtnons on the Impeachment of 
the Bart of Oxford, ibid. 1164. 

JENKES, Franch.— Proceedings against him 
for a Speech made by him at Guildhall, 28 
Car. 2. 1676, 6 vol. 1189.— The Speech, 
ilTid. ib'.— He is arrested and eJcaniined by 
the Privy Council, ibid. 1192.— He is Com- 
mitted to the Gatehouse, Ibid. 1194.— He 
makes several ineffeetual applications to be 
admitted to Bail, ibid. 1196.— He is after- 
wards Bailed, ibid. 1308.— Probability that 
this Case contributed to the passing of the 
ifttlwiAa Corpus Aet, ibid, ib* (note). 

JfiNKIS, John. See Pilkington, nomas. 

JENKINS, David, a Welsh Judge.— Proceed- 
inp in Parliament against him fof passing 
Sentence of Death against persons convicted 
of Treason^ in refusing to assist the King, 
and for talung up arms himself against the 
Parliament, 23 Car. 1> 1647, 4 vol. 922.— 
He refuses to kneel or plead at the Bar of 
the House of Commons, ibid. 924. — He 
oheerves the same Conduct in the House of 
Lords, ibid. 925.— *His Vindication of him- 
sdfy ibid. 926.— His Reply to an anonymous 
Answer to his Vindication, ibid. 930.— Plea 
delivered by him to the Parliamentary Com- 
missioners for keeping the Great Seal, when 
sued in Chancery befbre them, ibid. 941. — 
His Defence of this Plea, ibid. 943.— His 
Remonstrance to the Loids and Commons, 
ibid. 946. — His Conduct when applied^ in 
Prison to acknowledge the power of the rar- 
liament, ibid. 950.— Catalogue of his Works, 
ibid. 921 (hote). 

JENKINS^ Sir Leoline, Secretary of State.— 
Burnet's Account of him» 8 vol. 228 (note). 

JENKINS, William. See^idrf, Ce§><m«M&im. 

ISNKER, Sir Thomas, Recorder ef Londoni 
^ Car. «,9 vol. 1838j 10 vol* 162, 469, 484. 
«^HIs Speech for the Prosecution on the 
MalOfWm. Sdcheverell and others, for a 
Riot at Nottingham, 10 vol. 36.— His Speech 
for the Prosecution on the Trial of Henry 
Lord Delamere for Treason, 11 vol. 528. 

mrr I wn ritr — k Baroii of the Exchequer, 4 
Jat. S^ 1ft vol« d7, ISO. 

jTudge of C. P. 4 Jac. 2> 



1ft vol. 124.— He was expressly excepted out 
of the Act of Indemnity which passed in 
16d0, \^ vol. 1^41. 



lyui 



ntri in>iiiifi •■■ Sefjeaot at La;#, 1 ABii6.— 
Bte Uff^Mlk iHk P^tM el Ri^ard Hetha^ 



way OB his Trial for a Cheat, in pretendiDg 
to be bewitched, 14 vol. 668. 

JERMYN, Philip, Judge Of tk« Upper fiinch 
during the Cooimonwe^thi 4 tol. 12l$9« 

JOHNSON JPrancis.— His Trial dt Worcester 
for High Treason, under the Stat, tf Bliz. 
c. 2, for coming M a Popish PH^st ihto 
England, and remaining there. 31 C&r. 2, 
1679, 7 vol. rid.- H6 reftised the Oaths of 
Allegiance and Supremacy before a Justice 
of Peace at the Sessions, ibid. r30.-»-Evidetce 
against him on his Trial, ibid. t34.— He is 
found Guilty, ibid. 744.— Sentence of Death 
is passed upon him, ibid. 745.— BiS Dying 
Speech, ibid. ^47, 7A0. 

JOHNSON, George. See AHerbufiff J^tou^i 
Bishop, 

JOHNSON, Robert^ Judge of C« P. in IllAtnd. 
•^Proceedings against him ifi the QeilfU of 
King's Bench and Bsdhequer ill Ireland, &nd 
in the Court of King^sJBench ia Stigbmd^ 
for Libels upon the Lord Lieutemltit and 
other high Officers in Xf6lttttd> 46 iM 46 
Geo. 3, 1805, 29 voU dl.<^Upott HMftiftt ar- 
rested in Ireland, hd iUes out ft Hftheas 
Corpus returnable beford the Chief Justice 
of the King's Bench theriS, ibid. 8f .— 
The Return to the Habeas Corpus, ibid. ib. 
>— His Account of the circumstances whiah 
preceded his Arrest, ibid. 90.-— The Argu- 
ment upon the Return is adjourned into the 
Court of King^s Bench, ibid. 102.— Counsel 
for the Prosecution and for the Defendant, 



Argument 

Discharge, ibid. 124. — Mr. Johnson^s Argu^ 
ment on Uie same side, ibid. 140.-^Argu- 
inent of the Attorney General in Replr, imd. 
167 Judgment of the Court tlial the De- 
fendant is not entitled to be dischaif ed^ i/Lu 
Justice Day dissenting, ibid. 180. — ^rroceed-- 
ings in the Court of Exchequer in Ireltod, 
upon a Habeas Corpus sued out of that 
Court by the Defendant, Ibid. . 215.— Mr. 
Burrowes's Argument for the D«fetidliht*8 
Distiharge,ibid . ib^-^Mr. Ciimy/s A»ttffi«&t 
on the same side, ibid. 226. — Mr. Jdomlon's 
Argument on the same side, ibid. ff58.»-^Mr« 
Prime Seijeant's Argument against the De- 
fendant's Discharge, ibid* 288*— Jtfdgltteilt 
of the Court of Exchequer Against the 
Defendant's Discharge, Mr< Baron Smith 
dissentincN ibid. 293.— Proceedings in the 
Court of King^s Bench in England, upon the 
Defendant's Plea to the Jurisdictioh of the 
Court, ibid. 359.— the Indictment* ibid* ib* 
«— His Plea to the Jurisdiction, ibid. 385. — 
General Demurrer thereto, ibid» 386«— ^r. 
Abbott's Argument in support of the De* 
murrer, ibid. 388.-:Mr. Richardijon's Argu* 
ment in support of the Ple% ibid. 394.— 
Judgment of the Court against the Plea, 
ibid. 4lO.-^His trial, at the Bar of th# Court 
F 2 



u 



GJENERAL INDEX TO 



of King's Bench at Westminster, ibid. 413. 
—Introductory Note to the Trial, containing 
the Proceedings in Parliament subsequently 
to the Decision of the Irish Courts, ibid. ib. 
— CSounsel for the Prosecution and for the 
Defendant, ibid. 423. — Speech of the Attor- 

. ney General for the Prosecution, ibid. ib. — 
Bridence for the Prosecution, ibid. 436. — 
Mr. Adam's Speech for the Defendant, ibid. 

. ■ 458. — Evidence for the Defendant, ibid. 479. 

. —Reply of the Attorney General, ibid. 492. 
«-Lord Ellenborough's Charge to the Jury, 
ibid. 498.— The Jury find him Guilty, ibid. 
502. — ^A Nolle Prosequiis afterwards entered 
on the Record, ibid. ib. 

JOHNSON, Samuel.— His Trial at the Bar of 
thetlburt of King's Bench for publishing 
two seditious Libels, 2 Jac. 2, 1686, 11 vol. 
Id39.-^ubstance of the Information, ibid. 
1340.^— Evidence against him, ibid. 1346. — 

■ The Jury find him Guilty, ibid. 1350.— The 
Sentence, ibid. ib. — ^The Judgment reversed 
in Parliament after the Revolution, ibid. 
1351. — His '^Reasons for the Establishment 
of a Standing Army, and for dissolving tlie 
Militia," ibid. 1341 (note).— Another Work 

. of his, extracted from the Second Volume of 
State Tracts, and published in 1692, ibid. 
1342 (note). 

JOHNSTON, William.— Proceedings against 
him at Edinburgh for Contempt of Court, in 
publishing a scandalous Account of the Trial 
of Anderson and others before the Court of 
Justiciary, 33 Geo. 3, 1793, 23 vol.43.--The 
Court order him to appear and answer for 
his conduct, ibid. 45. — He is sentenced to 
three Months Imprisonment, and to find 
Sureties for three years, ibid. 59. — Proceed- 
ings against him in 1794, upon the forfeiture 
of his Sureties for good Behaviour, by a 
seditious Correspondence with Wm. Skirving, 
ibid. 60.— Petitions against him, ibid. ib. — 
The Correspondence with Skirving, ibid. 65 
(note). — ^Answers of himself and his Sureties 
to the Petition, ibid. 69. — ^No further Pro- 
cedure took place, ibid. 80. 

JOHNy the Painter. See AUken, James, 

JONES, David. See Grey de Werk^ Ford, 
Lord. 

JONES, Edward. See Abington, Edward. 

JONES, John, 5 vol. 1004, 1077, 1247. See 
Begiades. 

JONES, Sir Thomas, Judge of K. B. 29 Car. 2, 
7 vol. 59, 174, 261, 706, 780, 838, 935, 1047, 
1073, 1527, 8 vol. 243, 465, 564, 9 vol. 127, 
329. — His Judgment in the Court of King's 
Bench against the Discharge of the Earl of 
Shaftsbury, upon a Return to a Habeas 
Corpus brought by him upon his Commit- 
ment by the House of Lords, 6 vol. 1296. — 
His Charge to the Jury on the Trial of Tas- 
boTough and Price, for Subornation of Per- 
jury, 7 vol. 922. — ^He delivers the Judgment 
gf the Court in the Case of the Quo War- 



ranto against the Corporation of London, < 
vol. 1265, 1267 (note).— He delivers hii 
Opinion on the Trial of Lord'WilliamRassel 
that want of Freehold is no Cause of Chal 
lenge to a juror, 9 vol. 592. — His Charge u 
the Jury on the Trial of SirThos.Gascoigne 
for High Treason, in being concerned in th< 
Popish Plot, 7 vol. 1036. — His Defence ii 
the House of Commons of the Judgment o: 
the Court of King's Bench in the C&se o 
Jay and Topham, 12 vol. 823.— The Housji 
declare him to be guilty of a Breach of Pri 
vilege, by concurring in that Judgment, ibid 
834, — ^The House of Commons resolve U 
impeach him for Misconduct as a Judge, ii 
imposing exorbitant Fines and refusing 
Bail, 8 vol. 195. 

. Chief Justice of C. P 

10 vol. 1082, 1239. — He presided at th« 
Trials of Fernley, Ring, Gaunt, and Cornish 
for High Treason, 11 vol. 389. — Hogei 
North's Character of him, 8 vol. 163 (note). 
— Koger Coke's Account of. his . removai 
from Office, ibid. 195 (note). 

JONES, Valentine.— His Trial at Westminster, 
for Frauds practised by him in his Office oi 
Commissary General to the Forces in the 
West Indies, 49 Geo. 3, 1809, 31 vol. 251* 
— ^Abstract of the Indictment, ibid, ib^ — The 
Attorney General's Speech for the Prosecu- 
tion, ibid. 254? — Eviaence for the Prosecu- 
tion, ibid. 268. — ^Mr. Dallas's Speech in his 
Defence, ibid. 293. — Evidence for the De- 
fendant, ibid. 308. — Reply of the Attorney 
General, ibid. 311.— Lord EUenborough's 
Charge to the Jury, ibid. 321. — ^The Jury 
find him Guilty, ibid. 336.— Proceedings in 
the Court of Kind's Bench on his being 
brought up for Judgment, 33 vol. 1567. — 
Mr. Dallas's Speech in mitigation of Punish- 
ment, ibid. 1575. — ^The ['Attorney General's 
Speech in Aggravation, ibid. 1578. — The 
Judgment of the Court, ibid. 1583. 

JONES, Sir William, Judge of K. B. 3 Car. 1, 
3 vol. 359. — His Answer in the House of 
Lords, for his Judgment as one of the Court 
of King's Bench on the Habeas Corpus 
brought by Sir Thomas Darnell and others, 
imprisoned for refusing to subscribe to the 
Loan, 3 vol. 162. — He signs the Opinion in 
favour of Ship-Money v?ith the other Judges, 
ibid. 844. — His qualified Opinion in favour 
of Ship-Money in the Case of Hampden, 
with his Argument in Support thereof^ ibidl 
1181. 

JONES, Sir William, Attorney General, 3d 
Car. 2, 7 vol. 234, 261, 312.— His Speech 
on opening the Case against Philip, Earl of 
Pembroke, on his Triid in the House of 
Lords for the Murder of Mr. Cony, 6 voL 
1321. — His Speech for the Prosecution ob 
the Trial of Stayley for Treason, ibid. 1503- 
— Being called by Writ as Assistant to the 
House, he sat within the Bar on that occa- 
sioui ibid. ib.^-His Speech for the Pro^ectN 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



OB 



tioo, on the Trial of Edward Coleman for 
Treason, in being concerned in the Popish 
Plot, 7 fol. 9. — His Speech for the Prosecu- 
lioo on the Trial of Lord Comwallis for 
Murder, ibid. 149. — His Speech for the Pro- 
KCQtion, on the Trial of the supposed Mur- 
derers of Sir Edmondbury Godfrey, ibid. 
163.— Characters of him by Burnet, Roger 
North, and Sir William Temple, 8 irol. 174 
(note). 

JONES, Sir William.— His Dialogue between 
I Gentleman and a Farmer, on the Principles 
ofGoremment, 21 vol. 894. 

JUNIUS.— Trial of John Almon for publishing 
Jnnins's Letter to the King, 20 vol. 803. — 
The Letter aa set out in the Indictment, ibid. 

805. 

liACH, Benjamin. — ^His Trial at the Assizes 
for the County of Bucks, for a Libel, 17 Car. 
2, 1665, 6 vol. 701.— Chief Justice Hyde's 
nfeeling Conduct towards him, ibid. 702, 
f08.— Tlielndictmentj ibid. 703. — Hepleads 
Not Guilty, ibid. 705. — Evidence against 
lum, ibid. ib. — He is found Guilty, ibid. 708. 
Sentence passed uponhim^ ibid. 710. 

JIEARNEY, Edward.— His Trial under a 
! Special Commission of Oyer and Terminer 
I at Dublin, for High Treason in being conn 
I eemed in the Irish Insurrection, 43 Geo. 3, 
I 1803, 28 vol. 683.— Mr. Justice Downes's 
i Charge to the Grand Jury, ibid. 684.— The 
I lodicunent, ibid. 692.— Speech of the At- 
torney General for the Prosecution, Ibid. 
695.— Eridence for the Prosecution, ibid. 
r07.— Mr. Ball's Speech for the Prisoner, 
ibid, 735. — Evidence for the prisoner, ibid. 
742.— Lord Norbury's Charge to the Jury, 
ibid. 746.-The Jury find him Guilty, ibid. 
751.— He is executed^ ibid. 752. 

KEATING, John, Chief JusUce of C. P. in 
Ireland, 1 Will, and Mary .—His Charge to 
the Grand Jury previously to the Trial of 
KTeral Protestants found in arms in Ireland, 
12tol. 616.— Lord Clarendon's Account of 
K ibid. ib. (note). 

XEBLE, Richard. — ^He is one of the Commis- 
Moncrs for the Trial of John Lilburne for 
High Treason, l Car. 2, 1649, 4 vol. 1269. 
-His Charge to the Jury on the Trial, ibid. 
1401.— He is President of the High Court 
01 Justice, on the Trials of Christopher Love 
vA John Gibbons, 5 vol. 49, 268. 

^^^^G, Josiali. — His Examinations re- 
jecting the Rye-House Plot, 9 vol. 365.— 
«« Eridence against Thomas Walcot, ibid. 
^3.— His Evidence against William Hone, 
*id. 574.— His Evidence against Algernon 
Sidney, ibid. 848. 

^AN, Thomas.— His Trial at DubUn 
ywer a Special Commission of Oyer and 
Aenniner, for Higb Trea.Hon, in being con- 
doned in the Irish Insurrection, 43 Geo. 3, 



1803, 28 vol. 1239.— The Indictmeiity ibid, 
ib. — Speech of the Attorney General for the 
Prosecution, ibid. 1243.— 'Evidence for the 
Prosecution,ibid. 1246.— Mr.Busbe'sSoeech 
for the Prisoner, ibid. 1254. — ^LordNornury's 
Charge to the Jur^, ibid. 12Q5.— The Jur/ 
find him Guilty, ibid. 1268. — ^Lord Norbury's 
Address on passing Sentence upon himy 
ibid. 1269. — He is exeouted, ibid. 1272. 

KEIGLE, Henry. See Green, Captain Thonm, 

KEITH, Alexander.— His Trial at Edinburgh 
ibr Sedition, Mutiny, and Tumult in Burgh. 
2 Jac.2, 1686, 11 vol. 1017.— He is found 
Guilty, and sentenced to Death, ibid. 1024. 

KELLY, George. See AUerbury, Frmea, 
Bishop, 

KELYNG, John, King's Seijeant, 5 vol. 1177» 
6 vol. 76, 229. — He was ordered to attend 
as Counsel for the King at the Consultation 
of the Judges previously to the Trial of the 
Regicides, 5 vol. 971. — His insulting Con« 
duct to Sir Henry Vane on his Trial, 6 vol. 
171. 

Sir John, Judge of K. D. 15 Car. 2, 



6 vol. 532. 



, Chief Justice of K. B. 18 
Car. 2, 6 vol. 769, 879. — Mr. Luders says 
that he had the character of being a violent 
Cavalier, 6 vol. 910 (note).— He was accused ^ 
by the House of Commons of illegally fining 
Juries, ibid, ib.— Account of the I^roceed- 
jngs against him in the House of Commons^ 
ibid. 992* — His Report of the Opinion of 
the Judges in Messenger's Case, ibid. 892. 
— His Report of the Resolutions of the 
Judges in Ix)rd Morley's Case, ibid. 769. 

KENDALL, Thomas.— Proceedings in the 
King's Bench respecting him and Riefaard 
Roe, on a Habeas Corpus upon a Commit* 
ment for High Treason, by the Secretary of 
State, 7 Wm. 3, 1695, 12 vol. 1359.— The 
Return to the Habeas Corpus, ibid.. ib. — Sir 
Bartholomew Shower's Argument against the 
legality of the Commitment, ibid, ib.— 
Answer of the Attorney and Solicitor Ge* 
neral, ibid.l 366. — Sir Bartholomew Shower's 
further Argument against the Commitment, 
ibid. 1368.— The Court bail the Prisoners, 
ibid. 1376. 

KENMURE, William, Viscount, 15 vol. 761. 
See Denventwater, JameSf EarV o/*.— Letter 
written by him on the day before his Exe-i 
cution, ibid. 803.— His Execution, ibid. 806. 

KENN, Dr. Thos. Bishop of Bath and Wells. 
See Seven Bit^.— Granger's Account of 
him, 12 vol. 186. 

KENNEDY, Thos.— His Trial in Ireland, for 
High Treason, in being concerned in the 
Rebellion of the Defenders, 36 Geo. 3, 1796, 
26 vol. 353.— The Indictment, ibid. 355. — 
The Attorney General's Sneech for the Pro-^ 
secutioD, ibid. 362.— Evioence for the Pio- 



1/0 



GENEttAL INDEX TO 



SMUtloDy lUd. d65v^Mr. McNally's Spetch 
for the Deftnet, ibid. 370.-^Mr. J^ysaght's 
Sbeech on lommiDg up the Evidence for the 
Befonee^ ibid. 3r8.^Mr. Prime Serjeant's 
Reply, ibid. 381.— Xord ClonmelVs Charge 
to the Jary^ ibid. 383.-*^The Jury find him 
Guilty bnt recommeDd him to mercy» on 
aeconnt of his youth^ ibid. 388. — Lord Clon- 
mell'a Address on passing Sentence upon 
him itQd Hart, ibid. 420. — ^Lord Clonmeil's 
Address to the Grand Jury on the close of 
this and the other Trials of the Defenders^ 
ibid. 4t5, 

EBIinrON, Uoyd, Counsel.^-His Speech in 
Defence of Lord George Gordon on his Trial 
ibr High Treason, in having promoted the 
No Popery Riots in 1780, 21 vol. 546. 

■■ . ■ '■ Chief Justice of the Court 

of Great Session for the County of Denbigh. 
He delivers the Judgment of the Court in 
favour of the postponement of the Trial of 
the Dean of SW Asaph for a seditious Libel, 
21 vol. 868. 

^m Chief Justice of K. B. 



>f»a 




22 vol. 309, 358. — ^His Charge to the Jury 
on the Trial of John Stockdale for a Libel 
on the House of Commons, 29 vol. 291. — 
His Charge on the Trial of John Frost for 
Seditious Words, ibid. &16.w.His Charge on 
the Trial of Lambert and Perry for publish- 
ing a Seditious Libel in the Morning Chro- 
nlele, ibid. 10ia.<--His Charge on the Trial 
of Stone for High Treason, 25 vol.1493. — 
His Charge on the Trial of John Reeves for 
ft Libel on the English Constitution, 26 vol. 
590.>-*His Charge on the Trial of Thomas 
Williams for publishing a blasphemous Libel, 
ibid. 703. 

KBRNE. Chartes.-^His Trial at Hereford for 
High Treason under the Stat. 27 £lia. o. 2. 
for eoming as a Seminary Priest into £ng- 
land, and remaining there, 31 Car. 2, 1679, 
7 vol.- 707.r-^The Indictment, ibid, ib, — 
lEvidenee against him, ibid. ib^Evidence 
in his Defence, ibid. 712.-^Chief Justice 
Scroggs's Charge to the Jury, ibid.714.-«The 
Jury acquit him, ibid. 716. 

KETELBEY, Abel, Counsel, 16 vol. 114, 17 
vol. 435. — His Speech in Defence of John 
Matthews on his Trial for High Treason, in 
publishing a Pamphlet asserting the Pre- 
tender's Title, 15 vol. 1364.«-*His Speech in 
Defence of Christopher Layer on his Trial 
T High Treason, in levying war to bring in 
Pretender, 16 voU 237, 

KEY, Roberta cSee IFilkwgttm, Tkonm. 

KEYES, Robert. See Winter, Robert. 

KilYESj TliomajJ, See CAamocft; Bo^r*, 

KTOD, CaptaiA WilliauJ. His Trial in the 
Adoiiralty Court for Murder upon the High 
Sea^, 13 Win, 3, 1701. 14 vol. 123.-~He 
hesitates to plead, ibid. 127.~He pleads 



Not Guilty, ibid. 131.— The Indiotnent, 
ibid. 130. — Evidence against him, ilMd. 134. 
—His Defence, ibid. 188. — Evidence foi 
him, ibid. ib. — Chief Baron Ward charges 
the Jury, ibid. 143.— The Jury find him 
Guilty, ibid. 146.— His Trial with Nicholas 
Churchill, James Howe, Robert Lamley, 
William Jenkins, Gabriel Loffe, Hugh Par- 
rott, Richard Barlicorn, Abel Owens, and 
Darby Mullins, for Robbery and Piracy on 
a Ship called the Quedagh Merchant, at thi 
same Admiralty Sessions, ibid. 147. — The 
Indictment, ibid. ib.-<-Several of tbePrisoners 
state that they surrendered upon the King*s 
Proclamation, and are therefore entitled to i 
Pardon, ibid. 148. — ^The Proclamation, ibid. 
149. — ^The Court decide that th^ are not 
within the words of the Proclamation, ibid. 
151. — Opening of the Case for the Prosecu- 
tion, ibid. ib. — Evidenee for the Prosecution] 
ibid. 155.*-'Kidd's Defence, ibid. ie9.-*H6 
gives in evidence Commissions of Reprisals 
and for cruising against the French, and as« 
serts that the Quedagh Merchant had a 
French Pass on board, ibid. ib.-^DefeBces 
of the other Prisoners, ibid. 173.«-^Chief 
Baron Ward's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 180. 
-^The Jury find them all Guilty excepting 
Lamley, Jenkins, and Barlicorn, ibid. 186. 
—Four other Indictments for Piracy against 
them, ibid. 187. — ^ITieir Trials on two of the 
other Indictments, ibid, ib, — 'They are found 
Guilty, with the exception of Lamley, Jenk- 
ins, and Barlicorn, on both Indictments, ibid. 
%X7* — ^Their Trial on the two remaining In- 
dictments, ibid, ib, — ^Three of them, wlio 
came in on the Proclamation, ples^d Guilty, 
ibid. 218.— The others, excepting Lamley, 
Jenkins, and Bariicom, are found Guilty, 
ibid. 231, — Sentence of Death Is passed 
upon all who were convicted, ibid. 233«— 
Kidd is executed, ibid. 234.— Proceed- 
ings in the House of Commons f^om which 
these Trials arose, ibid. 123 (note)t 

SILLEN, John.— His Trial with John Mac 
Cann, otherwise called John Mac Kenna, 
under a Special Commission at Dublin, for 
High Treason in being concerned in tha 
Irish Insurrection, 43 Geo. 3, 1803, 28 vol, 
995.'^Mr. Prime Serjeant's Speech for the 
Prosecution, ibid. 996.— Evidence for the 
Prosecution, ibid, 998.— vMr, Curran's 
Speech in their Defence, ibid. lQ06.-^Eri- 
dfince for the Prisoners, ibid, tP13,— Mr. 
Baron Daly's Charge to the Jpry, ibid* 10?8. 
—The Jury find them Guilty, ibid, 1040.- 
They are executed, ibid, 1042. 

lilLMABNQCK, William, i;arlof.-Procfl€d- 
ingf iu the House of Peers on Indictroents 
against him, George Eari of Cromertif, and 
Arthur Lord Balmerino, for IIighTrea»eB,in 
being concerned in the Rebellion of 1745, 20 
Geo. 2, 1 746, 1 6 vol. 441 .—Resolutions of the 
House respecting the method of their Trial, 
ibid. 442.— Commission to Lord Chancellor 
Hardwieke, as Lord High Stewafd, ibli 



THE STATE T«IAta, 



449^-i^flM ladietnemts, ibid. 454.— The 
Lord Hiffh Steward's Address to (he Pri- 
sooen wnea brought to the Bar> ibid. 459. 
v^liBFd Kikmavnock and Lord Cromertie 
plead 'Ottilly, ibid. 460, 461.^Lord Bal- 
merino pleads Not Guilty, ibid. 462. — 
Speeches of the Kiog's Counsel on opemng 
th&r Case ^aiost Lcud Balmecino, ibid. 463. 
— Evidence for the Prosecution, ibi^. 470. — 
Uia Defenoe, ibid. 48X* — lie is unanin^ovisly 
found Guilty, ibid. 487. — Lord Kilmarnock^ 
Address q^ being eallfd upon for Ji^4giQeBtf 
ibid, 489. — ^Lord Croptertie's Speech on the 
same Occasion, ihid> 49^. — Loj^ Bal^nerino 
in^kes an Objection in arrest of Judgment, 
ibid. 494i^^He withdraws his Objection,. 
ibid. 497* — ^Sipeech of the lord High Stew- 
ard WH pmi^g Judgmtii^t, ibid, ib.— AccQunt 
of the conduct of Lord Kilmarnock after his 
Sentence, {^nd ^t his Execution, by James 
Foster, ibid. 503.— His interview with Lord 
Balmerino on his way to the place of Execu- 
^op, ibid, §11. — His Peliuon to t/ie Kipg, 
ibid. 5Xi% — His I-etter to his Son, ibid. 516. 
— Paper delivered by him to ]VIr. Foster at 
the place of Execution, ibid. 517. — Account 
qf his aud Lord Balmerino's Conduct by apo- 
ther hand, ibid. 5l8.-^Case of Lord Cro- 
mertie, sis priQted and said to be presented 
to ^he KiQg, ibid. 525. — He is pardoned, 
ibid, 5^8. — ^The Paper delivered by Lord 
Balmerino to the Sheriffs at the pl^^ce of 
Execution, ibid. 523, 856. 

KILWARDEN, Arthur, Viscount, Chief Jus- 
tice of K. B. in Ireland, 27 vol. 1343.-^His 
Charge to the Jury in the Case of Hevey 
ag^ipst Sirr, 28 vol. 47. — Accourit of his 
Assassination in the Streets of Dublin, ibjd. 
734, 700 (npte). See Wolfp, Arthur. 

KIMBOLTON, Edward, Lord. See Mm- 
ekeMter^ Edward, Earl of. — Proceedings in 
Parliament upon a Charge of High Treason, 
made by Charles the First against him, 
Denzil Hollia, Sir Arthur Haslerig, John 
Pym, John Hampden, and William Strode, 
If.Car. 1, 1641, 4 vol. 88.— The Attorney 
General, by the King's Command, exhibits 
Articles of High Treason against them in the 
House of Lord^, ibid. ib. — ^The King sends a 
Message to the House of Commons, requir- 
ing the Fiye Members to be given up to him, 
ibid. 36. — ^The Answer of the Cooimous, 
ibid* 37.-^The King goes to the House of 
Commons apd demands the Five Members, 
ibid. 87,— The Speaker's Answer to jhe King, 
ibid, 90. — Lord Clarendon's Remarks on the 
inmrudence of this measurci ibid. 87 (note). 
— ^Tha Cop^mons declare the King's coming 
to theiir |Iouse to be a breach of their Pnvi- 
|e|;es, ibid. 02,— Speeches of IVfr- Pytn> Sir 
A. ll^Jerigf ^nd Mr. Strode, in vindication 
of Ihienos^lves frgm the ^^rticli^s of Treason, 
ibid. 93. — ^The King abandons thjB Proceed- 
ings against them, ibid. 101. — Tlie Attorney 
G^eral disclaims all knowledge of the truth 
of the Artifites charged against them, ibid. 



II 



10$.-The PeclmtiQl M ^ n9m of 
Cos^moBS respecting tl^e brfadt^ of their 
Privileges by these Prooe^iiu^ ibid. )Q4. 
^The Cownons pe^itio^ w King to 
proceed agaiqst the Lgjrd Kimbplton and. ^he 
Five Men^beriTs, ibid. 107.— Tl^ King a^biiin- 
dons their farther Pros^ution, ifa^d. 108*. — 
An Act of Parliament is passed to yinc^ps^te 
them, ibid. 109.— Lior4 CWeudon's Aoooqnt 
of theiv triumphal Return frpos London to 
Westminster, ibid, ib.— rHis ^ip^ks on^he 
efieots of these Proceedings, ibid. 83 (np^). 
— After he beifiame Earl of M^^chester, l^ 
Kin\bolton s^t ^ J^dge vpoi^ the Trial oflne 
9egioi«fes» ^ vol. 9^ (note). 

KINCH, Tbomas. See SMekhy WiUiani, 

KllNG, peten Counsel. — {lis Speech in |he 
Ifouse of Commons in \he Debate oi| |he 

Greiit Cas^ of Ashby and Whitej 14 vol. 
7?9. 

KING, Sir Peter.-r}lis Speech iv^ Suppprt of 
the Second Article of Impeachment agaifist 
Dr. Sacheverell, 1$ vo}. 134.— |lis Speech 
in Reply, to 3s(chevereU's Defence ta^^at 
A^de, ibid. 419. 



• Chief Jiistice of C. P. 5 

Geo. 1. — Hi^ Charge to the Jury on |he 
Trial of John Matthews for High Treason^in 
printing a Pamphlet asserting ^he Pretepder's 
title, 15 vol. 1386. — His Speech on deliver- 
ing his Opinion in favour of the King's Pre- 
rogative concerning the Marriage and pd|i-. 
cation of the Royal Family, ibid. t222.— His 
Charge to the Jury on the Trial of Wood- 
burae and Coke on $^ Prosepution under the 
Coventry Act, for slitting the nose of Mr. 
Crispe, 16 vol. 74. — He was Speaker pf the 
House of Lords on the Trial of th^ I|n« 
peacbment of Loid Ch^noellor Mai^elesfield, 
ibid. 768. 

KINGSTON, Elizabeth, Duphess of.— Her 
Trial in the House of fiprds for Bigan^y, 16 
Geo. 3, 1776, 20 v<>l« 855.— The Court of 
King's Bench, on her being brought up by 
Habeas Corpus, admit her to Bailwit}! the 
consent of the Prosecutor, ibid. ib. (no^e). 
Commission to Lord Chancellor Bathurst to 
be Lord High Steward|ibid. 358* — Certiorari 
and Return thereto containing the Indict* 
ment, ibid. 368.— The Lord High Steward's 
Address to her on her being brought to the 
Bar, ibid. 370.— She pleads If pt Guilty, ibjd. 
372.---She offers to produce a Sentence of 
Jactitation in the Ecclesiastical Court agaipsi 
her first Marriage, ibid. ib.-r-The Attorney 
General objects to the admissibility of it in 
Evidence, ibid. ib*-rrHer Coifnse) ^re he^rd 
in support of the production of the Spnt#qee, 
ibid. 8T4.-r-.The Attorney G9neral i^onsents 
that the Proceedings in the Eeclesiastipal 
Court should be read, ibid. 375. — TN Pro- 
ceedings are read, ibid. 377.— Mr.. Wallace's 
Argument for the Duchess that the Sep|#»€e 



7i 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



of the EcclesiasticftlGonrt, aDculling the first 
Marriage, is a conclusive Answer to the 
charge of Bigamy, ibid. 391.— Mr. Mans- 
field's Argument on the same side, ibid. 403. 
—Dr. Calvert's Argument on the same 
side, ibid. 417. — ^Dr. Wynne's Argument on 
the same side, ibid. 429.--Tbe Argument of 
the Attorney General for the Prosecution, 
ibid. 446. — Argument of the Solicitor 
General on the same side, ibid. 464.— Mr. 
Bunning's Argument on the same side, ibid. 
481.— Dr. Harris's Argument on the same 
side, ibid. 494 —Mr. Wallace's Reply, ibid. 
508. — Dr; Calvert is heard in reply, ibid. 
530. — ^'I'he House direct the Attorney General 
to proceed with his Charge, ibid. 539. — 
His Speech on opening the Case, ibid. ib. — 
Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 559. — 
The Duchess's Defence, ibid. 602.— Evi- 
dence for the Defence, ibid. 613.— The 
Solicitor General declines to reply, ibid. 
622.— The Lords find her Guilty^ ibid. 623 
-—She prays the benefit of Peerage according 
to the Statutes, ibid. 625.--The Attorney 
General's Argument against her claim to the 
benefit of Peerage, ibid ib. — Mr. Wallace's 
Argument in Support of it, ibid. 633. — Mr. 
Mansfield's Argument on the same side, 
ibid; 634.-^The Attorney General's Reply, 
ibid. 637.— The Question is referred t5 the 
Judges, who give their Opinion that a 
Peeress is entitled to the benefit of the 
Statures, ibid. 642 (note). — She is discharged, 
ibid. 644.. 

KINLOCH, Charles and Alexander.— Foster's 
Report of the Proceedings relative to their 
Plea to an Indictment for High Treason, in 
being concerned in the Rebellion of 1745, 
that tbey were born and apprehended in 
Scotland and ought to be tried there, 20 Geo. 

• 2, 1746, 18 vol. a95.— They plead Not 
Guilty in the first instance, ibid. 396. — Af- 
terwards the Jury are discharged by consent, 
and the Prisoners are permitted to withdraw 
their Plea of Not Guilty, and to plead spe- 
cially to the Jurisdiction of the Court, ibid. 
397. — ^Their Plea to the Jurisdiction, ibid. 
398. — ^The Attorney General demurs to it, 
ibid. 400. — The Court give Judgmentagainst 
the Plea, ibid. 401. — On pleading a second 
time Not Guilty, they are tried and convicted, 
ibid. ib. — They move by their Counsel in 
arrest of Judgment, on the ground that the 
Discharge of the first Jury was illegal,, ibid. 
402. — ^The Court give Judgment against the 
Prisoners, ibid. 405 —Mr. Justice Foster's 
l^easons for concurring in the Judgment of 
the Court, ibid. ib. — The Prisoners were not 
executed, ibid. 401. 

KINLOCH, Sir Archibald Gordon, Bart.-^ 
His Trial at Edinburgh for the Murder of 
Sir Franeiff Kinlochy his^ Brother German, 
a5 Geo. 3, 1795, 25 vol. 891.— The IndicU 
ment, ibid. ib.— Mr. Hume opens the Nature 
Of the Defence, ibid. 894.— Evidence for 
Ifee JProsecution^ ibid. 900.-->Evidenc^ for 






the Defence, ibid. 944. — Evidence of Miss 
Rinloch, Sister of the Panel, .ibid. ^52. — 
Speech of the Lord Advocate for the Pro* 
secution, ibid. 968. — Mr. Hope's Speech for 
the Panel, ibid. 978. — ^The Court sum up 
the Evidence, ibid. 997. — ^The Jury find that 
the Act was committed under the influence 
of insanity^ ibid. 998. — Judgment of the 
Court, ibid. 999. 

KINNERSLEY, Thomas. See Hales, William. 

KINNYNMOUNT, Patrick.— His Trial in 
Scotland for Blasphemy and Adultery, 9 
Will. 3, 1697, 13 vol. 1^73.— The Indict- 
ment, ibid. 1274.— His Defence, ibid. 1278. 
— ^The Court having deserted the Dyet as to 
the principal part of the Charge, the Lord 
Advocate abandons the ProcQedings^ ibid. 
1282. 

KIRBIE, Luke. See Campion, Edmuttd, 

KIRKBY, Colonel Richard.— His Trial with 
Captain John Constable, Captain Cooper 
* Wade, Captain Samuel Vincent, and Captain 
Christopher Fogg, at a Court Martial in 
Jamaica,for Cowardice aud Neglect of Duty, 
1 Anne, 1702, 14 vol. ^37.— Vincent and 
Fogg appear as Witnesses for the Crown, 
ibid. 538. — Evidence against Kirkby, ibid. 
537. — He is sentenced to be shot, ibid. 542. 
— Evidence against Constable, ibid. ib. — He 
is cashiered, ibid. 543. — Evidence against 
Wade, ibid. ib. — He is sentenced to be 
shot, ibid. 544. — Evidence against Fogg and 
Vincent, ibid, ib.— They are sentenced to be 
suspended, ibid. ib. 

KIRWAN, O^en.— His Trial under a Special 
Commission at Dublin for High Treason 
in being concerned in the Irish Insurrection, 
43 Geo. 3, 1803, 28 vol. 776.— The Indict- 
ment, ibid. ib. — The Attorney General's 
Speech for the , Prosecution,* ibid. 778* — 
Evidence for the Prosecution, ibidJ 780. — 
Mr. Currants Speech for the Prisoner, ibid. 
786.— Evidence for the Prisoner, ibid. 798. 
—Mr. Baron George's Charge to the Jury, 
ibid. 801.— The Jury find him Guilty, ibid. 
804. — He is executed, ibid. 806. 

KIRWAN, Thomas. See Sheridan, Dr, Edward. 

KITCHEN,George. SeeGreen,CaptainThomas, 

KNEVET, Sir Ed mond.— Account^ from 
Stowe's Annals, of his Trial for striking 
within the King's Palace at Westminster, 
33 Hen. 8, 1541, 1 vol. 443.— He is found 
Guilty, and has Judgment to lose his right 
hand,ibid. 444. — ^List of persons called upon 
taexecute the Judgment, ibid. ib. — ^The King 
grants him a free pardon, ibid. 446.— Har- 
grave's Introductory Note to this Trial, ibid. 
443. — His Examination before the Council 
respecting the Charges against the Earl of 
Surrey, ibid. 454. 

KNIGHTLEY, Alexander.— His Trial at the 
Bar of the Court of King's Bemch for High 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



7« 



Treason, in being concerned in the Assas- 
sination Plot, 8 Will. 3, 1696, 13 vol. 397.— 
The Indictment, ibid. ib. — He pleads Not 
Guilty, bat afterwards withdraws his Plea 
and confesses the Indictment, ibid. 400.— 
Sentence is passed upon him, ibid. 403. — He 
is afterwards pardoned, ibid. 406. 

KNIGHTLEY, Sir Richard.— Proceedings in 
the Star-Chamber againsthim, Mr. Halles,and 
Sir — Wickstone and his Wife, for maintain- 
ing and enconraging seditious and sectarian 
Books, 31 £liz.l688, 1 vol. 1263. — Informa- 
tion of the Attorney General, ibid. ib. — 
Knightley^s Answer thereto, ibid. 1266.*- 
Hales's Answer, ibid. 1267. — Wickstone's 
Answer, ibid. 1268.^— Their several Punish- 
ments, ibid. 1270. — Account of Knightley, 
ibid. 1271 (note). — Camden's Notice of these 
Proceedings, ibid. 1S72 (note). 

OOWLES, Charles (commonly called Earl of 
Banbury). — Proceedings against him in the 
Sing's bench for the Murder of Philip Law- 
son, 4 and 5 Will, and Mary, 1692-1693, 
12 vol. 1167. — The Indictment, ibid. ib. — 
He pleads his Peerage in Abatement, ibid. 
1168 — The Attorney replies that the House 
of Lords had dismissed his Petition to be 
tried by his Peers, ibid. 1170. — -He demurs 
to the Replication, ibid. ib. — Judgment of 
the Court in favour of the Plea, ibid. 1191. 
— Account of these Proceedings delivered 
to the House of Lords by the. Attorney 
General pursuant to their Order, ibid. 1171. 
— ^His Petition to the Ring upon the Pro- 
ceedings in the King's Bench, ibid. 1175. — 
The King refers his Petition to the House 
of Lords, ibid. 1177. — Examination of Lord 
Holt and Mr. Justice Eyres by a Committee 
of Lords oj the subject of their Judgment in 
ttis Case, ibid, 1179 (note). — ^The criminal 
Proceedings against him discontinued, ibid. 
1205. — Account of the Proceedings in the 
House of Lords in 1661, respecting the Title 
of the Earl of Banbury, ibid. 1183. — Mr. 
Hargrave's Notice of this CasCj^ ibid. 1203. 
•^Mr. Hargrave's Observations on his Claim 
to the title of Earl of Banbury, ibid. 1205. 

KNOX, Thomas. — ^His Trial with John Lane 
at the Bar of the Court of King's Bench, for 
a Conspiracy to destroy the credibility of the 
Witnesses for the Crown in the Trials 
respecting the Popish Plot, 31 Car. 2, 1679, 
7 vol. 763. — Indictment against them, ibid, 
ib.— They plead Not Guilty, ibid. 766.— The 
King's Counsel open the Charge against 
them, ibid. 767. — Evidence against them, 
ibid. 771. — Speech of Mr. Withins, Knox's 
Counsel, ibid. 801. — Evidence for him, ibid. 
804. — Mr. Holt's Speech for Lane, ibid. 
808.— They are found Guilty, ibid. 812.— 
Their Sentence, ibid. ib. 

KYD, Stewart, Counsel.— His Speech in De- 
fence of Thos. Williams on his Trial for a 
blasphemous libel, 26 vol. 671. — He was 
indicted jointly with Hardy and others for 
High Treason in 1794, 24 vol. 2^2.— After 



the Acquittal of Hardy and Home Tooke, 
the Attorney General declines offering any 
Evidence against him, and he b dischanred. 
25 vol. 745. ' 

LAING, Malcolm. — ^Account of the Trial of 
the Earl of Bothwell for ibe Murder of 
Henry, Lord Darnley, extracted from his 
History of Scotland, 1 vol. 911.— His Re- 
marks upon Charies the First's insincerity of 
Character, 4 vol. 1151. —His Account of the 
Transactions connected with the Trial of 
Archibald, Marquis of Argyle, 5 vol.1369 
(note).— His Character of him, ibid. 1508 
(note).— His Account of the Trial of Archi- 
bald, Earl of Argyle, 8 vol. 851 (note).— His 
Observations on Lord Balroerino's Trial in 
Scotland for a Libel, 3 vol. 591 (note).— His 
Account of Fletcher of Saltoun, 11 vol. 
1049 (note).— His Account of the Duke of 
Lauderdale, 6 vol. 1033. 

LAKE, Dr. John, Bishop of Chichester. See 
Seven JBisAcpj.— Granger's Account of him, 
12 vol. 187. 

LALOR, Robert. — His Trial in Ireland vpon 
an Indictment en Stat. 16 Rich. 2, c. 5, for 
procuring Bulls from Rome, 2 vol. 533. — 

. The Indictment, ibid. 535. — He pleads Not 
Guilty, ibid, 536.— Tlie Attorney General 
produces the Charge againsthim, ibid. ib. — 
Evidence against him, ibid. 554. — He is 
found Guilty, ibid. 558. — Judgment passed 
upon him according to the Statute, ibid. ib. 

LAMBERT, John. See Peny, James. 

LAMLEY, Robert. See Kidd, Captain Thomas. 

LANCASTER, Thomas, Earl of.— Proceed- 
ings against him for High Treason, in taking 
Arms against the King, 15 Edw. 2, 1322, 1 
vol. 39. — Record of his Conviction, ibid. 41. 
— ^Assignment of Errors thereon, ibid. 45. — 
The Judgment is reversed in the first Par- 
liament of Edward the Third, ibid. 40. 

LANE, John. See Knox^ Thomas. 

LANGHORN, Richard.— His Trial at the Old 
Bailey for High Treason, in being concerned 
in the Popish Plot, 81 Car. 2, 1679, 7 vol. 
417. — Tfie Indictment, ibid, ib.— He pleads 
Not Guilty, ibid. 421. — Evidence against 
him, ibid. 424. — Oates's Evidence, ibid. 
526. — Evidence for him, ibid. 448. — Evi- 
dence in Reply, ibid. 470. — ^Chief Justice 
Scroggs'sCharge to the Jury, ibid. 479. — The 
Jury find him Guilty, ibid. 486. — Sentence 
of Death passed upon him, ibid. 487.-^His 
conduct in Newgate, under Sentence, ibid. 
586. — His Execution, ibid. 501. — His Dying 
Speech, ibid. ib. — His Memoirs, published 
soon after his Execution, ibid. 506. — His 
Petition to the King, ibid. 529. 

LATIMER, Hugh.— Passages from his Ser- 
mons respecting the Execution of Lord 
Seymour of Sudley, 1 vol. 505. — Bill of 
Complaint presented to Edward the Sixth by 



74 



6ENEBAL INDEX TO 



hhn and Hooper against Bonner, %bop of 
I/>ncloD, ibid. 653. 

LATIMERy Richard. See Messenger , Peter, 

LAUD, William, Bishop of Bath and Wells. 
-«-His Letter to Lord Scudamore containing 
his Opinion respecting Tithes and the nature 
and origin of the title to them, 4 vol. 436 
(note). 

Bishop of London. — His 



•«..«»*«.• 



Speech on delivering his Opinion in the 
Star-Chamber respecting the Punishment to 
be inflicted on Henry Sherfield, for breaking 
a Window in a Church at Salisbury, 3 vol. 
M8«-— He is said to have promoted the Pro- 
secution of Prynne for puolishing ^' Histrio- 
mastiXf* ibid, 561 (note). — He was accused 
of aggravating to Charles the First, the Of- 
fence of Richard Chambers in uttering 
seditious words before the Pri^ Council, 
ibid. 373 (note). — He threatens Felton with 
the Rack, if he does not confess who con- 
trived the Murder of the Duke of Bucking- 
ham, ibid. 371. 

Archbishop of Canterbury. 



— His Speech in the Star-Chamber on pass- 
ing Sentence against Prynn, Bastwick, and 
Burton, for publishing several Libels, 3 vol. 
725. — His Speech in the Star-Chamber on 
passing Sentence against Williams, Bishop 
of Lincoln, ibid. 792.— Kennett*s Anecdote 
of his Conduct on seeing Lord Strafford 
going to Execution, ibid. 1521 (note). — His 
Trial for High Treason on an Impeachment 
by the Commons, 16-20 Car. 1, 1640, 1644. 
4 vol. 315.'— Mr. Grimstone's Speech against 
him in the House of Commons upon the 
Motion for his Impeachment, ibid. 317. — 
Mr. HoUis, by command of the Commons, 
accuses him in the House ofLords of Treason, 
ibid. 318. — He is committed to the custody 
of the Gentleman Usher, ibid. 319. — Mr. 
Pym and others present Articles of Impeach- 
ment against hira, ibid. 320. — ^The Arch- 
bishop's Speech on the Articles being pre- 
sented, ibid. 32^.-<-The Articles, ibid. 326. 
—He is sent to the Tower, ibid. 330. — 
Ordinances of the Parliament prohibiting 
him from disposing of Preferments, and 
sequestering his Dignities, ibid. ib. — Further 
Articles of Itnpeachroent presented;^ ibid. 
332. — He petitions for time to answer, and 
for Counsel, ibid. 336.^ — Which are granted 
to him, ibid, 337. — He petitions that the 
Charges of Misdemeanour may be distin- 
guished from those of Treason in the Arti- 
cles, ibid. 336. — Upon which the Lords 
refuse to give any Opinion, ibid. 339.-— He 
answers. Not Guilty to the Articles, ibid. 
340.— The Commons complain that there 
is no Answer to the original Articles, ibid. 
344. — His Answer to all the Articles, ibid, 
345.— The Trial commenced, ibid. 349. — 
He requires that the Commons may finish 
the whole of their Evidence before he begins 
his Defence, ibid. 550. — ^This is refused, and 



he is ordered to defend himself npoa the 
charges seriatim, ibid. ib.—Sei}eant Wilde's 
Spe^ against him, ibid. 35d.«^The Arch- 
bishop's Speech before the I^vidence is open- 
ed, ibid. 357. — The Articles urged against 
him, with his Replies, ibid. 364.-<'<vAfter the 
Articles are gone through he reeapitulates 
the points of his Defence, ibid. 566. — ^Mi?. 
BrowB sums up the Charges for the Qom- 
moos, ibid. 576.*^The Archbishop's Counsel 
are heard, ibid. 577.-^Mr. Heme's SpeeNch 
for him, said to haye been written by Hi^e, 
afterwards Lord Hale, ibid. 577 and (note). 
— Serjeant Wilde admits that no one act of 
the Archbishop's amounted to TTeaaon, but 
that all his Misdemeanours taken together 
did, ibid. 586 (note). — Mr.Herne's hmooopous 
Remark on this doctrine, ibid. ib.-^Hi8 Pe- 
fence in the House of CoQiiQons, ibid. -^SS. 
— ^The Commons pass an Ordinance deelariBp 
him guilty of Treason, ibid. 596.-^TheIiQjrds 
vote him guilty of endeavouring to subvert 
the Laws, to overthrow the Protestant Reli- 
gion, and that he was an enemy to Parlia- 
ments, ibid. 598. — The Judges unanimously 
declare that neither nor all of these Charges . 
amounted to Treason, ibid. ib. — The lK>rds 
pass an Ordinance of Attainder against him, 
ibid. 599. — His Speech on the Scaffold, ibid. 
600. — His Prayer, ibid. '622.^He is prevail- 
ed upon by his Counsel, Mr. Heme, not to 
term the Parliament Traitors in his Speech 
on the Scaffold, ibid. 586 (note), — Ho is 
beheaded, ibid. 603.^Judge Whitelocke's 
Opinion of him, ibid. ib. — Lord Clarendon's 
Character of him, ibid. ib. — A Brief Relation 
of his Sufiferings and Death, taken from 
Lord Somers's Tracts, ibid. 607. 

LAUDER, Sir John. See Fountmnhall, Lard. 

LAUDERDALE, Charles, Earl o*f.— Proceed- 
ings at Edinburgh against him, Richard, 
Lord Maitland his Son, and others, for offi- 
cial Malversations respecting the Royal Mint 
of Scotland, 34 and 35 Car. 2, 1682-3, 11 
vol, 157.— Record of the Proceedings, ibid. 
183. 

LAUDERDALE, Richard, Earl of, 13 vol. 
1442. See Melfort, John, Earl of, 

LAUDERDALE, John, Duke of.— Proceed- 
ings in the House of Commons against 
him, 25 Car. 2, 1674, 6 vol. 1025.— The 
House resolve upon an Address to the Kipg 
to remove him from his Employments and 
from his councils for ever, ibid. 1032. — 
Burnet's Account of him, ibid. 1025 (note). 
— Laing's Account of him, ibid. 1033, — 
Statement of facts relative to his Administra- 
tion in Scotland, 11 vol. 157 (note). — Roger 
North praises his Government in Scotland, 
ibid. 171 (note). 

LAURENCE, Robert. See Boughton, Jokn. 

LAW, Edward, Counsel, 22 vol. 231, 309.— 
See Mknboroughy Edwgrdf Lord. 

" Attorney General for Lan- 

caster, 25 vol. 1155, 26 vol. 554, 27 vol. 621. 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



U 



^^is fijMtoh on the Pfoteeutioii of Thomas 
Walker and ethers for a treasonable Con- 
spiraeyy 98 vol. 1081.— He was of Counsel 
for the Prosecution in the Cases of Hardy 
and Uorne Tooke, 24 toI. 238, 35 toI. 2. 
— His Speech for the Prosecution on the 
Trial of iR^edbead Yorke for a treasonable 
Consp.iracY^ 25 vol, 1012. — His Reply in 
the 9aQ)e Case^ ibid. 1137, 

Sir Edward, Attorney €reneral.-**His 



Speeeh for the Prosecution on the Trial of 
Oovemor Wall for Murder, 28 vol. 51. 

LAYER, Christopher.— His Trial at the King's 
Bench bar for High Treason, in conspiring 
to overturn the Govercmept and bring in 
the Pretender, 9 Geo. 1, 1722, 16 vol. 93.— 
The Indictment, ibid. 94. — On being brought 
to the Bar to plead, b^ applies to have his Irons 
taken off, ibid. 96. — ^The Court refuse to order 
them to be taken off, ibid. 1 00. — His Counsel 
move to quash the Indictment, ibid. 101. — 
Arguments of the Counsel for the Prosecu- 
tion against the Motion, ibid. 105. — ^The 
Court refuse the Motion, ibid. 112.— He 
pleads a Misnomer in abatement, and pleads 
over Not Guilty to the Treason, ibid. 114. — 
The Attorney General demurs to the Plea in 
Abatement, ibid. 115. — The Prisoner's 
Counsel ^P9^y ^^ time to join in Demurrer, 
ibid. ib. — This is refused by the Court, ibid. 
122.— He withdraws his Plea in Abatement, 
ibid. 124.— The Trial, ibid. 129,— Speeches 
of the Counsel for the Prosecution, ibid. 1 89. 
— ^The Prisoner objects to a Witness for the 
Crown, that he had been promised a Pardon 
on condition of his giving Evidence against 
him, ibid. 158. — ^The Objection argued, ibid, 
ib. — ^The Court decide that it is no Objection 
to the competency of the Witness, ibid. 161. 
— Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 163. — 
A Paper containing the Scheme of an Insur- 
rection found in his custody, read in Evi- 
dence against him, ibid. 208. — Mr. Hunger- 
ford's Speech in his Defence, ibid. 233. — 
Mr. Ketelbey's Speech in his Defence, ibid. 
237. — Evidence for the Defence, ibid. 244. 
— ^The Prisoner's Address to the Jury, ibid. 
261. — Reply of the Solicitor General, ibid. 
263, — Evidence in Reply for the Prosecution, 
ibid. 287.— Chief Justice Pratt's Charge to 
the Jury, ibid. 290. — ^The Jury find him 
Guilty, ibid 299. — Sentence is passed upon 
him, ibid. 319. — His Execution, ibid. 321. 
— Paper delivered by him to the Sheriff at 
the place of Execution, ibid. 322. 

lAYTON, Sir Thomas. See FowUsy Sir Daoid, 

LEACH, Pryden. — Proceedings in the Court 
of King's Bench in Error in an Action for 
False Imprisonment brought by him against 
John Money, James Watson, and Robert 
Blackmore, three of the Ring's Messengers, 
5 and 6 Geo. 3,1765, 19 vol.1001.— Plead- 
ings in the Court below, ibid. 1003. — The 
Cause is tried and the Jury find for thie 
Plaintiff, with 400^. Damages, ibid. 1006.-* 



Bill of ExoeptioDS tendeied by the Defbad- 
ants and receiv<ed, ibid. ib.*«-ABsignHieBt of 
Errors upon the Bill of Exceptions, ibid. 
1007.»*-ArgumeDt of Mr. De Gre^, Solioitor 
General, for the Plaintiffs in Error, ibid,. 101 2. 
--^Mr. Dupning's Argument for the Defend* 
an(s in Error, ibid. 1020.— Reply of the 
Solicitor General, ibid. 1024.-*-Tbe Court 
affirm the Judgment of the Court below, upon 
a collateral point, without giving any Decision 
upon the principal pointi raised by the 
Argument, ibid. 1028. 

LEARY, Jeremiah. See O^Coigfy, Jamei. 

LEARY, John.-Hls Trial in Ireland for High 
Treason, in being concemed with a treason* 
able Association called Defenders^ 36 Geo. 
3, 1795, 26 vol. 295.-- The Indictment, ibid, 
ib. — Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 302. 
— Mr. Mac Nally's Defence, ibid. 321, — 
Evidence for the Defence, .ibid. 331 .-— Evi- 
dence in Reply for the Prgi^cution, ibid. 837. 
<i*-Reply of the Solicitor General, ibid. 842. 
"^Mr. Baron George's Charge to the Jury, 
ibid. 347. — ^The Jury acquit him, ibid. 351. 

LE BLANC, Sir Simon, Judge of K. B. 30 
vol. 547, 066, 31 vol. 234. See WUte, Henry. 
— His Charge to the Jury on the Trial of 
Georee Mellor and others for the Murder of 
Mr. Horsfall, 31 vol. 1008. — His Charges to 
the Jury on the Trials of several of the Lud- 
dites, under the Special Commission ^ 
York in 1813, ibid. 1068, 1102, 1139. '' 

LECHMERE, Nicholas, Counsel.— He is 
ordered by the House of Commons to be 
taken into. Custody for pleading in tjhe Court 
of King's Bench for the Discharge of the 
Aylesbury Men, 14 vol. 809. — ^His Speeeh 
in the House of Lords stating the grounds of 
the Charge made by the Commons against 
Dr. Sacheverell, 15 vol. 59. — His Speech in/ 
Support of the fourth Article of Impeach- 
ment against him, ibid. 191.— His Speech 
in Reply to the Defence made by Dr. 
Sacheverell to the First Article, ibid, 406. — 
His Speech in the House of Commons upon 
a Motion for. the Impeachment of Lord 

' Derwentwater and others for High Treason, 
in being concerned in the Rebellion of 1715, 

•ibid. 761, 



■ ■ Attorney General, 

5 Geo. 1. — His Speech for the Prosecution 
on the Trial of John Matthews for Treason, 
in printing a Libel asserting the Pretender's 
titles 15 vol. 1833.^-~His Reply in the same 
Case, ibid. 1378. 

LE DESPENSER, Hugh. S«e Despenser, 
Hugh, 

LEE, Captain Thomas.—His Trial for High 
Treason in conspiring forcibly to compel 
the Queen to liberate the Earis of Essex and 
Southampton, 43 Eliz. 1600, 1 vol. 1403.— 
The Indictment, ibid, ib.— Evidence for the 
Prosecution, ibid. 1404. — He is found 
Guilty, ibid. 1409.— Judgment is passed 
upon him, and he is executed, ibid. 1410. 



76 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



LEEy Wiltiai&i CounseL-^His Speech for the 
Appellant on the Trial of the Appeal against 
Bambridge and Corbett for the Murder of a 
Prisoner in the Fleet by ill-treatment, 17 
vol. 401. 

LEE, Sir William, Chief Justice of K.B. 17 
Geo. 2» 18 Tol. 289, 329, 353, 391, 395, 
425, 1203. 

LEECH, Benjamin. — Proceedings against 
hira at the Old Bailey for slandering the 
Election of North and Rich as Sheriffs of 
London, 34 Car. 2, 1682, 9 vol. 351.— The 
Indictment, ibid. 353. — He pleads in Abate- 
ment that the Grand Jury who found the 
Bill against him, were returned by North and 
Rich, and that tiieir Election as Sheriffs was 
void, ibid. 355. — ^The Court reject his Plea, 
• and, on his refusing to plead otherwise, fine 
him 20 Marks, ibid. 358. 

LEEDS, Thomas, Duke of. See Banby^ 
Thomas, Earl of, 

LEGAT, Bartholomew. — Proceedings against 
him for Heresy, 10 Jac. 1, 1612, 2 vol. 727. 
— Account of his Opinions, ibid. 728. — ^He 
is declared a Heretic by the Consistory of 
St. Paul's, and delivered over to the secular 
power, ibid. 729. — He is burned to death in 
Smithfield, ibid. 730.— The King's Warrant 
to the Lord Chancellor to issue the Writ De 
Hteretico comburendo, ibid. 731.— The Writ, 
ibid. 732. 

LEGGE, Heneage, Counsel, 18 vol. 289. 

' ■ ■ Baron of the Exchequer, 
25 Geo. 2, 19 vol. 283.— His Charge to the 
Jury on the Trial of Mary Blandy for Murder,. 
18 vol. 1170. 

LEIGHTON, Alexander. — ^Proceedings in the 
Star-Chamber against him for publishing ''An 
Appeal to the Parliament, or a Plea against 
Prelacy," 6 Car. 1, 1630, 3 vol.383. — Severe 
Sentence against him, ibid. 385. — He escapes 

*■ from Prison, but is retaken upon a Hue and 
Cry, ibid. ib. — ^The House of Commons in 
1641, resolve that his Punishment was illegal, 
and that he ought to have Satisfaction for 
what he had suffered, ibid. 387 (note). 

LEVINZ, Sir Creswell, King's Counsel, 30 
Car. 2, 7 vol. 84.— His Speech for the Pro- 
secution on the Trial of Nathaniel Reading 
for disparaging and attempting to suppress 
the Evidence of the PopishFlot, 7 vol. 268.— 
His Speech for the Prosecution on the Trial 
of Whitebread and others for High Treason, 
in being concerned in the Popish Plot, ibid. 
321. — ^His Speech against Richard Lang- 
borne for a similar offence, ibid. 423. 

--—-—— Attorney General, 31 

Car. 2, 7 vol.824, 968, 1049, 1069, 1555.— 
His Speech for the Prosecution on the Trial of 
Knox and Lane for disparaging the Evidence 
of the Popish Plot, 7 vol. 769.— His Speech 
for the Prosecution on the Trial of Tasborough 
and Price for a similar Offence, ibid. 888.*— 
Sir John Hawlea*s Notice of him in his 
Remarks on f itzharris's Trial, 8 vol. 429. 



■■ -Judge of C.P. 33 Car. 

2, 8 vol. 564, 11 vol. 400. — He delivers his 
Opinion on tiie Trial of Lord William Rus- 
sell that want of Freehold is no ground of 
Challenge to a Juror, 9 vol. 593. 

Seneant at Law. — He 



was removed from the Bench in 1685 by 
James the Second, aud returned •to prac- 
tice at the Bar, 12 vol. 260 (note).-^His 
Speech for the Defendants on the Trial of 
the Seven Bishops, ibid. 296. — He was of 
Counsel for Beiiiardi and others accused of 
participating in the Assassination Plot, 13 
vol. 764. — He argues in the Case of Kendal 
and Roe, against the legality of a Commit- 
ment for High Treason by a Secretary of 
State, 12 vol. 1375. 

LEWIS, David.-.His Trial for High Treason 
on the Stat. 27 Eliz. for returning as a Popish 
Priest into England and continuing there 
upwards of 4© days, 31 Car. 2, 1679, 7 vol. 
249. — He pleads Not Guilty, ibid. ib. — Evi- 
dence against him, ibid. 251.— Evidence for 
him, ibid. 254. — He is found Guilty, and 
Sentence of Death is passed upon him, ibid. 
256.— His Speech at the place of Execution, 
ibid. ib. 

LEWIS, James. See Dawson, JotefA, 

LEWIS, Sir William. See EoUit, DenzU. 

LILBURN, John,— Proceedings in the Star- 
Chamber against him and John Wharton for 
publishing Seditious Books, 13 Car. 1, 1637, 
3 vol. 1315.— Lilbum's Examination at the 
Attorney General's Chambers, ibid. 1318.— > 
He refuses to take the Star-Chamber Oath, 
ibid. 1320.— Their Sentence, ibid. 1327.— 
Lilbum's Speech to the people from the 
Pillory, ibid. 1329.— His Petition to the 
Houseof Commons,ibid. 1 345. — Resolutions 
of the House of Commons in 1640 against 
this Sentence, ibid. 1342. — Resolutions of 
the Commons transmitted to the Lords, ibid. 
1346. — The Lords take off his Fine, and ap- 
point his Cause to be heani de novo at their 
Bar, ibid. ib. — Bradshaw and Cooke assign- 
ed, him for Counsel, ibid. 1347. — The Lords 
reverse the Sentence of the Star-Chamber, 
ibid. 1358. — ^And pass an Ordinance giving 
him reparation out of the Estates of the late 
Lord Keeper, ibid. 1359, 1364.— This Ordin- 
ance thrown out at its second Reading by 
the Commons, ibid. 1360, 1366. — Repara- 
tion ordered him out of certain sequestered 
Estates, ibid. 1367. — His Trial by a Special 
Commission of Oyer and Terminer at the 
Guildhall of London for High Treason, 
1 Car. 2, 1649, 4 vol. 1269.— His Speech at 
his Arraignment, ibid. 1270. — He .argues 
against the legality of a Special Commission 
of Oyer and Terminer, ibid. 1275. — ^He hesi- 
tates to plead, ibid. 1293.— He pleads Not 
Guilty, ibid. 1294. — ^He objects to the At- 
torney General's whispering to the Court, 
ibid. 1324, 1301. — Indictment against hinii 
ibid. 1320.— The Attorney General's Speech, 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



77 



ibid. 133t<"-EFidence against him, ibid. 
1333. — ^His Observations to the Jary upon 
the Evidence against him, ibid. 1882. — The 
Attorney General's Reply, ibid. 1395. — ^The 
Court charge the Jury, ibid. 1401.— The 
Jury acquit him, ibid. 1405. —Extracts from 
Walker^s History of Independency, relat- 
ing to this Case, ibid. 1406. — Lord Cla- 
rendon's Account of Lilbum, and the cir- 
cumstances attending this Prosecution, 
ibid. 1416.— Lilburn's Account of some 
circumstances which preceded his Trial, 
ibid. 1421. — ^A Letter of Censure to him in 
answer to his Account of his Trial, ibid. 1434. 
— His Trial at the Old Bailey for returning 
from Banishment, 6 Car. 2, 1653, 5 vol. 407. 
— His Account of the circumstances which 
led to his Banishment, ibid. ib.—He refuses 
to kneel at the Bar of the House of Com- 
monSf ibid. 409. — ^Act of Parliament for his 
Banishment, ibid . 41 4. — His Commitment to 
Newgate upon his return, ibid. 415. — He 
applies to the Court for a Copy of the In- 
. dictment before he pleads, ibid. 416.— 
Which is granted, ibid. 419. — ^The Indict- 
menty ibid. ib. — ^The Court refuse his Ex- 
ceptions to the Indictment and his demand 
of Oyer of the Act of Parliament, unless they 
are signed by Counsel, ibid. 425, 434. — His 
Exceptions to the Indictment, ibid. 437.— 
The Jury acquit him, ibid. 443. — Examina- 
tion of the Jury before the Council of State 
respecting the grounds of their Verdict, ibid. 
445. — Examinations of the Witnesses against 
Lilbum, ibid. 449. — Passages from Thurloe, 
Oldmixon, and Whitelocke, respecting this 
Trial, ibid. 407 (note). 445 (note). — Crom- 
well's oppressive Conduct towards him, ibid. 
940. 

LILBURNE, Robert, 5 vol. 1003, 1205. See 
Regicides,* 

UMERICK, Thomas. See Messenger^ Peter. 

LINDSAY, David.— His Trial at the Old 
Bailey for High Treason, in being as a 
British Subject in France, and returning into 
England vdthout licence, 3 Anne, 1704,15 
vol. 987 — ^The Indictment, ibid. 988.— He 
pleads Not Guilty, ibid. 990. — The Queen's 
Counsel open the Case, ibid. 991. — He 
admits the facts of the Case for the Prosecu- 
tion, but claims the benefit of a General 
Pardon under a royal Proclamation, ibid. 
992.^*— Mr. Williams's Argument for him to 
shew that he is entiUed to the benefit of the 
Pardon, ibid. 999. — Mr. Raymond's Argu- 
ment to the same effect, ibid. 1007. — ^Argu- 
ments of Sir Thos. Powis and the Attorney 
and Solicitor General to the contrary, ibid. 
1015. — Lord Holt's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 
1027.— The Jury find him Guilty, ibid. 1029. 
—His Counsel move in arrest of Judgment, 
ibid. ib. — Sentence of Death is passed upon 
him, ibid. 1033. — He is reprieved at the 
place of Execution, ibid. 1035. — He remains 
a Prisoner in Newgate some vears, is banish- 
^^ and im v^ {XpUandi ibid* 1036, 



UNGARD,^^;ComiiiOttS6rieatttofLondon.— 
His Speech in Defence of Lord Cliancellor 
Macclesfield upon several of the- Articles of 
Impeachment against him, 16 vol. 1118, 
1228. — His Speech on summing up the 
Evidence for the Defence, ibid. 1247. 

LINSTEED, Thomas. See Green, Captain 
Thomas. 

LISLE, Lady Alice. See Lisle, John. — ^Her 
Trial at Winchester for High Treason, in 
harbouring a Traitor after the Duke of Mon- 
mouth's Rebellion, 1 Jac. 2, 1685, 11 vol. 
297. — ^The Indictment, ibid. ib. — She pleads 
Not Guilty, ibid. 308. — ^The Court allow her 
to have an indifferent person to assist her on 
her Trial on account of her age ^jjj^ infirmi- 
ties, ibid. 310. — Mr. PoUexfen's Speech for 
the Prosecution, ibid. 316.— Chief JusticeJef- 
feries's Address to the Prisoner, ibid. 322. 
— Evidence for the Prosecution, ibici, 323. 
—The Chief Justice's Examination of an 
unwilling Witness for the Prosecution, ibid. 
325. — ^Hisf violent Conduct towards the Wit- 
ness, ibid. 338, 346. — Lady lisle's Defence, 
ibid. 359.— ^efieries's Charge to the Jury, 
ibid. 362 .-^Hesitation of the Jury, ibid. 370. 
— It is said that the Jury at first acquit 
her, but that at last, upon Jefieries's 
threats, they bring her in Guilty, ibid. 372 
(note).— The Verdict, ibid. 373.— The Chief 
Justice passes Sentence upon her, ibid. ib. 
— Application is made to the King in her 
behsdf, 'who refuses to interfere, ibid. 376. 
—She petitions the King to alter her Sen* 

• tence to beheading, ibid. ib. — ^The King's 
Warrant for the alteration of the mode of 
Execution, ibid. 379. — She is executed, ibid, 
ib. — ^Paper delivered by her to the Sheriff at 
the place of Execution, ibid. 380. — ^At the ' 
Revolution her Attainder is reversed by Act 
of Parliament, ibid. 381. — Ludlow's Account 
of her Husband's Assassination, ibid. 297 
(note). — Burnet's Account of these Proceed- 
ings, ibid. 300 (note). — ^Foster's Notice of 
this Trial, ibid. 371 (note). 

LISLE, »Sir George* See Lucas, Sir Charles. 

LISLE, John. — He was Lord President of the 
High Court of Justice on the Trials of Sir 
Henry Slingsby, Dr. Hewett, and Mr. Mor- 
dant, ibr High Treason, in bearing arms 
against Cromwell and the Commonwealth, 
5 vol. 875, 886. 908. — Ludlow's Account of 
his Assassination in Switzerland, 11 vol. 
297 (note), 

LISTER, Sir Richard. See lA^ster, Sir 
JRichard, 

LITTLE rON, Edward, Counsel.— His Argu- 
ment, made by Command of the House of 
Commons, at a Conference vrith the Lords in 
favour of the Liberty of the Subject, 3 vol. 
85. — His Argument for Mr. Selden on the 
Return of a Habeas Corpus upon his Com- 
mitment by the Privy Council, ibid. 252.— 
He vras afterwards Chief Justice of the 
Common Fleas and Lord Keeperi ibid« ib, 



td 



OlSNERAL INDEX TO 



MAM* 



•^^ Sir Eclwafd) Solicitor General, 



13 Car. l.-*He was of Counsel for the Pro- 
secntidn ill the Proceedings in the Star 
Chamber against Prynne^ Bastwick^ and 
Burton for Several Libels, 3 vol. 718. — His 
Argument (or the Crown in the Great Case 
of Ship-Money, ibid. 923. 

LLOYD, Humphrey.— Account of his Trial, 
Convietion, and Execution for the Murder 
of a Yeomatt of the King's Guard, 5 Jac. -1, 
1607, 3 tol. 362. 

LLOYD, Sir Richard, Counsel.— His Speech 
on Opening the Indictment against Lord 
Balmerino, 18 vol. 463. 

LLOYD, Temperance. — Proceedings against 
her, Mary Trembles, and Susannah Edwards 
for Witchcraft, 34 Car. 2, 1682, 8 vol. 1017. 
«— Their Examinations and Confesuons be- 
fore Magistrates, ibid. ib.-^Their Confes- 
sions at Uie place of execution, ibid. 1036. 

iiOYD, Thomas. See Dtffi^n, PtOrkk WilUam. 

LLOYD^ Dr. William, Bishop of St. Asaph. 
See Seven Bifhope, — Burnet's Account of his 
ConUuet respecting Turberville, one of the 
Witoesses for the Popish Plot, 7 vol. 1351 
(note)i — Granger*s Account of him, 12 vol. 
185<— His Letter to Fell, Bishop of Oxford, 
et^Btaining an Account of the Execution of 
thb Duke of Monmouthv 11 vol. 1073. 

■ Bishop of Worcester. 

— Proceedings at the Bar of the House of 
Commons against him and his sou on the 
Compliaint Of Sir John Packington, for at- 
tempting to hinder his Election as a Meml)er 
for the Couiity of Worcester, 1 Anne, 1702, 
14 vol. 545. — Articles of Complaint against 
ihem, ibid. ib. — Witnesses examined in sup- 
port of the Articles, ibid. 546. — Tlie House 
resolve that the Bishop's conduct was a 
Breach of Privilege, and that an Address be 
presented to the Queen, praying her to re- 
move him. from his office of Lord Almoner, 
ibid. 557. — Proceedings in the House of 
Lords Upon this Resolution of the Commons, 
ibid. ib. (note).— The Queen's Answer to 
the Address, promising to remove him, ibid. 
558. 

LOFFE, Gabriel. See Kidd, Captmii J^illim. 

LOGAN, Rev. Mr.— He was the author of 
the " Review of the Charges against Warren 
Hastings,'' for the publication of which, 
Stockdale was prosecuted by order of the 
House of Commons, 22 vol. 2^7. — Curious 
Anecdote respecting the effect produced upon 
him hy hearing Sheridan's celebrated Speech 
against Warren Hastings, in the House of 
Commons, ibidi 262 (D0te)i 

LOGAN, Robert.— Proceeding^ in the Parlia* 
mient of Scotland against him, after his 
death, for Itigh Treason in being concerned 
in ^ihe Gowrie Conspiracy, 7 Jac. 1, 1809, 
2 vol. 707.— the Depositions of the Wit- 
nesses, tt)ld. tl4.*-His Namt and Arm de« 



' dared to be aboUshtd, -And his property Ibr- 
ftited to the King, ibid. 722 .--Mr. Laing 
says, in his History of Scotland, that in 
order io satisfy the maxim that no man is to 
be condemned in his absence^ his Bones 
were dug up and arraigned at th« Bar on 
these Proceedings, 11 vol. 47 (tiote). 

LONG, Walter. See Stroud, William. BoUis, 
DenzU, — Proceedings in the Star Chamber 
against him for absenting himself from his 
Bailiwick, when Sheriff of Wilts, to attend 
bis duty in Parliament, 4 Car. 1, 1629, 3 
vol. 233. — Abstract of the Information ex- 
hibited against him, ibid. ib. — He is com- 
mitted to the Tower during the King's 
pleasure, and sentenced to pay a Fine of 
2,000 Marks, and make submission, ibid. 236 . 

LORN, Lord. See ArgpU, ArMdid, EaH of. 

LOUDOUN, James, Earl of.^^Proce^ings in 
Scotland against bin, George Lord Melville, 
Sir John Cochrane of Ochiltree, and John 
Cochrane of Watersyde, his son, for IVeaaon 
in being concerned in Argyie's Rebellion, 
^6 Car. 2, 1684, 10 vol. OBO.-^Lettera of 
Treason exhibited against them by the Ad- 
vocate General, ibid. 991. -^The Cochranes 
are outlawed for non-appearaHoe, ibid. 1001. 
— Evidence against John Cochrane of Water- 
syde, ibid. 1003. — He is found Guiltjr, and 
sentenced, ibid. 1005. — The Earl of L<Hidoun 
and Lord Melville are outlawed for non- 
appearance, ibid. ib. — ^Proceedings against 
them in the Scotch Parliament, ibid* 1006. 
^^FOuntainhall^s Account of these Proceed- 
ings, ibid. 1041 » 

LOUGHBOROUGH, Alexander, Lord, Chief 
Justice of C. P. See Wedderbum, Alexander, 
— His Charge to the Grand Jury on opening 
the Special Commission for the Trial of 
persons concerned id the No^Popery Riots 
in 1780, 21 vol. 485. 

LOVAT, Simon Fraser, Lord. See Ftuser, 
ThomoB, — ^Proceedings in the House of Lords 
on his Trial upon an Impeachment for High 
Treason in bemg concerned in the Rebellion 
6f I745j 20 Geo. 2, 1746-7, 18 vol. 589. — 
Extracts fh)m the Journals of the House of 
Lords relating to the Proceedings ptepftra^ 
tory to his Trial, ibid. ib.'^Lord Chaticellor 
Hardwicke is appointed Lord High Steward, 
ibid. 541.— The Lord High Steward's Ad- 
dress to the Prisoner on his being brought 
to the Bar, ibid. 543 .-^Articles of Impeach- 
ment, ibid. 544.— His Answer therelO) ibid. 
548.— Replication of the CotatnonaL ibid. 
550.-^peeches of the Managers for the 
Commons, ibid^ ib.*^Speech of the Attorney- 
General in support of the Articles, ibid. 559. 
— ^The Prisoner objects to the cofnpetency 
of the Wittiess first called by the Managers, 
ibid. 575.-^The Objection, notbei&g ground- 
ed onfact, is disallowed, ibid. 565.-*-^EWd6nce 
in support of the Articles, ibid. 566.— Lord 
Lovat t)bject9 to the Etidenee of Munrtor of 



\ 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



T© 



Brov^toi^ tiM» Secretary to the jdwaf; Pre^ 
tettder, tliAt he vras attainted by Act of 
Pttrliamefity ibid. 609.-^The Managers for 
the Commons offer to produce the Record 
^f Munray^s Plea in tiie Court of Ring^s 
Bench, iii bar of fixectttion, that he surren- 
dered himself^ according to the Act of Par- 
liament, and was therefore excepted from 
the Attainder, the matter of wliich Plea was 
confessed by the Attorney General, ibid. ib. 
— Objectit>n to the admissibility of this 
EecOrd in EtHence, ibid. 610. — Arguments 
of t!re Prisoner's Counsel in support of the 
Objection, it)id. 611.-— Arguments of the 
Managers in support of its adinissibility, 
ibid. 6 19.^— Arguments of the Prisoner's 
Connsel in Reply, ibid, 633.— The Lords 
decide that the Kecord is admissible, ibid. 
^37. — ^e Recoid of the Proceedings in the 
King^ B^fiCh respectiag Murray, ibid, ib.— 
Hie Prisoner proposes to prove, by Parol 
Evidence, that Murray did not surrender as 
stated in the Record, ibid. 647.— The Lords 
resolve not to permit his Counsel to argue 
the admissibility of such Evidence, ibid. 650t 
— ^Murray's Evidence, ibid. ib,---Sir John 
Straage's Speech on summing up the Evi- 
dence in sup^ort^ the Articles of Impeach- 
menty ibid. 774.— Lord Loval's Defence, 
ibid. 796. — Reply of the Solicitor General, 
Mr. Murray (afterwards Lord Mansfield), 
for the Commons, ibid. 602k-^peeches of 
the Attorney General and other Managers 
in Reply 9 ibid. 814. — He is unanimously 
found Ouilty, ibid. 825. — His Speech on 
being called upon for Judgment, ibid. 827. 
—-The Lord High Steward's Address to him 
on passing Sentence, ibid. 833. — Account 
5xf kis Conduct immediately previous to his 
Execution, ibid. 842. — Paper delivered by 
liim to the Sheriffs at the place of Execution, 
ibid. 854. — ^The Lord President Forbes's 
Letter to him, dissuading him from joining 
ia the RebeUioD, ibid. 709 (note). — Lord 
Lovat's Letter to Murray of Broughton, ibid. 
748. — His Letter to the young Pretender, 
ibid. 751. — His Letter to the Laird of 
Locheil^ ibid. 754. — His Correspondence 
with his Son, the Master of Lovat, ibid. 759. 
— rLetters g( the young Pretender and 
Cosaeron of Lochiel to him^ ibid. 770.; 

IX)VE, Christopher.- His Trial in the High 
Court of Justice for High Treason against 
the Commonwealth in holding Correspond- 
ence with the Ring, 3 Car. 2, 1651, 5 vol. 
43. — The Charge exhibited by the Attorney 
General against him^ ib. 45. — He prays that 
Counsel may t>e assigned him before he 
^eads, ibid. 54. — He pleads Not Guilty, 
raid. 66. — ^The Solicitor Getaeral opens the 
Charge against him, ibid. ib. — ^The Attorney 
GenerarsSpe€ch,ibid.73. — Evidence against 
him, ibid. 76. — He objects to the compe« 
tency of the first Witness, on the ground of 
his having confessed himself guilty of Trea- 
^ ibid. ib.-^-'The Objecttcm is oTerruled, 



ibid, ib.^— Sotee of the Witness^ agiiiiiist 
him refuse to swear, ibid. 113, 132. — His 
Defence, ibid. 136. — ^The Attorney General's 
Reply, ibid. 166.— The Counsel for the 
Commonwealth reply upon the Evidence, 
ibid. 173. — He presents Exceptions in law 
to the Charge, and the Couft assign him 
Counsel to argue them, ibid. 206. — Mr* 
Hale argues the Exceptions, ibid. 214. — 
Sentence of Death against him. ibid. 251. — 
His Speech and Conduct on the Scaffold, ibid, 
ib.— LordClarendon*sNoticeofhim,ibia.267. 

LOVE, John*-^His Trial with others at Edin^. 
burgh for Rebellion, Treason, and Lese 
Majestic^ 3 Jac. 2, 1687, 12 voU 523.«^The 
Indictment, ibid. 524. — Ailments on the 
Relevancy of the Indictmeti't, ibid^ 527.-*>The 
Court decide that it is relevant, ibid. 54d«— 
The Counsel for the Panels object that one 
of the Witnesses is insane and infamous, 
ibid. 550.— The Court, after hearing Evi- 
dence as to the Objections, admit the Wit- 
ness, ibid. 559. — Evidence against them, 
ibid. 561. — ^They are acquitted, ibid. 567. — 
Fountainhairs Account of this Case, ibid. 568. 

LOVELL, Salathiel, Counsel, 10 vol. 61. 

-**M Sir Salathiel, Seijeant-at*Law, and 



rn-rnm^** 



Recorder of London> 14 vol. 1274-^He 
passes Sentence on Peter Cook, convicted of 
High Treason in being concerned in the 
Assassination Plot, 13 vol. 395. — ^He Was 
of Counsel for the Crown in conducting the 
Evidence on the Bill of Attainder against 
Sir John Fenwick, ibid. 546. 

Baton Of the Bsefavquer^ 



Q Ann, 15 vol, 466» 

LOWICK, Robert.-His Trial fot High Trea- 
son in being concerned in the Assassination 
Plot, 8 Will. 3, 1696, 13 vol. 267.— The 
Indictment, ibid. 139.— He pleads Not 
Guilty, ibid* 142.— -His Counsel object to 
the Indictment that the words " then and 
there*' are omitted to a. material Allegation, 
ibid. 267.— The Objection is overruled, ibid. 
277. — Evidence against him, ibid. 285.--Sir 
Bartholomew Shower's Speech in his De- 
fence, ibid. 296. — Lord Holt's Charge to the 
Jury, ibid. 303.-— The Jury find him Guilty, 
ibid. 307. — His Sentence, ibid. 308. — Paper 
delivered by him to the Sheriff at the place 
of Execution, ibid. 310. 

LOWRIE, William, of Blackwood.— Difliculty 
arising from the different names by which 
he is called by Historians, 9 vol. 1025 (note). 
— His Trial at Edinburgh for Treason in 
harbouring Rebels, after the Battle of Both- 
well Bridge, 35 CAr. 2, 1683, ibid. 1021.— 
The Indictment^ ibid, ib.— The additional 
Indictment, ibid. 1030«— ^Debate on the 
Relevancy of the Indictments, ibid. 1031.— 
The Court hold the Indictments relevant, 
ibid. 1039.--Further Debate on the Rele* 
vancy, ibid. 1042.— The Court hold the 
Indictments relevant in some parts, smd re- 
ject them as to others^ ibid. 1049*«-*Bfide&ce 



80 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



for the Prosecution, ihid. ib. — ^He is. foiiiid 
Guilty^ and sentenced to be beheaded, ibid. 
1054. — Fountainhall's Notices of this Case, 
. ilnd. 1021 (note), — ^Burnet's Account of it, 
ibid. 1025 (note). 

LOWTHER,^Sir Gerald. See Ratdiff; Sir 
George, 

LUCAS, Sir Charles.— He is taken with Sir 
George Lisle and Sir Bernard Gascoigne at 
the Surrender of Colchester to Fairfax, and 
condemned by a Council of War to be shot, 

4 vol. 1201. — Sir Charles Lucas and Sir 
George Lisle are shot. Sir Bernard Gascoigne 

' is reprieved, ibid. 1202. — Lord Clarendon's 
Account of this Transaction, ibid . 1 201 (note). 
— ^His Character of Lucas and Lisle, ibid. 
1202 (note). — Mr. Hume's Account of their 
Execution, ibid. 1203 (note). 

LUDERS, Alexander. — Extracts from his 
*' Considerations on the Law of High Trea- 
son in the Article of Levying War," 5 vol. 
972 (note), 6 vol. 899 (note), 902 (note). — 
His Translation of the Statute of Treasons, 

5 vol. 975 Tnote). — ^His Remarks upon the 
principle of qonstructive Levying War, as 
laid down in the Cases of Messenger and 
of Dammaree and Purchase, 6 vol. 902 (note), 
1 5 vol. 522 (note).— His Illustrations of the 
probable meaning of the terms " compassing 
and imagining," in the Statute of Treasons, 
7 vol. 961 (note). 

LUDLAM, Isaac: See Brandrethy Jeremiah. 
Luddites* — His Trial, under a Special Com- 
mission at Derby, for High Treason in being 
concerned in the Luddite Insurrection, 57 
Geo. 3, 1817, 32 vol. 1135.— The Indict- 
ment, ibid. 755.— The Attorney General's 
Speech for the Prosecution, ibid. 1137.— 
Evidence for the Crown, ibid. 1149. — Mr. 
Cross's Speech for the Prisoner, ibid. 1217. 
—Mr. Denman's Speech on summing up 
tlie Evidence for the Prisoner, ibid. 1226. — 
Reply of the Solicitor General, ibid. 1253. — 
Mr. Justice Abbott's Charge to the Jury, 
ibid. 1271. — The Jury find him Guilty, ibid. 
1306. — He is executed, ibid. 1394. 

LUKE, Sir Walter, Judge of K. B. 26 Hen. 8, 

I vol. 398. 

LUMSDEN, Alexander. See Anderson^ Lionel 

LUMSDEN,Mr. Sae HoUit^ Sir John. 

LUTTRELLi Edward, 16 vol. 1. See Beatofi, 
Hugh. 

LUTTRELL, Narcissus. — Extracts from his 

. *' Brief Historical Relation" respecting the 

Proceedings gainst persons accused of being 

implicated in the Rye-House Plot, 9 vol. 1005. 

LUTWYCHE, Sir Edward, Seijeant-at-Law, 
and Chief Justice of Chester, 10 vol. 559, 

II vol. 511. 

a Judge of C. P. 



4 Jac. 2, 12 vol. 124. — ^He was excepted out 
of the Act of Indemnity which passed iu 
1690| ibid. 1241. 



LUTWYCHE, Edward, Counsel, 15 ▼ol. 134d. 
— His Speech in Reply for the Commons on 
the Impeachment ot Lord Chancellor Mac- 
clesfield, 16 vol. 1361. 

LYSTER, Sir Richard, Chief Baroa of the 
f^chequer, 26 Hen. 8, 1 vol. 398. 

■ Chief Justice of K. B. 

38 Hen. 8, 1 vol. 458. 

MAC CANN, John.— His Trial at Dublin for 
being concerned in the Irish Rebellion, 38 
Geo. 3, 1798, 27 vol. 399.— The Indictment, 
ibid. ib. — Speech of the Solicitor General 
for the Prosecution, ibid. 405 (note). — Evi- 
dence for the Prosecution, ibid. 406.— Evi- 
dence for the Prisoner, ibid. 437. — Evidence 
in Reply, ibid. 448. — Mr. Baron Smith's 
Charge to the Jury, ibid. 449.— The Jury 
find him Guilty, ibid. 454.— Sentence of 
Death is passed upon him, ibid, ib.— He is 
executed, ibid. 456. 

MAC CANN, John, alias Mac Kenna. See 
Killen, John* 

MACCLESFIELD, Charles, Earl of. See 
Gerard of Brandon^ Lord. — Proceedings in 
an Action of Scandalum Magnaturo, brought 
by him against John Starkey, one of the 
Grand Jury of the County of Chester, for 
presenting him as a disaffected person, 36 
& 37 Car. 2, 1684-1685, 10 vol. 1329.— 
Abstract of the Declaration, ibid. ib. & 1338. 
—The Defendant pleads, that he returned 
the matter charged as libellous, in the dis- 
charge of his duty as a Grand Juror, ibid. 
1333.— The Plaintiff demurs specially to the 
Plea, ibid. 1335. — Report of the Arguments 
of Counsel in this Case, from Sir William 
Williams's MSS. ibid. 1337. -Mr. .Ward's 
Argument for the Plaintiff, ibid. 1338.—Mr* 
Holt's Argument for the Defendant, ibid. 
1351. — Observations upon some parts of 
Mr. Holt's Argument, from 6ir William 
Williams's MSS. ibid. 1382.— Mr. Wil- 
liams's Argument in Reply for the Plaintiff, 
ibid. 1387. — Judgment is given for the De- 
fendant, ibid. 1414. — ^Mr. Justice Street's 
Note of the Pleadings, Argument, and Au- 
thorities in this Case, communicated by Mr. 
Hargrave, ibid. 1413.— He was afterwards 
outlawed for High Treason, ibid. 1414.— 
The Indictment for High Treason, from 
Tremaine's Entries, ibid. 1416. 

MACCLESFIELD, Thomas, Earl of. Lord 
Chancellor. See Parkery Sir Thomas. — His 
Trial upon an Impeachment by the House 
of Commons for High Crimes and Misde- 
meanours in the execution of his Office of 
Lord Chancellor, 10 Geo. 1, 1725, 16 vol. 
767. — ^The Articles of Impeachment, ibid. 
768.— His Answer thereto, ibid. 784l — Re* 

, plication of the Commons, ibid. 800. — Sir 
G. Oxenden's Speech on opening the general 
Charge for the Commons, ibid. 801 .—Speech 
of Sir Clement Wearg (Solicitor General) on 
the general Charge, ibid. 813,— Sir Willian 



THE STATE TRIAtS. 



81 



Sttickland's Speech on opening the 5th, .6th, 
7th, and 8th Articles, respecting the Sale of 
Masterships in Chancery, ibid. 817. — Mr. 
Doddiogton's Speech on opening the 9th 
Article, respecting the Sale of the Office of 
Cleikof the Custodies, ibid. 822.— Evidence 
respecting the Oath of Office taken by the 
Lord Chancellor, ibid. 827. — Evidence re- 
specting the Oath of a Master in Chancery, 
and the nature of his Office, ibid. 830;— 
Evidence respecting the profits of the Office 
of Lord Chancellor, ibid. 840. — Evidence 
on the 9th Article, respecting the Sale of the 
Office of Clerk of the Custodies, ibid. 843. 
—Evidence on the 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th 
Articles, respecting the Sale of Masterships 
in Chancery, ibid. 858. — Mr. Onslow's Speech 
on opening the 11th Article, respecting the 
admission of persons of small property 
into the Office of Masters in Chancery, ibid. 
895.— -Mr. Palmer's Speech on opening the 
12th Article^ respecting the connivance at 
improper practices in the Offices of the 
Masters with respect to the Money of the 
Suitors, ibid. 900. — Evidence in support of 
the nth and 12th Articles, ibid. 901.— Mr. 
Gyhbon's Speech on opening the 13th and 
14th Articles, respecting a corrupt Order for 
an Arrangement in the Case of Fleetwood 
Dormer, one of the Masters, who had em- 
hezzled the Money of Suitors, ibid. 924. — 
Mr. Hedges's Speech on opening the same 
Articles, ibid. 929. — Evidence in support of 
the 13th and 14th Articles, ibid. 934.— Sir 
John Rushout's Speech on opening the 15th, 
16th, and 17th Articles, respecting the use of 
improper means to conceal the deficiency 
in Dormer's OflSce, ibid. 955. — Mr. Thomp- 
son's Speech on opening the same Articles, 
ibid. 966. — Evidence in support of the 15th, 
16th, and 17th Articles, ibid. 970.— Mr. 
Plammer opens the 18th Article, respecting 
the permission of the Masters in Chancery 
to traffic with the Money of Suitors, ibid. 
1002. — ^Mr. Cary's Speech on opening the 
same Article, ibid. 1005. — Evidence in sup- 
port of the 18th Article, ibid. 1007.— Lord 
Morpeth's Speech on opening the 19th 
Article, respecting the suggesting to the 
Masters in Chancery to make a false state- 
ment of their property, in order to prevent 
a Parliamentary Inquiry, ibid, 1025. — Mr. 
SnelVs Speech on opening the same Article, 
ibid. 1032. — Evidence in support of tlie 
19th Article, ibid. 1036.— Mr. West's Speech 
on snfhming up the Evidence in support of 
the Articles, ibid. 1057.— Serjeant Probyn*s 
Speech on opening the general Defence of 
the Earl, ibid. 1080.— Dr. Sayer's Speech 
on the general Defence, ibid. 1105.— Mr. 
Iingard*s. Speech dn opening the Defence 
to the Articles charging the Sale of Master- 
%8 in Chaocery, and the Office of Clerk 
oHhe Custodies, ibid. 1118.— Evidence in 
ropport of the Defence to the 9th Article, 
tcspecting the Sale of the Office of Clerk of 
the Custodies,* ibid, U29.— The Managers 
yOL, XXXIV. 



for the Commons ol»ect to Evidence of the 
practice of former Chancellors, ibid. ib. — 
The Lords admit the Evidence, ibid. 1136. 
—The Managers object to Evidence of the 
Sale of the Office of Cursitor by former 
Chancellors, ibid. 1142. — ^The. Lords resolve 
not to admit the Evidence, ibid. 1144. — 
Evidence in support of the Defeiice to the 
Articles respecting the Sale of Masterships 
in Chancery, ibid. 1146. — Mr. Robins's 
Speech on opening the Defence to the 11th 
and 12th Articles, respecting the admission 
of persons of small property into the Office 
of Masters, and the connivance at improper 
practices by them with the Money of Suitors, 
ibid. 1166. — Evidence in support of the 
Defence to these Articles, ibid. 1180.-^Mr. 
Strangers Speech on opening the Defence to 
the 13th and 14th Articles, respecting the 
Order for an Arrangement on occasion of 
the deficiency in Dormer's Office, ibid. 
1191. — Evidence in support of the Defence 
to these Articles, ibid. 1195. — Mr. Strange's 
Speech on opening the Defence to the 15th, 
16th, and 17th Articles, respecting the use 
of improper means to conceal the deficiency 
in Dormer's Office, ibid. 1211.— Evidence 
in support of the Defence to these Articles, 
ibid. 1216. — ^Mr. Lingard's Speech in the 
Earl's Defence as to the 18th Article, re- 
specting the permission of the Masters to 
traffic with the Suitors' Money, ibid. 1228. 
— Mr. Robins's Speech on opening the 
Defence to the 19th Article, respecting the 
suggesting to the Masters to make a false 
statement of their property in order to 
prevent an inquiry, ibid. 1232. — Evidence 
in support of the pefence to this Article, 
ibid. 1236. — Evidence of the general Cha- 
racter and Conduct of the Earl in his Office, 
in answer to the Charge of corrupt intention, 
ibid. 1241. — Mr. Lingard's Speech on sum- 
ming up the Evidence for the Defence, ibid. 
1247.— Mr. Robins's Speech in support of 
the Defence, ibid. 1254. — Mr. Strange's 
Speech, ibid. 1255.— The Earl's Speech at 
the close of his Defence, ibid. 1265. — Mr. 
Serjeant Pengelly's Speech in Reply to the 
Earl's Defence to the 5th, 6lh, 7th, 8th, 9th, 
11th, and 12th Articles, ibid. 1330.— Mr. 
Lutwyche's Speech in Reply to the Defence 
to the other Articles, ibid. 1361.— Evidence 
in Reply, ibid. 1375. — He is unanimously 
found Guilty, ibid. 1391. — He is sentenced 
to pay a Fine of 30,000/. ibid. 1395.— The 
House of Commons resolve that the Thanks 
of the House be given to the Managers, ibid. 
1393. — Extracts from the Journals of the 
House of Lords respecting the Debates upon 
the Sentence to be passed upon the Earl of 
Macclesfield, ibid. 1397. 

i 

MACDANIEL, Stephen.— His Trial, with 
John Berry, James Egan, and James Salmon, 
at the Old Bailey, for being accessary to a 

' Highway Robbery, 27 Geo. 2, 1755, 19 vol. 
745.— The Indictment, ibid. 746.— Evidence 
G 



99 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



for the Proseeutiony ibid. 747. — ^Their De^ 
fences, ibid. 774. — ^The Jury find a Special 
Verdict, ibid, 777. — Argument of the Special 
Verdict before the Twelve Judges, ibid. 778. 
-—Mr. Hume CampbeU's Argument for the 
Crown, ibid. 779.— *Mr. Madan's Argument 
on the same side, ibid. 786. — Serjeant Davy*s 
Argument for the Prisoners, ibid. 790. — Mr. 
Aston^s Argument on the same side, ibid. 
797. — Mr, Hume Campbell's Reply, ibid. 
800.<— Mr. Justice Foster delivers the opinion 
of the Judges, that the Offence was not a 
Felony under the Statutes, ibid. 801. — They 
are again indicted for a Conspiracy, ibid. 
808.— The Indictment, ibid, ib.— They are 
found Guilty, and sentenced to seven years 
Imprisonment, to stand twice in th^ Pillory, 
to find Sureties for three years, and to pay a 
Fine of one Mark each, ibid. 809. — >£gan is 
killed in the Pillory, ibid. ib. — Macdaniel 
and Berry are tried for Murder, in causing 
Joshua Kidden to be convicted and executed 
for Robbery, knowing him to be innocent, 
ibid. 810.— They are found Guilty, but 
the Court respite the Judgment, in order 
that it may be argued whether the Offence 
amounts to Murder, ibid. 811.— The At- 
torney General declines to argue the point, 
and they are discharged, ibid. 813. 

MACDONALD, Archibald. Counsel.— His 
Argument for the Plaintiff in the Case of the 
Island of Grenada, 20 vol. 287. — His Argu- 
ment in support of the Rule for a Criminal 
Information against Captain Baillie, for a 
Libel upon the Governors of Greenwich 
Hospital, 21 vol. 61. 



■^■i* 



97 Geo. 3, 22 vol. 183. 



■ Solicitor General, 

• 

Attorney General. 

— His Speech for the Prosecution on the 
Trial of John Stockdale, for a Libel on the 
House of Commons, 22 vol. 247. — His Reply 
in the same Case, ibid. 285.— His Speech 
for the Prosecution on the Trial of Thomas 
Paine, for publishing the Second Part of the 
" Rights of Man," ibid. 380. 

' Chief Baron of 



the Exchequer. — He was one of the Judges 
who presided at Hardy*s Trial for High 
Treason, 24 vol. 221. — His Charge to the 
Jury on the Trial of Governor Wall for 
Murder, 3d vol. 143. 

MACIK)NALD, /Eneas, alias Angus.— Fos- 
ter's Report of the Proceedings against htm 
for High Treason in being concerned in the 
Rebellion of 1745, 21 Geo. 2, 1747, 18 vol. 
857. — His Defence is, that he was born in 
the Dominions of the King of France, ibid. 
858. — The Jury find him Guilty, but recom- 
mend him to Mercy, and he is afterwards 
pardoned, ibid. 860. — Whilst un.der Sentence 
: of Death, he is charged with Process in a 
Civil Suit, which the Court refuse to set 
aside; ibid. ib« 



MACDONALD of Glenco, 13 vol. 879. See 
GlencOf Mastacre of, 

MACEWEN, James.— Proceedings against 
him and others, at Glasgow, for administer- 
ing unlawful Oaths, 57 Geo. 3, 1817, 33 vol. 
629. — They are outlawed for not appearing, 
ibid. 632. 

MACFARLANE, William. See Codiing, 
William. 

MACGROWTHEa, Alexander— His Trial 
for High Treason in being concerned in the 
Rebellion of 1745, 20 Geo. 2, 1746, 18 vol. 
391. —His Defence, ibid. 392. — ^He is con- 
victed, but is afterwards reprieved, ibid. 394. 
—Foster's Report of his Case, ibid. 392. 

MACGUIRE, Connor, Lord.-His Trial at 
the Bar of the Court of King's Bench for 
High Treason in being concerned in the Irish 
Massacre, 20 Car. 1, 1645, 4 vol. 653.— 
May's Account ,of the Massacre, ibid. 654 
(note). — The Indictment, ibid. 653.— 'He 
pleads Not Guilty, ibid. 662. — He also 
pleads his Peerage in Abatement, and that 
ne ought to be tried by his Peers in Ireland, 
ibid. 663. — Mr. Prynn*s Argument for the 
Prosecution against this Plea, ibid. 690.— The 
Court decide that an Irish Baron may he 
tried by a Jury in England, ibid. 665. — The 
Parliament approve of the Judgment of the 
Court, ibid, ib,— He asks for time to bring 
Witnesses from Ireland, which is refused, 
ibid. 666. — He challenges all the Jury who 
appear, ibid. 667. — Whereupon a Distringas 
i> issued, returnable the next day, ibid, 669. 
— Having gone through all his Challenges, 
he requires that each Juryman, as he appears, 
may be asked on Oath, whether he has any 
share in the forfeited Rebels' lands in Ire- 
land, ibid. 670. — ^This is done, ibid. 671.— 
The Jury are sworn, and the Evidence pro- 
duced against him, ibid. ib. — His own Ex- 
amination given in Evidence, ibid. 674.— 
His Defence, ibid. 682. — He is found Guilty, 
ibid. 684. — -Sentence of Death passed upoD 
him, ibid. 685. — He petitions Parliament to 
remit a part of his Sentence, ibid. 687.— 
This is refused, ibid. ib. — His Conduct at 
the place of Execution, ibid. ib. 

MACGUIRE, Michael.— Proceedings on his 
Trial in Ireland for High Treason, in en- 
couraging one of the King's Soldiers to he- 
come a Defender, 36 Geo. 3, 1795, 26 vol. 
293.— The principal Witness for the Prose- 
cution being unable to identify his person, 
he is acquitted, ibid. 294. 

MACINTOSH, James, Counsel.— He was 
one of the Counsel §or the Earl of Thanet, 
on his Trial at Maidstone for a Riot, in 
attempting to rescue Arthur O'Connor, 2T 
vol. 821. —His Speech for the Defendant on 
the Trial of Peltierfor a Libel on Buonaparte, 
when First Consul of the French ReinibliC) 
28 vol. 563* 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



MACINTOSH, Joha.—Hw Trial for High 
Treason at Dublin, under a Special Com- 
inission of Oyer and Terminer, for being 
concerned in the Irish Insurrection, 43 Oeo. 
3, 1803, 28 vol. I215.--The Indictment, 
ibid. ib. — Speech of the Attorney General 
for the Prosecution, ibid. 1218. — Bvidence 
for the Prosecution, ibid. 1220. — ^Mr. Mac 
Nally*s Speech in his Defence, ibid. 1233. — 
The Jury find him Guilty, ibid. 1239. — ^He 
is executed, ibid. 1240. 

MACKAY, George, 21 vol. 1045. See Sirattan, 
George, 

MACKINLEY, A ndrew. — Proceedings against 
him in the High Court of Justiciary in Edin- 
burgh for administering unlawful Oaths, 57 
Geo. 3, 1817, 33 vol. 275.— The Indictment, 
ibid. 276. — Mr. Cranstoun's Argument 
against the Relevancy of the Indictment, ibid. 
282.^-Mr. Grant's Argument on the same 
side, ibid. 309. — Mr. Drummond's Argu- 
ment in support of the Relevancy of the 
Indictment, ibid. 329. — Mr. Clerk's Reply, 
ibid. 343. — ^The Court order Informations 
to be delivered, ibid. 360. — ^The Lord Ad- 
vocate serves another Indictment, ibid. 363. 
—Information for the Crown, ibid. 372.— 
Information for the Prisoner, ibid. 396. — 
Supplementary Information for the Prisoner, 
ibid. 453. — Lord Hermand's Argument on 
delivering his Opinion in favour of the Rele- 
vancy of the Indictment, ibid. 493. — Lord 
Gillies's Argument on delivering his Opinion 
against the Relevancy, ibid. 502. — ^Lord Pit- 
milly's Argument in favour of the Relevancy, 
ibid. 517. — Lord Reston's Argument on the 
same side, ibid. 526.-^The Lord Justice 
Clerk's Argument on the same side, ibid. 
535.— Interlocutor of Relevancy, ibid. 553. — 
Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 560.^- 
The Lord Advocate having finished the Evi- 
dence for the Prosecution, declines proceed- 
ing further with the Trial, ibid. 620.— The 
Jury, under the direction of the Court, find 
the Libel Not Proven, ibid. 627. — Address 
of the Lord Justice Clerk to the Prisoner 
upon his Discharge, ibid. ib. 

MACK WORTH, Sir Humphrey.— His Speech 
in the House of Commons in the Debate on 
the Great Case of Ashby and White, 14 vol. 
761. — He publishes a Pamphlet upon the 
subject under discussion in that Case, ibid. 
695 (note). 

MACLANE, David— His Trial for High 
Treason at Quebec in Lower Canada, for 
heing concerned in a design to overthrow 
the Government there, 37 Geo. 3, 1797, 26 
▼ol. 7el. — Charge of Mr. Osgoode, Chief 
Justice of the Province, to the Grand Jury 
assembled under a Special Commission for 
his Trial, ibid. 722.-~The Grand Jury find 
a true Bill against him, ibid. 731.— The 
Indictment, ibid. 733. — ^The Attorney Gene- 
ral's Speech for the Prosecution, ibid. 749. 
—Evidence for the Prosecution/ ibid. 763. 



8a 



•—The Prisoners SpM6h in U$ Deteoe, 
ibid. 780. — Speeches of hif Coumel, ibid; 
783. — Reply of the Attorney General, ibid* 
789.— The Chief Justice's Charge to the 
Jury, ibid, 793.— The Jury find bim Guilty, 
ibid. 811. — His Counsel move in Arrest of 
Judgment, ibid. 812. — ^The Attomejr General 
shows cause against the Motion, ibid. 814. 
— ^The Court overrule the Objection, ibid. 
822.-^The Chief Justice passes Sentence of 
Death upon himi ibid. 824,«*He is executed^ 
ibid. 826. 

MACLAREN, Alexander.-^Pfoeeedings in 
the High Court of Justiciary in Scotland on 
his Trial, with Thomas Baird, for Sedition^ 
57 Geo. 3, 1817, 83 vol. l.--.>The Indict- 
ment, ibid. ib. — ^Defences for the Panek^ 
ibid. 6.— Explanation of the Defences by 
the Counsel for the Panels, ibid. 8. — Inter- 
locutor of Relevancy, ibid. 18.^^£vidence 
for the Prosecution, ibid. ib^-«£vidence in 
Exculpation, ibid. 40.<~The Lord Advocate's 
Speech for the Prosecution, ibid. 49.'— Mr. 
Clerk's Speech in Defence of Madareo, ibid* 
73. — Mr. Jeffrey's Speech in Defence of 
Baird, ibid. 88.— The Lord Justice Clerk's 
Charge to the Jury, ibid. 121. — ^The Jury 
find them Guilty, but recommend them io 
the clemency of the Court, ibid. 135.— *They 
are sentenced to Six Months imprisonment, 
and to find Security for three Years, ibid. 137. 

MACLAUCHLAN, William. See Porteout, 
Captain John. — His Trial at Edinburgh foe 
Mobbing, Murder, and other Crimes, 10 
Geo. 2, 1737, 17 vol. 993.— The Indictment, 
ibid. ib. — Defences for the Panel, with the 
Answers thereto, ibid. 997.— Interlocutor of 
relevancy, ibid. 1002. — ^The Jury acquit hinif 
ibid. 1003. 

MACPHERSON, James.^ExtrtoU from his 
Life of King James the Second, respeeting 
the Proceedings against Lord Clarendon, 6 
vol. 291.— Doubts of the Authenticity of 
the Life of James the Second, as published 
by him, ibid. 297.— Lord Holland's Detection 
of the Imposture in bis Address prefixed to 
Mr. Fox's Historical Work, ibid. 299. 

MADDER, John. See Green, C^em Thomas. 

MAHONY, Matthew* See Goo4cre, Gg^m 

Samuel, 

MAITLAND, Charles, Lord Haltoa.-<~Ppo« 

ceedings against him in Scotiand for Per- 
jury in his Evidence on the Trial of James 
Mitchel, for attempting to murder Archbishop 
Sharp, 33 Car. 2, 1681, 6 vol. 1261.— Pe- 
tition of Mitchel to the Lords of the Articles^ 
ibid. 1263.— The Letters of Lord Halton to 
Lord Kincardin, upon which the Charge 
against Mitchel rested, ibid. ib. — Lord 
Halton's Answer to the Petition, itnd. 1265^ 
—His £videnceonMitchellBTrial,ibid. 1256. 
— Mitchel's Second Petition, with the Answer 
thereto,ibid.l267.—TheLopdBof the Articles 
declare their <^ini0At»f Lord HaHoa's Inoo^ 
Q 2 



84 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



, cence, t ibid. - 1268.— Lord Fountainhall's 
. Account oflhese Proceedings,, ibid. 1270. 

MALLET, Sir Thomas, Judge of K. B. 18 
Car.l , 6 vol. 74. — His Answer, when required 
to publish from the Bench certain Resolu- 
tions of the Parliament in behalf of the 
Ordinance of the Militia, and against the 
' Commission of Array, 4 vol. 153 (note).— 
He is sent to the Tower on his refusing so 
to do, ibid. ib.—He had been before im- 
prisoned for not giving Notice to the Par- 
liament of the contents of the Kentish 
Petition immediately upon his seeing it, 
ibid. ib.—He was a Judge of K. B. after 
the Restoration, 5 vol. 971.— He was one of 
the Commissioners for the Trial of the Regi- 
cides, ibid. 980. ^ 

MANCHESTER, Henry, Earl of, Lord Privy 

• Seal. — His Speech on delivering his Opinion 

- in the Star Chamber in favour of a mild 

Sentence upon Henry Sherfield for breaking 

a Painted Window in a Church at Salisbury, 

3 vol. 556. 

MANCHESTER, Edward, Earl of, Lord 

Chamberlain. See Kimbolton, Edward^ Ixn-d, 

— He was Speaker of the House of Lords, 

pro tempore, during the Commonwealth, 4 

' vol. 1203.— He sat as a Judge on the Trial 

of the Regicides, 5 vol. 986.— Ludlow's Re- 

markupon his conductin this respect, ibid. ib. 

(note). — He sat as one of the Lords Triers on 

theTrial of Lord Morley for Murder, 6 vol. 775. 

M ANSEL, Sir Robert. See Whitebcke, James, 

MANSFIELD, James, Counsel, 19 vol. 1080, 
20 vol. 1.240, 1319,21 vol. 1061.— His Argu- 
ment iq the Case of the Duchess of Kings- 
ton, that a Sentence of the Ecclesiastical 
Court, annulling the first Marriage, is a con- 
clusive Answer to the Charge of Bigamy, 
20 vol. 403. — His Argument in support of 
the Duchess's claim of Privilege of Peerage 
upon her Conviction, ibid. 634. 

— — ^— Sir James, SoliciPor General. 
— His Speech in Reply for the Prosecution, 
on the Trial of Lord George Gordon for 
High Treason, 21 vol. 621. — His Speech in 
Reply for the Prosecution on the Trial of 
De la Motte for High Treason, ibid. 794. 

MANSFIELD, . Richard. See Sacheverell, 

William, 

MANSFIELD, William, Earl of. Chief Justice 

. of K. B. See Murray^ The Hon. William, 

. — His celebrated Speech on delivering the 

Judgment of the Court for the Reversal 

. of the Outlawry in the Case of John 

Wilkes, 19 vol. 1098.— Another Report 

of a part of that Speech, ibid. 1401. — 

Contemporary Remarks upon it, ibid. 1404 

(note), ibid. 1113 (note).— He delivers the 

Judgment.of the Court in the Case of Fabrigas 

. y. Mostyn, 20 vol. 226. — His Judgment in 

the Case of the Island of Grenada, ibid. 320. 

—His Charge to the Jury on the Trial of 

Johtt Home for ^ ^b^li ibid, 759«— His 



Charge to the Jury on the Trial of John 
Almon for publishing Junius's Letter to 
the King, ibid. 836.— His Charge to the 
Jury on the Trial of John Miller for re- 
printing Junius's Letter to the King, ibid. 
892. — He'delivers the Judgment of the Court 
of King's Bench in the Case of the King v. 
Woodfall, respecting the limit of the powers 
of Juries in Cases of Libel, ibid. 917.— 
This Judgment is afterwards read by him in 
the House of Lords, ibid. 921.— Questions 
proposed to him by Lord Camden respecting 
the Doctrine contained in this Judgment, 
ibid. ib.—He delivers the Judgment of the 
Court of King's Bench on discharging the 
Rule for a Criminal Information against 
Captain Baillie, 21 vol. 66.— His Charge 
to the Jury on the Trial of Lord George 
Gordon for Treason, ibid. 644.— His Charge 
to the Jury in the Case of the Madras 
Council, ibid. 1219.— His Charge to the 
Jury on the Trial of Charles Bembridge for 
Frauds committed by him as an Accountant 
in the Office of the Pay-Master General, 22 
vol. 74. — He delivers the Judgment of the 
. Court on discharging a Motion to arrest the 
Judgment, or to grant a new Trial in that 
Case, ibid. 150. 

M ANWARING, Roger.— Proceedings against 
him for preaching Sermons in favour of 
Loans, and the power of the King to enforce 
them without the authority of Parliament, 
4 Car. 1, 1628, 3 vol. 335.— The Declara- 
tion of the House of Commons against him, 
ibid. 338. — Mr. Pym'a Speech at a Con- 
ference with the House of Lords on deliver- 
ing the Charge against him, ibid. 340.— He 
is brought to the Bar of the House of Lords 
to answer to the Charge, ibid. 352. — His 
Defence, ibid. 353.— The Judgment against 
him, ibid. 356. — ^His Submission and Re- 
cantation, ibid. 357. 

MANWOOD, Sir Roger, Chief Baron of the 
, Exchequer, 26 Eliz. 1 vol. 1096, 1229, 1251. 
— His Speech in the Star Chamber on de- 
claring the manner of the Death of the Earl 
of Northumberland, ibid. 1122. — He was 
one of the Commissioners appointed for the 
Trial of Mary, Queen of Scots, ibid. 1167. 

MARCH, Earl of. See Mortimer, Roger, 

MARGAROT, Maurice.— His Trial at Edin- 
burgh for Sedition, in becoming a Member 
of an illegal Assembly called the General 
Convention, 34 Geo. 3, 1794, 23 vol. 603. 
— ^At the commencement of the Trial, he 
objects to the absence of the Lord Justice 
General, ibid. ib. — ^The Objection is orcr- 
ruled, ibid. 608.— The Indictment, ibid. ib. 
— His Objections to the relevancy of the 
Indictment, ibid. 616. — Answer of the So- 
licitor General thereto, ibid. 617.— Tbe 
Court decide that the Indictment is relevant, 
ibid. 622.— Evidence for the prosecution* 
ibid. 632.— Evidence for the Panel, ibid. 

en,-— Tph.^ Lprd Advoca^e'a Speech foif tw 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



BS 



Piosecution, ibid. 679. — ^Margaret's Speech 
in his Defence, ibid. 710. — ^The Court sum 
up the Evidence, ibid. 763. — ^The Jury find 
him Guilty, ibid. 768. — The Court sentence 
himtoTransportation for Fourteen Years, ibid. 
771. — ^His subsequent Conduct,' ibid. 1412. 
— He dies soon after his return to England 
in 1815, ibid. 1413. 

MARKHAM, Sir Griffin.— He is tried with 
Sir Edward Parham, George Brooke, Bar- 
tliolomew Brookesby, Anthony Copley, Wil- 
liam Watson, and William Clarke, for High 
Treason, in being concerned in Sir Walter 
Raleigh's Plot, 1 James 1, 1603, 2 vol. 61. 
—Indictment against them, ibid, ib.— They 
are all found Guilty, except Sir Edward 
Parham, ibid. 65. — Letter containing an Ac- 
count of the Proceedings respecting them 
after their Trial, ibid. ib. — Watson, Clarke, 
and Brooke are executed, ibid. 66. — Mark- 
ham is pardoned at the place of Execution, 
ibid. ib. — ^The King's Warrant for suspend- 
ing the Execution of Markham, ibid. 69. 

MARLBOROUGH, Charles, Duke of. See 
Barnard, WUUam. 

MARLBOROUGH, John Churchill, Duke of. 
— ^Anecdote respecting his conduct on being 
applied to for his attendance to give Evidence 
at the Trial of the Earl of Oxford (Harley), 
15 vol. 1179. 

MARSHALL, William. See Wakeman, Sir 
George, Anderson, Lionel. 

M ARSON, John. See Cowper, Spencer, 

MARTEN, Henry, 5 vol. 1000, 1199. See 
Regicides, 

MARY, Sister to Edward the Sixth, afterwards 
Queen of England. — Proceedings on the 
part of the Lord Protector and Council re- 
specting her Non-conformity, 4 and 5 Edw. 
6, 1550-1551, 1 vol. 527.— Her Letter to the 
Lord Protector and the Council concerning 
their interference with her Religion, ibid. ib. 
— Instructions for Dr. Hoptou to answer 
her Letter, ibid. 529. — Her Second Letter 
to the Protector and the Council, remonstrat- 
iug against their summoning some of her 
household, ibid. 532. — ^The King's Letter to 
her, ibid. 533.^— Her Reply thereto, ibid. 
535. — Correspondence between her and the 
Council, respecting the Prosecution of her 
Chaplains for saying Mass at her House, 
ibid. 536. — Her Letter to the King, entreat- 
ing him not to interfere with her using Mass, 
ibid. 548. — ^The King's Answer thereto, ibid. 
549. — ^The King's Instructions td the Mes- 
sengers sent by him to her, ibid. ib. 

MARY, Queen of Scots. See Bdbington, 
Anthony, Damley, "Henry, Lord, — Evidence 
of Nicholas Hubert, alias Paris, respecting 
her Adultery with Both well, 1 vol. 942. — 
Indecent Ballads and Letters found in her 
possession, ibid. 991. — Proceedings against 
her for being concerned in Babington's Plot 
against the Qaeen, 28 Eliz. 1586> ibid. 1161. 



— Commission for her Examination .an^ 
Trial, ibid. 1166. — ^The Commissioners meet 
at Fotheringay, ibid. 1168. — She is prevailed 
upon to submit to her Trial, ibid. 1172. — 
Correspondence between her and Babington, 
ibid. 1174. — ^The Commissioners adjourn to 
the Star Chamber, ibid. 1188.— They find 
her Guilty, ibid. 1189.— The Parliament 
petition Queen Elizabeth for Execution upon 
the Sentence, ibid. 1190. — The Queen's 
Answer thereto, ibid. 1192. — The Lord 
Chancellor and the Speaker of the House of 
Commons urge reasons for the Execution 
of Mary, ibid. 1195. — Queen Elizabeth con- 
sents, ibid. 1198. — Commission for her 
Execution, ibid. 1201.— Offensive Letter of 
Mary to the Queen, ibid. 1202 (note). — Her 
Execution, ibid. 1207. — Account of the Evi- 
dence against her, from the Hardwicke State 
Papers, ibid. 1211 — Letter from Archibald 
Douglas to her, confirming the Confession 
of James, Earl ofMortoun, respecting the 
Murder of Lord Damley, ibid. 953. 

MASKALL, Henry John. — His Trial for 
assisting in the destruction of Lord* Mans- 
field's House during the Riots in 17*80, 21 
Geo. 3, 1780, 21 vol. 653. — Evidence for 
the Prosecution, ibid, ib.—- His Defence, 
ibid. 670. — Evidence for the Prisoner, ibid. 
673.— He is acquitted, ibid. 688. 

MASSEY, Major General Edward. See HolUs, 
DenziL 

MATTHEWS, John.— His Trial for High 
Treason in printing a Libel asserting the 
Title of the Pretender to the Crown, 5 Geo. 
1, 1719, 15 vol. 1323.— The Indictment, 
ibid. 1324. — He pleads Not Guilty, ibid. 
1331. — ^The Attorney GeneraFs Speech for 
the Prosecution, ibid. 1333. — Evidence 
against him, ibid. 1340. — Mr. Hungerford's 
Speech in his Defence, ibid. 1359.— Mr. 
Ketelby's Speech for him, ibid. 1364. — Evi- 
dence for the Prisoner, ibid. 1369. — Evi- 
dence in reply, ibid. 1377. — Reply of the 
Attorney General, ibid. 1378. — Chief Justice 
King's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 1386.— The 
Jury find him Guilty, ibid. 1394. — His 
Counsel make several Objections in Arrest 
of Judgment, which are overruled by the 
Court, ibid. ib. — Sentence is passed upon 
him, and he is executed, ibid. 1403. 

MAWGRIDGE, John.— His Case upon a 
Special Verdict found upon an Indictment 
for the Murder of William Cope, 17 vol. 57. 
— Lord Holt delivers the Opinion of the 
Judges, that the facts found by the Special 
Verdict amount to Murder, ibid. 59. — 
Particulars of the Case, ibid. 71. — ^Before 
the Argument of the Special Verdict, he 
escapes, but is afterwards retaken and exe- 
cuted, ibid', ib. — His Conduct immediately 
before his Execution, ibid. 72. 

MAY, William. See Dawson, Joseph. 
MAY, Thomas*— His Account of the Masaiacrc 



OBNERAL INDEX TO 



of th« PvotMttnti in Inland in the time of 
Charke the Fitit, 4 roh 654 (note). 

MAYNARD, John, Counsel, 6 rol. 348.— He 
iigns the Exceptions to the Indictment on 
the Trial of Lilburne, for returning firom 
Banishmenti ibid. 431. 

--———— Seijeant-at-Law, 6 vol. 
76f dl3, 1045. — ^Hift unworthy Conduct on 
being imprisoned by Cromwell, with Ser- 
jeant Twisden and Mr. Wadham Windham, 
for pleading in the Case of Mr. Cony, 5 vol. 
d36<— -His Speech in the House of Commons 
upon the Deoate upon the Charges against 
liord Clarendon, 6 vol. 326. — He is appoint- 
ed a Manager for the House of Commons 
on the Trial of Lord Mordant, ibid. 796. — 
He is one of the Counsel for the Crown on 
the Trial of Tonge and others for High 
Treason, ibid. 232. — He is of Counsel for 
the Prosecution on the Trial of Lord Morley 
for Murder, ibid. 776. — His Argument in 
the Case of the Earl of Shailesbury, in favour 
of the legality of a Commitment by the 
House of Lords for a Contempt, ibid. 1290. 
•*^His Speech for the Prosecution on Cole- 
man's Trial for High Treason, 7 vol. 6.— His 
Speech for the Prosecution on the Trial of 
Lord Comwallis in the House of Lords for 
Murder^ ibid. 154. 



■■ Sir John, King's Ancient Serjeant, 

8 vol. 267, 453, 1366, 10 vol. 561.— His 
Speech for the Crown on the Trial of Knox 
and Lane, for disparaging the Evidence of the 
Popish Plot, 7 vol. 767.— His Speech for the 
Crown on the Trial of Tasborough and Price 
for attempting to discourage Dugdale, one 
of the Witnesses for the Popish Plot, from 
ffivinff Evidence, ibid. 887.—His Speech 
for the Prosecution on the Trial of Sir 
Thomas Gascoigne for High Treason, in 
being concerned in the Popish Plot, ibid. 
067.— His Speech in the House of Lords as 
one of the Managers for the House of Com- 
mons, in support of the Impeachment of 
Lord Stafford, ibid. 1298. — His Speech in 
the House of Commons on the Motion for 
the Impeachment of Chief Justice Scroggs, 
8 vol. 208.— His Speech for the Defendant 
in the Case of Pritchard against Papillon, 
for a False Arrest, 10 vol. 330.— He is called 
as a Witness on Oates's Trial for Perjury, 
ibid. 1162.— His Speech in the Debate in 
the House of Commons on the Earl of 
Danby's pleading a Pardon from the King 
to an Impeachment by the Commons, ibid. 
785. — He was a King's Serjeant in 1688, 
under James the Second, 12 vol. 125.— He 
takes a part in the Debate on the Mdtion 
for impeaching Sir Adam Blair and others, 
for dispersing a treasonable Declaration of 
James the Second, in 1689| ibid. 1212. 

MAYNAHD, Sir John. See Mdlis, VenzlL 
UAYNABD, WiUiam, Lord. See Suffolk, 



MEAD, WiUiam. See Penn^ WUUtm. 

MEALMAKER, George.— His Trial in Scot- 
land for Sedition and administering unlawful 
Oaths, 38 Geo. 3, 1798, 26 vol. 1135.— The 
Indictment, ibid. ib. — Debate on the Rele- 
vancy of the Indictment, ibid. 1140. — ^The 
Court hold the Indictment relevant, ibid. 
1144. — Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 
1145.<-~The Lord Advocate's Speech to the 
Jury, ibid. 1158. — The Jury find him Guilty, 
ibid. I163.--He is sentenced to Transporta- 
tion for 14 years, ibid. ib. 

MEGGOTT, Sir George-— His Case in Par- 
liament on a complaint of Breach of Privi- 
lege, for having prosecuted at law several 
persons for their Evidence before a Com- 
mittee of the House of Commons, 14 vol. 
749 (note). 

MELANCTHON.— His Opinion respecting 
Impotence and Divorce, as produced by Arch- 
bishop Abbot, in confirmation of his Reasons 
against the Divorce of the Earl and Coun- 
tess of Essex, 2 vol. 796. 

MELDRUM, Robert. See Bemardi, John, 

MELFQRT, John, EaH of.— Proceedings in 
Scotland against him, John, Earl of Middle- 
toun, Richard, Earl of Lauderdale^ and 
others, for Treason under the Scotch Statute, 
1 Will. & Mary, c. 8, for joining in arms 
with the French King, and remaining in 
France after the 1st of June, 1693, 6 Will. 
and Mary, 1694, 13 vol. 1442. — ^They are 
outlawed for not appearing, ibid. 1443.— 
Upon the Petition of the King's Advocate, 
they are afterwards admitted to make their 
Defences, ibid! ib. f^ 

MELLOR, George.~His Trial with WiMMJ 
Thorpe and Thomas Smith for the MutWr 
of William Horsfall, under the Special Com- 
mission at York, for the Trial of peruons 
concerned in the Luddite Insurrection, 53 
Geo. 3, 1813, 31 vol. 997.— Mr. Park's 
Speech for the Prosecution, ibid. 998.— Mr. 
Justice Le Blanc's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 
1008.— The Jury find them Guilty, ibid. 
1033. — Mr. Justice Le Blanc's Address on 
passing Sentence of Death upon them, ibid, 
lb.— They are executed, ibid. 1063. See 
Ludditei, 

MELVILLE, George, Lord. See Loudom, 
JameSf Earl of, 

MELVILLE, Henry, Viscount.— His Trial in 
the House of Lords on an Impeachment of 
High Crimes and Misdemeanours by the 
Commons, 46 Geo. 3, 1806, 29 vol. 549.-- 
Introductory Note, ibid. ib. — Resolutions 
of the House of Commons against him, ibid. 
551.— The Resolutions are presented to the 
King, ibid. 655. — Lord Melville requests to 
be heard in his own Defence in the House 
of Commons, ibid, 560. — His Speech, ibid. 
ib.-*-The House resolve to impeaeh biro, 
ibid. 694.-- Proceedings in both Houses of 
Farliametit respecting the Impeacbment, 



THE STATE TRIALS* 



87 



prelimitiaty to the Trial, ibid. tb.^Proceed- 
ings on the Trial, ibid. 605.— Names of the 
Managers for the Commons, ibid. ib. — 
Names of Lord Melville^s Cfomisel, ibid. 
606 .---Articles of Impeachment, ibid. 608. 
Answer of Lord Melville, ibid. 622.-— 
Further Article of Impeachment, ibid. 623. 
— Answer thereto^ ibid. 624. — Replication 
of the Commons, ibid. ib.«— Mr. Whitbread's 
Speech on opening the Articles, ibid. 625. 
-^Evidence in support of the Preamble to 
the Articles, ibid. 671.— The Third lleport 
of the Commissioners of Accounts in 1781, 
ibid. 673. — The Appendix thereto, ibid. 
686.-^£vidence of the Resolutiokis of the 
House of Commons upon the Reports of 
the Commissioners, ibid. 688. — Evidence 
of the Kitig's Wartant for the Augmentation 
of the Salary of Mr. Barr^» then Treasurer 
of the Navy, in cobseqtience of One of the 
above Resolutions of the Comnlonsi ibid. 
689.*-^£Tideilce of the Gratit of ati additional 
Salary to Lotd MeWille, ibid. 706.'^Extract 
from the Eighth Report of the Commissioners 
of Poblie Accounts, ibid. 711. — Evidence 
on the First and Tenth Articles respecting 
the appropriation of certain sums of the 
pubtio money by Lord Melville to his own 
use, before the passing of the Act of Par- 
liament for better regulating the Office of 
Treasurer of the Navy, ibid. 713. — Evidence 
of the Appointment of Mr. Douglas as Lord 
Melville's Paymaster, and of his acting as 
such under a Power of Attorney from Lord 
Melville, ibid. ib. — Evidence respecting the 
Duties and Nature of the Office of Paymaster 
to the Treasurer of the Navy, ibid. 748. — 
The Managers for the Commons propose to 
prove Mr. Douglas's acknowledgment of the 
receipt of a sum of money from the Ex- 
chequer, in order to affect Lord Melville 
criminally with such receipt, ibid. 746. — 
Discussion respecting the admissibility of 
this Evidence, ibid. 747. — ^The Lords decide 
that the Evidence is admissible, ibid. 763.— 
Evidenee of the Examination of Lord Mel- 
ville before the Commissioners of Naval 
Inquiry in 1804, ibid. 797.— His Corres- 
pondence with tlie Commissioners relative 
to that Examination, ibid. 808. — Evidetl^e 
in support of the Fifth Article, respecting 
the appropriation of certain other sums of 
public money by Lord Melville to his own 
use, before the passing of the Act of Par- 
liament, ibid. 892.-— Evidence on the Second 
Article, charging Lord Melville with con- 
niving at the employment of several sums 
of public money by Mr. Trotter, his Pay- 
master^ to his own private use, ibid. 898«— 
Mr. Trotter's Evidence in Chief, ibid. 902. 
—His Cross-Examination, ibid. 929. — His 
Re-Examination, ibid.946. — Evidence of Mr. 
Tierney, ibid. 1111.— Sir Samuel Romilly's 
Speech on summing up the Evidence in 
support of the Articles, ibid. 1150.-«Mr. 
Plbttier*s Speech on openitig the Defefice, 

iWd* n W.— EWdeticfi for the Defence, Ibid. 



130B»<— Mr. Adam's Speceh on summing tip 
the Evidence for the Defence, ibid. iai3.< — 
Sir Arthur Piggott*s Reply upon the poiats 
of law urged for the Defence, ibid. 1371.' — 
Mrt WhitbreadVgeneral Reply for the Com- 
mons, ibid. 1392.^^Questions proposed to 
the Judges by the House of Lords upon 
some of the principal parts of the Charge, 
with their Answers thereto^ ibid. 1468.^ — 
Analysis of the Votes of the Lords upon the 
several Articles, ibid. 1477. — He is acquitted 
by a majority of the Lords upon all the 
Articles, ibid. l481« 

MENZIES^ James. See Cameron, Angus, 
MENNONS, John, See SmUh^ Jameu. 

MEREIAM, Johti. Bee Denew, JStUkankL 

MERRICK^ Sir Gilly. See Blunt, Sir ChrU* 
tephett 

M:fiSSENOER, Peter.— His Trial with several 
Others for High Treason in tutnultuoUsly 
assembling together under the pretence of 
pulling down Bawdy Houses, 20 Caf. 2, 
1668, 6 vol. 879.— Evidence against them, 
ibid. 880.— The Jury, by direction of the 
Judge (Chief Justice Kelyng), find a Special 
Verdict as to some of the Prisoners, and 
acquit the others, ibid. 891.— The Special 
Verdict, ibid* ib. 897.— Kelyng*S Report of 
the Opinions of the Judges upon this Case, 
ibid. 892. — ^All the Judges, excepting Lord 
Hale (then Chief Baron), are of opinion, 
that the Facts found by the Special Verdict 
constitute High Treason, ibid. 899. — 
Resolutions of the Judges as to the Judg- 
ment to be given in each of the several 
Cases, ibid. 911. — Mr. Luders's Remarks 
upon this Case, and the doctrine of Con- 
structive Levying of War, contained in the 
Resolutions of the Judges, ibid. 908 (note). 
— Lord Hale's Account of the grounds of his 
dissent from the Opinion of the Judges, ibid. 
910 (note). 

MICHELL, Sir Francis. See Mompestm, Sir 
'Giles. — Proceedings in Parliament against 
him for Monopoly and abuse of Patents, 19 
Jac> 1, 1631, 2 vol. 1132.— Offences charged 
against him in the House of Lords, ibid, ib, 
— His Defence, ibid. 1133. — He is found 
Guilty by the Lords unanimously, ibid. 1185. 
— His Sentence, ibid. ib. 

MIDDLEMORE, Humphrey.— His Trial With 
William Exroew, and Sebastian Nudigate^ 
for denying tlie King*s Supremacy, 27 Hen. 
8, 1535, 1 vol. 473.— They are found Guilty, 
and Judgment of Death is passed upon them, 
ibid. ib. — They are refused the Sacrament 
before their Execution, ibid. ib. 

MIDDLESEX, James, £ari of. See Suffolk, 
James^ Earl of. 

MIDDLESEX, Lionel, Eari of,LordTreasurer. 
—Proceedings on his Impeachment for High 
Crimes and Mi8demeanours,22Jac. 1,1624, 
2 voj. t J 3^.— Report of ft PowroUtie of \hp 



88 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



House of Lords appointed to examine the 
Stores and Ammunition of War, ibid. 1186. 
— Sir Edward Coke, on the part of the Com- 
mons, opens, the Charges against him, ibid. 
1190. — Sir Edwin Sandys supports the 
Charges for the Commons, ibid. 1194. — The 
Lords appoint a Committee to examine the 
Charges, ibid. 1197. — The Committee report 
thereon, and deliver a part of the Articles of 
Impeachment to the House, ibid. ib. — He 
petitions for Warrants for the attendance of 
Witnesses,and for Counsel, ibid. 1199. — The 
House grant him Warrants for his Witnesses, 
but refuse Counsel, ibid. 1200. — He applies 
for Copies of the Depositions taken against 
him, which are refused, ibid. 1201. — Addi- 
tional Articles exhibited against him, ibid. 
1202. — His Answer to the First Part of the 
Articles, ibid. 1203. — His Answer to the Ad- 
ditional Articles, ibid. 1214.— Petition of 
several Merchants against him respecting an 
Imposition on Hops, ibid. 121 6. — ^The King's 
Speech to the Lords respecting the Proceed- 
ings against the Lord Treasurer, ibid. 1218. 
— ^The Attorney General opens the Charge 
respecting the Wardrobe, ibid. 1221. —rHis 
Answer thereto, ibid. 1223. — The Attorney 
General opens the Charge of Bribery and 
Corruption, ibid. 1225.— His Answer there- 
to, ibid. 1228. — ^The Attorney General opeds 
the Charge respecting the Lease of Sugars, 
ibid. 1230.— His Defence thereto, ibid. 1231. 
— ^The Attorney General opens the Charge 
respecting Groceries, ibid, ib.— His Defence 
thereto, ibid. 1232. — The Attorney General 
opens the Charge as to his unlawful bargain- 
ing for Sir Roger Dallison's Lands, ibid. ib. 
— His Defence thereto, ibid. 1236. — He 
petitions for further time on account of his 
Sickness, ibid. 1237. — ^Tlie Lords send a 
Committee with a Physician to his House, to 
order him to attend on the same Afternoon 
if he were not too ill, ibid.ib. — The Attorney 
General opens the Cliarge respecting Muni- 
tions, ibid. 1238.— His Answer thereto, ibid. 
1240.-— The Attorney General opens the 
Charge respecting the Court of Wards, ibid. 
1241. — His Answer thereto, ibid. 1242. — 
His General Defence to all the Charges, 
ibid. 1244. — ^The Lords acquit him of some 
of the Charges, and find him Guilty upon 
others, ibid. 1245. — Sentence of the Lords 
upon him, ibid. 1250.— Wilson's Account 
of him in his Life of James the First, ibid. ib. 

MIDDLETOUN, Captain James.— Proceed- 
ings in Scotland against him and others for 
High Treason, in holding the Fortress of 
the Bass against the King, 5 Will, and 
Mary, 1694, 13 vol. 643.— The Indictment, 
ibid, ib.— Debate on the Relevancy, ibid. 
851.— Interlocutor of Relevancy, ibid. 865. 
—Evidence against them, ibid. 866.— The 
Jury find two of the Panels Guilty, and they 
are sentenced to Death, ibid. 872. — The 
others are also found Guilty and sentenced, 
ibid, 877. i > 



MIDDLETOUN, John, Earl of. See Mdfort, 
John, Earl of, 

MILLER, John. — His Trial in London upon 
an Ex'Officio Information for re-printing 
Junius's Letter to the King, 10 Geo. 3, 1770, 
20 vol. 869. — ^The Solicitor General's Speech 
for the Prosecution, ibid. ib. — Evidence for 
the Prosecution, ibid. 876. — Serjeant Glynn's 
Speech for the Defendant, ibid. 878. — Mr. 
Davenport's Speech on the same side, ibid. 
885. — Reply of the Solicitor General, ibid. 
888. — Lord Mansfield's Charge to the Jury, 
ibid. 892. — The Jury acquit him, ibid. 895. 

MILLINGTON, Gilbert, 5 vol. 1002, 1203. 
See Regicides^ 

MILLS, Richard. See Jackson^ WUlidm. 

MITCHEL, James. See MaUland, Charles. 
— His Trial in Scotland for shooting at 
Archbishop Sharp, 29 Car. 2, 1677, 6 vol. 
1207. — Burnet's Account of the Attempt upon 
Archbishop Sharp, ibid. ib. (note). — ^Laing's 
Account,ibid.l215(note). — Mitchel acknow- 
ledges the fact under a promise of mercy, 
before a Committee appointed to examine 
him, ibid. 1216.— After two years imprison- 
ment, he is again brought before the Com- 
mittee and examined, ibid. 1217. — He re- 
fuses to acknowledge his former Confession, 
ibid, 1227. — He is threatened with the Tor- 
ture, ibid. 1228. — ^The Torture is applied 
to him, but he still refuses to acknowledge 
his Confession, ibid. 1232. — His Trial, ibid, 
ib. — Indictment against him, ibid, ib.— He 
denies the Charge, ibid. 1236. — His Counsel, 
in the Debate on the Relevancy of the In- 
dictment, urge that the Offence charged can- 
not amount to Murder, and that the former 
Confession, if made, cannot be available 
against his Life, being made upon a promise 
of Pardon, ibid. ib. — Interlocutor of Re- 
levancy, ibid. 1 253. — ^The Court hold, that if 
it be proved that the Confession was obtain- 
ed on a promise of security for life and 
limb, it is a sufficient defence to ensure the 
Panel his Life, ibid. 1254.— Evidence for the 
Prosecution, ibid. ib. — ^The Assize find the 
Indictment Proven, and that the Confession 
*was not made under a promise of safety, 
ibid. 1260. — Sentence is passed upon him, 
ibid. ib. — His Speech at the place of Execu- 
tion, ibid. 1261. — Mr. Laing s Remark upon 
this Trial, ibid. ib. (note). 

MITCHELL, Robert. See Duncan, Alison. 

MITFORD, Sir John, Solicitor General, 22 
vol. 791, 26 vol. 7, 554, 1218.— His Reply 
for the Prosecution on the Trial of Hardy 
for High Treason, 24 vol. 1 1 67. — His Speech 
for the Prosecution on the Trial of Home 
Tooke for High Treason, 25 vol. 27.— His 
Reply on the Trial of Stone for High Treason, 
ibid. 1396. 

MODERS, Mary, alias Stedman, alias the 
German Princess,— Her Tr^al (or Bigaipy* 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



89; 



15 Car. H, 1663, 6 vol. 273.— The Indict- 
ment, ibid. ib. — She pleads Not Guilty, ibid. 
274. — Evidence against her, ibid. 275. — 
Her Defence, ibid. 278. — She is acquitted, 
ibid. 283. - 

MOHUN, Charles, Lord.— His Trial before the 
House of Lords for the Murder of William 
Mountford, 4 Will, and Mary, 1694, 12 vol. 
• 949. — ^The Indictment, ibid. 956. — ^Address 
of the Lord High Steward to him on his being 
brought to the Bar, ibid. 957.— He pleads 
Not Guilty, ibid. 960.— The Attorney General 
opens the Case for the Prosecution, Ibid. 961. 
— Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 966. — 
Evidence in his Defence, ibid. 988. — Reply 
of the Solicitor General, ibid. 1009. — Reso- 
lutions of the Judges, and Arguments of 
Counsel upon several Questions of law 
arising out of the facts in Evidence, ibid. 
1015. — He is acquitted by a Majority 
of the Lords, ibid. 1048.— His Trial before 
the House of Lords for the Murder of 
Richard Coote, 11 Will. 3, 1699, 13 vol. 
1033.--The Indictment, ibid. 1034.— He 
pleads Not Guilty, ibid. 1035.— The Speech 
of the Attorney General for the Prosecution, 
ibid. 1036. — Evidence for the Prosecution, 
ibid. 1037.— His Defence, 1053.— Reply of 
the Solicitor General, ibid. 1055. — He is 
unanimously acquitted, ibid. 1059. — He was 
afterwards killed in a Duel by the Duke of 
Hamilton, who was also killed, 12 vol. 949 
(note). — ^Passages from Swift's Journal to 
dtelia relating to this Catastrophe, ibid. ib. 

MOMPESSON, Sir Giles. See MicheU, Sir 
Francis, — Proceedings in Parliament against 
him for Monopoly and Abuse of Patents, 18 
Jac. 1, 1620, 2 vol. 1119.— Od being sum- 
moned to appear before the House of Com- 
mons he makes his -Escape beyond Sea. ibid, 
ib. — Measures taken for his Apprehension, 
ibid. 1121. — Reports of the several Com- 
mittees appointed by the House of Lords to 
inquire into the Grievances occasioned by 
his Abuse of several Patents, ibid. 1122. — ^The 
King's Speech in the House of Lords, com- 
mending the Proceedings against him, ibid, 
1126. — Resolutions of the House of Lords 
against him, ibid. 1130. — The Sentence 
p^gssed upon him, ibid. 1131. 

MONCRIEF, Hugh. See Gowrie, John, 
Earl of. 

MONCRIEFF, James, Advocate.— Informa- 
tion for Andrew Mac Kin ley upon the Re- 
levancy of the Indictment against him for 
administering unlawful Oaths, written by 
him, 33 vol. 396. 

MONEY, James. See Leach^ Dryden, 

MONK, General George.— Letter of Charles 
the Second to him from Breda, immediately 
before the Restoration, 5 vol. 947. — His 
Answer to Hale's proposal in Parliament 
respecting the imposition of Conditions upon 
Charles the Second at the Restoration,^ ibid. 



969.-~Bumet and Laing's Account of his 
base Conduct in transmitting confidential 
Letters of the Marquis of Argyle to the 
Scotch Parliament^ in order to ensure his 
Conviction, ibid. 1371 (note), 1504 (note). 
— Mr. Rose's Reasonings and Evidences 
respecting the truth of this Charge, 10 vol. 
758 (note). — Sir George Mackenzie seems 
to have established the truth of the Charge, 
ibid. 764 (note). — He sits upon the Trial of 
the Regicides as Duke of Albemarle, .5 
vol. 986. — Mr. Fox's Remarks upon his 
Character, ibid. 987 (note).. 

MONMOUTH, Henry, Earl of. See North, 
ampton, Spencer, Earl of, 

MONMOUTH and BUCCLEUGH, James, 
Duke of. — Algernon Sidney's Account of his 
Procedure against the Scotch Insurgents, 11 
vol. 259 (note).— -Proceedings against him, 
Sir James Dalrymple of gtair, and Andrew 
Fletcher of Saltoun, in the Court of Justiciary, 
for High Treason and Rebellion, 1 and 2 Jac. 2, 
1685-6, ibid. 1023.— The Libel against him, 
ibid. 1057. — Fountainhall's Account of tidese 
Proceedings, ibid. ib. (note). — Monmouth's 
Declaration on his landing at Lyme, ibid. 
1032 (note).— The Act of Attainder against 
him, ibid. 1048 (note). — Account ofhis Exe- 
cution, ibid. 1068. — His Letter to the King, 
ibid. 1072.— Letter of Dr. Lloyd, Bishop of 
St. Asaph, containing an account of his 
Death, ibid. 1073. — Account of his Actions 
and Behaviour from the time of his Apprehen- 
sion till his Death, ibid, 1076. — Observations 
and References on the question, whether 
Charles the Second was married to his Mother, 
il?id.l097.-— Documentsfrom the State-Paper 
Office, relating to the intercourse between 
Charles the Second and him upon the subject 
of the Plots of 1683, ibid. 1097.— Account of 
his Capture after the battle of Sedgmoor, pub- 
lished by command of the King, ibid. 1101. 
— Dryden's Account of his Progress in quest 
of popularity, 10 vol. 1336 (note). 

MONSON, Sir Thomas.- His Arraignment for 
the Murder of Sir Thomas Overbury, 13 Jac. 
1, 1615, 2 vol. 949.— Chief Justice Coke's 
Speech, ibid. ib. — He pleads Not Guilty, 
ibid. ib. — His Trial is abandoned and he is 
se*t at liberty, ibid. 952. 

MONTACUTE, Lord. See Exeter, Marquis of. 

MONTAGUE, Sir Edward, Chief Justice of 
C. P. 38 Hen. 8, 1 vol. 458. 

MONTAGUE, Sir Edward, Chief Justice of 
K. B. 16 Jac. 1. — His Speech on delivering 
his Opinion in the Star Chamber respecting 
the Sentence to be passed upon Mr. Wrayn- 
ham for slandeTing Lord Chancellor Bacon, 
2 vol. 1078. 

MONTAGUE, William, Chief Baron of the 
Exchequer, 32 Car. 2, 7 vol. 1527, 11 vol. 
404. — He is one of the Judges who presided 
at the Trial of Lord William Russel^ 9 vol. 
592. — He is examined as a Witness for the 
Defendant on the Trial of Oatss for Perju/yj^ 



90 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



10 Tol. 1168.^He presides with Jefferies at 
the Trial of Lady Alice Lisle at Winchester, 
llVol.944.^Heis8aidto have been removed 
from the Bench in 1G66» in consequence of 
his refusal to support the Dispensing Power, 
12 vol. 261 (note). 

MONTiiAGLE, Lord.— Narrative of the de- 
livery of a Letter to him, discovering the 
Gunpowder Pioty 2 voL 195. 

MOORE, Henry, It vol. 645. See Hastings, 
Town and Port of, 

MORDANT, John.— His Trial before the 
High Court of Justice for High Treason, in 
conspiring to levy War against the Common- 
wealth, and corresponding with Charles the 
Second, 10 Car. 2, 1658, 5 vol. 907 —The 
Charge against him, ibid. 911.— He disputes 
the Jurisdiction of the Court, ibid. 914.— He 
pleads Not Guilty, ibid. 917.— The Evidence 
against him, ibid. 918.^— His Defence, ibid. 
&2S. — He is acquitted by the President's 
casting Vole, ibid. 923, 912 (note).— Lord 
Clarendon's Account of this Trial, and the 
circumstances attending it, ibid. 907 (note). 

MORDANT, John, Viscount. — Proceedings 
on his Impeachment for High Crimes and 
Misdemeanours, 18 Car. 2, 1666, ibid. 785. 
—Articles of Impeachment against him de- 
livered to the Lords, ibid. 789. — His Answer 
thereto, ibid. 792. — Names of the Managers 
for the Commons^ ibid. 796. — The Commons 
object to his sitting within the Bar on the 
Tnal of the Impeachment, ibid. 799. — Dis- 
pute between the two Houses on this 
Matter, ibid. 801. — The Proceedings are 
ended by the prorogation of the Parliament, 
ibid. 806. — He is again impeached in a 
subsequent Session, and the Charge referred 
to a Committee, ibid. ib. — Lord Clarendon's 
Account of his activity in bringing about 
the Restoration, 5 vol. 912 (note), 6 vol. 
785 (note). — For his Services in this respect 
he was created Viscount Avalon and Baron 
Motdant, by Charles the Second, 6 vol. 787 
(note). — Jealousy of the Royal party towards 
him after the Restoration, ibid. 785 (note). 
— He was Father to the celebrated Charles, 
Earl of Peterborough, ibid. 787 (note). 

MORDANT, Lady Mary. See Norfolk, 
Henri/ Howard, Duke of, 

MORE, Sir Thomas, Lord Chancellor.— His 
Trial for High Treason in denying the King's 
Supremacy, 26 Hen. 8, 1535, 1 vol. 385. — 
His Conversation with Rich, the Solicitor 
General, previous to the Trial, ibid. ib. — 
The, Indictment is read, ibid. 387. — His 
Answers to the Charges contained therein, 
ibid. 388. — Rich gives Evidence of Sir 
Thomas More's Conversation with him, ibid. 
390. — His solemn denial of the truth of 
Riches Statement, ibid. ib. — He contends, 
that to substantiate the Charge against him, 
express Malice must be proved, ibid. 391. — 

' The Jury fiod him Guilty, ibid, 392.— He 



contends that the act of Supremacy is con- 
trary to the Law of God, and that the Indict- 
ment founded upon it is invalid^ ibid, ib.- — 
The Court overrule the Objection to the 
Indictment, ibid. 393. — ^Judgment of Death 
is passed upon him, ibid. ib. — His Conduct 
before and at the time of his Execution, 
ibid. 395. — Burnet's Account of his Trial, 
Execution, and Character, ibid. 475. 

MORETON, John, Serjeant-at-Law. — His 
Speech for the Prosecution on the Trial of 
Twyn and others for High Treason, 6 vol, 
520. 

"^ Judge of K. B. 18 Car. 2, 



6 vol. 769. 

MORETON, Thomas, Bishop of Durham. See 

Twdve Bishops. 

MORETON, William, Recorder of London, 
18 vol. 289, 19 voU 283. — His Charge to the 
Jury on the Trial of Elisabeth Canning for 
Perjury, 19 vol. 633. — His Address to her 
on passing Sentence of Transportation for 
Life upon her, ibid 673. 

MORGAN, David. — His Trial for High 
Treason in being concerned in the Rebellion 
6f 1745, 20 Geo. 2, 1746, 18 vol. 371.— 
Evidence against him, ibid. ib. — His De- 
fence, ibid. 383. — Evidence for him, ibid. 
384. — The Prisoner's Speech on summing 
up the Evidence for his Defence, ibid. 385. 
— Reply of the Solicitor General, ibid. 386. 
—The Jury find him Guilty, ibid. 387.— 
He is executed, ibid. 389.— His Speech at 
the place of Execution, ibid. 390. — Account 
of him, ibid. 389. 

MORLEY, Thomas, Lord.— His Trial by his 
Peers in the Court of the Lord High Steward 
for'the Murder of Mr. Hastings, 18 Car. 2, 
1666, 6 vol. 769.— Kelyng's Report of the 
Resolutions of the Judges on such points of 
Law as were likely to arise on the Trial, 
ibid, ib.— Commission to Lord Clarendon to 
be Lord High Steward, ibid. 772. — Evidence 
for the Prosecution, ibid. 776. — Speech of 
the Solicitor General (Finch) on summing 
up the Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 
778. — He is found Guilty of Manslaughter 
by a Majority of the Peers, ibid. 785.— He 
prays the Benefit of the Statute and is dis* 
charged, ibid. 786. 

MORPETH, Lord.— His Speech as one of the 
Managers for the House of Commons on the 
Trial of the Impeachment of Lord Chan- 
cellor Macclesfield, 16 vol. 1025. 

MORRIS, Harvey. See Tandy, James Napper, 

MORRIS, John, alias Poyntz. — Proceedings 
against him, with Mary his Wife, Isabel 
Smith, Leonard Darby, and John Harris, for 
forging and producing in Evidence a Copy 
of a pretended Act of Parliament for enforc- 
ing the eonveyance of certain Ldnds, 23 
Car. 1, 1647, 4 ''ol. 951.— Charge ejdiibitei 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



01 



agftinst tiiem itt iht Hou^fi of Lords by the 
detk of the Parliatnent[»^ ibid. ib. — Sentence 
of the Lords against them, ibid. 953.--^ur- 
ther Proceedings in the House against 
Isabel Smith for the Forgery of another 
Copy of the Act of Pariiamenty and of the 
records of Fines of the Lands mentioned 
therein, ibid. 954.*^The Lords declare the 
Act of Parliament and the Fines to be void, 
ibid. 954.*«~Petition in their favour to Sir 
Thomas Fairfax, ibid. 957^ 

MORRIS, Colonel John, Governor of Ponte- 
fract Castle. — His Trial at York for High 
Treason in levying War against the late King 
and the Parliament. 1 Car. 2, 1649, 4 vol. 
1249.— He pleads Not Guilty, ibid. ;|253.— 
He demanas Counsel and a Copy of the 
Indictment, which are denied him, ibid. 
1260.— His Defence, ibid. 1262.— He re- 
monstrates asainst being ironed, ibid. 1266. 
— ^The Jury find him Guilty, ibid, ib.— His 
Conduct at the place of Execution, ibid. 
1267. — Clement Walker's Account of these 
Proceedings, ibid- 1251 (note). — Lord 
Clarendon s Account of the Transactions at 
Ponte fract Castle which preceded this Trial, 
ibid. 1254 (note).— Whitelocke*s Account of 
the Trial, ibid. 1266 (note). 

MORTIMER, Sir John.— Proceedings upon 
an £x post facto Act of Parliament against 
him for making his Escape from Prison and 
asserting the title of the Earl of March to the 
Crown, 3 Hen. 6,1424, 1 vol. 267.--He is 
sentenced to be hanged, drawn, and quar- 
tered, and is executed accordingly, ibid. 
268. 

MORTIMER, Roger, Earl of March.— Arti- 
cles of Impeachment for High Treason ex- 
hibited in Parliament against him, 3 Edward 
3, 1330, 1 vol.51.— Judgment thereon that he 
should be drawn and hanged, ibid. 53. — He 
is executed accordingly, ibid. 54. — ^The Judg- 
ment against him was afterwards reversed 
by Act of Parliament and his Grandson was 
restored to his Title and Estate, ibid, ib.— 
Account of his immediate Descendants, 
ibid. ib. See Beresford^ Simon de (note). 

MORTIMER, Thomas. See Gbcester, Thomas, 
Duke of, 

MORTON, John. — Proceedings on his Trial 
with James Anderson and Malcolm Craig 
at Edinburgh for Sedition, 33 Geo. 3, 1793, 
23 vol. 7. — The Indictment, ibid. ib. — De- 
bate on the Relevancy of the Indictment, 
abid. d.— The Court find it relevant, ibid, 16. 
—Evidence against the Panels, ibid. ib. — 
Evidence in exculpation, ibid. 18.— The Jury 
iind them Guilty, ibid. 20.— Their Letter to 
the Lord Justice Clerk, ibid. ib. — Sentence 
of the Court, ibid. 26. 

MORTON, John, Counsel, 19 vol. 709.— His 
Speech in Defence of Elizabeth Canning on 
her Trial for Peijury, 19 vol. 431.— He was 
aftfrwfUf^s Chief Jui^tice of Chester, ibid. ib. 



-^He is of Counsel for Dr. H^isey on his 
Trial for High TreasoD| ibid. 1343.--His 
Speech for the Prisoner on that Trial| ibid. 
1875. 

MORTOUN, James, Earl of.--His Trial for 
the Murder of Henry, Lord Darnley, 23 
Eliz. 1581, 1 vol. 947.— Record of the In- 
dictment and Proceedings against him, ibid, 
ib. — His Confession, ibid. 949.— 'His Exe- 
cution, ibid. 953.— Letter from Archibald 
Douglas to Mary Queen of Soots in oonfirmft* 
tion of his Confessioni ibid, ib* 

MOUNTAGUE, Sir Henry, Chief Justice of 
K. B. 15 Jac. 1. — His Speech on granting 
Execution upon Sir Walter Raleigh, 2 vol. 
34. 

MOUNTAGUE, James, Counsel.— His Avpi- 
ment in the Court of King's Bench against 
the validity of the Commitment^of the Ayles- 
bury Men by the House of Commons, 14 
vol. 850.-^His Speech in Defence of John 
Tutohin on his Trial for a Libel, ibid. 1119. 
— His Argument on showing Cause against a 
Rule for amending the Entry of the Jury 
Process in that Case, ibid. 1 161. 

Sir James, Attorney General, 

5 Ann. — His Speech for the Prosecution cm 
the Trial of Robert Peilding for Bigamv, 14 
vol. 1329. — His Speech as one of the 
Managers for the House of Commons on the 
Trial of the Impeachment of Dr. Sacheverel, 
15 vol. 53. — His Speech for the Prosecution 
on the Trial of Dammaree for High Treason, 
ibid. 549. — His Speech in Reply in the same 
Case^ibid. 589. — His Speech for the Prose- 
cution on the Trial ofWillis for High Treason, 
ibid. 616. — His Speech in Rejuy in that 
Case, ibid. 641. — His Speech for the Prose- 
cution on the Trial of Purchase for High 
Treason, ibid. 654.— His Speech in Reply 
in the same Case, ibid. 680. 

" Baron of the Ex- 
chequer 4 Geo. l.^His Argument on de^ 
livering his Opinion on the Case referred to 
the Judges by George the Eirst respecting 
the King's Prerogative in the Education and 
Marriage of the Royal Family, 15 vol. 1215. 

MOUNTAGUE, Richard.— Proceedings in 
Parliament against him for publishing a fttc- 
tious and seditious Book, 1 Car. 1, 1625, 2 
vol. 1258.— The Commons appoint a Com- 
mittee to inquire into the errors of his Book, 
and take Sureties for his appearance to 
answer, ibid, 1259.— The King signifies to 
the Commons his disapprobation of their 
Proceedings, ibid. ib. — The Bishops of 
Rochester, Oxford, and St. David's, write to 
the Duke of Buckingham on his behalf, ibid. 
1260. — Articles drawn up by the Commons 
against him, ibid. 1263.— -It does not appear 
that any thing was done upon these Articles, 
ibid. 1366. 

MOWBRAY, Dav)d.--Hi8 Triftl for » TumiiU 



9d 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



and Riot at Edinburgh against the saying of 
Mass and other Popish Worship, 2 Jac. 2, 
1666, 11 vol. 1003.— The Indictment, ibid, 
ib. — He confesses the Charge, ibid. 1015. 
—He is found Guilty and sentenced to be 
hanged, ibid. 101 7.— He was afterwards re- 
prieved for a short time^^^but whether he was 
ultimately executed, is not known, ibid. 
1018. — Fountainhairs Account of this Case, 
ibid. 1003 (note). 

MUIR, Thomas.«-His Trial in the High Court 
of Justiciary at Edinburgh for Sedition, 33 
Geo. 3, 1793, 23 vol. 117.— The Indictment, 
ibid. ib. — His Defences, ibid. 129. — ^Inter- 
locutor of Relevancy, ibid. 132. — He objects 
to several of the persons who appear on the 
Jury, that they were Members of a political 
Association called the Friends of the Con- 
stitution, ibid. 134. — ^The Court repel the 
Objection, ibid, 136. — Evidence for the 
Prosecution, ibid. ib. — He objects to a Wit- 
ness that he was an Agent for the Crown in 
procuring Evidence against him, ibid. 141. 
—.The Lord Advocate withdraws the Witness 
on this fact being proved, ibid. 142. — Evi- 
dence of the Papers found in his possession, 
ibid. 164. — Evidence in exculpation, ibid. 
168.— Evidence of William Skirving, ibid. 
ib. — The Lord Advocate's Speech for the 
Prosecution, ibid. 179.— Mr. Muir's Speech 
in his own Defence, ibid. 186. — ^The Lord 
Justice Clerk sums up the Evidence, ibid. 
229.— The Jury find him Guilty, ibid. 231. 
— Opinions of the different Members of the 
Court respecting the Sentence, ibid. 232. — 
He is sentenced to be transported for 14 
years, ibid. 236.— Address of the Society for 
Constitutional Information to him after his 
Conviction, 24 vol. 566. — His Letter to that 
Society in acknowledgment of the same, ibid. 
570. — His subsequent History, 23 vol. 
1412. 

MULLINS, Darby. See Kidd, WUUam. 

MUNSON, Lionel. See Anderson, IMmel 

MURPHY, Timothy.— His Trial at the Old 
Bailey for forging a Will, 26 Geo. 2, 1753, 
19 vol. 693.— The Indictment, ibid. 694.— 
Speeches of the Counsel for the Prosecution, 

, ibid. 695. — Evidence for the Prosecution, 
ibid. 701. —His Counsel object to the Testi- 
mony of a Person who stood indicted for 
the same transaction, ibid. 702. — Argument 
of the question, whether an Accomplice who 
has been indicted is a good Witness, ibid, 
ib. — The Court decide that his Evidence is 
admissible, ibid. 709. — He is found Guilty, 
ibid. 726.— His Confession, ibid, ib.— He is 
executed, ibid. 734. 

MURRAY, John, of Broughton, Secretary to 
the Young Pretender. — Discussion respect- 
ing the admissibility of his Evidence on 
the Trial of Lord Lovat, 18 vol. 607.— His 
Evidence against Lord Lovat, ibid. 651. 

B«URRAY, The Hon. William.— Solicitor 



General. See Mansfield, WUliamf Lard, 1 8 
vol. 325, 337.— His Reply for the. Prose- 
cution on the Trial of Francis Townley for 
High Treason, 18 vol. 346. — His Reply a3 
one of the Managers for the Commons on 
the Trial of the Impeachment of Lord Lovat, 
ibid. 802. — His Speech on summing up the. 
Evidence for the Prosecution on Sie Trial 
of William Owen for publishing a libel, ibid. 
1222.— He was afterwards Chief Justice of 
K. B.ibid. 337. 

NAIRN, Katherine,— Her Trial in the Court of 
Justiciary, with PatrickOgilvie for Incest and 
Murder, 5 Geo. 3, 1765, 19 vol. 1235.— The 
Indictment, ibid. 1236. — Debate on the Rele- 
vancy of the libel and the Defences of the 
Panels, ibid. 1244.— The Court find the Libel 
relevant, ibid. 1258. — The Prisoners petition 
the Court to have one of the Witnesses for 
the Prosecution kept apart from the rest, ibid. 
1259. — ^Tlie Petition is granted, ibid. 1261. 
— Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 1262. 
— Evidence for the Panels, ibid. 1310. — 
They are found Guilty by a ereat plurality of 
voices, ibid. 1315. — ^Tbe Counsel for the 
Panels move in Arrest of Judgment, ibid. 
1318. — The Court refuse to arrest the Judg- 
ment, ibid. 1326. — ^Katherine Nairn petitions 
for a suspension of her Sentence on account 

. of pregnancy, ibid . 1 327.— Sentence of Death 
is passed upon Patrick Ogilvie, ibid. 1328. — 
A Jury of Midwives is sworn to try the 
pregnancy of Katharine Nairn, who return 
that they are uncertain whether she is preg- 
nant or not, ibid. 1330. — The Court direct 
them to report their Opinion at a future day, 
ibid. ib. — Proceedings in this Trial trans- 
mitted to the Privy Council, ibid. 1332. — 
Opinion of an English Barrister thereon, 
ibid. ib. — Ogilvie is respited for some time 
and he is then executed, ibid. 1335. — Paper 
signed by him before his Execution declaring 
his innocence, ibid. 1337. — The Jury of 
Midwives return that Katherine Nairn is 
pregnant, ibid, 1338. — She afterwards 
escapes, ibid. ib. 

NAIRN, William, Lord. See Derwentwater, 
James, Earl of, 15 vol. 761. 

NARES, George, Counsel. — His Speech in 
Defence of Elizabeth Canning on her Trial 
for Peijury, 19 vol. 451.— He argues in 
Support of an Objection to the Evidence of 
a witness on the Trial of Timothy Murphy 
for Forgery, ibid. 702. 

- Serjeant at Law, 19 vol. 

1153. 

Judge of C. P. 11 Geo. 3, 

19 vol. 1152, .20 vol. 183, 1316. 

NAYLER, James. — Proceedings in the House 
of Commons against him for Blasphemy and 
other .Misdemeanours, 8 Car. 2, 1656, 5 vol. 
801.— Report of the Committee of the House 
of Commons on his Case, ibid, ib, — First 
Article against him that, he assumed the 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



03 



Character of Christ, ibid. 805. — Evidence in 
support thereof, ibid. ib. — ^The Committee 
resolye that the first Article is proved, ibid. 
806. — Second Article that he assumed the 
Titles of Christ, ibid. 808.— Evidence of his 
Assumption of various Titles of Christ with 
the Resolutions of the Committee thereon, 
ibid. ib. — He is brought to the Bar of the 
House and examined, ibid. 81 5. — The House 
resolve that he is guilty of Blasphemy, ibid. 
816. — Debates in the House whether he 
should be put to Death, ibid. 817. — His 
Sentence as finally resolved on by the House, 
ibid. ib. — Neale's Account of the Proceed- 
ings against him, ibid. 801 (note). — Account 
of his Extravagances, ibid. 819 (note). — 
Whitelocke's Argument that he ought not to 
be put to death, ibid. 821. — Account of bis 
life. Trial, and Examination, from the 
Harleian Miscellany, ibid. 827.*'Hume's 
Notice of him, ibid. 803 (note). 

NEILE, Dr. Richard, Bishop of Lincoln. — 
Proceedings in Parliament against him for 
Words spoken by him in dissuading the 
Lords from a Conference with the Commons 
on the subject of Impositions, 12 Jac. 1, 
1614, 2 vol. 865.-*He makes a Submission 
in the House of Lords, ibid. 868. 

NEVIL, Alexander, Archbishop of York. See 
TresUiofi, Sir Robert, 

KEVIL, Sir Edward. See Pole, Sir Geoffrey. 

NEVILL, Sir Edward, Judge of C. P. 4 Will, 
and Mary, 12 vol. 833, 1039, 1379, 13 vol. 
1, 139. — He was made a Baron of the Ex- 
chequer in 1 685, and was removed from the 
Bench in 1 686 (2 Jac. 2), for refusing to 
support the Dispensing Power, 12 vol. 261 
(note). — At the Revolution he was restored 
to the Bench, ibid. ib. 

NEWBOLT, William.— Account of the Pro- 
ceedings on his Trial with Edward Buttler 
for High Treason, in publishing a Declara- 
tion of James the Second, extracted from the 
Harleian MSS. 15 vol. 1404.— They are both 
found Guilty, ibid. 1406. 

NICHOLL, Anthony. See HoUis, Denzii. 

NICHOLLS, Sir Austin, Judge of C. P. 14 
Jac. 1, 2 vol. 952. 

NITHISDALE, William, Earl of. See Der- 
toentwater, James, Earl of^lS vol. 761. 

NIVEN, John.— His Trial in Scotland for using 
slanderous expressions respecting the Duke 
of York (afterwards James the Second), 32 
Car. 2, 1680, 8 vol. 125. — He is found 
Guilty, and sentenced to be hanged, but it 
does not appear that the Sentence was exe- 
cuted, ibid. 128. — ^Fountainhall*s Account of 
this Case, ibid. 125 (note). 

NOBLE, Richard.—His Trial with Mary Sayer, 
and Mary Salisbury, for the Murder of John 

Sayer, 12 Anne, 1713, 15 vol. 731. —Evi- 
dence giv^ of attempts m^d^ by th^ Prisoners 



to tamper with the Witnesses and Jury, ibid. 
732. — ^Upon this Evidence the Jury are set 
aside and another Jury called, ibid. 735. — 
Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. ib. — 
Their Defence, ibid. 739. — Noble is found 
Guilty, and Mary Sayer and Mary Salisbury 
are acquitted, ibid. 745. — Noble moves in 
arrest of Judgment, but his Objections are 
overruled, ibid. 746.— His Address to the 
Court before Judgment, ibid. ib. — He is 
executed, ibid. 750. — His Dying Speech, 
and an Account of his Conduct after his Con- 
demnation, ibid. ib. — Observations by a 
Student of the Inner Temple upon the point 
of Law on which his Motion in Arrest of 
Judgment was founded, ibid. 753. 

NOEL, William, Counsel. — His Speech in 
Defence of Richard Francklin on his Trial 
for a Libel in the Craftsman, 17 vol. 662. — 
His Speech as one of the Managers for the 
House of Commons on the Trial of the Im« 
peachment of Lord Lovat, 18 vol. 817. 

Sir William, Judge of C. P. and Chief 

Justice of Chester, 32 Geo. 2. — He delivers 
the Judgment of the Court in the Case of 
Stevenson, that the facts proved by the Spe- 
cial Verdict amounted to Manslaughter only, 
19 vol. 878. 

NOLAN, Michael,Counsel.— His Argument on 
shewing Cause against the Rule for a New 
Trial in the Case of Governor Picton, 30 vol. 
733. — His Argument of the Special Verdict 
found at the Second Trial of that Case, ibid. 
884. 

NORBURY, John, Lord, Chief Justice of C. P. 
in Ireland. See Toler, John, — His Charges 
to the Juries on the Trials of several per- 
sons for High Treason, in being concerned 
in the Irish Insurrection, 28 vol. 746, 882, 
1265.— His Charge to the Jury on the Trial 
of Robert Emmett for being concerned in 
the same Insurrection, ibid. 1168. — His 
Charge to the Grand Jury of the County of 
Tipperary assembled for the Trial of the 
Caravats and Shanavests in 1811, 31 vol. * 
414. 

NORFOLK, Henry Howard, Duke of.— Pro- 
ceedings in the House of Lords upon his 
application for a Bill of Divorce, 3 Will, and 
Mary, 12 vol. 883.— The Duchess petitions 
to be heard before the Bill is received, 
ibid. 885. — The House order that both par- 
ties be heard by their Counsel at the Bar 
as to the reception of the Bill, ibid. ib. — The 
House resolve to receive it, ibid. 886. — ^The 
Bill, ibid.ib. — Reasons on behalf of the Duke 
for receiving the Bill, ibid. 888. — On the 
reception of the Bill by the Lords, the 
Duchess petitions for Particulars of the 
Charge against her, ibid. 889.— The Duke's 
Charge against the Duchess, ibid. ib. — Her 
Answer, complaining that the Charge is 
general and indefinite, ibid. 890. — ^The 
Dnke deliy^rs a more particular Charge, 



d4 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



ibid. 891.— Answer of the Duchess thereto, 
ibid. 892. — Evidence is produced and 
Counsel heard in support and in denial of 
the Charge} ibid. 894. — Depositions of the 
Witnesses in support of the Charge, vfiih 
the Evidence or Witnesses on the part of 
the Duchess to invalidate their Testimony, 
ibid. 897. — Observations upon the Evidence 
in support of the Charge published by the 
Friends of the Duchess, ibid, 898 (note). — 
The Bill is negatived on the second read- 
ing, ibid. 928. — Burnet*s Account of these 
Proceedings, ibid. 883 (note). — ^Proceedings 
in an Action for Criminal Conversation with 
the Duchess, brought by the Duke against 
John Germaine, 4 Will, and Mary, 1692, 
ibid. 927. — Speech of the Attorney General 
for the Plaintiff, ibid. 928. — Evidence for the 
Plaintiff, ibid. 929.— Evidence for the De- 
fendant, ibid. 939. — ^Lord Holt's Charge to 
the Jury, ibid. 945. — ^The Jury return a Ver- 
dict for the Plaintiff with 1 00 Marks Damages, 
ibid. 948. — Proceedings in Parliament on 
the Duke's second Application for a Divorce, 
12 Will. 3, 1700, 13 vol. 1283.— The Bill, 
ibid. ib. — ^The House of Lords resolve to 
receive only Evidence of facts occurring 
since the rejection of the former Bill, ibid. 
1286. — Evidence in support of the Bill, ibid. 
1287. — Evidence against the Bill, ibid. 1305. 
— Evidence in Reply, ibid. 1322. — ^The 
House commit the Bill, ibid. 1327. — The 
Duchess's Petition to the Commons on the 
Bill being sent down to them, ibid. ib. — 
Reasons for passing the Bill published by 
the Duke, ibid. 1328. — Reasons of the 
Duchess against the passing of the Bill, ibid. 
1338. -^Proceedings in the House of Com- 
mons, ibid. 1344. — ^The Duchess's Counsel 
are heard, ibid. 1345. — Sir Thomas Powis's 
Speech against the Bill, ibid, ib — Mr.Dodd's 
Speech on the same side, ibid. 1352.^ Dr. 
Pinfold's Speech on the same side,ibid. 1 353. 
—-Mr. Serjeant Wright's Speech in its Sup- 
port, ibid. 1355. ^Speeches of Mr. Nortbey 
and Dr. Oldish on the same side, ibid. 1359. 
—Sir Thomas Powis's Reply, ibid. 1361.— 
The House go into a Committee on the 
Bill, ibid. 1364, — ^The Duke's Counsel open 
the Evidence for the Bill, ibid. ib. — The 
Counsel against the Bill require further time 
to make their Defence, which is refused, 
ibid. 1366. — ^They offer to produce the De- 
positions of the Witnesses for the Bill in the 
House of Lords to shew a variance between 
them and /their Evidence to the Committee, 
ibid. 1367 — On this being refused the 
Duchess's Counsel decline proceeding fur- 
ther with their Case, ibid. 1368.— The Bill 
is passed, ibid. 1370. — The Duchess after* 
wards marries Sir John Germaine^ ibid. 
1370 (note). 

NORFOLK, Thomas Howard, Duke of (The 
Father). — Proceedings against him for High 
Treason, 38 Hen. 8, 1546, 1 vol. 451.— On 
certain Charges being made against his Son, 



Henry, Earl of Surrey, he is sent to the 
Tower, ibid. 453. — His Letters to the King 
and to the Lords, ibid. 456. — His Confession 
and Submission, ibid. 457.— Burnet's Ac- 
count of the Proceedings against him, ibid. 
458. — A Bill of Attainder is passed against 
him, ibid. 461.— A Warrant to behead him. 
the next morning was sent to the Tower, 
but the King dying in the night, it was not 
executed, ibid, ib.-:— Bishop Thirleby's 
Letter respecting him, ibid. 465. — ^The 
Duke's Letter to the Lords of the Council 
after his Examination in the Tower, ibid. 
466. — He was Lord High Steward on the 
Trial of Edward, Duke of Buckingham, ibid. 
296. — He was one of the Commissioners for 
the Trial of Sir Thomas More, ibid. 387. — 
He was also Lord High Steward on the 
Trials of Lord Dacres and Queen Anne 
Boleyn, ibid. 408, 409. 

NORFOLK, Thomas Howard, Duke of (The 
Son).-- His Trial before the Lords at West- 
minster for High Treason in assisting the 
claim of Mary Queen of Scots to the Crown 
of England, 14 Eliz. 1571, 1 vol. 957. — 
Arrangements in Westminster Hall for the 
Trial, ibid. ib. —The Indictment in English, 
ibid. 959. — The same in Latin, ibid. 1035. 
— He applies to the Court to allow him 
Counsel, which is refused, ibid. 965.— He 
pleads Not Guilty, ibid. 967. — His Address 
to the Lords previous to the Case being 
opened against him, ibid, ib.—- The Queen's 
Counsel open the Charges against him, ibid. 
968. — Examination of the Bishop of Ross 
read, ibid. 975. — ^Letter of the Earl of Mur- 
ray read, ibid. 979.— ^Letter from the Bishop 
of Ross to the Queen's Mother (Anne 
Boleyn), ibid. 983.— The Duke's Letter to 
the Earl of Murray, ibid. 986 .^The Bishop 
of Ross's Confession read, ibid. 992. — 
Cavendish's Evidence, ibid. 997. — ^TheDuke 
is found Gnilty, ibid. 1031. — Judgment is 
passed upon him, ibid. ib. — His Address to 
the Lords after Judgment is pronounced, 
ibid. 1032, — His Execution, ibid. ib. 

NORKOT, Jane.— Curious Narrative of the 
Circumstances attending the discovery of her 
supposed Murderer, found among the Papers 
of Serjeant Maynard, 14 ?ol. 1324. 

NORRIS, Henry.— His Trial with Mark 
Smeton, William Brereton, and Sir Francis 
Weston, for High Treason, in having Criminal 
Conversation with Queen Anne Boleyn, 28 
Henry 8, 1536, 1 vol. 417. — Smeton con- 
fesses, and the others are found Guilty by the 
Jury, and Sentence of Death is passed upon ^ 
them, ibid. ib. — They are executed, ibid.421. 

NORTH, Sir Dudley. See London, City qf. 
Prifchard, Sir William, — His Examination 
before a Committee of Lords appointed 
after the Revolution to inquire into the 
Prosecutions of Lord William Russel, 
Colonel Sidney, and otherS| 9 vol. 969. — 
Roger North's Accovnt of the Disturb^ 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



06 



anc^s respecting his Election to the 0£5ce of 
Sheriff for the City of London^ ibid. 187. 

NORTH, Francis, Counsel, 6 vol. 520, 540, 
880. 

NORTH, Sir Francis, Chief Justice of C. P. 
31 Car. 2, 6 vol. 1396, 7 vol. 312, 424, 609, 
1527, 8 vol. 775, 9 vol. 7. — His Argument 
on delivering his Opinion in the Exchequer 
Chamber in the Case of Bafnardiston v. 
Soames, against the Judgment of the Court 
of King's Bench, 6 vol. 1092. — His 
Narrative at the Council Board of his Exa- 
mination of Bedlow at Bristol concerning 
the Popish Plot, ibid. 1494.— -His Charge to 
the Jury on the Trial of Nathaniel Reading 
for attempting to suppress Evidence of the 
Popish Plot, 7 vol. 307. — His Address to 
Reading on passing Sentence upon him, 
ibid. 309. — Resolution of the House of Com- 
mons to impeach him, 8 vol. 211. — ^His 
Charge to the Jury on the Trial of Colledge 
for Treason, ibid. 710. — Burnet's Remark on 
his Conduct on Colledge's Trial, ibid. 551 
(note). — Sir John Havfles's Remark upon 
him, 9 vol. 801. 

————— Lord Keeper. — 'His 
Speech to the Lord Mayor, Aldermen, and 
Citizens of London, on the presentation of 
their Petition respecting the Quo Warranto 
against them, 8 vol. 1274. — Extracts from 
his MSS. respecting the Popish Plot, pub- 
lished by Sir John Dalrymple, 6 vol. 1497. 
— Roger North's Defence of his refusal to 
grant a fiat for a Writ of Error to reverse 
Sir Thomas Armstrong's Outlawry, 10 vol. 
121. — Doubts respecting the truth of Roger 
North's Statement, that he interfered with 
James the Second to put a stop to JefiPe- 
ries's Severities in the West of England after 
Monmouth's Rebellion, 1 1 vol. 306 (note). 

NORTH, Roger, Counsel. See North, Francis, 
9 vol. 522, 641, 653, 10 vol. 38, 559, 11 vol. 
390. — He is one of the Counsel for the Pro- 
secution on the Trial of Lord William 
Russel, 9 vol. 594.— He is also of Counsel 
for the Prosecution on the Trial of Algernon 
Sidney, ibid. 840. — His Account of this Trial 
in the " Examen," ibid. ib. (note). — His 
History of the Motives for the Writ of Error 
in the Case of Bamardiston against Soames, 
14 vol. 719 (note). — His Account of the 
Proceedings on the Impeachment of the Earl 
of Danby, 11 vol. 614 (note). 



Attorney General to the 

Queen, 4 Jac. 2, 12 vol. 125. — His Examina- 
tion by a Committee of the House of Lords 
appointed in 1689 to inquire who were the 
Advisers and Prosecutors of the Murders of 
Lord William Russel, Colonel Sidney, and 
others, 9 vol. 995. 

NORTHAMPTON, Earl of.-His Speech on 
the Trial of Henry Garnet for being concern- 
ed in the Powder Plot, 2 vol. 247.— His 
Case on an Information in the Star Chamber 



for slanderous Words spoken of liim, ex* 
tracted from Coke's Reports, 10 Jac. 1,1613. 
ibid. 861. — Resolutions of the Judges in this 
Case, ibid. 863. 

NORTHAMPTON, Spencer, Earl of.— Pro- 
ceedings against him, William Earl of De- 
vonshire, Henry Earl of Dover, Henry Earl 
of Monmouth, Charles Lord Howard of 
Charlton, Robert Lord Rich, Charles Lord 
Grey of Ruthven, Thomas Lord Coventry, 
and Arthur Lord Capel, for absenting them- 
selves from the House of Lords contrary to 
an Order of the House, 18 Car. 1, 1642, 
4 vol. 176.— The House of Lords send for 
them, ibid, ib.— Their Answer, ibid. 177.^- 
The Commons impeach them, ibid. 178. — 
Mr. Hollis's Speech on delivering the Arti- 
cles of Impeachment, ibid. ib. — Sentence 
against them, ibid. 184. 

NORTHAMPTON, William Parr, Marquis 
of. See Norlfwmberland, John Dudley, 
Duke of. 

NORTHEY, Edward, Counsel, 13 vol. 1253- 
— His Argument for the Plaintiff against 
the King's Dispensing Power in the Action 
against Sir Edward Hales for neglecting to 
take the Oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance, 
11 vol. 1187.— His Speech in the House of 
Commons for the Duke of Norfolk, on the 
Second Reading of his Divorce Bill, 13 vol. 
1359. 

NORTHEY, Sir Edward, Attorney General, 
1 Ann, 14 vol. 531. — His Speech in Reply 
for the Prosecution on the Trial of David 
Lindsay for High Treason, ibid. 1018.— His 
Speech for the Prosecution on the Trial of 
John Tutchin for a Libel, ibid. 1105. — His 
Argument in support of a Motion to amend 
the Jury Process in that Case, ibid. 1140. — 
His Speech as one of the Managers for the 
Commons on the Trial of the Impeachment 
of the Earl of Wintoun for High Treason, 
15 vol. 833. — His Speech for the Prosecu- 
tion on the Trial of Francis Francia for 
High Treason, ibid. 906. 

NORTHINGTON, Robert, Earl of. Lord 
Chancellor, 5 Geo. 3. See Henley, Robert, 
Lord. — He is appointed Lord High Steward 
on the Trial of Lord Byron for the Murder 
of Mr. Chaworth, 19 vol. 1178. 

NORTHUMBERLAND, Henry Piercy, Earl 
of. — Report of the Public Declaration of his 
Treasons in the Star Chamber after his 
Death; together with the Examinations of 
several Persons respecting his Suicide, 27 
Eliz. 1585, 1 vol. 1111.— Speech of the- 
Attorney General (Popham) in the Star 
Chamber, detailing the Earl's Treasons, ibid. 
1115. — Speecli of the Solicitor General 
(Egerton) on the same Subject, ibid. 1120. 
— Speech of Sir Roger Manwood, Chief 
Baron of the Exchequer, describing the 
Manner of his Death and the Examinations 
taken on a Coroner's Inquisition, ibid. 1122* 



96 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



NORTHUMBERLAND, John Dudley, Duke 
of. — ^His Trial in the House of Loi^s, with 
William Parr, Marquis of Northampton, 
and John Dudley, Earl of ^Warwick, for High 
Treason, in asserting the title of Lady Jane 
Grey to the Crown, 1 Mary, 1553, 1 vol. 
765. — ^The Duke proposes two Questions of 
Law to the Court, ibid. ib. — They all con- 
fess the Indictment, ibid. 766. — They are 
executed, ibid. 768. — ^The Duke disavows 
his Religion on the Scaffold in hopes of a 
Pardon, ib. ibid, and (note). 

NORTON, Christopher.— Account of his Exe- 
cution with John Norton for High Treason, 
in being concerned in the Northern Re- 
bellion, 13 Eliz. 1570, 1 vol. 1083. 

NORTON, Sir Fletcher, Attorney General, 4 
Geo. 3.— He exhibits an Information against 
John Wilkes for a Seditious Libel in the 
" North Briton," 19 vol. 1075, 1382.— His 
Speech for the Prosecution on the Trial of 
Lord Byron for the Murder of Mr. Cha- 
worth, ibid. 1183. 

Speaker of the House 



of Commons, 19 vol. 1138. 

NORWICH, Earl of. See Holland, Earl of . 

NOTTINGHAM, Earl of. See Finch, Heneage. 

NOY, William, Counsel. — His Argument in 
the Court of King's Bench for Sir Walter 
Earl, on the Return to a Habeas Corpus 
sued out by him and others, in order to try 
the legality of their Imprisonment for re- 
fusing to lend on the Commission of Loans, 
3 vol. 11. 



' Attorney General, 8 Car. 1. — 

His Speech in the Star Chamber on the 
Prosecution of Henry Sherfield for breaking 
a Window in a Church, 3 vol. 536. — His 
Speech in the Star Chamber on the Prose- 
cution of Prynn for writing ''Histrio- 
mastix,'' ibid. 566. — Notices of him by 
Howell, Kennett, and other Writers, ibid. 
828 (note). — Lord Clarendon's Character- of 
him, ibid. 834 (note). 

NUDIGATE, Sebastian. See Middlemore, 
Humphrey, 

NUNDOCOMAR, Maha Rajah.— His Trial 
at Calcutta for forging a Persian Bond, 15 
Geo. 3, 1775, 20 vol. 923.— The Indictment, 
ibid. 925. — Translation of the Bond charged 
to be forged, ibid. 933. — Evidence for the 
Prosecution, ibid. 934. — The Defence, ibid. 
968. — Evidence for the Prisoner, ibid. 969. 
— Chief Justice Irapey's Charge to the Jury, 
ibid. 1063.— The Jury find him Guilty, ibid. 
1 078. — His Trial with Joseph Fowke, Francis 
Fowke, and Roy Rada Churn, at Calcutta, 
for a Conspiracy against Warren Hastings, 
Esq. Governor General of Bengal, and 
others,' ibid. 1077". — Proceedings previous 
to the Trial, ibid. ib. — Motion on behalf of 
tie Goveroor General and Council to quash 



the Prosecution as against Roy Rada Chum, 
on the ground of his being a Sovereign 
Prince and an Ambassador, ibid. 1107.— 
Arguments of the Counsel for the Prosecu- 
tion on opposing the Motion, ibid. 1112.— 
Arguments of the Court' on refusing the 
Motion, ibid. 1119. — ^The Indictment, ibid. 
1143. — Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 
1147. — ^They are acquitted^ ibid. 1186.— 
His Trial Ivith Joseph Fowke and Roy lUda 
Chum for a Conspiracy against Richard 
Barwell, Esq. one of the Members of the 
Supreme Council of Bengal, ibid. 1185.— 
The Indictment, ibid. ib. — Evidence for 
the Prosecution, ibid. 1187. — Fowke and 
Nundocomar are found Guilty, RoylUda 
Churn is acquitted, ibid. 1226. 

GATES, Dr. Titus. See Fopish FbtJ-Bx% 
NaiTative of the Popish Plot, 6 vol. 1429.— 
His Evidence against Coleman, 7 vol. 15.— 
Against Ireland and others, upon which he 
was afterwards convicted of Perjury, ibid. 
91. — ^Against Whitbread and othiers, ibid. 
322.— Against Richard Langhom, ibid. 426. 
— Against Wakeman and others, ibid. 619. 
— Against Anderson and others, ibid. 837. 
— Against Lord Castlemaine, ibid. 1070. 
—Against Lord Stafford, ibid. 1320, 1347. 
—He and Bed low exhibit Articles of Accu- 
sation before the Privy Council against 
Chief Justice Scroggs, 8 vol. 163.— His 
Evidence against Fitzharris, ibid, 362.— 
His Evidence on behalf of Colledge, ibid. 
646. — Proceedings on a Writ of Inquiry in 
an Action of Scandalum Magnatum, brought 
by James, Duke of York (afterwards James 
the Second), against him, 36 Car. 2, 1684, 
10 vol. 125.— The Judgment in this Action 
was reversed at the Revolution, ibid. 1327. 
—The Writ of Inquiry, ibid. 129.— Evi- 
dence of the Words spoken by him, ibid. 
134.— Chief Justice Jeffei:ies*s Charge to 
the Jury, ibid. 140. — The Jury assess the 
Damages at 10,000/., ibid. 148.— His Trial 
at the King's Bench for Perjury in his Evi- 
dence on the Trial of Whitebread and 
others, 1 Jac. 2, 1685, ibid. 1079.— He 
challenges a Juror peremptorily, but his 
Challenge is not allowed, ibid. 1080.— The 
Indictment, ibid. 1082. — Speeches of the 
King's Counsel on opening the Case against 
him, ibid. 1089. — Evidence against him, 
ibid. 1092.— His Defence, ibid. 1135.— He 
urges that the Record of the Conviction and 
Attainder of Whitebread and others is con- 
clusive Evidence of the Facts therein stated, 
and that those Facts cannot be averred to 
be false against it, ibid. 1136.— The Court 
hold otherwise, ibid. 1137.— Evidence for 
the Defence, ibid. 1140.— Repl/ of the 
King's Counsel, ibid. 1 172.— Evidence in 
reply, ibid. 1175. — Oates sums up his En- 
dence, ibid. 1191.— He objects to the Evi- 
dence of Papists against him, ibid. 1192.— 
The Court decide that a Papist is a coffl- 
petent Witness, ibid, 1193,— The Solicitor 



THE STATE TtllALS. 



97 



General sums up the Evidence in reply for 
the Grown, ibid. 119^9. — Chief. Justice 
Jefferies's Charge to the Jury, ibid, 1210. — 
The Jury find him Guilty, ibid. 1227.— 
His Trial on the Second Indictment for 
Perjury, 1 Jac. 2, 1685, ibid., ib. — ^The 
Indictment, ibid. ib. — ^The Speeches of the 
Counsel for the Prosecution, ibid.' 1239. — 
Evidence against him, ibid. 1240. — His De- 
fence, ibid. 1281 . — Evidence for the Defence, 
ibid. 1285.—- He sums up his Evidence, ibid. 
1288. — ^The Solicitor General replies, ibid. 
1291. — Chief Justice Jefferies's Charge to 
the Jury, ibid. 1298. — The Jury find him 
Guilty, ibid. 1309. — He makes Objections 
- to both Indictments in aiTest of Judgment, 
• ibid. 1311. — The Court overrule the Objec- 
tions, ibid. 1312. — Judgment against him 
on both Indictments, ibid. 1315. — Particu- 
lars of his Application to the House . of 
Lords, after the Revolution, for a Reversal 
of these Judgments, ibid. 1317. — The Judg- 
ments are affirmed, ibid. 1326.— Burnet's 
Character of him, 6 vol. 1407. 

O'BRIEN, Dennis, See Thanet, SackvUle, 
Earl of , 

OCLE, Thomas de. ^ee Gttmej/y William de, 

O'COIGLY, James.~His Trial with Arthur 
O'Connor, John Binns, John Allen, and 
Jeremiah Leary for High Treason, be- 
fore a Special Commission of Oyer and 
Terminer, held at Maidstone, 38 Geo. 3, 
1798, 26 vol. 1101.— Mr. Justice Buller's 
Charge to the Grand Jury, ibid. 1192. — 
The Grand Jury return true Bills against 
them, ibid. 1197. — Caption and Indictment, 
ibid. 1202. — Counsel for the Crown and for 
the Prisoners, ibid. 1218. — Application on 
the part of the Prisoners to the Court, com- 
plaining of an attempt made to excite a 
Prejudice against them in the minds of the 
Jury, ibid. 1219. — Affidavit in support of 
the Application, ibid. 1223. — Objections to 
Jurors tried by Triers, ibid. 1227-1230. — 
The Counsel for the Prisoners object to the 
Crown's right to challenge without cause, 
ibid. 1231. — Mr. Scott's Argument in sup- 
port of the Objection, ibid. ib. — ^The Court 
d^ide in favour of the Right of the Crown, 
ibid. 1240. — ^The Attorney General's Speech 
for the Prosecution, ibid. 1245. — Evidence 
for the Prosecution, ibid. 1266. — Mr. 
Pluroer^s Speech in Defence of O'Coigly 
and O'Connor, ibid. 1375. — Mr. Gurney's 
Speech in Defence of Birnis, 27 vol. 1 . — 
Mr. Fergusson's Speech in Defence of Allen, 
ibid. 16. — Mr. Scott's Speech in Defence of 
Leary, ibid. 26. — Evidence for the Prisoners, 
ibidi. 27-— Mr. Erskine's Evidence as to the 
Chai^aater of O'Connor, ibid. 38. — Mr. Fox's 
Evidence to the same effect, ibid. 41. — Mr. 
Sheridan's Evidence, ibid. 45. — Mr. Dallas's 
Speech on summing up the Evidence for 
the Prisoners, ibid. 53. — ^The Attorney- 

. Gene^l's R^ply, . ibid, 95^,— Mr, Justice 
VOL, XXXIV, 



Buller's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 125. — 
The Jury find O'Coigly Guilty, and acquit 
the other Prisoners, ibid. 138. — Mr. Justice 
Buller's Address on passing Sentence upon 
O'Coigly, ibid. 139.— Life of O'Coigly, with 
Observations on his Trial, ibid. 141. — His 
Conduct previous to and at his Execution, 

ibid. 247 ^Trial of the Earl of Thanet and 

others for a riotous attempt to rescue Arthur 
O'Connor at the close of his Trial, ibid. B21. 

O'CONNOR, Artlmr. See OCoigly, Jmrm, 

OGILVIE, James, Lord. See Spotiswood, Sir 
Robert. 

OGILVIE, John (a Jesuit). — Proceedings 
against him for High Treason . at Glasgow, 
13 Jac. 1, 1615, 2 vol. 883.— His Exami- 
nation at Glasgow, ibid. ib. — Commission 
issued to try him, ibid. 885. — His Answers 
to the Questions proposed to him respecting 
the temporal and spiritual power of the 
Pope, ibid. 886. — Indictment against him, 
ibid. 887. — His Defence, ibid. 891.— He is 
found Guilty and sentenced to be hanged, 
ibid, 897. — Account of his Execution, ibid. 
898. 

OGILVIE, Patrick. See Nairn, Catharine. 

OKEY, Colonel John, 5 vol. 1301. See 
Regicides, 

OLDCASTLE, Sir John. See Cobham, Lord. 

OLIPHANT, John.— His Trial with others, 
at Edinburgh, for drinking the health of the 
Pretender and cursing the King) 1 Geo. 1> 
1715, 17 vol. 763.— The Indictment, ibid. 
764. — Information for the King's Advocate, 
ibid. 766. — Information for the Panels, ibid. 
770. — ^The Court find the Libels relevant, 
ibid. 777. — Evidence for the Prosecution, 
ibid. 778. — Verdict of the Assize, ibid. 779. 
— Sentence of the Court, ibid. 780. 

ONEBY, Major John.— His Trial at the Old 
Bailey for the Murder of William Gower, 
12 Geo. 1, 1726, 17 vol. 29.— The Indict- 
ment, ibid. ib. — Evidence against him^ ibid. 
31. — Evidence for him, ibid. 34. — The Jury 
find a Special Verdict, ibid. 36. — Serjeant 
Darnell's Argument of the Special Verdict 
in the Court of King's Bench for the Prose- 
cution, ibid. 38. — Serjeant Eyre's Argument 
for the Prisoner, ibid. 39. — ^Judgment of the 
Court on the Special Verdict, that the facts 
found constitute Murder, ibid. 41. — Chief 
Justice Raymond's Argument on delivering 
the Judgment of the Court on the Verdict, 
ibid, ib.— Sentence of Death is passed upon 
him, but he commits Suicide in Newgate, 
ibid. 55. — Narrative of his Life, ibid. 56. 

ONSLOW, Arthur. — His Case upon an Appeal 
in the House of Lords, brought against him 
by Sir Nicholas Stoughton, 6 vol.1134. 

ONSLOW, Mr.— His Speech in the House of 
Lords as one of th^ Managers for the Housq 
H 



»8 



GENERAL INDEI TO 



of Commons on th« Trial of the Impeoch- 
ment of Lord Chancellor Macclesfield, 16 
vol. 895. 

ONSLOW, Deozil.-^His Case on an Action 
brought by him against the Sheriff of Surrey 
for a False Return of Members to serve in 
Parliament for that County, 14 toI. 707 
(note). 

ONSLOW, Lord, f^ee Arnold, Edward. 

ORFORD, £dward, Bail of. See Somerh 
John, Lard, 

ORLETON, Adam de, Bishop of Hereibrd.-— 
He is accused of Treason in taking Arms 
against the King, 16 £dw. 2, 1323, 1 toI. 
39. — He pleads his Privilege as a Minister 
of Holy Church, and that he ought not to 
answer tvithout leave from the Archbishop 
of Canterbury, ibid, ib.— The Archbishop 
and his Suffragans intercede for him, ibid, 
ib. — He is again summoned to answer, 
"When the Archbishops and other Churchmen 
take him forcibly from the Bar, ibid, ib.— 
The King prefers a Bill of Indictment 
against him to tlie Grand Jury of Hereford- 
shire, and, on its being found, seizes on his 
Temporalities, ibid. ib.->^His Temporalities 
are restored to him by Edward the Third, 
ibid. 40. — He moves in Parliament that 
King Edward the Second should be deposed, 
ibid. 47.*^He is one of the Deputation from 
the Parliament to resign their Homage and 
Fealty to Edward the Second, ibid. 49. 

ORMISTOUN, the Laird of. See Darrdey, 
Bentjy Lord, 

ORMOND, James, Duke of.— Articles of 
Impeachment against him for High Treason 
in adhering to the Pretender, and holding 
Correspondence Vith the French Govern- 
ment, 1 & 2 Geo. 1, 1715, 15 vol. 1007.-— 
On his not appearing to Answer, a Bill of 
Attainder is passed against him, ibid. 1012. 
—He passes the rest of his life abroad, in 
adherence to the Pretender, ibid. 1014. 

ORR, William. See Pmcrfjr, Peter. — Account 
of the Proceedings in Ireland against him, 
under the Irish Insurrection Act, for ad- 
ministering unlawful Oaths, 37 Geo. 3, 1797, 
26 vol. 901.— Arguments of his Counsel in 
arrest of Judgment, upon a Verdict of Gnilty 
being returned, ibid. 909.-~The Objections in 
arrest of Judgment are overruled, and Sen- 
tence of Death is passed upon him, ibid. 
914.— Trial of Peter Finerty for a Libel, in 
certain Remarks upon this Trial, and the 
Execution of the Sentence against Orr, ibid. 
923. 

ORRERY, Earl of.— Proceedings against him 
on an Impeachment by the Commons for 
High Crimes and Misdemeanours, 21 Car. 
2, 1669s 6 vol. 913.— Debate in the House 
of Commons upon the Charges, ibid. ib. — 
He is ordered into the custody of the Ser- 
}eant-at-Arms; ibid. 915.— His Defence in 



tht House of Commons, ibid. ib. — ^The 
House resolve that the Aiccusation against 
bim be left to be prosecuted at law, ibid. 
92a'^No further Proceedings appesr to 
have been bad, ibid. ib. (note). 

ORTON, Henry. See Conxion, Edmund. 

OSBALDESTON, Lambert See WUUama, 
John, Buhop qf Lincoln. 

OSBORNE, Sir Thomas. See Dattby, Thomas, 
Earl of. — His Speech in the House of Com- 
mons in the Debate upon the Impeachment 
of Lord Clarendon, 6 vol. 837.:-^Bumet's 
Notice of him, ibid. ib. (note). 

OVERBURY, Sir Thomas.— Trial of his Mur- 
derers, 2 vol. 91 1 . — ^Trial of Richard Weston, 
ibid, ib.— Trial of Anne Turner, ibid. 930. 
—Trial of Sir Jervis Elwes, ibid. 935. — 
Trial of James Franklin, ibid. 947.— Trial 
. of Sir Thomas Monson, ibid. 949.— Trial of 
the Countess of Somerset, ibid. 951.*— Trial 
of the Earl of Somerset, ibid. 965. 

OWEN, John, otherwise Collins. Proceed- 
ings against him for Treason in declaring 
the Pope's Supremacy, and maintaining 
that it would be lawful to kill the King/ 
if excommunicated by the Pope, 13 Jac. 1, 
1615, 2 vol. 879.— He is found Guilty by 
the Jury, ibid. 882. — ^The Court unani- 
mously hold that the Offence amounts to 
Treason, ibid, ib; — Judgment is given 
against him, ibid. 884. 

OWEN, Dr. John, Bishop of St. Asiapk See 
Twdoe Bi$hofA. 

OWEN, Sir John. See Holland, Earl of. 

OWEN, Dr. Morgnn, Bishop of Llandaff. See 
Twfhe Bitbops. 

OWEN, William.— His Trial for publishing a 
seditious Libel, upon a Prosecution by the 
Attorney General, at the suggestion of the 
House of Commons, 26 Geo. 2, 1752, 18 
vol. 120a,— The Information, ibid. 1204. — 
Speech of the Attorney General for the Pro- 
secution, ibid. 1220. — Evidence for the 
Prosecution, ibid. 1 222. — Mr. Ford's Speech 
in his Defence, ibid. 1223. — Evidence to 
the Character of the Defendant, ibid. 1227. 
—Mr. Pratt sums up the Evidence for the 
Defendant, ibid. ib. — The Jury acquit bim, 
ibid. 1228. — Lord Mansfield^ in delivering 
the Judgment of the Court against the 
Motion for a new Trial in the Case of the 
Dean of St. Asaph, says that the Report of 
this Trial in the State Trials is incorrect, 21 
vol. 1038. 

OWENS, Abel. See Kidd, dptmn WiUiam. 

OXFORD AND MORTIMER, Robert, Earl 
of. See EM^, JMer^.— Proceedings in 
Parliament against bim upon an Impeach* 
ment for Higli Treason and other High 
Crimes and MtsdemeammTS, 8 Geo. 1 , 1 717, 
1 5 vol. 1045. — Connntssion to Lord Ghta- 
^eilor Cowper to be Lord High Ste<mffd, 



THE STATS TRIAIS. 



Oft 



ibid. 1050.^-The Articles of Impeachment, 
ibid. 1052. — His Speech m the House of 
Lords on the Motion for his CommitmeDt, 
ibid. 1084.<— Further Articles of Impeach- 
meot, ibid. 1085. — His Answer, ibid. 1103. 
—Replication of the House of Commons, 
ibid. 1158.— Mr. Hampden's Speech for the 
Commons, ibid. 1160. — ^The Lords resolve 
that the Commons be not admitted to pro- 
ceed upon the Articles for Crimes and Mis- 
demeanours till Judgment is given upon the 
Articles for High Treason, ibid." 11 65. — 
Paper delivered by the Commons at a Con- 
ference between the two Houses, containing 
their Reasons against this Resolution, ibid. 
I166.*-The Lords resolve to adhere to their 
Resolution, ibid. 1168^ — ^Reasons of the 
Lords for the maintenance of their Resolu- 
tion, ibid. 1169.^ — After disputes upon this 
subject, the Lords resolve to proceed pre- 
sently with the Trial, ibid. 1174. — ^Form of 
Proclamation adopted by the Lords on the 
aoDp^ppearance of the Commons to make 
good their Impeachment, ibid. ib. — ^He is 
unanimously acquitted, ibid. 1176.-— Swift's 
Character of him, ibid. 1045 (note).^ — ^Lord 
. Bolingbroke^s Opinion of him, ibid. 1047 
(note). — Bnmet's Account of his Advance- 
ment* to the Peerage, ibid. 1048 (note)« — 
Preamble to his Patent, composed by Svrift, 
ibid. 1049 (note). 

PAGE, Francis, Counsel. — His Argument in 
the Court of Queen's Bench for the Discharge 
of the Aylesbury Men, on their Commitment 
by tlie House of Commons for a Breach of 
Privilege, 15 vol. 850. — ^The House order 
him into the Custody of the Serjeant-at- 
Arms for arguing that Case, ibid. 808. 

■■ Sir Francis, Judge of K. B. 5 Geo. 1, 
15 vol. 1324, 17 vol. 160.— His Charge to 
the Jury on the Trial of William Hales for 
Forgery, 17 vol. 203. — His Charge to the 
Jury on the Trial of John Huggins for 
Murder, ibid. 354. — His Charge to the Jury 
on the Trial of Thomas Bambridge for 
Murder, ibid. 394. 

PAIN, William. See Ttwmj^Wj Natkamel. 

PAINEy Thomas. — His Trial on an ex»officio 
Information, in the Court of King's Bench, 
for a Libel, contained in the Second Part of 
the Rights of Man, 33 Geo. 3, 1792^ 23 vol. 
357.— 'The Information, ibid. ib. — Counsel 
for the Crown and for the Defendant, ibid. 
380. — Speech of the Attorney General for 
the Prosecution, ibid. 400.-rPaine's Letter 
to the Attorney General, from Paris, on the 
subject of this Prosecution, ibid. 397, 404.— 
Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 400. — 
Mr. Erdtine's Speech for the Defendant, 
ibid. 410.— The Jury stop the Attorney 
General's Reply, and return a Verdict of 
Guilty, ibid. 472.^His Letter to the People 
ol France, 24 vol. 495. 

PALMER, Sir Geoflfrey, Attorney General, 
12 Car. 2, 6 vol. 971; 983, 6 vd. 733, T76. 



—He was named in the GommiKuoh for the 
Trial of the Regicides, 5 vol. 985. — ^His 
Speech for the Prosecution on the Trial of 
John James, one of the' Fifth Monarchy 
Men, for Hish Treason, 6 vol. 77.-<-Hif 
Speech for the Prosecution on the Trial of 
Sir Henxy Vane, ibid. 148. 

PALMER, Roger. See Caitlmame, liogtr, 
Barlof. 

PALMER, Sir Thomas. See Qotei, /Sir JeAit. 

PALMER, Thomas Fyshe.— His Trial before 
the Circuit Court of Justiciary at Perth for 
Sedition, 33 Geo. 3, 1793, 23 vol. 237.--The 
Indictment, ibid. ib. — His Counsel object 
to the Indictment on the ground of a Mis- 
nomer, ibid. 244. — ^The Court overrule the 
Objection, ibid. 252. — Mr. H^gart's Ar|:u- 
ment against the Relevancy of the Indict- 
ment, ibid. 255. — Mr. Maconochie's Argu- 
ment on the other side, ibid. 282. — ^Xne 
Court decide that the Indictment is relevant, 
ibid. 290^-^Evidence for the Prosecution, 
ibid. 299. — Evidence for the Defence, ibid. 
329. — Mr. Burnett's Speech for the Prose* 
cution, ibid. 331. — ^Mr. Clarke's Speech for 
the Defence, ibid. 339. — ^The Court sum up 
Um Evidence, ibid. 388. — ^Tbe Jury find bim 
Guilty, ibid. 371 < — He is sentenced to 
Transportation for seven yean, ibid. 372<-^ 
Proceedings in the House of Commons on 
the presentment of a Petition from him, ibid. 
360 (note). — Accounts of him in various 
contemporary Publications, ibid. 248 (note), 
ibid. 378. — ^Address by the Society for Con- 
stitutional Information to him after his Sen- 
tence, 24 vol. 586. — His Letter to the Chair- 
man of the Society in answer thereto, ibid. 
56*7. 

PALMER, Mr.— His Speech a^ one of the 
Managers for the Commons, in the House 
of Lords, on opening some of the Articles 
of Impeachment against Lord Chancellor 
Maoclesfield, 16 vol* 900. 

PANTALEON SA, Don, Brother of the Por- 
tuguese Ambassador.— Proceedings against 
him for Murder, 6 Car.. 2, 1654, 5 voL 481. 
—Account of the Riot and Tumult, occa- 
sioned by him and his followers, at the New 
Exchange, ibid. ib. — ^Wbitelocke's Narrative 
of the Transaction, ibid. 464. — He is tried 
with two of his Fdlowers hj a Special Com- 
mission of Oyer and Terminer, ibid. 466.—- 
He pleads ihaX he was one of the Suite of 
the Portuguese Ambassador, and that, in 
his absence, he had a Commission to be 
Ambassador himself, ibid, ib^— The Court 
reject his Plea of Privilege, ibid. ib. — He 
pleads Not Guilty, ibid. ib. — The Jury find 
them Guiltjr, and they are sentenced to be 
hanged, ibid. 467.— His Petition to Crom« 
well, ibid. 493. — ^He is beheaded, ibid. 479. 
— Dr. Zouch's Account of these Proceed'i 
ings, ibid. 482. — Another Account, ibid. 
483.— Extracts from Thurloe's State Pape^ 
relating to the IVansaction, ibid, 488. 
R 2 



100 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



PAPILLON, Thomas; See Pritchard^ Sir 

WiUiam, . 
PARHAM, Sir Edward. See Markham, Sir 

Gr^iu 

PARK, James Allan, Counsel, 29 vol. 423, 
503, 31 vol. 1, 271.— His Speech for the 
Prosecution on the Trial of Swallow and 

« others for Burglary, under the Special Com- 
mission at York in 1813 for the Trial of the 

. Luddites, 31 vol. 972. — ^His Speech for the 
Prosecution on the Trial of Mellor and 
others, under the same Commission, for the 
Murder of Mr. Ilorsfall, ibid. 998.--His 
Speech for the Prosecution on the Trial of 
John Schofield, under the same Commis- 
sion, for maliciously shooting at John 
Hinchliffe, ibid. 1035.— His Speech for the 

' Prosecution on the Trial of John Eadon, 
under the same Commission, for administier- 

' ing unlawful Oaths," ibid. 1 064.— His Speech 
for the Prosecution on the Trial of James 

' Haigh and others, under the same Codq- 

■ mission, for riotously destroying a Mill, 
ibid. 1093. — His Speech for the Prosecution 
on the Trial of Job Hey, under the same 
Commission, for a Burglary, ibid. 1137. 

PARKER, John, Baron of the Exchequer 
during the Protectorate, 5 vol. 946. 

PARKER, Thomas, Counsel. See Mocc/es- 
Jield, Thomas, Earl of. — His Argument for 

• the Defendant in the Court of King's Bench, 

' on shewing cause against the amendment of 

• the Jury Process, in the Case of Tutchin, 14 
vol.1173. 

Sir Thomas, Queen's * Serjeant.— 



His Speech as one of the Managers for the 
House of Commons, in support of the Fourth 
Article of Impeachment on the Trial of Dr. 
Sacheverel, 15 vol. 169. — His Speech in 
Reply to the Defence on the Fourth Article, 
ibid r 447. — Burnet says, that he distinguish- 
ed himself above all on that Occasion, ibid. 
11 (note). — ^He was appointed Chief Justice 
of K*. B. on the death of Lord Holt, ibid. 
14 (note). 

Thomas, Lord, Chief Justice of the 



Queen's Bench, 9 Ann, 15 vol. 731. — His 
Charge to the Jury on the Trial of Dam- 
maree for High . Treason, ibid. 596. — His 
Charge to the Jury on the Trial of Francis 
- Willis for High Treason, ibid. 646.— His 
Charge to the Jury on the Trial of Purchase 
for High Treason, ibid. 684. — His Speech 
on delivering his Opinion in favour of the 
King's Prerogative respecting the Marriage 
and Education of the Royal Family, ibid. 
1222. 

PARKYNS, Sir William.— His Trial for High 

Treason in being concerned in the Assassi- 

' nation Plot, 8 Will. 3, 1696, 13 vol. 63.— 

• The Indictment, ibid. 66. — He pleads Not 

Guilty, ibid. 70.— He applies to the Court 

' to postpone the Trial, on the ground that 

he has not had time to collect his Witnesses^ 



ibid, ib.— The Court refuse the Application, 
ibid. 72.— He applies for Counsel, suggest- 
ing the late Act of Parliament (7 Will, and 
Mary, c. 3), ibid, ib.— The Court refuse the 
Application, on the ground that the Act of 
Parliament had not come into operation, 
ibid, ib.— Speech of the Attorney General 
for the Prosecution, ibid. 77. — Evidence for 
the Prosecution, ibid. 85.— Lord Holt sug- 
gests to him the material points of the 
Evidence for the Prosecution, and he 
answers them seriatim, ibid. 108. — ^He ob- 
jects that there is but one Witness to prove 
his design to assassinate the King, ibid. 
112. — The Court hold that, as the design to 
assassinate the King v?as merely an Overt 
Act of compassing the King's Death, and as 
there were Witnesses to other Overt Acts of 
the same species of Treason, . the Evidence 
was sufficient, ibid. ib. — Reply of the 
Solicitor General, ibid. 119.— Lord Holt's 
Charge to the Jury, ibid. 126. — ^The Jury 
find him Guilty, ibid. 133. — Judgment is 
passed upon him and Sir John Freind, ibid. 
136. — Paper delivered by him to the Sheriffs 
at the place of Execution, ibid. 138. — An 
Account of what passed at his Execution, 
ibid. 406. — Proceedings against Mr. Collier 
and two other Non-juring Clergymea for 
absolving him and Sir John Freind at the 
place of Execution, ibid. 405. — Mr. Collier^s 
Defence of his Conduct in giving him Abso- 
lution, ibid. 408. — Declaration by the Arch- 
bishops, and certain Bishops, censuring the 
Conduct of the Clergymen at his Execution, 
ibid. 411.— Mr. Collier's Reply to the 
Declaration, ibid. 413. 

PARR, Catharine, Queen Dowager of Henry 
the Eighth.— She marries Lord Seymour of 
Sudley, 1 vol. 484. 

PARR, William, Marquis of Northampton. 
See Northumberland^ John Dudley, Duke of. 

PARRIS, alias PARRY, Charles. See ^w- 
derson, Lionel. 

PARROT, Hugh. See Kidd, Captain WUium. 

PARRY, John. See Vinty John. 

PARRY, William>-His Trial for High Trea- 
son in attempting to kill the Queen, at the 
instigation of the Papists, 26 Eliz. 1584; 1 
vol. 1095. — He is arraigned, and pleads 
Guilty, ibid. 1097-1098.— The Evidence is 
produced against him notwithstanding his 
Confession, ibid. 1098. — His Confession 

Previous to his Trial, ibid. 1099. — His 
•etter to the Queen, ibid. 1104. — Letter to 
him from the Cardinal di Como, ibid. 1105. 
— His Letter to the Earl of Leicester and 
the Lord Treasurer, prajring ^ for Pardon, 
ibid. 1106. — He offers to withdraw his Con- 
fession, and says that it was extorted from 
him, ibid. 1107. — Chief Justice Wray passes 
Sentence of Death upon him, ibid. 1110.-^ 
He is executed in Palace Yard, Westminsteri 
ibid, 1112, 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



101 



PATE, John. See Hastingt, Henry, 

PATERSON, James. See Black, Bavid. 

PAUL, William. See Walker, Thomas. 

PAULETT, Lord William.— His Speech in 
support of the Second Article of Impeach- 
ment against Dr. Sacheyerell, 15 vol. 151. 

PEACHAM, Edmund.— He is indicted for 
Treason for treasonable Doctrines contained 
in a Sermon not preached, but ivritten by 
him, and found in his Study, 12 Jac. 1, 
1615, 2 vol. 869. — He is tried and found 
Guilty, but not executed, ibid. ib. — Inter- 
rogatories exhibited to him, ibid. ib. — He is 
examined upon the Interrogatories with the 
Torture, ibid. 871. — Sir Francis Bacon's 
Letters to the King respecting this Case, 
ibid. ib. — Peacham's second Examination 
in the Tower, ibid. 877. — Paper in the 
hand-writing of James the First, discussing 
whether the Facts in Peacham's Case 
amounted to Treason, ibid. ib. 

PEACHELL, Dr. John, Vice-Chancellor of 
the University of Cambridge. See Cam- 
bridge University, — Proceedings against him 
and the University of Cambridge before the 
Ecclesiastical Commissioners appointed by 
James the Second, for refusing to admit a 
fienedictine Monk to the degree of Master 
of Arts, 3 Jac. 2, 1687, 11 vol. 1315.— 
Summons from the Commissioners, ibid. 
1324. — His Examination, ibid. 1325. — ^The 
Answer of the Univeraity, containing their 
Reasons for their Conduct, ibid. 1326. — 
His second Examination, ibid. 1329. — Sen- 
tence of Deprivation is passed upon Dr. 
Peachell, ibid. 1335.— The Sentence, ibid. 
1339. — Burnet's Account of these Proceed- 
ings, ibid. 1315 (note). 

PEARSALL, Oliver. See Wdker, Thomas. 

PECK, Edward, Serjeant-at-Law. — He is 
ordered into the custody of the Serjeant-at- 
Arms by the House of Commons for plead- 
ing on an Appeal in the House of Lords 
against a Member of. the House of Commons, 
6 vol. 1146. 

PECKHAM, Mr. Counsel.— His Argument 
for the Defendant in Error in the Case of 
Fabrigas v. Mostyn, 20 vol. 207.— His 
Speech in Defence of De la Motte on his 
Trial for High Treason, 21 vol. 778. 

PELTIER, Jean.— His Trial upon an ex- 
ofiBcio Information for a Libel on Napoleon 
Buonapar^, when First Consul of the French 
Republic, 43 Geo. 3, 1803, 28 vol. 529.— 
Counsel for the Prosecution and for the 
Defendant, ibid. ib. — The Information, ibid. 
530. — Speech of the Attorney General for 
the Prosecution, ibid. 547.— -Evidence for 
the Prosecution, ibid. 558.— Mr. Mac- 
intosh's Speech for the Defendant, ibid. 
563. — Reply of the Attorney General, ibid. 
608.— Lord Ellenborough's Charge to the 
Jury, ibid. 616.— The Jury find him Guilty, 
hwt in consequence of the renewal of the 



War between France and Great Britain, he 
is not brought up for Judgment, ibid. 619. 

PEMBERTON, Francis, Counsel, 20 Car. 2, 
1668. — He is of Counsel for the Prosecution 
on the Trial of Messenger and others for 
Treason, 6 vol. 880. 

Serjeant-at-Law, 27 



Car. 2. — He is ordered into the custody of 
the Seijeant-at-Arms by the House of Com- 
mons for a Breach of Privilege in pleading, 
by Order of the House of Lords, on an 
Appeal brought in that House against a 
Member of the House of Commons, 6 vol. 
1146. 

Sir Francis, Judge of K. B. 



31 Car. 2. — He presides at several of the 
Trials for the Popish Plot, 7 vol. 330, 428, 
610, 771, 831, 889, 965.— Burnet says, that 
he lost his Seat in the Court of King's Bench 
by means of Chief Justice Scroggs, 8 vol. 
245 (note). — On being displaced from his 
Seat on the Bench, he returns to his 
Practice at the Bar, 9 vol. 580 (note). 

'• Chief Justice of 



K. B. 33 Car. 2.— On Sir William Scroggs's 
removal, he is made Chief Justice, 8 vol. 
245 (note). — His Charge to the Jury on the 
Trial of Fitzharris, ibid. 385. — Sir John 
Hawles says, that the Evidence was unfairly 
summed up by him on that Trial, ibid. 438. 
— His Charge to the Jury on the Trial of 
Dr. Oliver Plunket, ibid. 488. — His Address 
on passing Judgment upon Plunket, ibid. 
492. — IJis Charge to the Grand Jury pre- 
vious to preferring the Indictment against 
the Earl of Shaftesbury, ibid. 760.— His 
Charge to the Jury on the Trial of Nathaniel 
Thompson and others for slandering the 
Evidence of the Popish Plot, ibid. 1366.— 
His Charge to the Jury on the Trial of 
Count Coningsmark and others for Murder, 
9 vol. 77. — His Charge to the Jury on the 
Trial of Lord Grey of Werk and others for 
conspiring to debauch Lady Henrietta 
Berkeley, ibid. 178. — Burnet says, that not 
being satisfied to give his Judgment for the 
Crown in the Case of the Quo Warranto 
against the City of London, he was removed 
to the Common Pleas, upon North's Ad- 
vancement, before the final Judgment of the 
Court in that Case was delivered, 8 vol, 
1039 (note). 

Chief Justice of 



C. P. 35 Car. 2.— His Charge to the Jury 
on the Trial of Thomas Walcot for High 
Treason in being concerned in the Rye- 
House Plot, 9 vol. 558. — His Charge to the 
Jury on the Trial of Lord William Russel, 
ibid. 635. — His Charge to, the Jury on the 
Trial of John Rouse, ibid. 653.— He is 
taken from the Bench shortly after the Trial 
of Lord William Russel, ibid. 580 (note). 

Serjeant-at-Law, 



36 Car. 2.~He is one of the Counsel in the 
Lady Ivy's Case,. 10 voL 567.— He is onft 



1<» 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



of ibe Coonsel for the Seven Bisbops, 12 
▼ol. 202. — He 18 ordered to attend in the 
House of Commons to answer lor his con- 
cnmog in the Judgment of the Court of 
King's Bench in the Case of Jay and Top- 
ham, ibid. 822. — His Beasons for his Judg- 
ment in that Case, ibid. 825, 827.— ^The 
House of Commons resolve that he was 
Guilty of a Breach of Privilege by concur- 
ring in that Judgment, ibid. 834. — He 
appears to have been assigned as Counsel 
to Sir John Fenwick in 1696, 13 vol. 543. 
—Burnet's Notice of his Character, 8 vol. 
245 (note). — He filled three judicial Offices, 
was removed from each, returned twice to 
practice at the Bar, and died at last a Puisne 
Serjeant, 12 vol. 260 (note). 

I>BMBROKE, Philip, Earl of.— His Trial at 
Westminster, in the Court of the Lord High 
Steward, ibr the Murder of Nathaniel Cony, 
30 Car. 2, 1678, 6 vol. 1309.— His Petition 
to the House of Lords for a Trial, ibid. ib. 
— His Petition is refened to a Committee 
of Privileges, ibid. 1312. — Report of the 
Committee upon the method of bringing 
him to Trial, ibid. 1313. — A Special Com- 
mission of Oyer and Terminer is issued, 
under which an Indictment is preferred and 
found against him, ibid. 1315.— The Indict- 
ment is removed into the House of Lords 
by CertioTari, ibid. ib. — ^His Trial, ibid. 
1316.— Lord Nottingham, then Lord Finch, 
is appointed Lord High Steward, ibid. 1317. 
— ^The Lord High Steward's Address to the 
Prisoner on his being brought to the Bar, 
ibid. ib. — ^The Indictment, ibid. 1320. — 
Speech of Sir William Jones, Attorney 
General, for the Prosecution, ibid. 1321.^- 
Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 1323. — 
Evidence for the Defence, ibid. 1338. — 
Reply of the Solicitor General, Sir Francis 
Winnington, ibid. 1343.— The Lords acquit 
him of Murder, but find him Guilty of Man- 
slaughter, ibid. 1349.— He prays the Privi- 
lege of the Statute, and is aischarged, ibid. 
1350. — Extracts from the Journals of the 
House of Lords respecting him, ibid. 1309 
(note).— He is committed to the Tower by 
the King for Blasphemy, ibid. ib. — Upon 
committing a violent Assault upon Philip 
Ricaut, he is compelled to give Security in 
the House of Lords for keeping the peace, 
ibid. 1311 (note). — Proceedings in the 
House of Lords on his Quarrel with the 
Earl of Dorset, ibid. 1312 (note). 

PENGELLY, Thomas, Seijeant-at-Law.— He 
is said to have been a natural Son of Richard 
Cromwell, 6 vol. 140 (note).— His Speech 
for the Prosecutioh on the Trial of Chris- 
topher Layer for High Treason, ibid. ib. 



■ ; Sir Thomas, King's Serjeant. — 

His Speech in Reply for the Commons on 
the Trial of the Impeachment of Lord 
Chancellor Macclesfiela, 16 vol. 1330. 

■ Chief Baron of the 



Exchequer, 3 Geo. 2»— His Charge t6 the 
Jury on the Trial of William Hales for 
Forgery, 17 vol. 219.— His Charge to tho 
Jury on the Trial of Hales and Kinnersley 
for Forgery, ibid. 250. 

PENN, William.— Account of his Trial with 
William Mead for being present at a 
tumultuous Assembly in Gracechurch Street, 
written by themselves, 22 Car. 2, 1670, 6 
vol. 951. — ^The Indictment, ibid. 954. — 
They plead Not Guilty, ibid. 955.— The 
Court fines them for not taking off their 
Hats on coming into Courl, ibid. 956. — 
Evidence against them, ibid. 957. — They 
are remeved from the Bar, and the Jnry are 
charged in their absence, against which Fenn 
remonstrates, ibid. 961. — ^Die Jury return a 
Verdict of " Guilty of Preaching in Grace- 
church Street," ibid. 962. — The Jury are 
commanded to re-consider their Verdict, 
but return into Court with the same Verdict 
as to Penn, and Not Guilty as to Mead, 
ibid. ib. — The Court threaten the Jury, 
ibid. 963.— The Jury are enclosed all night, 
and the next morning deliver the same 
Verdict, ibid. 964. — They are enclosed a 
second night, and then return a Verdict of 
Not Guilty as to both Defendants, ibid. 
966. — ^The Court fine the Jury for their 
Verdict, ibid. 967. — Penn and Mead are 
sent to Newgate for non-payment of their 
Fines, ibid. 969. — Defence which they in- 
tended to have made, ibid. 970. — ^The Jury 
are sent to Newgate for non-payment of 
their Fines, ibid. 969. — Proceedings in the 
Court of King's Bench upon a Habeas 
Corpus sued out by Bushell, the Foreman 
of the Jury, ibid. 999. 

PENN, Sir William. — Proceedings against him 
on an Impeachment for several High Crimes 
and Misdemeanours, 20 Car. 2, 1668, 6 vol. 
869. — Burnet's Account of the Transaction 
from which these Proceedings arose, ibid, 
ib. — Articles of Impeachment against him, 
ibid. 873. — His Answer thereto, ibid. 876. 
— ^The House of Commons refer the consider- 
ation of the Answer to a Committee, ibid. 
878. — ^The Proceedings appear to have been 
discontinued here, ibid. ib. — Lord Claren- 
don's Account of him, ibid. 869 (note). — 
He was Vice*- Admiral of England, and 
Father of the Founder of Pennsylvania, ibid, 
ib. 

PENNINGTON, Isaac, 5 vol. 1000, 1198. 
See Regicides, 

PENRUDDOCK, Colonel John.— His Trial 
with several others, at Exeter, for High 
Treason in levying War against the Lord 
Protector and the Government, 7 Car. 2, 
1655, 5 vol. 767. — He demands Counsel, 
but is refused, ibid. 771. — He pleads Not 
Guilty, ibid. 773.~He contends that there 
can be no such Oifence as Treason against 
the Protector, ibid. ib. — His Address to the 
Jury, ibid. 776.— The Jury find him Guilty, 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



lOB 



ibid. TTf.— His Address tb the Court on 
being cat!etl upon fbt Judgment, ibid. lb. — 
He is sentenced to Deatb, ibid. Jb.— His 
Address to tbe People from the Scaffold, 
ibid. 77B.— Letter frofn his Wife, ^H^ith his 
Answer 'thereto, written the night befbre 
his Execution, ibid. 783.-^Curious Notes 
for the assistance of Colonel Penruddock 
and the other Prisoners on their Trial, ex- 
tracted from Thurloe's State Papers, ibid. 
784. — list of the several persons indicted, 
with the Verdicts in their respective Cases, 
ibid. 78d.— Lord Clarendon's Account of 
the Transactions which led to the Trial of 
Penruddock, ibid. 76T(note).^Lord Hale 
refbses to assist as Judge at the Tri&l, ibid, 
ib. 

PERCEVALi The Hon. Spencer, Counsel.-- 
His Speech for the Prosecution on the Trial 
of John Binns, at Warwick, for Seditious 
Words, 20 vol. AQSt-'^is Speech in Reply 
in the samf Case, ibid. 643* 



— Solicitor Ge- 



neral, 28 vol. 64. 

■■ »> > >■ ■ ■ ■■■■■ n iiw ! ■■ ■ I AttomeyGe- 

neral. — ^His Speech for the Prosecution on 
tbe Trial of Colonel Despard for High 
Treason, 28 vol. SOd.-^His Speech for the 
Prosecution on the Trial Of Peltier for a 
libel on Buonaparte, when Firdt Consul of 
the French Republic, ibid.54T. — Hie Speech 
for the Prosecution on the Trial of William 
Cobbett for a Libel on the Lord Deutenant 
and other Officers of State in Ireland, 29 
vol. 21.^»-His Speech for the Prosecution 
on the Trial of Mr» Justice Johnson for a 
Libel, ibid* 423. — His Speech in Reply in 
the same Case, ibid. 492. 

PERIAM, William, Judge of C. P. 28 Eliz. 
1 vol. 1251, 1315.— He was one of the 
Commissioners for the Trial of Mary, Queen 
of Scou, 1 vol. 1167. 

Sir William, Chief Baron of the 



Exchequer, 43 Eliz. 1 vol. 1334. 

PERROTT, Sir John, Lord Deputy of Ire- 
land. — ^liis Trial at the Bar of the Court of 
King's Bench for High Treason, 84 Eliz. 
1592, 1 vol. 1315.— Abstract of the Indict- 
meots, ibid. 1816-17.->-He pleads Not Guilty 
to both Indictments, ibid. ib« — Contemptu- 
ous Words, used by him respecting the 
Queen, given in Evidence to show a treason- 
able intention, ibid. 1318. — ^The Jury find him 
Guilty, but Judgment is respited, ibid. 1326. 
-^Betng called on for Judgment, he ofiers to 
make an Exception to the Indictment, but 
is not permitted, ibid. 1828.«>-His Speech, 
ibid. ib. — ^Chief Justice Anderson passes 
sentence of Death upon him, ibid. 133 1.<— 
He dies in the Tower, ibid. 1334. 

PERRY, James.— His Trial with John Lam- 
bert and James Gray, on an ex-officio In- 
formation, for a Seditious Libel, 34 Geo. 3, 



1798, 22 Vol. 963.«*-Mr. Fetty^ Advertise- 
ment to the original Report of the Trial, ibid, 
ib. — The Information, ibid. 958. — On the 
Cause being called on, only seven Special 
Jurors appeared, and, the Attorney General 
not praying a Tales, the Trial goes off, ibid. 
965.— A Rule for a new Special Jury being 
taken out, Mr. Erskine moves the Court On 
behalf of the Defendants to discharge it, 
ibid. ^5.— Mr. Erskine's Argument in sup- 
port of the Motion, ibid. ib. — ^The Court 
grant the Motion, ibid. 983.— Counsel for 
the Prosecution and for the Defendant, ibid. 
986.'^The Attorney Generars Speech t&t 
the Prosecution, ibid» ib.*— Mr. Erskine^s 
Speech for the Defendants, ibid. 995.— The 
Attorney Generars Reply) ibid. 1011.— 
I^rd Kenyon's Charge to tbe Jury, ibid. 
lOlO.i^The Jury aequit them^ ibid. 1020.— 
Mr. Peng's Trial with James Lambert, on 
an eXM)fficio Information, for a Libel on 
the King, 50 Geo. 3, 1810, 31 vol. 335.—- 
Counsel for the Prosecution and for the 
Defendants, ibid^ ib.' — ^The Information, 
ibid. 336.— speech of the Attorney General 
for the Prosecution, ibid* 337. — Mi;. Perry's 
Speech in his Defence, ibid» 340.^Reply 
of the Attorney General, ibid. 358.— Lord 
Ellenborough's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 
363.-^The Jury acquit the Defendants, ibid. 
368. 

PERRY, Joan.— Remarkable Account of lier 
Trial, Condemnation, and Execution^ with 
her two Sons, John and Richard Perry, for 
the supposed Murder of Mr. Harrison, 14 
voL 1312i — On Mr. Harrison's sudden dis- 
appearance^ John Perry states before a 
Magistrate that he and his Brother had 
jrobbed and murdered him, and that their 
Mother was accessary thereto, ibid. 1315. — 
Joan and Richard Perry declare their inno- 
cence, ibid. 1317.-— An Indictment is found 
against them at the Assizes, but the Judge 
(Sir Christoplier Turner) refuses to try them, 
because the body had not been found, ibid. 
1318. — At the next Assizes they are tried, 
condemned, and executed, Joan and 
Richard Perry at the place of Execution 
strongly asserting their innocence, ibid. 
1319* — Mr. Harrison afterwards returns 
home, ibid. ib. — His Letter, accounting for 
his sudden disappearance, ibid. ib. 

PETERBOROUGH, Henry, Earl of. See 
Sdisbuty, James, Earl of. 

PETERS, Hugh, 5 vol. 1007, 1016, 1279. 
See Regicides, 

PETRE, William, Lord. See Stafiord, WO- 
Ham, Viscount. 

PETT, Peter.— Proceedings against him on 
an Impeachment for several High Crimes 
and Misdemeanours, 20 Car. 2, 1668, 6 vol. 
865.— Articles of Impeachment, ibid. 866. 
— No further Proceedings are had against 
him, ibid. 868. 



le* GENERAfL INDEX TO 

PEYTO, WiUiam. See Tde, Cardinal. 

PHILIPS, Sir Ambrose, Serjeant-at-Law. — 
His Examination before a Committee of the 
House of Lords, appointed in 1689, to 
inquire into the Murders of Lord Russel, 
Colonel Sidney, and others, 9 vol. 989. 

PHILIPS, George. See Tonge, Thomas, 



PHILLIPS, Sir Edward, King's Serjeant.— 
He opens the Indictment on the Trial of 
the Conspirators in the Powder Plot, 2 toI. 
164. 

PHFLLIPSONE, Christopher.—His Trial in 
the Court of Justiciaiy in Scotland - for 
drinking the health of James the Second, 
and wounding Ensign Loudoun, 9 Will. 3, 
1697, 14 vol. 113.— Debate on the Rele- 
vancy of the Indictment, ibid. 115. — In- 
formation and Defences for the Panel, ibid. 
116. — Interlocutor of Relevancy, ibid. 118. 
• — Evidence against him, ibid. 119.«^He is 
acquitted, ibid. 121. — Hi^Wife complains 
by Petition to the Lords of Justiciary against 
him for ill-treatment, ibid. ib. — The Ix)rds 
order him to find Security for keeping the 
Peace towards her, ibid. 123. 

PHIPPS, Constantine, Counsel, 14 vol. 781 
(note). — He was of Counsel for Ambrose 
liookwood and Charles Cranburne on their 
Trials for High Treason, in being concerned 
in the Assassination Plot, 13 vol. 146, 254. 
— He defends Captain Thomas Vaughan on 
his Trial in the Court of Admiralty for 
Treason on the High Seas, ibid. 486. — His 
Speech for the Prosecution on the Trial of 
Richard Hathaway for a Cheat, in pretend- 
ing to be bewitched, 14 vol. 646. — His 
Speech in Defence of Dr. SachevercU upon 
the First Article of the Impeachment against 
him, 15 vol. 222. — His Speech in Defence 
of Dr. Sacheverell upon the Second Article, 
ibid. 295.— His Speech on the Third Article, 
ibid. 320.— His Speech on the Fourth Ar- 
ticle, ibid. 347. 

Sir Constantine, Lord Chancellor of 



Ireland. — He was appointed Lord Chan- 
cellor of Ireland by Queen Anne's Tory 
Ministry in 1711, 15 vol. 222 (note).— Mr. 
Currau*s Representation of the Proceedings 
against him in the Irish House of Commons, 
ibid. ib. — References to these Proceedings 
in th£ Journals of the Irish House of Com- 
n^ons, ibid. ib. 

In the Reign of 



George the First he returned to his Practice 
at the English Bar, 15 vol. 222 (note). — His 
Argument for the Earl of Wintoun in arrest 
of Judgment, on his Trial for High Treason 
in the House of Lords, ibid. 876. — He is 
reprimanded by the House for addressing 
the Lords before the point of law is stated, 
and leave given him by the House to argue 
it, ibid. 875. — His Argument in Reply on 
\he 9ame occasion, ibid. ^^Q. — He is of 



Counsel for WiUiam Hendley, ibid. 1412. — 
His Speech in the House of Lords against 
the passing of the Bill of Pains and Penalties 
against Bishop Atterbury, 16 vol. 498. — His 
Recapitulation of the Evidence against the 
Bill, ibid. 573. 

PICKERING, Thomas. See Ireland, William. 



PICTON, Thomas, Governor and Commander 
in Chief in Trinidad. — Proceedings against 
him for a Misdemeanour in inflicting the 
Torture upon Luisa Calderon, in the Island 
of Trinidad, 44-52 Geo. 3, 1804-1812, 30 
vol. 225. — Writs of Mandamus from the 
Court of King's Bench to the Governor of 
the Island for the Examination of Witnesses 
on the subject of the Prosecution, ibid. ib. 
— Return thereto, ibid. ^31. — Examinations 
and Proofe annexed to the Returns, ibid. 
233. — Abstract of the Indictment, ibid. 
227. — His Trial in the Court of King's 
Bench at Westminster, ibid. 449. — Counsel 
for the Prosecution and for the Defendant, 
ibid. ib. 450-451 .-:-Evidence for the Prose- 
cution, ibid. 456. — Mr. Dallas's Speech for 
the Defendant, ibid. 467.— Lord Ellen- 
borough suggests the propriety of a Special 
Verdict, which is agreed to, ibid. 491. — 
Evidence for the Defendant, ibid. 492. — 
Evidence to shew that the Spanish Law in 
the Island of Trinidad authorized Torture, 
ibid. 506. — Evidence to shew the contrary, 
ibid. 516. — Mr. Dallas's Speech to the Jury 
upon this Question in the Case, ibid. 521. — 
Mr. Garrow's Reply, ibid. 525. — Lord 
Ellenborough's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 
536. — ^The Jury find that there was no Law 
authorizing the infliction of the Torture in 
the Island, and, under the direction of Lord 
Ellenborough, return a. general Verdict of 
Guilty, ibid. 540. — Proceedings in the 
Court of King*s Bench on a Motion for a 
New Trial, ibid. ib. — Affidavits for the 
Defendant, ibid.'ib. — A Rule to shew cause 
is granted, ibid. 555.--*Motion for leave to 
file a supplemental Affidavit for the De- 
fendant, ibid. 559. — Leave is given to file 
the Affidavit, ibid. 568.— The Rule for a 
New Trial is enlarged till the Return of a 
Mandamus to be issued to the Governor of 
Trinidad, to examine Witnesses and receive 
Proofs respecting the allowance of Torture 
by the Law then established in the Island, 
ibid. 592. — Return to the Mandamus, ibid, 
ib. — -Mr. Garrow's Argument on shewing 
cause against the Rule for a New Trial, 
ibid. 728. — Mr. Nolan's Argument on the 
same side, ibid. 733. — Mr. Harrison's Ar- 
gument on the same side, ibid. 754. — Mr. 
Dallas's Argument in support of the'Rule, 
ibid. 756. — The Court suggests the propriety 
of a New Trial for the purpose of raising 
the Questions in the Case upon a Special 
Verdict, ibid. 803.— The Rule for a New 
Trial is made . absolute, ibid. 806. — Pro- 
ceedings on the Second Trial, ibid. 805.— 
Mr: Oarrow's Speech for the ProscQutiqn^ 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



im 



ibid. ib. — Evidence for the Prosecution, 
ibid, 809.— Mr. Dallas's Speech for the 
Defendant, ibid. 818.— Evidence for the 
Defendant, ibid. 840.— Mr. Garrow's Reply, 
ibid. 8.49.— Lord EUenborough's Charge to 
the Jury, ibid. 863.— The Jury find that, 
by the law of Spain, Torture was allowed 
in the Island of Trinidad at the time of its 
cession to Great Britain, and they negative 
Malice on the part of the Defendant, ibid. 
870, — ^The Special Verdict, as recorded, 
ibid. ib. — Argument on the Special Verdict, 
ibid. 883. — Mr. Nolan's Argument of the 
Special Verdict for the Crown, ibid. 884. — 
Abstract of Mr. Stephen's Argument on the 
other side, ibid. 931.— Mr. Nolan's Reply, 
ibid. ib. — No Judgment was ever pro- 
nounced by the Court upon the Special 
Verdict, ibid. 955 (note).— Account of 
General Picton's military distinction after 
the period of this Trial, ibid. 956.— He 
twice receives the Thanks of the House of 
Commons for his services, ibid. 957. — He 
was killed at the Battle of Waterloo, ibid. ib. 

PIERCY, Sir Robert. See Constable, Sir 
Robert. 

PIERS, Dr. William, Bishop of Bath and 
Wells. See Twelve BUJiops. 

PIGGOTT, Sir Arthur, Attorney General,— 
His Speech in Reply for the Commons on 
the Impeachment of Lord Melville, 29 vol. 
1371. 

PIGOTT, Sir Francis. See Constable, Sir 
Robert, 

PIGOTT, George, Lord. See Stratton, George, 

PILKINGTON, Thomas. See Ward, Sir 
Patience.— -His Trial with Samuel Shute, 
Henry Cornish, Ford Lord Grey of Werk, 
Sir Thomas Player, Slingsby Bethel, Francis 
Jenks, John Deagle, Richard Freeman, 
Richard Goodenough, Robert Key, John 
Wickham, Samuel Swinock, and John 
Jekyll for a Riot and Assault at the Election 
of Sheriffs for the City of London, 35 Car. 
2, 1683, 9 vol. 187.— Roger North's Ac- 
count of the Contests for the Election of 
Sheriffs in London from which this Case 
arose, ibid, ib.— Account of the same Oc- 
currences from Narcissus Luttrell's MS., 
ibid, 211.— The Information, ibid. 219.— 
Tlie Defendants' Counsel Challenge the 
Array, ibid. 226.— The Court overrule the 
Challenge, and a Bill of Exceptions is 
tendered, which the Chief Justice (Sir 
Edmund Saunders) refuses to sign, ibid. 
234.— The King's Counsel open the Case, 
ibid. 235. — Evidence for the Prosecution, 
ibid. 240. — Evidence respecting the manner 
of electing Sheriffs in London, ibid. 242. — 
Mr. Williams's Speech in their Defence, 
ibid. 264. — Evidence for them, ibid. 269. — 
The Attorney General's Reply, ibid. 286.— 
The Chief Justice charged the Jury, ibid. 
?88.— Tb^ Jury iind them Guilty, ibid, m* 



— Their several Sentences, ibid. 293.— -The 
Judgment is reversed in Parliament at the 
Ilevolutiou, ibid. ib. — ^They petition the 
King that their Prosecutors and Judges 
may be excepted from the Act of Grace, 
ibid. 294. — Debate in the House of Com* 
mons upon their Petition for Indemnity 
from the Estates of their Prosecutors and 
Judges, ibid. 295. — ^The Question for bring- 
ing in a Bill for such Indemnity is nega- 
tived, ibid. 298. — Account of the Action for 
Scandalum Magnatum brought by the Duke 
of York against Pilkington, ibid. 299 (note). 

PINE, Hugh. — His Case upon a Charge of 
Treason, for speaking contemptuous Words 
of the King, 4 Car. 1, 1628, 3 vol. 359.— 
Precedents of Prosecutions for Slander of 
the King, ibid. 360. — ^The Judges declare 
his Offence not to be Treason, ibid. 368. 

PINFOLD, Sir Thomas. See GokUng, John. 

PITCAIRN, Alexander. — Proceedings in 
Scotland against him for High Treason in 
impugning the Title of King William to the 
Throne by scandalous 'Expressions used in 
a Sermon, 9 Will. 3, 1697, 13 vol. 1449. 

PITT, The Hon. William.— His early Opinions 
respecting a Reform in Parliament, 22 vol. 
492 (note), ibid. 494 (note). — His Evidence 
on the Trial of Home Tooke, 25 vol. 381. 

PIUS THE FIFTH.— His Bull excommuni- 
cating Queen Elizabeth, and absolving her- 
Subjects from their Allegiance to her, 1 vol. 
1076. 

PLAYER, Sir Thomas. See Pilkington, 
Thomas, 

PLESSINGTON, William.— He was a Semi- 
nary Priest, executed at Chester at the time 
of the Popish Plot, 7 vol. 702.— His Dying 
Speech, ibid. ib. 

PLUMER, Thomas, Counsel, 28 vol. 81, 
356. — His Speech in Defence of John 
Reeves on his Trial for a Libel on the 
English Constitution, 26 vol. 555. — His 
Speech in Defence of 0*Coigly on his Trial 
for High Treason, ibid. 1375.— He is lead- 
ing Counsel for Lord Melville on the Trial 
of his Impeachment in the House of Lords, 
29 vol. 606. — His Speech in Defence of 
Lord Melville, ibid. 1196. 

Sir Thomas, Solicitor General.— 

His Argument for the Crown in the House 
of Lords on the Writ of Error in the Case 
of Hart and White, for a Libel in the Inde- 
pendent Whig, 30 vol. 1337. 

PLUMMER, Mr.— His Speech as one of the 
Managers for the Commons on the Trial of 
the Impeachment of Lord Chancellor Mac- 
cles^ld, 16 vol. 1002. 

PLUMTRE, Henry. See SacheoereU, William, 

PLUNKETT John. See Atterhwry, Francis,, 
BiSihop, 



106 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



PLUNKET, Dr. Oliver, Titular Primate of 
Ireland.— His Trial at the Bar of the Court 
of King's Bench for High Treason, 33 Car. 
2, 1681, 8 vol. 447. — He applies for time 
to bring his Witnesses from Ireland, which 
is denied him, ibid. 448. — Substance of the 
Indictment, ibid. 451.— The King's Counsel 
open the Case, ibid. 452. — Evidence against 
him, ibid. 454.-- The Solicitor General and 
Serjeant Jefieries sum up the Evidence for 
the Crown, ibid. 484. — ^A Witness examined 
for him, ibid. 488.— Chief Justice Pember- 
ton's Charge to the Jury, ibid. ib. — ^The 
Jury find him Guilty, ibid. 489.— His Speech 
on being brought up for Judgment, ibid. ib. 
— ^The Chief Justice passes Sentence of 
Death upon him, ibid. 493. — His Speech 
at the place of Execution, ibid. 495.— Bur- 
net's Accdunt of this Trial, ibid. 447 (note). 
— Mr. Fox's Remark upon this Case, ibid. 
500 (note). 

PLUNKETT, William Conyngham, Counsel, 

28 vol, 1. — ^His Speech in Defence of Henry 
Sheares. on his Trial for Treason, 27 vol. 
340. — His Reply for the Prosecution on the 
Trial of Robert Emmett, 28 vol. 1158.— 
His exercise of the right to reply in that 
Case occasioned Animadversions, ibid. ib. 
(note).-«Proceedings in an Action brought 
by him against Cobbett for a Libel, 29 
vol. 1. 

Attorney 

General for Ireland. — His Speech for the 
Prosecution on the Trial of Mac Donough 
and Kearney, being the first Case under the 
Special Commission for the Trial of the 
llireshers, 30 vol. 5. 

POCKLINGTON, Dr. John.— Proceedings 
against him for Innovations upon the Church 
of England, 17 Car. 1, 1641, 5 vol. 747.— 
Petition of one of his Parishioners to the 
House of Lords against him, ibid. ib. — 
Articles of Charge against him, ibid. 749, — 
Sentence of the House of Lords upon him, 
ibid. 765. — Articles against him found 
amongst the Records of the University of 
Cambridge, ibid. 766. 

POLE, Cardinal. — He is attainted in absence 
with Michael Tbrogmorton, John Hilliard, 
Thomas Gold well, and William Peyto, for 
subjecting themselves to the Pope, 29 Hen. 
8, 1538, 1 vol. 481. 

POLE, Sir Geoffrey. — He is indicted with 
Sir Edward Ne?ill, George Crofts, and John 
Collins, for denying the King's Supremacy, 

29 Hen. 8, 1538, 1 vol. 480.— They all plead 
Guilty, excepting Sir Edward Ne^fill, ibid. 
481. — Sir Geoffrey Pole is the only one hot 
executed, his life being spared on account 
of his having discovered the Matter, ibid. ib. 

POLE, Michael De la. See Sufolk, Earl of. 

POLE, William De la. See Suffolk, Duke of 

POLLEXFEN, Henry, Counsel, 7 vol. 1242, 



8 vol. 561. 10 vol. Iir6.*-His Speedi in 
Defence or Tasborough on his Trial for 
Subornation of Peijury, T vol. 889. — His 
Argument in support of the Plea in Abate- 
ment in Fittharris's Case, 8 vol. 307. — I£is 
Argument for the Corporation in the Case of 
the Quo Warranto against the City of London, 
ibid. I213.--His Speech in Defence of Sir 
Patience Ward, on his Trial for Perjury, 9 
vol. 337. — His Argument in support of 
Lord RusseVs Challenge of a Juror for not 
having a forty-shilling Freehold, ibid. 586. 
— His Defence of William Sacheverell and 
otliers for a Riot at Nottingham, 10 vol. 65. 
— His Argument in support of Rosev^ell's 
Motion in Arrest of Judgment, ibid. 277. — 
His Argument for Mr. SSmdys in the Great 
Case of Monopolies, ibid. 414.-- HisSpeech 
for the Prosecution on the Trial of Lady 
Alice Lisle, 11 vol. 316.— His Speech for 
the Defendants on the Trial of the Seven 
Bishops, 12 vol. 370.— Anecdote from the 
Diary of Henry, Lord Clarendon, respecting 
his language ontheLandingof King William, 
and the Flight of James the Second, 13 vol. 
204 (note). — His Speech for the Defendants 
in the Case of the Seven Bishops, ibid. 370. 
— Burnet says, that he was an honest and 
learned, but a perplexed Lawyer, ll vol. 
776 (note). 

Sir Henry, Chief Justice of 



C. P. 2 Will, and Mary.— His Charge to 
the Jury on the Trial of Lord Preston, 12 
vol. 810. 

POOR, Edmund. See Cavenagh, Michad. 

POPE, Alexander.— He is examined as a 
Witness for Bishop Atterbury on the Pro- 
ceedings against him in the House of L<ords, 
16 vol. 572 (note). 

POPHAM, John, Attorney General, 24 Eliz. 
1581, 1 vol. 1051, 1131, 1320.— His Speech 
in the Star Chamber declaring the Earl of 
Northumberiand's Treasons, 1 vol. 1115.— 
His Speech in the Star Chamber on the 
Prosecution of William Davison for de- 
livering the Warrant for the Execution of 
Mary, Queen of Scots, ibid. 1229. 



Sir John, Chief Justice of K. B., 

34 Eliz. 1 vol. 1333, 1409, 2 vol. 159.— He 
was made Chief Justice on the 28th of May, 
1 592, 1 vol. 1 327.— His Evidence on the Trial 
of Sir Christopher Blunt and others for High 
Treason, containing an Account of his Mis- 
sion to the Earl of Essex by the command of 
Queen Elizabeth, ibid. 1426.— His Address 
to Sir Walter Raleigh on passing Sentence 
of Death upon him, 2 vol. 30.— He is one 
of the Commissioners for the Trial of Garnet 
for High Treason in being concerned in the 
Powder Plot, ibid. 217.— His Opinion in 
the Case of the Postnati, ibid. 568. 

PORDAGE, Dr. John.— Proceedings of the 
Commissioners appointed by Cromveell for 
ejecting scandalous and insufficient Ministers 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



107 



against him, 6 Car. 2, 1654, 5 toI. 539. — 
The first Articles of Charge against him for 
maintaining certain heterodox Opinions in 
Religion, ibid. 542. — His Answer to them, 
ibid. 545. — ^The second Articles for speak- 
ing against Matrimony, and dealing with 
Conjurers, ibid. 549. — His Answer thereto, 
ibid. 551. — ^The third Articles for holding 
unsound Doctrines in Religion, for Incon- 
tinence, and conversing with Spirits, ibid. 
555. — His Answer thereto, ibid. 562. — 
Depositions of the Witnesses against him, 
ibid. 579. — He is ejected from his Church, 
ibid. 629. — He is restored to his Living 
at the Restoration, ibid. 632. 

PORT, Sir John, Judge of K. B. 26 Hen. 8, 1 
vol. 398. 

PORTEMAN, Sir William, Judge of K. B. 1 
Mary, 1 vol. 869. 

PORTEOUS, Captain John. See Madauchlan, 
William, — Proceedings on his Trial at Edin- 
burgh for Murder, 10 Geo. 2, 1736, 17 vol. 
923.— The Indictment, ibid. ib. — Advocates 
for the Crown and for the Panel, ibid. 928. — 
Information for the King's Advocate, ibid, 
ib. — Information for the Panel, ibid. 939. 
— ^The Court find the Indictment relevant, 
ibid. 963. — Evidence for the Prosecution, 
ibid. 965. — Evidence for the Panel, ibid. 
978.— The Assize find him Guilty, and 
Sentence of Death is passed upon him, 
ibid. 985. — His Petition to Queen Caroline, 
ibid. 986.— He is reprieved, ibid. 989. — ^The 
Mob break open the Prison and hang him, 
ibid. 991. — Extracts from the Gentleman's 
Magazine relating to this Transaction, ibid. 
992. 

PORTER, Sir Charles. See Caningibtf^ Tliomat^ 
Lord, 

PORTER, Captain George.— His Evidence 
against Chamock, King, and Keyes, 12 vol. 
1396.— His Evidence againstSirJohnFreind, 
13 vol. 16. — Against Sir William Parkyns, 
ibid. 85. — Against Ambrose Rookwood, 
ibid. 182. — Against Charles Cranburne,ibid. 
243. — ^Against Peter Cook, ibid. 351. — 
Against Sir John Fenwick, ibid. 580. — He 
has a Pension granted to him in conse- 
quence of his Discoveries relating to the 
Assassination Plot, ibid. 784 (note). — Ac- 
count of his Trial for the Murder of Sir 
James Hacket, ibid. 782 (note). 

PORTERFIELD, John,of DuchalL— HisTrial 
at Edinburgh for Treason in harbouring 
Triutors, and concealing a proposal made to 
him to advance Money to the Earl of 
Argyle, a declared Traitor, 36 Car. 2, 1684, 
10 vol. 1045. — He is found Guilty upon his 
own Confession, ibid. 1062. — Sentence 
against him, ibid. ib. — The time and place of 
his Execution left to the King^ ibia. ib.— « 
Fountainhairs Report of this Case, ibid, 1064. 
— The Scotch Parliament ratify the Sentence 
of the Court of Justiciary, ibid. 1066. 



PORTLAND, William, Bad of. See Somen, 
John, Lord, 

POTTER, Vincent, 5 vol. 1005, 1214. See 
Regiddei, 

POWELL, Sir John, Judge of K. B. 3 Jac. 2. 
—He is brought to the Bar of the House of 
Lords, to answer for his Judgment in the 
Earl of Devonshire's Case, 11 vol. 1368. — 
He was one of the Judges of the Court of 
King's Bench at the Trial of the Seven 
Bishops, 12 vol. I89.r.-He gives hisX)pinioa 
in that Case, against the lUng's Dispensing 
Power, ibid. 426. — He is said by Lord 
Camden, to have been the only honest man 
of the four Judges of the Court at that 
time, 1 9 vol. 990.-^Dean Swift's Notice of him 
in his << Journal to Stella,'^ 15 vol. 707 (note). 

Judge of C. P. 8 Will. 3, 



18 voLl39, 451. 



■ Judge of K. B. 1 Ann. 

14 vol. 1189. — ^His Address on passing Sen- 
tence of Death upon Haagen Swendsen, 
and Sarah Baynton, for forcibly taking away 
Pleasant Rawlins, an Heiress, 14 vol. 631.— 
He delivers his Opinion against the Discharge 
of the Aylesbury Men, ibid. 854.^ — ^His 
Charge to the Jury on the Trial of Robert 
Feilding for Bigamy, ibid. 1362. 

POWIS, Sir Littleton, Baron of the Exche- 
quer, 8 Will. 3. 13 vol. 451, 14 vol. 559.— 
His Letter to Lord Chancellor Macclesfield, 
containing an Account of the Trial of Wm; 
Hendley for unlawfully collecting Money for 
Charities, 15 vol. 1414. 

JudgeofK. B. 4Geo.l, 



15 vol. 162, 16 vol. 34. — His Opinion in 
favour of the King's Prerogative respecting 
the Education and Marriage of the Royal 
Family, 15 vol. 1220. 

POWIS, Sir Thomas, Solicitor General, 2 
Jac. 2. — ^His Argument for Sir Edward 
Hales in favour of the King's Dispensing 
Power, 11 vol.1192. 

■ ' ■ Attorney General, 4 

Jac. 2. 12 vol. 125. — His Speech for the 
Prosecution on the Trial of the Seven Bishops, 
12 vol. 280.— His Reply in the same Case, 
ibid. 397. 

- Counsel, — He is of 



Counsel for the Defendant on the Trial of an 
Action brought by the Duke of Norfolk 
against John Germaine, for Criminal Cou"* 
versation with the Duchess, 12 vol. 930. 
— His SpeechJn the House of Commons 
on behalt of Sir John Fenwick, against the 
Bill of Attainder in his Case, 13 vol. 631. 
— His Argument on the Trial of the Earl 
of Warvnck for Murder, in favour of the 
Competency of a Witness convicted of a 
clergyable Felony, who has received his 
Clergy, but has not been burned in the Hand, 
or pardoned, ibid. 1007,— His Speech in 
Defence of Charles Duocombe on nis Trial 



109 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



for fraudulently indorsing Exchequer Bills, 
ibid. 1076. -His Speech for the Duchess 
of Norfolk in the House of Lords, against 
the passing of the J)uke's Divorce Bill, ibid. 
1345. — His Argument in the House of Lords 
in the .Case of Dr. Thomas Watson, Bishop 
of St. Darid^s, against the power of an 
Archbishop to deprive a Bishop, 14 vol. 455. 
-—His Speech in the House of Commons in 
the Debate on the Great Case of Ashby 
and White, ibid. 712. 

Queen's Serjeant, 3 



Ann. — His Argument for the Crown on the 
Trial of David Lindsay for Treason, 14 vol. 
1015. — He is of counsel for the Crown on 
the Trial of Tutchin for a Libel, ibid. 1104. 
— His Argument in favour of the amend- 
ment of the Jury Process in Tutchin*8 Case, 
ibid. 1135. 

POWIS, William, Earl of. See Stafford, Wil- 
liam. Viscount. 

POWLE, Henry. — His Speech in the House 
of Commons on a Motion for the Im- 
peachment of the Earl of Danby, 11 vol. 
724. — His Speech, as one of the Managers 
for the Commons, on summing up the Evi- 
dence against Lord Stafford, 7 vol. 1516. 

POWRIE, William. See Damh/, Henry, 
Lord, — His Depositions respecting the 
Murder of Lord Darnley, 1 vol. 915. 

POYNTZ, John. See Motris, John. 

PRAED, William Mackworth, Serjeant at Law. 
— His Evidence in the House of Lords on 
the Trial of the Impeachment of Lord Mel- 
ville, 29 vol. 797. 

PRAT, Waller. See Hendley, WUliam. 

PRATT, Charles, Counsel. — His Speech on 
summing up the Evidence for the Defence 
on the Trial of William Owen for a Libel, 
18 vol. 1227.— He is one of the Counsel for 
the Prosecution on the Trial of Timothy 
Murphy for Forgery, 19 vol. 707. 



■ Attorney General, 33 Geo. 

2. — His Speech for the Prosecution on the 
Trial of Earl Ferrers for Murder, 19 vol. 895. 
— His Speech for the Prosecution on the 
Trial of Dr. Hensey for High Treason, ibid. 
1350. — He is said to have instituted but one 
Prosecution for Libel while he was Attorney 
General, and to have stated to the Jury on 
that occasion, that he did not wish for a Con- 
viction,if any man whatsoever doubted of the 
Guilt of the Defendant, 20 vol. 709. 

Sir Charles, Chief Justice of C. P. 



3 Geo. 3. — He delivers the Judgment of the 
Court of Common Pleas on discharging Mr. 
Wilkes, 19 vol. 987, 990.— His Charge to the 
Jury in the Case of Wilkes v. Wood, ibid. 
1166. 

Charles, Lord Camden, Chief Jus- 



tice of C. P, — His Argumetit on deliverijog 



the Judgment of the Court of Common 
Pleas for the Defendant, - in the Case of 
Entick V. Carrington, 19 vol. 1044. — His 
Questions to Lord Mansfield respecting the 
Doctrine laid down by him, on the extent 
of the power of a Jury on Trials for Libel^ 
20 vol. 921. 

PRATT, Sir John, Judge of K. B. 3 Geo. 1, 
15 vol. 923. — ^His Argument on delivering 
his Opinion in favour of the King's Prero- 
gative respecting the Education and Marriage 
of the Royal Family, 15 vol. 1216. 

Chief Justice of K. B. 8 



Geo. 1 . — His Charge to the Jury on the Trial 
of Reason and Tranter for Murder, 16 vol. 
45.— His Charge to the Jury on the Trial 
of Christopher Layer for High Treason, ibid. 
290. 

PRAUNCE, Miles.— His Evidence on the 
Trial of Green and others for the Murder of 
Sir Edmondbury Godfrey, 7 vol. 169. — 
Account of the Proceedings against him 
for Perjury in his Evidence on that occasion, 
ibid. 228 (note). — ^His Examinations before 
the Privy Council respecting the Popish Plot, 
7 vol. 1225, 1231. See Thompson, Nathaniel. 

PRESSICKS, Mary. See Thwing, Tlumas. 

PRESTON, Lord. See Grahme, ^ Richard, 

PRICE, Anne. See Tasborough, John. 

PRICE, John. — Proceedings against him and 
several other Protestants in Ireland, for High 
Treason, 1 Will, and Mary, 1689, 12 vol. 
613.-— Chief Justice Heating's Charge to the 
Grand Jury, ibid. 616.— The Indictment, 
ibid. 621. — ^The Trial is postponed for want 
of qualified Jurors, ibid. 627. 

PRICE, Robert, Counsel.— His Letter to the 
Duke of Beaufort, containing an Account 
of the Trial of the Seven Bishops, 12 vol. 
200 (note). — His Argument for the Prisoner 
on several points of Law, on the Trial of 
Loi*d Molmn, in the House of Lords for 
Murder, ibid. 1020, 1025, 1028, 1033, 
1037. 

■ Baron of the Exchequer, 4 

Geo. 1. — His Opinion against tlie King's 
Prerogative respecting the Education and 
Marriage of the Royal Family, 15 vol. 
1224. 

PRIDEAUX, Edmund, Attorney General for 
the Commonwealth, 5 vol. 521, 773. — His 
Speech for the Prosecution on the Trial of 
Chriatopher Love for Treason, 5 vol. 73. — 
His Reply to Love's Defence, ibid. '^66, 
181. — His Argument against the Discharge 
of Captain Streater, upon a Commitment by 
Order of the Parliament, ibid. 391 . — He is 
charged by John Lilburne with being an 
impeached Traitor, ibid. 430. 

PRIEST, William.— Proceedings in the Star 
Chamber against him and Richard Wright 
for sending and carrying a ChaUenge,| la 



THE STATE TRIALS; 



109 



Jtc. 1, 1615, 2 vol. 1033. — ^Decr^e of the 
Court against them, ibid. 1042. * 

PBITCHARD, Sir William. —Trial of an 
Action on the Case for a malicious Arrest 
brought by him against Thomas Papillon, 
Esq. at uuildhall in London, 36 Car. 2, 
1684, 10 vol. 319.— The Declaration, ibid. 
322 (note). — Speech of the Attorney General 
for the Plaintiff, ibid. 323. — Evidence for 
the Plaintiff, ibid. 324. — Serjeant Maynard*s 
Speech for the Defendant, ibid. 330.— 
Speeches of Mr. Williams and Mr. Ward 
for the Defendant, ibid. 332, 334. — Evi- 
dence for the Defence, ibid. 338. — Reply 
of the Plaintiff's Counsel, ibid. 350. — Evi- 
dence in reply, ibid. 353. — Chief Justice 
Jefferies's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 358. — 
The Jury find for the Plaintiff, with Damages 
10,000/. ibid. 372.— Account of this Trial 
from Narcissus Luttrell's MSS. ibid. 319 
(note). 

PROBYN, Edmund, Serjeant at Law.— His 
Speech in the House of Lords on opening 
the General Defence of Lord Chancellor 
Macclesfield, 16 vol. 1080. 

Judge of K. B. 3 Geo. 2, 



17 vol. 568. 

PRYNN, William.— Proceedings in the Court 
of Star Chamber against him for publishing 
a Book entitled " Histrio-mastix,'* and against 
Michael Sparkes for printing, and William 

. Buckner for licensing the same, 9 Car. 1, 
1632, 3 vol. 562. — ^The Information, ibid. ib. 
— ^His Answer thereto, opened by Mr. Atkins, 
ibid. 564. — S|teech of the Attorney General 
(Noy) for the Prosecution, ibid. 566. — Mr. 
Atkins's Speech in Defence of Prynn, ibid. 
570. — Mr. Holborne^s Speech in his Defence, 
ibid. 572. — Mr. Heme's Speech in his De- 
fence, ibid. 573. — Speeches of the Members 
of the Court, on delivering their Opinions 
respecting the Sentence to be pronounced 
upon him, ibid. 574.— ^Proceedings in the 
Star Chamber against him, Dr. John Bast- 
wick, and Mr. Henry Burton, for several 
Libels, 13 Car. 1, 1637, ibid. 712.— They 
prepare their Answers to the Information, 
but their Counsel refuse to sign them, ibid. ib. 
— ^They petition to be allowed to' sign them 
themselves, but are refused by the Court, ibid . 
713. — Prynn's Reasons for being allowed to 
sign his Answer, ibid. ib. — ^They put in a 
Cross Bill against the Bishops, which the 
Lord Keeper refuses to admit, ibid. 714. — 
Mr. Holt, Prynn's Counsel, draws his Answer 
but refuses to sign it, ibid. 716. — Mr. Tom- 
linshisSecondCounsel signs it, but the Officer 
of the Court refuses to take it, ibid. 717.— 
The Information is taken by the Court pro 
confesso, and they are brought up to receive 
their Sentences, ibid, 716, 717. — Prynn's 
Speech, ibid. 719. — Bastwick's Speech, ibid. 
721. — Burton's Speech, 724. — ^Archbishop 
Laud's Speech on delivering his Opinion as 

; iQ am S«nteQ9e| ibi4i T%5,-r'The Seuteoce, 



ibid. 766.— Bastwick's Letter to Archbishop 
Laud, praying for Mone^ to assist him in 
preparing his Defence, ibid.' 725 (note).— « 
Their Conduct at the Pillory, ibid. 745. — 
They are imprisoned until the year 1641, 
ibid. 755. — ^Their Petitions to the Long 
Parliament, ibid. ib. — Resolutions of the 
House of Commons, condemning the Pro- 
ceedings against them, ibid. 764.— rExtracts 
from Clarendon and Kennet respecting them, 
ibid. 766. — Clarendon's Account of their 
triumphant Entry into London after their 
liberation, ibid. 769. — Prynn conducts the 
Prosecution of Colonel Fiennes, 4 vol. 185. 
■ — He is employed by the Commons, with 
otliers, to manage the Evjdence against Arch' 
bishop Laud, ibid. 348. — ^His Argument in 
Macguire's Case, to prove that a Baron of 
Ireland may be tried by a Jury in England 
for Treasons committed in Ireland, ibid. 689. 
— He is ordered by the House of Commons 
to assist in preparing the Charge against 
Judge Jenkins, ibid. 923. 

PUCKERING, Sir John, Queen's Serjeant, 1 
vol. 1233.— He opens the Charge against 
Abington and others on their Trial for High 
Treason, 1 vol. 1143. — Reasons urged to 
Queen Elizabeth by him, as Speaker of the 
Lower House of Parliament, for- the expe- 
diency of executing Mary Queen of Scots, 
ibid. 1195. 

PULESTONE, John, Judge of C. P. during 
the Commonwealth, 4 vol. 1249, 1269. 

PURCHASE, George.— His Trial at the Old 
Bailey for High Treason its. levying War 
against the Queen, under pretence of pulling 
down Meeting-houses, 9. Anne, 1710, 15 
vol. 651.— The. Indictment, ibid. 545. — He 
pleads Not Guilty, ibid. 546.— Speech of the 
Attorney General (Sir James Montagu),* for 
the Prosecution, ibid. 654. — Evidence against 
him, ibid.- 655. — Mr. Darnell's Defence of 
him, ibid. 664. — Evidence in support of the 
Defence, ibid. 668. — ^Mr. Darnell sums up 
the Evidence for the Prisoner, ibid. 678. — 
Reply of the Counsel for the Prosecution, 
ibid. 680. — Chief Justice Parker charges 
the Jury, ibid. 684. — ^The Jury find a Special 
Verdict, ibid. 690. — ^The Special Verdict, 
ibid.691.— Chief Justice Parker delivers the 
Opinion of the Judges, that the facts found 
by the Special Verdict amount to Treason, 
ibid. 699. — He is afterwards pardoned, 
ibid. 702. 

PYM, John. See EmhdUany EAoard, Lord. — 
. His Speech at a Conference between the 
Lords andCommons, on delivering the Charge 
of the Commons against Dr. Manwaring, for 
preaching Sermons containing Doctrines 
subversive of public Liberty, 3 vol. 340.— 
He conducts the Charge for the Commons 
on the Trial of the Earl of Strafford, ibid« 
I417.--His Speech in the House of Lords on 
delivering the Articles of Impeachment 
against Sir George B^tcUff| 4 toK 49,-^His 



110 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



Sp«teh in tha House of hords on delirering 
tb« Aiticloi of Impeajchment aeaiast Arch- 
bifhop Laud, ibid, a20,-^Hi8 body, which 
was buried in Westminster Abbey in 1643, 
was removed at the Restoration, 5 vol. 1337 
(QDte)« 

QU£ENSB£RRY,Jamc8,Dukeof.See£aa/ie, 



QUELCH, Captain John.— His Trial with 
several others at the Court of Admiralty in 
New England for Piracy, Robbery, and 
Murder, 3 Anne, 1704, 14 vol. 1067.— Arti- 
cles against them, ibid. 1068.~Several of 
the prisoners plead Guilty, and are received 
as Witnesses for the Queen, ibid. 1071. — 
Quelch pleads Not Guilty, ibid. 1072. — 
Speeches of the Counsel for the Prosecution, 
ibid. 1073. — Evidence against Quelch, ibid. 
1076.-*^His Counsel make several legal Ob- 
jections to the Case for the Prosecution, 
which are overruled, ibid. 1084. — ^The Court 
adjudge him Guilty, and pass Sentence upon 
him, ibid. 1088.^Ue is executed, ibid. 1095. 
•-^Trials of the others, ibid. lOSB.-^Accoant 
of. their Execution, ibid. 1095. 

RABY, John, Counsel,— »His Speech on sum- 
ming up the Evidence for the Prosecution 
on tiie Trial of Woodbume and Coke for 
disfiguring Edward Crispe, 16 vol. 66. 



m,, I ■ . ■ , Serjeant at Law.— His Charge to 
the Jury on the Trial of William Hales for 
Forgery, 17 vol. 393. 

RADLEY, Richard. — Proceedings against him 
for speaking Scandalous Words of Chief 
Justice Scroggs, 8 vol. 701.— He is con- 
victed and fined 200/. ibid. 706. 

RAINE, Jonathan, Counsel.— His Speech in 
Defence of Joseph Hanson, on his Trial for a 
Misdemeanour in encouraging the Weavers 
of Manchester in a Conspiracy to raise their 
Wages, ai voL 27. 

RALEIGH, Sir Walter.—He interests himself 

on behalf of Udall, a Puritan Minister, tried 

and convicted of Felony, in writing a Libel 

upon Queen Elizabeth, 1 vol. 1308.— He 

attends in the House of Lords as Captain of 

the Guard on the Trial of the Earls of Essex 

and Southampton, ibid. 1335.— He attends 

voluntarily at the Execution of the Eaii of 

Essex, ibid. 1360. — His own Account of his 

disposition towards the Earl of Essex, 2 vol. 

44.— His Trial for High Treason, 1 James 1, 

3 vol. l.-^ub&taDce of the Indictment, ibid. 

ib.-^e pleads Not GuUly, ibid. 4.--'Sir 

Edward Coke (Attorney General) opens the 

Case against him, ibid. 5.-^Scurnk)us Laii- 

gotge used by Coke towards him, ibid. 7,9,10, 

^ d6.-^Coke is rebuked by the Court for 

hia impatience, ibid. 26.— Cobham's Exaini- 

nations read against him, ibid, to, 12. — 

RtWigb prodoees a Letter from Cobharo k- 

voki&ghiftAciusAtioBy iMd» S&^-^He i» foiwd 



Ooil^, ibid. 29.— Cikief Justioe Popinla's 
Address to him on passing Juagncnt 
against him, ibid. 30. — ^After 14 yeai^ Im« 
prisonment, he is allowed to command an 
expedition to Guiana, ibid. 31. — On return- 
ing unsuccessful. Proceedings are taken 
in the Court of King's Bench for Execution 
on the Judgment against him, ibid. 33.— 
He contends that the King's Commission 
to command the Guiana Expedition was 
an implied Pardon, ibid. 34.— JExecution is 
awarded, ibid. 35.— Warrant for his Exe- 
cution, ibid. ib. — His Letter to the King 
in defence of his conduct in Guiana, ibid. 
37. — ^His Letter to the King written the 
night before his Execution, ibid. 38.— His 
Letter to his Wife written at the same time, 
ibid. 39.— His Execution, ibid. 40.— Bishop 
Kennett's Remarks on Sir Walter Raleigh's 
Conspiracy, ibid. 45. — Two Letters of Sir 
Dudley Carleton respecting the same, ibid. 
ib. — ^Account of the Guiana Expedition, with 
a character of Sir Walter Raleigh, from 
Howeirs Familiar Letters, ibid. 55.-^ir 
John Hawles expresses an Opinicm, that if 
Sir Walter Raleigh was guiltv of the Matter 
laid to his Charge, it was High Treason, ibid. 
63 (note). 

RAMSEY, David. See Rea, JJmtld, Lord. 
Uchiltrie, James, Lord, 

RATCLIFF, Sir George.— Proceedings in the 
House of Lords in Ireland against him, Sir 
Richard Bolton, Lord Chancellor of Jreland, 
Dr. John Bramhall, Bishop of Deriy, and 
Sir Gerard Lowther, Chief Justice of the 
Common Pleas, for High Treason, 16 Car. 1, 
1641,4 vol. 51.-<Oa]>taii^ Mervin*8 Speech 
to the Lords on bringing up the Impeach- 
ment against them, ibid. ib. — ^Articles of 
Impeachment against them, ibid. 57.— The 
Parliament afterwards order Reparation to 
several persons out of Ratcliff's EsUte, ibid. 
68. — ^Proceedings in Parliament against him 
for being concerned in the Treasons of the 
Earl of Strafford, 16 Car. 1, 1640, ibid. 47. 
^^Articles of Impeachment against him, ibid. 
48.— Mr. Pym's Speech in the House of 
Lords <m delivering the Articles against him, 
ibid. 49.- -He is committed by the House of 
Lords to the Gate-House, ibid. 50. 

RATCLIFFE, Charles,— Foster's Report of 
the Proceedings in the Court of King's 
Bench, respecting the Award of Execution 
against him upon an Attainder for High 
Treason, in being concerned in the Rebellion 
of 1715, 20 Geo. 2, 1746, 18 vol. 429.-On 
being brought into Court by Habeas Corpus, 
he pleads that he is not the person namea in 
the Record of Attainder, upon which Issue 
is joined, ibid. 430.— Account of the Evi- 
dence against him upon this Issue, ibid. 433 
(note).— The Jury find that be is the same 
person, ibid. 434.— He is executed, ibid. 
437. 

SAVAILLAC^AcGoaiiC ef thf bwtodas 



THE STATE TEIALa 



111 



circiunstaiices of his Torture and BxecutioD, 
6 ?ol. 1223 (note). 

> RAWLINS, Pleasant, 14 vol. 597. See&^ 
(OR, Sarub. Swendserif Haagen, 

RAYMOND, R6bert, Counsel, 14 vol. 642> 
1329. — He is assigned of Counsel for David 
Lindsay on his Trial for High Treason, 14 
▼ol. 989.— -His Argument for the Prisoner 
CD that Trial, ibid. 1007. 

I Sir Robert, Attorney General, 
9Geo. 1. — His Speech for the Prosecution 
on ihe Trial of Christopher Layer for High 
Treason, 16 vol. 151. 

■ ■ Chief Justice of 

K. B. 12 Geo. 1, 17 vol. 159.-'He delivers 
the Judgnoent of the Court upon the Special 
Verdict in Msyor Qneby's Case, 17 voU 41. 
— Hi« Qiarge to the Jury on the Trial of an 
Appeal of Murder, brought by Mary Castell 
against. Thomas Bambridge and Richard 
CorbeU, ibid 452.*- His Charge to the Jury 
on the Trial of Richard FrancKlin for a Libel 
published in The Crafuman, ibid. 671. 

RAYMOND, Thomas, Serjeant at Law, 7 vol. 
1242. 

Sir Thomas, Judge of K. B. 34 

Car. 2, 7 vol. 1048, 1082, 8 vol. 564, 1273 
(note), 9 vol. 127, 11 vol. 858. 

RAYNESFORD, Sir Richard, Baron of the 
Exchequer, 18 Car. 2, 6 vol. 769, 879. 

I I > i ■ Chief Justice 

of K.B.29 Car. 2. — ^He delivers his Opinion 
against the Discharge of the Earl of Shaftes- 
bury, 6 vol. 1296. 

REAy Donald, Lord . See UehUirie, Jcma^ Lord. 
—Proceedings in the Court of Chivalry on 
an Appeal of High Treason by him against 
David Ramsey, 7 Car. 1, 1631, 3 vol. 483. 
— Mr. Hargrave's Introductory Note, ibid. 
ib.<— Sanderson^s Account, ibid. 485. — Oc- 
casion of thfe Quarrel, ibid. ib. — Form of 
die Proceeding, ibid. ib. — Precedents of 
Trial by Battle on an Appeal of Treason, 
referred to by Dr. Duck, the King's Advo- 
cate, ibid. 487. — ^The Appellant delivers in 
his Charge in Writing, ibid, ib.-- -Ramsey's 
Answer thereto, ibid. 489. — Rushworth's 
Account, ibid. 494. — ^Letters Patent creating 
L<»d Lindsey Constable of England, ibid. 
496« — ^Lord Rea's Petition to the King, ibid. 
497, — ^Hts Appeal, ibid. 498.'-Ram8ey's 
Defence, ibid. 502«-*-Form of the Adjudica- 
tion of Battle, ibid. 507. — Dimensions of the 
Weapoiis to be used, ibid. 51 1. — ^Tlie King 
revolves tiie Letters Patent to the Lord 
Constable, and ends the Proceeding, ibid. 
5«.— The King's Letter to the Marquis of 
Hamilton respecting this Proceeding, ibid. ib. 

READ, --^. — Account of bis Case before Lord 
Holt fiir publisfaiag an obseene Libel; 17 vol. 
167 (note). 



READING, Nathaniel.— His Trial for a Mis- 
demeanour in bribing a Witness to give 
false Evidence against Persons accused of 

^ being concerned in the Popish Plot, 31 Car. 
2, 1679, 7 vol. 259.— The Indictment, ibid. 
262.— He pleads Not Guilty, ibid. 264.— 
Speeches of the King's Counsel for the Pro- 
secution, ibid. 267.— Evidence for the Pro- 
secution, ibid. 270. — His Speech in his 
Defence, ibid. 286.— Evidence in 8)tpport of 
the Defence, ibid.289.— Chief Justice North's 
Charge to the Jury, ibid. SO/.-^He is found 
Guilty, ibid. 309.— His Sentence, ibid, 310. 
—-His Evidence in the House of Lords 
respecting a Breach of Privilege by |he 
Arrest of Counsel in the Court of Chancery 
by the Serjeant-at-Arms of the House of 
Commons, 6 vol. 1155. 

REASON, Hugh.--.His Trial vi^ith Robert 
Tranter at the Bar of the Court of King's 
Bench for the Murder of Edward Lutterell, 
Esq. 8 Geo. t, 1722,16 vol, I, -.The Indict- 
ment, ibid, ib,— They plead Not Guilty, 
ibid. 5.— Speech of Mr. Serjeant Cheshire 
for the Prosecution, ibid. 7.«— Evidence for 
the Prosecution, ibid. 18, — Evidence of the 
Dying Declarations of Mr. Lntterell, ibid. 
24.— Defenoeof the Prisoners, ibid. 38.-*^Evi- 
dence for the Prisoners, ibid. 39.— Reply of 
the Counsel for the Prosecution, ibid. 42* — 
Chief Justice Prati's Charge to the Juiy, ibid. 
45. — Underthe direction of the Chief Justice, 
the Jury find them guilty of Manslaughter, ' 
ibid. 54. — ^The Sentence of Burning in the 
Hand is executed upon them behind the Bar 
of the Court, ibid, ib.— Sir John Strange's 
Report of this Case, ibid. 1 (note).-*Foster's 
Remarks upon Strange's Report, ibid. 9 
(note). 

REDDING, Joseph. See AngKik^f, Jame^ 

REDHEAD, Henry, otherwise called Henry 
Yorke. — His Trial at York for a Seditious, 
Conspiracy, 35 Geo. 3, 1795, 25 vol. 1003^ 
—He objects to the Crown's Right of chal* 
lenging without Cause, ibid« ib.^ -Counsel 
for the Prosecution and for the Defendant, 
ibid. 1004.— The Indictment, ibid. ib. — Mr. 
Law's Speech for the Prosecution, ibid, 1012. 
—Mr, Justice Rooke informs the Defendant 
that he must elect whether he or his Counsel 
will address the Jury, ibid. 1021.— He is not 
permitted by the Court to examine the same 
Witnesses which his Counsel has examined 
ou his behalf, ibid. ib. — Evidence fpr the 
Prosecution, ibid, ib.— The Defendant's 
Speech to the Jury in his Defence, ibid, 
1065. — Evidence for the Defendant, ibid. 
1113.— Mr. Law's Reply, ibid. 1137.— Mr. 
Justice Rooke's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 
I149.--The Jury find him Guilty, ibid. 1154. 
—He is sentenced to pay a Fine of 200/. to 
be imprisoned for two years in Dorchester 
Gaol, and to find Sureties, ibid, ib. — He is 
afterwards called to the Bar, ibid. ib. 

REDMOND, OeM Lfuubert^; 



112 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



' Dublin under a Special Commission of Oyer 
and Terminer for High Treason, in being 
concerned in the Irish Insurrection, 43 Geo. 
3, 1803, 28 vol. 1271.— The Indictment', 
ibid. ib. — Speech of the Attorney General 
for the Prosecution, ibid. 1276. — Evidence 
for the Prosecution, ibid. 1284. — Mr. Mac 
Nally's Speech in his Defence, ibid. 1299. 
— ^Mr. Baron George's Charge to the Jury, 
ibid. 1307.— The Jury find hiro Guilty, ibid. 
1310. — Mr. Baron George's Address to him 
on passing Sentence of Death, ibid. 1311. — 
He is executed, ibid. 1315. — Previously to 
his Trial, he attempts to commit Suicide, 
ibid. 1316. 

REEVES, John. — His Trial on an ex officio 
Information filed by the Attorney General 
at the suggestion of the House of Commons, 
for a Libel upon the English Constitution, 
36 Geo. 3, 1796, 26 vol. 529.— The Informa- 
tion, ibid. ib. — Speech of the Attorney Ge- 
neral (Sir John Scott) for the Prosecution, 
ibid. 534.— Evidence for the Prosecution, 
ibid. 554. — Mr. Plumer's Speech for the 
Defendant, ibid. 555. — The Attorney Gene- 
ral's Reply, ibid. 581. — Lord Kenyon's 
Charge to the Jury, ibid. 590. — ^The Jury, in 
giving their Verdict of Not Guilty, express 
an opinion that the Publication was improper, 
ibid. 594. — ^Note upon the Conduct of the 
Jury in this respect, and the cause of it, 

' ibid. ib. 

REEVES, Thomas, Counsel.— His Speech in 
. Reply for the Prosecution on the Trial of 
Reason and Tranter for Murder, 16 vol. 42. 
— His Speech in Reply in the House of 
Lords, in support of the Bill of Pains and 
Penalties against Bishop Atterbury, ibid. 
607. — His Speech for the Appellant on the 
Appeal of Murder against lliomas Bam- 
bridge and Richard Corbett, 17 vol. 398. 

REID, John. See Codling, William. 

RENWICK, James.— His Trial at Ediriburgh 
for High Treason for preaching in the fields 
against the Government, 4 Jac. 2, 1688, 12 
vol. 569. — The Indictment, ibid. ib. — ^He is 
found Guilty and sentenced ^o be hanged, 
ibid, 572. — Wodrow's Account of him and 
of these Proceedings, ibid. 573. — Account 
of his Execution, ibid. 583. — Fountainhairs 
Notice of this Case, ibid. 585. 

RERESBY, Sir John.— His Account of the . 
Trial of Lord Stafford, 7 vol. 1293 (note). 

REYNOLDS, James, Seijeant-at-Law.— His 
Argument on behalf of the Prince of Wales 
against the Prerogative of the Crown re- 
specting the Education and Marriage of the 
Royal Family, 15 vol. 1203. 



■ Judge of K. B. 3 Geo. 2. 

— His Charge to the Jury on the Trial of 
Hales and Kinnersley for Forgery, 17 vol. 
280. 

REYNOLDS, John. ^^^Grem^CaptamThmas, 



REYNOLDS, Richard. See Roughtotif Jokn. 

RICCARDS, Arthur. See Sacheverell, William. 

RICH, Richard, Solicitor General, 26 Hen. 8. 
— His Conference with Sir Thomas More in 
the Tow^r, 1 vol. 388. — ^He gives Evidence 
of what passed at this Conference on Sir 
Thomas More 's Trial, ibid. 390. — Sir Thomas 
More charges him with Perjury, ibid. ib. — 
He gives Evidence on the Trial of . Fisher, 
Bishop of Rochester, ibid. 399. 

RICH, Robert, Lord. See Northampton, 
Spencer, Earl of, 

RICHARD THE SECOND, King of England. 
— Proceedings respectinghis Depositionfrom 
the Throne, 1 Hen. 4, 1399, 1 vol. 135. — He 
renounces the Crow;n by Deed, ibid. 138. — 
Articles of Accusation exhibited against him 
in Parliament, ibid. 140. — Sentence of Depo- 
sition against him, ibid .151 . — His Conversa-* 
tion with theCommissioners who conveyed the 
Sentence of Deposition to him in the Tower, 
ibid. 155.-^Debate in Parliament respecting 
the mode of disposing of him, ibid. 1 58. — 
The Bishop of Carlisle's Argument against 
the lawfulness of deposing him, ibid, ib.— - 
His Imprisonment and Death, ibid. 160. — 
Different Accounts of the manner of his 
Death, ibid. 160 (note) e. 

RICHARDS, Sir Richard, Chief Baron of the 
Exchequer.: — His Charge to the Jury on the 
Trial of John Thomas Brunt for Hfgh 
Treason, in being concerned in the Cato- 
Street Plot, 33 vol. 1305. 

RICHARDS, Samuel. See Sacheverell, WiUiam. 

RICHARDSON, John, Counsel, 29 vol. 1, 
503. — His Argument in support of the Plea 
in Abatement to the Jurisdictiod of the Court 
in Judge Johnson's Case, 29 vol. 394. 

' Sir John, Judge of 

C. P. — He is one of the Judges named 
in the Special Commission for the Trial of 
the Conspirators in the Cato- Street Plot, 33 
vol.711. 

RICHARDSON, Sir Thomas, Chief Justice of 
C. P. 4 Car. 1, 1 vol. 359, 371, 374, 401. 

■ Chief Justice of 



K. B. 8 Car. 1. — His Speech on delivering 
his Opinion in the Star Chamber, respecting 
the Sentence of the Court on Henry Sher- 
field for breaking a Window in a Church, 3 
vol. 543. — His Speech on delivering his 
Opinion in the Star Chamber respecting the 
Sentence of the Court upon rrynne for 
writing "Histrio-mastix," ibid. 577. 

RICHMOND, James, Duke of.—Proceedings 
against him in Parliament as a Malignant 
and an evil Counsellor to the King, 17 Car. 1, 
1641-2, 4 vol. 111. — ^The Commons propose 
to the Lords to join them in a Petition to the 
King to remove him from his Offices, ibid. 
114.— His Defence, ibid. 115.— Upon hear- 
ing the Evidence, Uie Lords resolve not tQ 
join in the Petition^ ibid. 120, 



tH[E STAT 

lUCHMOND^ Duke of.— -His Evidence on 
Hardy's Trial, 24 vol. 1047.— His celebrated 
Letter to Colonel Sharman on Parliamentary 
Reform, ibid. 1048. 

BICKHILL, Sir William, Judge of C. P. 21 
Ric 3. — He is commissioned by Richard the 
Second to take the Confession of Thomas 
Dake of Glocester, 1 vol. 131. 

RIGBY, Mr.— His Speech in the House of 
Commons in Answer to Lord Keeper Finch's 
Defence of himself, 4 vol. 8. 

RING, William. See Fendey^ John, 

ROBERTSON, Andrew. See Green, Captain 
Thomas. / 

ROBERTSON, George.— His Trial in the 
Court of Justiciary for neglecting to pray 
for tlie King, when performing Public Wor- 
ship at a Meeting-House, 1 Geo. 1, 1715, 17 
voL 781. — The Indictment, ibid. ib. — In- 

. formation fortheKing's Advocate, ibid. 782. 
— Information for the Panel, ibid. 785. — ^The 
Court decide that the Libel is relevant, ibid. 
787w— Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 
788. — ^Verdict of the Assise, ibid. 790.— The 
Court sentence him to desist from preaching 
for three years under a Penalty of 500 Marks 
for each contravention, ibid. ib. 

ROBERTSON, James. See CidUnder, James 
TAompion. 

ROBINS, Mr.— His Speech in Defence of 
Lord Chancellor Macclesfield upon several 
of the Articles of Impeachment against him, 
16 voL 1160, 1232. 

ROCHE, Thomas Maxwell.— His Trial at 
Dublin under a Special Commission of Oyer 
and Terminer for High Treason, in being 
concerned in the Irish Insurrection, 43 Geo. 
3, 1803, ^8 vol. 753— -The Indictment, ibid. 
ib. — Speech of the Attorney General for the 
Prosecution, ibid. 756. — Evidence against 
him, ibid. 758. — Mr. Mac Nally's Speech in 
his Defence, ibid. 765. — Evidence for the 
Defence, ibid. 771.— Charge to the Jury, 
ibid. 772.— The Jury find him Guilty, ibid. 
774. — He is executed, ibid. 776. 

ROCHESTER, Bishop of. -See Atterbwy, 
Dr. Francis. Fisher, Dr. John. Spratt, iSr. 
Thomas. 

ROCHFORD, Lord. See Bolet^, Anne. 

ROE, Owen, 5 vol. 1003, 1204. See Regicides. 

ROE, Richard. See KendaU, Thomas. 

ROGERS, WilUam. See Cowper, Spencer. 

ROKEBY, Sir Thomas, Judge of K^B. 8 Will. 
3, la Tol. 1, 64, 451. 

ROLLE, Henry, Chief Justice of the Upper 
Bench during the Commonwealth, 5 vol. 344, 
466. — ^Ludlow's Accountofthecircumstances 

' which induced him to resign his Seat on the 
Bench, 5 vol. 936.— Whitlocke calls him 

VOL. XXXIV. 



E TRIALS* 113 

'^a wise and learned Man,'^ ibid. 466 
(note). 

ROMILLY, Samuel, Counsel. — His Speech in 
Defence of John Binns on his Trial at War. 
wick for uttering Seditious Words, 26 vol. 
614. 

Sir Samuel, Solicitor General.— 



His Speech on summing up the Evidence 
for the Commons on the Impeachment of 
Lord Melville, 29 vol. 1150.^ — His Vindica« 
tion of the Maidm that it is better that ten 
guilty Persons should escape than that one 
innocent Man should suffer, 7 vol. 1529 
(note). 

ROMSEY. SeeRumsey. 

ROOKE, Giles, Serjeant at Law. — His Speech 
for the Prosecution on the Trial of William 
Winterbotham for preaching a seditious 
Sermon, 22 vol. 826. — His Speech in Reply 
in the same Case, ibid. 869. 

I Sir Giles, Judge of C. P. 35 Geo. 3, 

— His Charge to the Jury on the Trisd of 
Henry Redhead, otherwise Henry Yorke, 
for being concerned in a treasonable Con- 
spiracy, 25 vol. 1149. — He is one of tlie 
Judges who sit under tlie Special Commis* 
sion for the Trial of Governor Wall for 
Murder, 28 vol. 51 . 

ROOKWOOD, Ambrose. See Winter, Robert. 
— He was one of the Conspirators in the 
Powder Plot, 2 vol. 159. 

ROOKWOOD, Ambrose.— His Trial for High 
Treason in being concerned in the Assassina- 
tion Plot, 8 Will. 3, 1696, 13 vol. 139.— The 
Indictment, ibid. ib. — He pleads Not Guilty, 
ibid. 142. — His Counsel ol^ect to proceeding 
with the Trial, that the Copy of the Jury 
Panel was not delivered two full days before 
the Trial, and after the Return of the Venire, 
ibid. 145. — ^The Court decide that it is un» 
necessary that the Copy of the Jury Panel 
should be delivered aner the Return of the 
Venire, ibid. 152. — ^His Counsel object that 
the Copy of the Indictment delivered ac- 
cording to the Act of Parliament does not 
contain the Caption, ibid. 114. — ^The Court 
decide that the Objection is made too late 
after Plea, ibid. 156. — His Counsel offer to 
move to quash the Indictment after the Jury 
are sworn and before Evidence is given, 
ibid. 161.— The Court refuse to entertain the 
Motion on the ground of its Irregularity in 
point of time, ibid. 168.— Speech of the 
Attorney General for the Prosecution, ibid. 
178. — Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 
182. — Sir Bartholomew Shower's Defence of 
him, ibid. 201.— The Prisoner's Counsel 
offer Evidence of the general bad Character 
of one of the Witnesses for the Prosecution, 
ibid. 209. — ^The Court allow them to shew 
his general Character, but not to prove him 
Guilty of particular Crimes, ibid. 211.— 
Evidence for the Prisoner, ibid. 212.<^Lord 
I 



114 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



Holt's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 213.— The 
Jury find him Guilty, ibid. 222. — ^Lord Holt's 
Address on passing Sentence upon him and 
the other persons convicted of the same 
Treason, ibid. 308. — His Execution, ibid. 
310. — Paper delivered by him to the Sheriff 
at the place of Execution, ibid. 311. 

ROSE, Sir John William, Recorder of London. 
— ^His Address to Governor Wall on passing^ 
Sentence of Death upon him, 28 vol. 1349. 

ROSEW£LL» Thomas.— His Trial at the Bar 
of the Court of King's Bench for High 
Treason in preaching a Seditious Sermon at 
a Presbytenan Conventicle, 36 Car. 2, 1684, 
10 vol. 147.— The Indictment, ibid. 149.— 
He pleads Not Guilty, ibid. 152. — ^Evidence 
against him, ibid. I59w — He takes sevend 
Objections to the form of the Indictment, 
which are overruled, ibid. 180. — ^His Speech 
2D his Defence, ibid. 183. — Evidence for 
him, ibid. 190^ — He sums up the Evidence 
for his Defence, ibid. 233. — Chief Justice 
Jefferies charges the Jury, ibid. 237. — The 
Jury find him Guilty, ibid. 259. — He objects 
in arrest of Judgment, that the treasonable 
words laid in the Indictment are not alleged 
to have been spoken of and concerning the 
King, ibid. 260.— The Court assign him 
Counsel to argue the Objecti6n, ibid. 264. — 
Arguments of Counsel for and against the 
Objection, ibid. 269.— The Court defer their 
Judgment till the next Term, when he pleads 
a Pardon, ibid. 302. — The Pardon, ibid. 
303. — Burnet's Account of these Proceed- 
ings, ibid. 147 (note). 

ROSS, George. See Vint, John. 

ROTHERAM, John, Counsel.— He draws the 
Plea offered to the Court by Colonel Sidney, 
9 vol. 822. — Jefferies's Conduct towards him, 
when pleading for Richard Baxter, 11 vol. 

499. 

Serjeant at Law. — ^His 

£3caminatioa before the Committee of Lords 
appointed in 1689, to examine into the 
Murders of Colonel Sidney, Lord Russel, and 
others, 9 toI. 988. 

ROURKE, Felix.— His Trial at Dublin under 
a special Commission of Oyer and Terminer 
for High Treason in being concerned in the 
Irish Insurrection, 43 Geo. 3, 1803, 28 vol. 
925. — ^The Indictment, ibid. ib. — Speech of 
the Attorney General for the Prosecution, 
ibid .928. — Evidence for the Prosecution,ibid. 
930. — Mr. Curran's Speech for the Prisoner, 
ibid. 945. — Evidence for the Prisoner, ibid. 
950. — Mr. Ponsonby's Speech on summing 
up the Evidence for the Prisoner, ibid. 969. 
— Reply of the Solicitor General, ibid. 980. 
— ^The Jury find him Guilty, ibid. 992. — 
Mr. Baron George's Address on passing 
Sentence of Death upon him, ibid. 992.- He 
is executed, ibid. 996. 

ROUSE, John.— His Information respecting 
the Rye-House Plot, 9 vol, 490.— His Trial 



at the Old Bailey for High Treasan in faeiqgi 
concerned in the Rye-House Plot, 35 Car. 
2, 1683, ibid. 637.— The Indictment, ibid. 
ib. — He is arraigned with William Blagne, 
and pleads ^ot Guilty, ibid. 638.— He is 
tried alone at his own desire, ibid. 639.— 
Evidence against him, ibid. 641. — Hts De- 
fence, ibid. 647.— He is found Guilty, ibid. 
654. — His Sentence and Execution, ibid. 
668. 

ROWAN, Archibald Hamilton.— Proceedhigs 
on the Trial of an Ex-ofiicio Information 
filed against him in the Court of King's 
Bench in Ireland for a Seditious libel, 33 
and 34 Geo. 3, 1793-4, 22 toI. 1033.— The 
luformation, ibid. ib. — ^The Attorney Gene- 
ral's Speech for the Prosecution, ibid. 1040. 
—Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 1054^ 
—-Evidence for the I>eflendant,ibid. 1064.— 
Mr. Currants Speech for the Defendant,ibid. 
1066. — Mr. Prime Serjeant's Reply, ibid. 
1097. — Lord Clondleirs Charge to the Jnty, 
ibid. 1107.— The Jury find him Guilty, ibid. 
1119. — ^Affidavits in support of a motion for 
a New Trial, ibid. 1 120. — Arguments on the 
motion for a New Trial, ibid. 1128.— Judg- 
ment of the Court affirming the Verdict, 
ibid. 1163.— Mr. Hamilton Rowan's Speech 
on being called upon for Judgment, ibid. 
1180.— Account of his Escape from Prisdn, 
ibid. 1186. — He receives a Pardon, ibid. 
1189.— Proceedings in Scotland against him, 
23 vol. 750 (note). 

ROY Rada Chum. See Nundoeomar. 

RUDYARD, Sir Benjamin.— His Speech in 
the House of Commons in the Debate on the 
Liberty of the Subject, occasioned by the 
Imprisonment of Sir 'Iliomas Darnell and 
others for refusing to lend upon the Com- 
mission of Loans, 3 vol. 62. — His Speech in 
the House of Commons in the Debate on tiie 
same subject, previously to drawing up the 
Petition of Riglit, ibid. 173. 

RUMBOLD, Colonel Richard,— Proceedings 
in the Court of Justiciary against him for 
High Treason, in being concerned in the 
Rye-House Plot and Argyle's Rebellion, 1 
Jac. 2, 1685, 11 vol.873.— The Indictment, 
ibid. 875.— He is found Guilty, ibid. 678^ 
Account of his Execution, ibid, ib.— Wod- 
row's Account of the mode of his App|«- 
hension^ ibid. 873 (note).— Lord Fottntaitt- 
hall's Account of these Proceedings, ibw. 
881.— Mr. ?ox's Account of Rumbolffs 
Case, ibid. 882. 

RUMLEY, William. See Wukeim,SitOmp' 

RUMSEY, Colonel John.— His E»min»tios 
and Informations respecting the Bye-HonjJ 
Plot, 9 vol. 374, 437.— His Evidence on tW 
Trial of Walcot, ibid. 52&— His £vid»oe 
on the Trial of Lord Russel, ibid. ^Sfi-Tff 
Evidence on the Trial of ColonelSidneyy^l^^ 
847. 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



iU 



mUSHOUT, Sir Jbh]i.-^His Speeeh in the^ 
House of Lords as one of the Managers for 
the CommoQSi in sapport of several of the 
Articles of Impeachment against Lord 
Chancellor Macclesfield^ 16 ¥01.955. 

RUSSEL, WilHam. See Anderson, JUonel 

RUSSEL, WilUam, Lord.— His Examination 
in the Tower respecting the Rye^Honse 
Plot, 9 Tol. 488. — Burnet's Account of his 
Apprehension, ibid. 500. — ^His Trial at the 
Old Bailey for High Treason, in being con- 
cerned in the Rye-House Plot, 35 Car. 2, 
1683, ibid. 577. — The Indictment, ibid., 578. 
— He pleads Not Guilty, ibid. 581. — Lady 
Russel assists him by taking Notes, ibid. 584. 
—He objects to Jurors not having a free- 
hold of 40s. per annum, and Counsel are 
assigned him to argue the Objection, ibid. 
585.— Argument of his Counsel, ibid. 586. 
'-Argument of the King's Counsel against 
the Objection, ibid. 589. — ^The Court 
decide against the Objection, ibid. 591.*— 
The King's Counsel open the Case, ibid. 
594. — Speech of the Attorney General (Sir 
Robert Sawyer), for the I^rosecution, ibid. 
595.—- Colonel Rumsey's Evidence against 
liim, ibid. 596. — Lord Howard's Evidence, 
ibid. 602. — Evidence for Lord Russel, ibid. 
619.— Eiddence of Lord Howard's repeated 
Declarations that he knew nothing about 
the Plot, ibid/ 620.— Dr. Burnet's £vi- 
dence, ibid. 6!el. — Lord Russel's Address 
to the Jury, ibid. 625. — ^The Counsel for 
die Pfoseeation reply, ibid. ib. — Chief 
Justice Pemberton's Charge to the Jury, 
ibid. 635. — ^The Jury find him Guilty, ibid. 
636. — Summary Account of this Trial from 
Narcissus Luttrell's MSS. ibid. 1009.— He 
is brought up for Judgment, ibid. 666. — 
Judgment against him, ibid. 667. — ^The King 
remits the whole of the Sentence except be- 
heading, ibid. 684 (note). — ^The King's un- 
feeling Speech on remitting part of his Sen- 
tence, ibid. ib. (note).*-^Petitions of the Earl 
of Bedford and Loitl Russel for Lord Ros- 
sePs life, ibid. 686 (note).— Lord Russel's 
Letter to the Duchess of York, ibid. 687 
^ote). — His Letter to the King, delivered 
after his Death, ibid. 688 ^note). — ^Lady 
Russel's Letter to the King, ibid. ib. — His 
Execotien, ibid. 683. — Paper delivered by 
htm to the Sheriff at the place of Execution, 
ibid. 685. — Luttrell's Account of bis Exeeu- 
tiouy ibid. 1010. — Mr. Fox's Remark upon 
the Story of the last days of his Life, ibid. 688 
(note).<^-Act of Parliament for rerersing his 
Attainder, ibid. 695.— Burnet's Account of 
his Trial and Execution, ibid« 505.^— The 
''Case of WiUiam Lord RusseV ibid. 695. 
•—Sir Bartholomew Shower's '^Antidote 
against Poison," being Remarks upon the 
Paper delivered by Lord Russel to the 
Sheriff ibid. ro9.-^rRobert Atkins's ** De- 
fence of Lord Russel's Innoceney/^ ibid. 719. 
-*-Sir B. Shower's ^ Magistracy and Grovem* 
amt U England vindicated^" ibid. 741.^ 



-~" Further Defence of Lord Rossiers Infto- 
cency," ibid. 783.— Sir John Hawles's Re- 
marks upon Lord Russel's Trial, ibid. 7^3. 
' —The Depositions of seyeral persons con^ 
nected with this Trial, and those of Algernon 
Sidney, Sir Thomas Armstrong, and Mr. 
Cornish, before a Committee of the House 
of Lords after the Revolution, ibid. 951. 

RUtHVEN, Alexander and Henry. See 
Gowrie, John, Earl of, 

RYAN, John. See Goldmg, Jokn. 

RYDER, Sir Dudley, Attorney General, 20 
Geo. 2. — His Speech for the Prosecution on 
the Trial of Francis Townley for High Trea- 
son, in being concerned in the Rebellion of 
1745, 18 vol. 335. — His Speech in the House 
of Lords as one of the Managers for the 
Commons, on the Trial of the Impeachment 
of Lord Lovat, ibid. 559.— His Argument 
in favour of the admissibility of the Evi^ 
dence of Murray of Broughton on that Trial, 
ibid. 619. — His Speech for the Prosecution 
on the Trial of William Owen for a Libel, 
ibid. 1220. 



SACHEVERELL, Dr. Hcnry^— A Summary 
Account of the Proceedings in Parliament 
rdiating to his Case, 15 vol. 1. — Burnet's 
Account of his Character and of the Pro-i 
ceedings against him, ibid. 7 (note). — His 
Trial in Westminster Hall upon an Impeach ' 
ment by the Commons for High Crimes and 
Misdemeanours, in preaching seditious Do^ 
trines in two Sermons delivered at Derby 
and at St. Paul's, 9 Anne, 1710, ibid. 86.— 
Articles against him, ibid. 37.*— His Answer 
thereto, ibid. 40. — Replication of the Com« 
mons, ibid. 52. — Speech of Sir James 
Mountague (Attorney General), for the 
Coiiimons on opening the Articles of Im- 
peachment generally, ibid. 53. — Mr. Lech- 
mere's Speech on the same side, ibid. 59.—* 
Dr.Sacheverell's Counsel admit the* public 
cation of the Sermons, ibid. 68.— The Dedi- 
cation of the D^rby Sermon, ibid. ib. — ^The 
Dedication of the Sermon preached at St. 
Paiil's, ibid; 69. — The Sermon preached at 
St. Paul's, ibid. 71.— Sir Joseph Jekyll's 
Speech in support of the First Article of Im- 
peachment, charging him with traducing the 
Principles of the Revolution, and denying 
the lawfulness of Resistance, ibid. 95. ---Sir 
John Holland's Speech in support of the 
First Article, ibid. 110.— Mr. Walpole's 
Speech, ibid. 112. — Sir John Hawles's 
Speech, ibid. 116. — General Stanhope's 
Speech, ibid. 126.— Sir Peter King's Speech 
in support of Uie Second Article of Impeach- 
ment, clmrging him^with preaching against 
Toleration and Liberty of Conscience, ibid. 
134.— Lord William Paulett's Speech, ibid. 
151.— Mr. Cooper's Speech, ibid. 152. — Mr. 
Thompson^ Speech in support of the Third 
Article, charging him with arraigning the 
Resolution of Parliament in 1705, asserting 
the Security of the Church of England^ ibid, 
X % 



JIW 



GENERAL IINDEX TO 



157.-^Mr.'Cdnp%6n'8 Spieechy ibid. 194. — 
Mr. Dolben's Speech, ibid* 167. — Serjeant 
Parker's Speech in support of the Fourth Ar« 
ticle, charging seditious Suggestions against 
the Government, ibid. 169. — ^Mr. Secretary 
Boyle's Speech, ibid. 186.— -The Chancellor 
of the Exchequer's Speech, ibid. 188. — Mr. 
Lechmere's Speech, ibid. 191. — ^The Mana- 
gers for Uie House of Commons close their 
Case, ibid. 195. — Sir S. Harcourt's Speech 
in his Defence to the First Article, ibid. 196. 
— Mr. Dodd's Speech, ibid. 213. — Mr. 
Phipps's Speech, ibid. 222.— Mr. Dee's 
Speech, ibid. 237. — Dr. Henchman's Speech, 
ibid. 240. — Extracts from Sermons and 
Homilies asserting Non-resistance to be a 
Doctrine of the Church of England, read in 
his Defence to the First Article, ibid. 244. 
— Mr. Dodd's Speech in his Defence to the 
Second Article, ibid. 292. — Mr. Phipps's 
Speech, ibid. 295. — Mr. Dee's Speech, ibid. 
302. — Dr. Henchman's Speech, ibid. 304« — 
Evidence in support of the Defence to the 
Second Article, ibid. 309. — ^Mr. Dodd's 
Speech in his Defence to the Third Article, 
ibid. 318. — Mr. Phipps's Speech, ibid. 320. 
— Mr. Dee*8 Speech, ibid. 327.^— Dr. Hench- 
. man's Speech, ibid. 329. — Evidence of 
. blasphemous and heretical Publications in 
. support of the Defence to the Third Article, 
ibid. 331. — ^Mr. Dodd's Speech in his De- 
fence to the Fourth Article, ibid. 344. — Mr. 
. Phipps's Speech, ibid. 34T. — Mr. Dee's 
. Speech, ibid. 354.—- Dr. Henchman'j Speech, 
ibid. 357. — ^Proclamations against Profane- 
ness and Immorality read in Evidence in 
support of the Defence to the Fourth Article, 
ibid. 359. — ^Dr. Sacheverell's Speech, ibid. 
364.— Sir Joseph Jekyll's Speech in Reply 
for the Commons to the Defence to the 
First Article, ibid. 380.— The Solicitor 
. Generars Speech, ibid. 396.-«Mr. Lech- 
. mere's Speech, ibid. 406.— Sir Peter King's 
Speech in Reply to Uie Defence to the 
Second Article, ibid. 418. — Mr. Cooper's 
Speech, ibid. 431. — Mr. Thompson's Speech 
in Reply to the Defence to the Third Article, 
ibid. 438.— Serjeant Parker's Speech in 
Reply to the Defence to the Fourth Article, 
. ibia. 447. — Question proposed to the Judges 
at the suggestion of the Earl of Nottingham, 
ibid. 466.— The Lords resolve that the Com- 
mons have made good their Articles of Im- 
peachment, ibid. 468.— They find Dr. Sache- 
verell Guilty by a majority of Seventeen, 
ibid. 470. — He pleads in arrest of Judg- 
ment, ibid. 471.— Mr. Hatsell's Account of 
the Dispute between the Blade Rod and the 
Speaker, oji the Speaker's going up with the 
Commons to the House of Lords to demand 
.Judgment, ibid. 472 (note).— The Lords 
overrule the ppints taken in arrest of Judg- 
ment, and pass Sentence, ibid. 473.-^He is 
sentenced not to preach for Three years, and 
his Sermon* are ordered to be , burned by 
the common Hangman, ibid. 474.— L<«pd 
Haversham's Speech in the House of Loids 



on tbe First Article of Impeachment, tbiS* 
475.— The Bishop of Salisbury (Buniet's> 
Speech, ibid. 480.— The Bishop of Oxford's 
Speech, ibid. 494.— The Bishop of Dncoln's 
Speech on the Second Article, ibid. 503. — 
Tne Bishop of Norwich's Speech, ibid« 516« 
—^Protests i^inst the Resolutions of the 
Lords in this Case, ibid. 32. — After the ex- 
piration of the term of Silence imposed upon 
him by the Sentence, he is presented to the 
Rectory of St. Andrew's Holbom, by Qaeen 
Anne, ibid. 474. 

SACHEVERELL, William. ~Hb Trial with 
several others for a Riot and Consph^cy at 
the Election of Mayor for the Town of 
Nottingham, 36 Car. 2, 1684, 10 vol. 29. — 
The Information, ibid. 31. — ^The King's 
Counsel open the Case, ibid. 36. — Mr. 
PoUexfen, for the Defendants, objects to the 
Evidence of Members of the new Corpora- 
tion, as the merits of the Case turned upon 
the validity of the Charter of that Corpora* 
tion, ibid. 39.. — The Objection is overruled 
by &e Court, ibid. 40. — Evidence for the 
Prosecution, ibid. 41.— *Mr. Pollexfen's 
Speech for the Defendants, ibid. 65. — Evi- 
dence for the Defendants, ibid. 71. — Chief 
Justice Jefferies's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 
92. — ^The Jury find them all Guilty excepting 
one, ibid. 96. — Their several Sentences, ibid» 
ib. — Mr. Sacheverell's Statement of the 
Case of the Corporation of Nottingham, ibid. 
95. 

SAINT ALBANS, Viscount. See Bacon, Sir 
Francit. 

SAINT ASAPH, Dean of, 21 vol. 847. See 
Shipley, William Davies, 

SAINT JOHN, Oliver, Counsel. See Bedford, 
Earl of, — His Case on an Information in 
the Star-Chamber for publishing a Paper 
against a Benevolence collected under 
letters of the Privy Council, 13 Jac. 1, 1615, 
2 vol. 899. — Mr. Hiu^ve's Introduetocy 
Note to this Case, ibid. ib. — ^Mr. Saint 
John's Letter to the Mayor of Marlborough, 
which formed the subject of this Prosecution, 
ibid. 900. — Sir Francis Bacon's Speech for 
the Prosecution, ibid. 902.— His Argument 
for Mr. Hampden in the Great Case of Ship- 
Money, 3 vol. 856. — ^His Speech on deliver- 
ing the Resolutions of the House of Com« 
mons against Ship-Money, at a Conference 
of both Houses of Parliament, ibid. 1262.*- 
His Argument for the Bill of Attainder 
against Lord Strafford, ibid. 1477.— Lord 
Clarendon's Account of him, ibid. 856_(note). 
— He was Chief Justice of the Common 
Pleas during the Protectorate, 5 vol. 946. 

SAINT LkOER, Sir John. See Gilbert, 
Jeffery, 

SALISBURY, James, Earl of.— Proeeedings 
in Ptoliament against him and Henry» Eirl ' 
of Peterborough, on an Impeachment (^High 
Treason^ for departlDg from their AUegiaace 



THE STATE TRIAlS. 



117 



«nd being reconciled to the Church of Rome, 
1 and 2 Will, and Mary, 1689-1690, 12 vol. 
t9^3.-^Tbey are brought severally to the 
Bar of the House of Lords, ibid. 1234, 1235. 
. — They are committed to the Tower, ibid. 
1235. — They remain in the Tower for nearly 
two years, daring which time a Dissolution 
and several Prorogations of Parliament take 
place, and then are discharged, ibid. 1238* 

SALISBURY, John. See Burleigh, ^ Simon. 

^SALISBURY, Mary. See Noble, Richard. 

SALISBURY, Thomas. See Babington, Atir 

SALMON, Francis. See SachevereU, William. 

SALMON, James. See Macdahiel, Stephen. 

SANCHAR, Lord. See Spnquire, Lord. 

SANCROFT, Dr. William, Archbishop of 
Canterbury. See Seven Bt<A(^.'— Granger's 
Account qI him, 12 vol. 183. 

SANDYS, Sir Thomas. See Monopolies, Ca$e 
of. 

SANQUIRE, Lord.— Proceedings on his Ar- 
raignment at the Bar of the Court of King's 

- Bench for being accessary to the Murder of 
John Turner, 10 Jac. 1, 1612, 2 vol. 743. — 

. £ennet*8 Account of the Circumstances which 
led to the Murder, ibid. ib. (note).— The 
Indictment, ibid. 744.^ His Address to the 
Court, confessing his Guilt, ibid. 746.— 
Sir Francis Bacon's Speech, ibid. 750.— Mr. 
Justice Yelverton's Address on passing Sen- 

. tence of Death upon him, ibid. 753. — His 
Execution, ibid. 754.>-Lord Coke's Report 
of Lord Sanquire^s Case, ibid. 755. — His 
Account of the Facts, and of the difficulties 
of this Proceeding, ibid. 761. — ^LordSanquire 

y demands his Trial in the House of Lords, 
but is denied, not being a Peer of Parlia- 
ment, ibid. 755. 

8ARUM, Countess of. — She is beheaded for 
denying the King's Supremacy, and holding 
correspondence with the Pope, 31 Hen. 8, 
1539, 1 vol. 482. 

SAUNDERS, Edmund, Counsel, 8 vol. 779, 
1378. — His Speech in Defence of Anne 
Price, on her Trial with John Tasborough for 
endeavouring to suppress the Evidence of 
the Popish Plot, 7 vol. 906. — He is assigned 
as Counsel to Lord Stafford and the other 

. Popish Lords, ibid. 1242. — His Argument 
for the Crown against the Plea in Abate- 
ment in Fitzharris's Case, 8 vol. 270. — He 
moves the Court of King's Bench to dis- 
charge the Earl of Danby on Bail, 11 vol. 
831. 

— — — Sir Edmund, Chief Justice of 
K. B. 35 Car. 2. — Memorandum of his pro- 
' motion to the Bench, from Sir Thomas Ray- 
' motid's Reports, 31 vol. 607.— His Charge 
' to the Jury on the Trial of Pilkington and 
•' others for a Riot in ^th^ Common Hall on 



occasion of llhe Election of Sheriffs for 
London, 9 vol. 288. — His Charge to the 
Jury^on the Trial of Sir Patience Ward for 
Forgery, ibid. 346.— Burhetsavs that ** he was 
a learnt, but a very immoral Man,'' B vol. 
1039 (note). — Roger North's curious Account 
of his Or^n and Character, 9 Toi. 22<6 
(note). 

SAUNDERS, Sir Edward, Judge of C. P. t 
Mary, 1 vol. 869. 

' Chief Baron of the 



Exchequer, 14 Eliz. 1 vol. 957. 

SAUTRE, William.— Proceedings against hiik 
for Heresy before a Convocation of Bishops, 
2 Hen. 4, 1400, 1 vol. IdS.'^Arttcles against 
him, ibid. 165. — His Answers thereto, ibid. 
165. — Sentence against him,'ibid. 168.— His 
Recantation, ibid. 169. — Sentence of De- 
gradation pronounced against him, ibid. 171. 
— His formal Degradation from the Priest- 
hood, ibid. ib. — The writ De Httrelico Com- 
biirendo is issued against him, ibid. 173.— 
The Writ De Hseretico Comburendo was in 
this Case a Special Act of Parliament, ibid« 
174. 

SAVAGE, John. See BabuigUm, Anthin^. 

SAWYER, Sir Robert, Counsel.— His Speech 
for the Prosecution on the Trialof Sir George 
Wakeman for High Treason, in being con- 
cerned in the Popish Plot, 7 vol. 599. 






—*-——— Attorney General, 33 
Car. 2, 8 vol. 453, 775, 9 vol. 236, 300, 10 
vol. 3, 133, 162, 311, 323, 557, 11 vol. 391. 
—His Argument, against the. Plea in Abate- 
ment in Fitzharris's Case, 8 vol. 243.---His 
Speech for the Prosecution on the Trial of 
Fitzharris, ibid. 340.--His Speech for the 
Prosecution on the Trial of Colledge, ibid. 
589.— His Argument for the Crown in the 
Case of the Quo Warranto against the City 
of London, ibid. 1147.— His Speech for the 
Prosecution on the Trialof Ford Lord Grey, 
and oUiers, for carrying away Lady Henrietta 
Berkeley, 9 vol. 132.— His Speech for the 
Prosecution on the Trialof Walcot for High 
Treason in being concerned in the Rye* 
House Plot, ibid. 522.— His Speech for the 
Prosecution on the Trial of lord Williato 
Russel, ibid. 595.— His Speech for the Pro- 
secution on the Trial of Algernon Sidney, 
ibid. 838.— His Speech for the Prosecution 
on the Trial of John Hampden for a Misde- 
meanour, ibid. 1062.— His, Speech for the 
Prosecution on the Trial of Braddon and 
Speke, ibid. 1130.— He moves the Court of 
King's Bench for Execution agaius^ Sir 
Thomas Armstrong on the Record of his 
Outlawry for High Treason, 10 vol. 109. — 
His Argument for the East India Company 
in the Great Case of Monopolies, ibid. 457. 
—His Speech for the Prosecution on Gates's 
First Trial for Perjury, ibid. 109a— His 
Speech on Gates's Second Trial, ibid. 1240. 
—His Speech for the Prosecution o» the 



119 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



Trial of Lord Delamere, 11 toI. 598 <— His 
proper Conduct, on being required by James 

. the Second to draw up a Warrant to invest 
a Popish Priest with a Benefice, ibid« 1192 
(note). — ^His Speech for the Defendants on 
the Trial of the Seven Bishops, 12 vol. 358. 
— Burnet's Character of h^n, 8 vol. 1039 
(note]).— He was expelled the House of 
Commons after the Revolution, for being 
concerned in the Proceedings upon Sir 
Thomas Armstrong's Outlawry, 9 vol. 935 

. (note), 10 vol. 119.— Mr. Hargrave's fie. 
marks upon him, 10 vol. 117 (note). 

KAYER, Dr.— His Speech in Defence of Lord 
Chancellor Macclesfield on the Trial of his 
Impeachment, 16 vol. 1105. 

SAYER, Mary. See Nohlcy Bkhard. 

j^AYRE, Stephen. — ^Trialofan Action brought 
by him against the Earl of Rochford, one of 

. His Majesty's Secretaries of State, for false 
Imprisonment, 17 Geo. 3, 1777, 20 vol. 
1285.— Counsel for the Plaintiff and for the 
Defendant, ibid. ib. — Abstract of Mr. Ser- 
jeant Glynn's Speech for the Plaintiff, ibid. 
1287 (note).— Evidence for the Plaintiff, 
ibid. 1287. — Abstract of the Speech of the 
Attorney General (Thurlow) for the Defend- 
ant, ibid. 1300 (note). — Evidence for the 
Defendant, ibid. 1301.— Abstract of Mr. 

. Serjeant Glynn's Speech in R^plv,ibid. 1311 
(note). — Chief Justice De Grey's Charge to 
the Jury, ibid. 1312 (note).— The Jury 
return a Verdict for the Plaintiff with l,000r. 
Damages, subject to the Opinion of the 

• Court upon two Questions, ibid. 1811. — ^The 

' Court give Judgment for the Defendant, 
ibid. 1316. 

SCARLETT, James, Counsel.— His Speedy in 
the Court of King's Bench in mitigation of 
Punishment in the Case of John Hatchard, 
32 vol. 735. 

SCHOFIELD, John. See LaddUa. 

SCOT, Thomas, 5 vol. 1004, 1058, 1272. See 
Tiegicideh. 

SCOTT, Alexander. See JUinrgoro^, Misurice. 
Gerraldy Joseph, Skirvingf William, — Pro- 
ceedings against him in tne High Court of 
Justiciary for Sedition, in belonging to an 
unlawful Society, 34 Geo. 3, 1794, 23 vol. 
383. — The Indict nent, ibid. ib. — He is out- 
lawed for non-af earance, ibid. 391. 

SCOTT, John, Counsel.— He was of Counsel 
for Mr. Bembridge on his Trial for Miscon- 
duct as a Clerk in the Navy Pay Office, 
22 vol. 61.— His Argument for a New Trial 
in that Case, ibid. 90. 

•— r — Sir John, Solicitor General, 22 vol* 
309, 380. 



Trial of Eaton for publishing Paine's ^Letter 
to the Addressers on the Late ProclamatioD/' 
ibid. 791. — HisSpeech in Reply in thetame 
case, ibid. 813. — ^His Speech for the Prose- 
cution on Hardy's Trial for High Treasoo, 
24 vol. 241. — His Reply for the Prosecution 
on the Trial of Horne Tooke for High 
Treason, 25 vol. 497. — His Speech for the 
Prosecution on Stow's Trial for HighTreason^ 
ibid. 1170. — His Speech for the Prosecutioii 
on Crossfield's Tnal for High Treason, 26 
vol. 11 . — His Reply in the sa,me Case, ihid. 
168. — His Speech for the Prosecution on the 
Trial of O^Coigly and others for High 
Treason, ibid. 1245.^ — His Speech for the 
Prosecution on the Trial of Cutbell for a 
Libel, 27 vol. 654. — His Speech for the 
Prosecution on the Trial Of LordThanet and 
others for a Riot, ibid. 829. 

SCOTT, Sir William, Judge of theAdmiradty 
Court. — His Charge to the Grand Jury at 
the Admiralty Sessions, previously to the 
Trial of Codling and others for feloniously 
casting away a Ship at Sea, 28 vol. 178. 

SCROGGS, Sir WilUam, Counsel, ^ y^U 
876. 

. ' ' Chief Justice of 



• — . ■ Attorney General. — His 

Speech for the Prosecution on the Trial of 
John Binns for Seditious Words, 22 vol. 474. 
•—His Speech in Reply in that Case, ibid. 
609.— :His Speech for the Pwjiecutiou on the 



K. B. 30 Car. 2, 7 vol. 714,767.— His Charge 
to the Jury on the Trial of William Stayley for 
being concerned inthe Popish Plot,6 vol.1 508. 
— His Charge to the Jury on the Trial of Cole- 
man, 7 vol, 66. — ^His Charge to the Jury on 
tbeTrial of Ireland and otiiers, ibid.l 30. — His 
Charge to the Jury on the Trial of Green and 
others for the Murder of Sir Edmondbury 
Godfrey, ibid. 213.— His Charge to the Jury 
on the Trial of Whitebread and others for 
being concerned in the Popish Plot, ibid. 
411. — ^His Charge to the Jury on the Trial 
of Richard Langhorn, for being concerned 
in the Same Plot, ibid. 479. — His Charge to 
the Jury on tlie Trial of Sir George Wake- 
man and others for b^ng concerned ia the 
same Plot, ibid. 681. — His S^peech in the- 
Court of King's Bench on holding several 
' persons to Bail for a Libel upon himself, il)id. 
701.— His intemperate Conduct on the Trial 
of Andrew Brommich, a Romish Priest, 
ibid. 725. — His Charge to the Jury on the 
Trial of Harris for publishing a seditious 
Libel, ibid. 929. — His illegal Conduct on 
Francis SmitVs Application to be admitted 
to Bail on a Charge of Libel, ibid. 955.—* 
His Chaige to the Jury on the Trial of ihe 
Earl of Castleraaine for being concerned in 
the Popish Plot, ibid. 1107. — He was at first 
a zealot in the Prosecution of persons accused 
of being concerned in the Popish Plot, but 
when he found the King and Court averse to 
these Prosecutions, he altered his conduety 
ibid. 1054 (note). — ^Proceedings against him 
before the Privy Council, 31 Car. 2, 1679, 
8 vol. 163. — Articles exhibited against him 
by Gates and Bedlow, ibid. ib. — His Answer 
thereto,ibid. 172.^Prooeedings against him 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



110 



♦ ' • • • 

in Paiiiftment for dischar^ng a Middlesex ^ 
Grand Jury , in order to prevent their present- 
ing tbe Duke of York as a Papist, 32 Car. 
2y 1680, ibid. 174. — The House of Commons 
resolve to impeach him, ibid. 195.-^Articles 
of Impeachment against him, ibid. 197.— 
Debate in the House of Commons upon these 
Articles, ibid. 201 . — He is ordered tp find 
Bail for his appearance in tlie House of 
Lords to answer the Impeachment, ibid. 
212. — ^His Answer to the Articles of Im- 
peachment, ibid. 215. — He is removed from 
his Office, and receives a Pension for life, 
ibid. 216. — Roger North's Account of him, 
ibid. 168 (note). — Burnet's Character of him, 
6 vol. 1425. 

SCROOP, Adrian, 5 vol. 1004, 1034, 1298. 
See Regicides. 

SEAFORTH, Kenneth, Earl of.— Proceedings 
against him in the Court of Justiciary for 
Treason, 9 Will. 3, 1697, 13 vol. 1445.— He 

' is discharged upon giving Security for his 
good behaviour, ibid. 1449« 

SEATON, Archibald. See Stirling, James. 

SEDLEY^ Sir Charles, Bart.— Summary Ac- 
count of the Proceedings in the Court of 
King's Bench against him for Obscenity, 15 
Car. 2, 1663, 17 vol. 155 (note). — He con- 
fesses the Indictment, ibid. ib. — He is fined 
2,000 Marks, and imprisoned for a Week, 
ibid. ib. 

SELDEN, John, Counsel. See Bedford, Earl 
rf. — His Argument for Sir Edmund Hamp- 
den in the Court of King's Bench, on the 
Habeas Corpus brought by him and others 
to try the vaJidity of their Commitment for 
refusing to lend upon the Commission of 
Loans, 3 vol. 16. — His Speech in the House 
of Commons in the Debate on the Liberty 
of the Subject previously to the Petition of 
Rights, ibid. 78.— His Argument at the 
Conference between the two Houses of Par- 
liament respecting the Liberty of the Sub- 
ject, ibid. 94. — Proceedings in the House of 
Commons against the Earl of Suffolk for 
charging him with razing a Record, ibid. 156. 
^-His Argument at a Committee of Lawyers 
appointed to draw up th^etition of Rights, 
ibid. 175. — Proceedings in the Court of 
King's Bench, upon a Habeas Corpus sued 
out by him to try the validity of his 'Com- 
mitment by the Lords of the (^Council for 
resisting the King's Command for an Ad- 
journment of the House of Commons, ibid. 
236. — Mr. Littleton's Argument for his 
Discbarge, ibid. 252.^- His own Argument, 
ibid. 264.— Proceedings against him in the 
Star-Chamber for publishing a scandalous 
and seditious Writing, 6 Car. 1, 1630, ibid. 
887« — He was one of the Managers for the 
Commons on Lord Strafford's Trial, ibid* 
1421* — Selden, Holbome, and Bridgman, 
strongly oppose the Bill of Attainder against 
Lord Strafford, ibid. 1469. 

SELLERS^ John. See Tonge, Thmas 



SEMPLE, John. — Proceedings against him, 
John Watt, and Gabriel lliompson, in the 
Court of Justiciary at Edinburgh for pub- 
lishing a treasonable Declaration, 36 Car. 2, 
1684, 11 vol. 949.— The Indictment, ibid, 
ib. — ^The Declaration, ibid. ib. (note). — Ibey 
are found Guilty, ibid. 974. — They are sen- 
tenced to Death, ibid. 976. — Semple's Letter 
to his Mother and Sister, ibid. 983. — Wod- 
row's History of the Circumstances connected 
with these Proceedings, ibid. 949 (note). — 
Fountainhairs Account of these Proceed- 
ings, 10 vol. 846 (note). 

SEXBY, Colonel Edward.— His Confession of 
his having instigated Miles Sindercome to 
attempt to murder the Protector, 5 vol. 
845 (note). — He dies in the Tower in 1658, 
ibid. 846 (note). — Account of the Evidence 
respecting his being the Author of the 
Book called " Killing no Murder," ibid. 852 
(note). 

SEYMOUR, Edward.— He was active in the 
Prosecution of Lord Clarendon, 6 vol. 323, 
ibid. ib. (note).— Proceedings in Parliament 
against him on an Impeachment for Mis- 
conduct in his Office of Treasurer of the 
Navy, 32 Car. 2, 1680, 8 vol. 127.— Arti- 
cles of Accusation against him, ibid. 128. 
— His Answer to them in the House of 
Commons, ibid. 138.— The House resolve 
to impeach him upon these Articles, ibid. 
154. — Articles of Impeachment against him 
read in the House of Lords, ibid. 160.— »His 
Answer thereto, ibid. ib. — He petitions for 
Counsel, who are assigned to him, ibid. 161 . 
— ^The Dissolution of the Parliament puts an 
end to the Proceedings, ibid. 162. — ^Bur- 
net's Account of him, ibid. 180 (note).— 
Dryden's Character of him under the name 
of ** Amiel," in Absalom and Achitophel, 
ibid. 136 (note). 

Sir Edward. — His Speech in the 

House of Commons in the Debate on the 
Great Case of Ashby and White, 14 vol. 
730. 

SEYMOUR, Sir Francis.— His Speech in the 
Debate in the House of Commons on the 
Imprisonment of Sir Thomas Darnell and 
others for refusing to lend upon the Com- 
mission of Loans, 3 vol. 60. 

SEYMOUR, Sir Thomas, Lord Seymour of Sud- 
ley. — Proceedings in Parliament against him 
for High Treason and other Misdemeanours, 
2 and 3 Edw. 6,1 549,1 vol.483. — He marries 
Catherine Parir, the Queen Dowager, and 
obtains an influence over the mind of the 
King, ibid. 484^— He is prosecuted by his 
Brother, the Protector, ibid. 486. — ^Articles 
against him, ibid. 487.— *0n the Articles 
being]delivered to him, he demands an open 
Trial,' ibid. 492. — ^His Answer to some of 
the Articles, ibid. 493. — A Bill of Attainder 
against him is passed in the House of 
Lords, ibid. 494.— Some Opposition is made 



130 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



to it io the Hcmse of Commons, ibid. ib. 
(note). — ^The Bill passes the Commons^ ibid. 
495 (note).— The Bill, ibid, 496.— The 
Warrant for his Execution, ibid. 504. — 
Passages from Latimer's Sermons respecting 
his Executioni ibid. 505. 

SHAFTESBURY, Anthony, Earl of.— His 
Speech in the Honse of Lords in the De- 
bate on Dr. Shirley's Case, 6 vol. IITI. — 
Proceedings in the Cburt of King's Bench 
on a Habeas Corpus sued out by hi&a on his 
Commitment to the Tower by the House of 
Lords, 29 Car. 2, 1677, ibid. 1269.— Ac- 
counts of these Proceedings and the Circum- 
stances from which they arose, by Burnet, 
Kennett, and North, ibid. ib. (note).— The 
Eeturn to the Habeas Corpus, setting out 
an Order of the House of Lords for his 
Commitment iot Contempts generally, ibid. 
1270. — Mr. Williams's Argument against 
the Return, ibid. 1276.— Mr. Smith's Argu- 
ment on the same side, ibid. 1285. — Argu- 
ments of Serjeant Maynard and the Attor- 
ney and Solicitor General in support of the 
Commitment, ibid. 1290. — Tlie Earl's Speech 
in Reply, ibid. 1294. — Judgment of the 
Court that they have no Jurisdiction to 

. inquire into the validity of the Coromit- 
ment, ibid. 1296. — ^The Earl makes a Sub- 
mission to the House, ibid. 1297. — ^Extracts 
fpom the Journals. of the House of Lords 
respecting this Transaction, ibid. ib. — Reso- 
lution of the House of Lords in 1680. con- 

. demning these Proceedings, ibid. 1310. — 
Proceedings at the Old Bailey on present- 

. ing to the Grand Jury a Bill of Indictment 
against him for High Treason, 33 Car. 2, 
1681, 8 vol. 759.— Chief Justice Pem- 
berton's Charge to the Grand Jury, ibid. 
760. — ^The King's Counsel require that the 
Evidence to the Grand Jury may be given 
in open Court, to which the Court consents, 
notwithstanding an. Objection by the Grand 
Jury, ibid. 771. — ^The Indictment, ibid. 
775. — Evidence against him, ibid. 780. — 
The Jnry return the Bill Ignoramus, ibid. 
821. — Accounts of this Proceeding by 
Burnet and other Historians, ibid. 759 
(note), B25, 827. — Sir John Hawles's Re- 
marks on this Proceeding, ibid. 835. — 
Dry den's Character of Lord Shaftesbury, ibid . 

766 (note). — Mr. Fox's Notice of him, ibid. 

767 (note). 

SHARP, Dr. James, Archbishop of St. 
Andrew's. — ^His treacherous Conduct in the 
Case of Mitchell, 6 vol. 1207 (note).— Ac- 

• counts of his Death by Burnet and Laing, 
ibid. 1212 (note). — Wodrow's Particular 
Account of his Assassination, 10 vol. 812 

' (note). — ^Narrative of his Muider published 
by Authority, ibid. 821 (note).— Trial of 
David Hackstoun for being concerned in 
his Mui*der, tbid. 791. 

iSH ARPE, Dr. John. See Compton, Dr. Heitry, 

SHARPLESS, John. See Mmenger, Peter. 



SHEARES, Henry and John.— Their Itial at 
Dublin, under a Special Commissioa of 
Oyer and Terminer, for High Treasoo ia 
being concerned in the Irish Rebellion, 38 
Geo. 3, 1798, 27 vol. 255. — Counsel for 
the Prosecution and for the Prisoners, ibid. 
256.— The Indictment, ibid. 257.-- The 
Counsel for the Prisoners move to quash 
the Indictment, on the ground that one of 
<he Grand Jury was an Alien, ibid. 265. — 
The Court refuse the Application, ibid. 266. 
— ^They plead in Abatement that one of the 
Grand Jury is an Alien, ibid. 207. — Repli- 
cation of the Crown, that the Grand Juror 
objected to had taken the Oaths of Allegiance 
and Supremacy, ibid. 268. — The Prisoners 
demur to the Replication, ibid. 271. — Mr. 
Currants Argument in support of the De- 
murrer, ibid. ib. — Mr. Prime Serjeant's 
Argument for the Replication, ibid. 281 .—- 
Mr. Plunkett*s Argument for the Demurrer, 
ibid. 282. — ^The Court give Judgment 'of 
Respondeat Ouster upon the Demurrer, ibid. 
285. — The Attorney General's Speech to 
the Jury for the Prosecution, ibid. 292.-— 
Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 306. — 
Mr. Ponsonby's Speech in Defence of John 
Sheares, ibid. 329. — Mr. Plunkett's Speech 
in Defence of Henry Sheares, ibid. 340.-- 
Evidence for the Prisoners, ibid. 347.^ — Mr. 
Curran's Speech on summing up the Evi- 
dence for the Prisoners, ibid. 364. — Peculiar 
circumstances attending the delivery of this 
Speech, ibid. 363 (note). — ^Mr. Prime Ser- 
jeant's Reply, ibid. 379< — Lord Carleton's 
Charge to the Jury, ibid. 385. — ^The Juiv 
find them Guilty, ibid. 392. — LordCarieton^ 
Address on passing Sentence upon them, 
ibid. 395.-^Iney are executed, ibid. 397. 

SHEILS, Alexander. See Archer, Thonuu. 

SHEPHERD, Sir Samuel, Attorney General. 
His Speech for the Prosecution on the Trial 
of James Watson for High Treason, 32 vol. 
26. — His Speech for the Prosecution on the 
Trial of Jeremiah Brand reth, for High Treason 
in being concerned in the Luddite Insurrec- 
tion, ibid. 779. — His Speech in Reply on 
the Trial of William Turner for the same 
Treason, ibid. 1084. — ^His Speech for the 
Prosecution on the Trial of Isaac Ludlam 
for the same Treason, ibid. 1137. 

SHERFIELD, Henry. — Proceedings against 
him in the Star-Cbamber, for breaking a 
painted Window in a Church at Salisbury, 
8 Car. 1, 1632, 3 vol. 519w--Sir Robert 
Heath (Attorney General) opens the In- 
formation against him, ibid, ib.— Mr. Hemes' 
Speech in his Defence, ibid. 520. — His 
Ajnswer to the Information, ibid. 522. — 
Depositions of the Witnesses for the Prose* 
cution, ibid. 525.^--Mr. Herbert's Speeph 
for the Defendant, ibid; 528. — Evidence for 
the Defendant, ibid. 530. — ^The Attorney 
General's Reply, ibid. 536. — Speeches of 
the different Members of the Court on 
delivering their Opinions respecting the 



THE STATE TRIALS- 



121 



, Sentence, ibtd;539<. — Bishop Laud's Speech, 
^d. 548. — Sentence of the Court upon him, 
ibid^ 562. 

SHERIDAN, Dr. Edward .-^-Proceedings in 
the Court of King's Bench in Ireland against 
him and Thomas Kirwan for Offences 
against the Stat. 33 Geo. 3, c. 29, called 
the Irish Convention Act, 52 Geo. 3, 1811, 
1812, 31 vol. 543.— Counsel for the Prose- 
cntioD and for the Defendant, ihid. ib. — 
The Defendant Kirwan challenges one of 
the Grand Jurors, ibid. 548. — Right of a 
Defendant to chsdlenge a Grand Juror 
argned, ibid. 549. — ^The majority of the 
Court decide that no Challenge lies to a 
Grand Juror, ibid. 566. — Kirwan pleads in 
Abatement that several of the Grand Jury 
held Offices under the Crown, and thai others 
of them were not Freeholders, ibid. 576.^ — 
The Attorney General demurs to the Pleas 
in Abatement, ibid. 578. — Argument of the 
Attorney General in support of the De- 
murrer, ibid, ib.— Mr. North's Argument for 
the Plea^, ibid. 587.— Mr. Goold's Argu- 
ment for the Pleas, ibid. 593. — ^Mr. Towns- 
end's Reply for the Crown in support of 
the Demurrer, ibid. 600. — Judgment of the 
Court against the Pleas in Abatement, ibid» 
611.— Trial of Dr. Sheridan, ibid. 634.— 
The Indictment, ibid. 638. — Speech of the 
Attorney General for the Prosecution, ibid. 
641. — ^Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 
656. — Mr. Burrowes's Speech in Defence of 
Dr. Sheridan, ibid. 684.— Mr. Goold's 
Speech on summing up the Evidence for 
the Defence, ibid. 712. — Reply of the Solici- 
tor General, ibid. 729. — Chief Justice 
Downes's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 745. — 
The Jury acquit Dr. Sheridan, ibid. 753. — 
Trial of Mr. Kirwan, ibid, ib.— He challenges 
the Array of the Jury, on the ground of. its 
being made at the nomination of the Solici- 
tor for the Prosecution, ibid. 754. — ^Trial of 
the Challenge, ibid. 755.— The Triers find 
against the Challenge, ibid. 799.-— The Jury 
are sworn, ibid. 807. — Speech of the Attor- 
ney General for the Prosecution, ibid. 809. 
— ^Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 817. 
— ^Mr. Burrowes makes an Objection to the 
Case for the Crown on the ground of a 
Variance, ibid. 854. — The Court reserve the 
point, ibid. 867.^— Mr. Burrowes's Speech 
for (he Defendant, Mr. Kirwan, ibid. ib. — 
Reply of the Solicitor General, ibid. 887. — 
Chief Justice Downes's Charge to the Jury, 
ibid. 909.-^The Jury find Mr. Kirwan 
Guilty, ibid. 922.— The Court inflict a 
nominal Punishment upon him, ibid. 928. 

SHERIDAN, Richard Brinsley.— His Eri- 
dence on the Trial of Home Tooke for 
High Treason, 25 toI. 386.— His Evidence 
on the Trial of William Stone, ibid. 1248. 
— His Evidence on the Trial of the Earl of 
Thanet and others, 27 vol. 923. 

SHERWIN, John. See SachevereU, WilUam. 

^HERWIN, Ralph. See Can^'m, Msiund. 



SHIELDS, William.— His Trial in Ireland 
with Thomas Watson and Thomas Kinch 
for the Murder of Thomas Ryan, 43 Geo. 
3, 1802, 28 vol. 619.— The Indictment, 
ibid. ib. — Counsel for the Prosecution and 
for the Prisoners, ibid. ib. — Mr. Mac Natt/s 
Speech for the Prosecution, ibid. 621.— 
Eridence for the Prosecution, ibid. 624.'^— 
Evidence for the Prisoners, iWd. 640. — The 
Jury acquit Kinch and Watson, but^ not 
agreeing in their Verdict as to Shields, they 
are discharged, ibid.— The Trial of WiU 
liam Shields, by another Jury, ibid. 647^-«' 

' Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 650.*^^ 
Evidence for the Prisloner, ibid. 670.F-^Mr. 
Justice Day's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 679* 
-^The Jury acquit him, ibid. 682. 

SHIPLEY, William Davies, Dean of St. 
Asaph. — Proceedings on an Indictment 
against him for publishing Sir William 
Jones's Dialogue on the Prmciples of Go- 
vernment, 23-24-25 Geo. 3, 1783-1784, 21 
vol. 847.— Introductory Note to this Case, 
ibid. ib. — ^Motion on the part of. the Prose- 
cution to put ofi* the Trial at Wrexham, on 
the ground of Pamphlets having been cir- 
culated tending to prejudice the Juiy, ibid. 
848. — Mr. Erskine shews cause against the 
Motion, ibid. 859.— The Court grant tke 
Motion, ibid. 868.— The Trial comes on 
before Mr. Justice Buller, at Shrewsbwy, 
ibid. 876.— The Indictment, ibid. ib. — 
Counsel for the Prosecution and for the 
Defendant, ibid; 885. — Mr. Bearcroft^s 
Speech for the Prosecution, ibid. ib.-^Evi- 
dencefor the Prosecution, ibid. 891. -r-Mr. 
Erskine's Speech for the Defendant, ibid. 
898. — Evidence for the Defendant, ibid. 
930.— Mr. Bearcroft's Reply, ibid; 933.— 
Mr. Justice BuUer's Charge to the Juiy, 
ibid. 943.— The Jury return a Verdict of 
« Guilty of publishing only," ibid. 950.— Con- 
versation between the Judge, Mr. Erskine, 
and the Juiy before the Verdict is recorded, 
ibid. ib. and ibid. ib. (note).— A Verdict of 
« Guilty of publishing, but whether a libel 
or not the Jury do not find," is recorded, 
ibid. 955.— Proceedings in the Court of 
King's Bench on a Motion for a New Trial, 
ibid, ib.— >Mr. Erskine^s Speech on that 
Occasion, ibid. 957.— The Court grant a 
Rule to shew causci ibid. 970. — Mr. 
Erskine's Arguments for the Rights of 
Juries, in his Speech in support of the Rule, 
ibid, ib.— Mr. Welch's Speech on the same 
side, ibid. 1023.— Lord Mansfield's Judg- 
ment on discharging the Rule, ibid. 1033. 
—Mr. Erskine moves in Arrest of Judg- 
ment, ibid. 1041.— The Judgment is arrdsted 
for want of proper Averments in the In- 
dictment, to point the application of the 
libellous matter charged to the King and 
Government, ibid. 1044. 

SHIRLEY, Dr. Thomas, 6 vol. 1121. See 
Faggf Sir John. 

SHIV£RS^ Richard. See Golding, JQhtjk, 



133 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



SHOWERy 9ir BaHhokmiew, Recorder of 
I/mdon. — ^He was one of the Counsel for 
the Prosecution on the Trial of the Seven 
l^hops, 12 vol. 333. 

■ ' ' ' ' ■ Counsel. — His 



T 



Argument in the Court of King's Bench in 
the C^se of Kendall and Roe, against the 
. Yitlidity of a Commitment by the Secretary 
. of State for High Treason, 12 vol. 1359. — 
. His Argument of several points of law for 
. Ambrose Rookwood, on his Trial for High 
Treason, 13yol. 145, 154, 201. — His Speech 
oa summing up the Evidence for the Prisoner 
. ^Q the Trial of Peter Qook, ibid. 376.— His 
. Speedi in the House of Commons in De- 
fence of .Sir John Fenwick, ibid* 640.—- His 
Speech in Defence of Charles Duocombe, 
' on his Trial for a Fraud upon Government, 
ibid. J080. — ^His "Antidote against Poison," 
being Remarks by him upon the Paper 
delivered by Lord William Russel to the 
Sheriffs at the place of Execution, 9 vol. 
710.-i-His *' Magistracy and Government of 
England vindicated" respecting the Proceed- 
ings in the Case of Lord William Russel, 
ibid.r41. 

SHREWSBURY, Gilbert, Eari of.— Lord 
Cdce's Report of the Case respecting his 
claim to the Earldom of Waterford and 
Barony of Dungarvan in Ireland, 2 vol. 741. 

SHREWSBURY, Mary, Countess of.— Pro- 
ceeding3 against her before a Select Council 
for a (Jbntempt, in refusing to answer fully 
before the Privy Council respecting the 
Escape and Marriage of Lady Arabella 
.Stuart, or to subscribe her Examination, 10 
Jac. 1, 1612, 2 vol. 769.—- The Charge against 
ber, ibid. 770. — ^The Council determine that, 
if s^e should be proceeded against judicially 
in the Star Chamber, she should be fined 
"^OfiOOl. and be imprisoned during pleasure, 
•ibid. 776.— -Sir Francis Bacon's Speech 
against her, ibid. ib. 

SfilUTE, Samuel. See PUkmgton, Thomat. 

SIDNEY, Colonel Algernon.— His Trial at 
the Bar of the Court of King's Bench for 
High T/eason in being concerned in the 
Rye^Housa Plat, 35 Can 2, 1663, 9 vol. 817. 
—The Indictment, ibid, ib.— He hesitates 
to pl^d, ibid^ 8!^0,— He offers a Special 

. Plea* which he afterwards withdraws, and 
Ijieads Not Guilty, ibid. 822.-*The Special 
Plea, ibid. ib. (note). — ^He demands a Copy 
of the Indictment, and Cpunsel, which are 
xelused by the Court, ibid. 833. — Speech of 
the Attorney General (Sir Robert Sawyer) 
for the Prosecution, ibid. 838.--^Evidence 
against him, ibid. 840.— Lord Howard's 
Evidence, ibid, 849. — Evidence of his hand- 
writing to certain Papers, ibid. 854.— Chief 
Justice Jefieries's unworthy Attempt to pro- 
cure his acknowledgment that he was the 
Author of certain Papers produced against 
him, ibid. 858 and (note). — ^His Defence, 
ibid. 860,»-<-£videiiee in contradiction of 



Lord Howard's Testimony, ibid. 969. — ^U^ 
Address to the Jury, ibid. 876. — Reply of 
the Solicitor General (Finch), ibid. 860. — 
Chief Justice Jefferies's Charge to the Jury, 
ibid. 888.— The Jury find him Guilty, ibtd. 
895. — Being called on for Judgraeoty he 
makes several Objections, which are over- 
mled, ibid. 897.— Sentence of Death is pass- 
ed upon him, ibid. 901. — His Petition to the 
King, ibid. 904w — ^His Execution, ibid. 906. 
—The King remits all the circumstances of 
his Sentence, except beheading, ibid, tb.-— 
Paper delivesed by him to the Sheriff at the 
place of Execution,ibid.907. — ^His "Apology 
lor himself in the Day of his Death,'' ibid. 
916.*'The Examination of several Peraons 
after the Revolution connected with this 
Trial and the Cases of Lord Russel, Sir 
Thomas Armstrong, and Mr. Cornish, ibid. 
951.— Act of Parliament reversing Sidney's 
Attainder, ibid. 991.r~Sir John Hawles's 
Remarks upon this Trial, ibid. 999.— Roger 
North^s Account of it in the ^^Exanaen,'' 
- ibid. 840 (note). — Burnet's Account of 
Sidney, ibid. 492. — ^His Account of his Trial 
and Execution, ibid. 514.— Remarks upon 
the existence of a Concert between Sidney 
and the Court of France, ibid. 906 (note). — 
Accountof his Trial and Execution, extracted 
from Narcissus Luttrelfs ^ Brief Historical 
Relation," ibid. 1014, 1016. 

SIMONS, Henry, the Jew. — ^His Case upon 
his Trial for maliciously and fiilsely putting 
Money into the Pocket of James Ashley, 
with intent to charge him with robbing him 
of the same, 25 Geo. 2, 1752, 19 vol. 680. 
— Narrative of the Circumstances which 
gave occasion to this Trial, ibid. ib. — The 
Indictment, ibid. 682. — He is found Guilty, 
ibid. 684. — He moves for a New Trial, ibid, 
ib. — Affidavits of the Jury in support of the 
Motion for a New Trial, statingj^that they 
merely meant to find the fact that Simons 
put the Money into Ashley's Pocket, as 
charged by the Indictment, but not the 
criminal Intention with which he was charged 
to have done it, ibid. ib. — ^The Court grant 
a New Trial, ibid. 692. — Simons recovers 
Damages in Actions for false Imprisonment 
against Ashley and the Constables who 
apprehended him, ibid. ib. (note). 

SINCLAIR, Charles. See Skning, WUlmm. 
GerrMy Jowpk. Margarotf iictmoe.— -Pro- 
ceedings against him in the High Court 
of Justiciary for Sedition, in being a 
Member of an unlawful Assembly^ c&dled 
the General Convention, 34 Geo. 3, 1794, 
23 vol. 777.— The Indictment, iUd. tU 
— "Advocates for the Prosecution and for 
the Panel| ibid. 784. — ^Argument of Mr. 
Fletcher against the Rc^vancy of the Indict« 
ment, ibid. ib. — Argument of the Counsel 
for the Prosecution in support of it, ibid. 
786.— The Court decide that the Indictment 
is relevant, ibid. 795. — ^The Prosecution ii 
abandoned; ibid* 802. 



T|IJE STATE TRIALS. 



1S3 



ailD£aCO|i£, Miles, otlMniMe oalled Fiih. 
— His Trial for High Treason in oonfpifing 
the Death of the Lord Protector, and the 
subversion of the Government, 8 Car. 2, 
1657, 5 vol. 841.— The Indictment, ibid. 
844.— He pleads Not Guilty, ibid. ib.>-The 
Evidence against him, ibid. ib. — He is 
foond Goiitjri and sentenced to Death, ibid. 
648. — He tid&es PoiseQ in the Tow«r, ibid. 
851«~-*Proceedings on the Coroner's Inquest 
held on his body, ibid. 853. — Certificates of 
the Physicians and Surgeons respectipg the 
appearance of his body after death, ibid. 
857. — ^Verdict of the Coronet's Inquest, ibid. 
8S8. — ^Evidence produced on the Coroner's 
Inquest, ibid. 860.— -Examinations taken 
before the Council, ibid. 866. — ^Lord Claren- 
don's Notice of his Case, ibid. 851 (note)« 

SIRR, Charles Henry. See Hevey, John, 

SKENE, Jame8.-^His Trial at Edinburgh for 
being accessary to the Rebellion of the 
Covenanters at Air's Moss and Bothwell 
Bridge, and for treasonable Declarations, 
32 Car. 2, 1680, 8 vol. 123.— He is found 
Guilty upon his own Confession, and bang- 
ed, ibid. 124. — Lord Fountainhairs Notice 
of this Case, ibid. 123 (npte). 

SKINNER, Matthew, Ser|eant4it*Law.~His 
Speech for the Defendants on the Trial of 
the Qno Warranto against the Town and 
Port of Hastings, 17 vol. 893. 



■^ King's Serjeant. <>- His 

Speech for the Prosecution in Uie House of 
liords, on the Trial of Lofd Kilmam e ck ^ 18^ 
vol. 463. 

SKINNER, Dr. Robert, Bishop of Oxford. 
See ISodve Bithops. 

SKINNER, Thomas.^ProceedingB , on a Pe- 
tition by him to the House of Lords against 
the East India Company, 18 Car. 2, 1666, 
6 vol.. 709. — ^Hia Petition to the King in 
Council, ibid. 711.T*-<It is referred to certain 
Inords,. ibid. ib.rrrHis Case before the Lords 
Referees, ibid. 712.— Answer of the East 
Jndift Company, ibid. 713.*r-His Reply, 
ibid. 714. — ^The Leeds Referees report to 
the JLipg and Council in favour of his claim, 
ibid. 715. — ^The King, by a Message, re- 
commends it to the House of Lords to do 
justice to him, ibid. 716.-T*The Company's 
Answer to his Petition in the House of 
I^ds, denying the Jurisdiction of the Lofds 
to determine the matters of the Petition, 
ibid. ib. — The House of Lords appoint a 
day to hear the Case, but Parliament is 
proiogQed before any Decision is formed 
upon it, ibid. 717.-^His Petition to the 
House of Lords on the next meeting of Par- 
liament, ibid. ib.T-^The Company's Answer 
thereto, objecting as before to the Jurisdic- 
tion of the House of Lords, ibid. 718.^The 
Jadgfes give their Opinion tQ the House, 
that, part of the matters of the Petitions 
mi^ht.^ determined in the ordinaiy Courts 



of Lnr, and pari not, sUd. TlOd^llie 
Howe refer it to a Committee to state vHiat 
Recompence he ought to receive, ibid. 721. 
— ^Tbe Company's Petition to the House of 
Commons, ibid. ib. — Resolutions of the 
Commons against the Proceedings of the 
Lords, ibid. 726. — ^The House of Lords 
resolve that the Petition of the Company to 
the House of Commons b a scandaloudt 
libel^ and that the Company should pay to 
Skinner 5,000/., ibid. 724.--C!onferences 
between the two Houses of Parliament ]re- 
specting the Jurisdiction of the House of 
I^rds to take cognizance of this Case, ibid. 
729. — The King proposes to both Houses to 
erase from their respective Journals aU 
Entries relating to this Ca^e, and to end 
their differences, which is done, ibid. 767.— 
Narrative of the Occurrences subsequent to 
the Conferences, from Mr. Hargrave's Abridg- 
ment of this Case, ibid. 7^8. 

SKIRVING, William. See Oerrald, Joupk. 
Muur^ Thomoi, Margmrot^ JMonrtoi—- His 
Evidence on the Trial of Thomas Muir, 
23 vol. 168.— His Trial at Edinburgh for 
SeditioUf in being a Member of an ui|* 
lawful Society, 34 Geo. 3, 1794^ ibid. 
391, 472.— The Indictment, ibid. 472.— 
The Solicitor General's ArgumeUt in sup« 
pcNrt of ^ Relevancy of the Jadictmeiit, 
ibid. 484.H-Mr. Skirving's Argument against 
it, ibid. 491. -^The Court decide that the 
Indictment is relevant^ ibid* dOd.-^Evidesce 
for the Prosecution, ibid. dH'-VJTie Panel 
produces no Evident, ibid. 53^.wrbe Lord 
Advocate's Speech for the Prosecution,, ibid. 
536. — Skirving's Speech in his Defenooi 
ibid. 562.-^The Court sum up the Case, 
ibid. 588.«*The Jury find him GuiUy» ilnd. 
593.— The Court determine to .sentence him 
toTransportationfor Four teen years,ibid-594. 
— ^Address of the Society for Constitutional 
Information to him after his Conviction, 24 
▼ol. 566.t— His Letter to -the President of 

the Society in acknowledgment tharepf„ ibid* 
568. — ^He dies soon after his arrival in New 
Holland, 23 vol. 1412. 

SLAUGHTER, Johui See Gfo^iiM^, Jo4«. 

SLAUGHTERFORD» Christopher.^Aeeouit 
of his Trial ^d Condi^qination .upon aa 
Appeal of Murder aft^r i^n Acquittal upon 
an Indictment, 18 vol. 326 (note) — Paper 
delivered by him to the Sheriff at the place 
of ExecutioQ, ibid* ib. 

SIINGSBY, Sir Henry.—His Trial befom the 
High Court of Justice for, High.Treasoi)i in 
conspiring to deliver up the GsirrisoQof^ll* 
to Charles the Second, 10 Car. 2, 1658, 5 
vol. 871.<-*The Charge against him, ibid* 
874.— *He pleads Not Guilty, ibid. 876. — 
Evidence against him, ibid. 877. — ^Ilie At- 
torney General (Prideaux) sums up the Evi- 
dence, ibid. 882.— Judgment of the Court 
upon him, ibid. 925.-T-His Execution, ibidi 
929.^Loid Claraodon's Aeoeunt of htm. 



134 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



' ibid. 871 (note).— LadlowV Account of the 
TransactioQ from nvhicli this Proceeding 
. aroie, ibid. 882. 

SIJOANE, Dr. (afterwards Sir Hans Sloane). 
— ^His Evidence respecting the Appearances 
of the Bodies of persons who have died by 
Drownings 13 vol. 1 156. 

SMETON, Marie. See Norrit, Henry. 

SMITH, Francis.— His Trial for publishing 
libellous Remarks upon the Trial of Wake- 
man and others, 32 Car. 2, 1680, 7 vol. 931. 
—Speech of Jefferies, the Recorder, for the 
Prosecution, ibid. 933. — His Counsel admit 
the Indictment, ibid. 936. — ^A small Fine is 
imposed upon him, ibid. 937. — A Narrative 
of nis Sufi&rings in consequence of this and 
other Proceedings against him, written by 
himself, ibid. ib. — A Bill preferred against 
liim for another Libel is ignored by the 
Grand Jury, ibid. 942. — ^Jefferies's Conduct 
to die Grand Jury on that occasion, ibid. ib. 
•^-Jefferies endeavours to induce him to 

. confess the Bill which the Grand Jury had 
ignored, ibid. 943. 

SMITH, Henry, 5 vol. 1005, 1205. See 
* 'RegjiddeM, 

SMITH, Isabel. See Morrti, John. 

SMITH, James. — ^Proceedings against him and 
^John Mennons, in the High Court of 
Justiciary, for Sedition, in belonging to an 
unlawful Society, 33 Geo. 3, 1793, 23 vol. 
33.— The Indictment, ibid, ib.— Smith is 
outlawed for not appearing to answer, ibid. 
42. 

SMITH, Mary.— Account of her Case for 
Witchcraft, 13 Jac. 1, 1616, 2 vol. 1049.— 
Her Interviews with the Devil, ibid. 1051. — 
Her supposed' Practices against several 
persons, ibid. 1053. — Her Conduct at her 
£zecution, ibid. 1050. 

SMITH, Samud. See SachevereO, William. 
SMTTH, Walter. See CargiU, Donald. 

SMYTH, Sydney Stafford, Counsel, 17 vol. 
801. — ^His Speech for the Prosecution on 
the Trial of the Smugglers at Chichester for 
Murder, 18 vol. 1086. 

■ III Sir Sydney Stafford, Baron of the 

Exchequer, 25 Geo. 2, 18 vol. 1117. 

SNATI, William. See Cook, Skadrach. 

SNIGG, George, Baron of the Exchequer, 6 
Jac. 1, 2 vol. 576. 

80AME, Sir William, 6 vol. 1063. See Bar- 
fuardition, Sir Samud, 

SOMERS, John, Counsel— He is of Counsel 
. for the Defendants on the Trial of Pilkington 
and others, for a Biot at the Election of 
Sheriffs for the City of London, 6 vol. 226. 
— He is retained as one of the Counsel for 
the Seven Bishops, at the suggestion of 
^ FpUexfeo, who rcSfttsed to aocept a Retainer 



unless he was joined with him, 12 toI. 31 fi 
(note). , - ( 

Sir John, Solicitor General, 3 Will. 



and Mary. — His Speech for the Prosecution 
on the Trial of Lord Preston for High 
Treason, 12 vol. 678. 

Attorney General, 4 Will. 



and Mar^, 12 vol. 928. — His Speech for the 
Prosecution on tlie Trial of Ix>rd Mohun 
in the House of Lords for Murder, 12 vol. 
961. 

— - John, Lord, Lord Chancellor, 11 
Will. 3. — He is appointed Lord High 
Steward on the Trials of the Earl of Waiwick 
and Lord Mohun for Murder, 13 vol. 940. 
— ^His Address to the Earl of Warwick, on 
his being brought to the Bar, ibid* 952. — 
— His Address to Lord Mohun on his being 
brought to the Bar, ibid. 1033. . . 

Lopd Keeper, 12 WilL 

3. — His celebrated Argument on giving his 
Judgment in the Exchequer Chamber in the 
Bankers' Case, 14 vol. 39, — Mr. Hargrave 
characterizes this as one of the most elaborate 
Arguments ever delivered in Westminster 
HaSu, ibid. 3. — ^He is said to have expended 
several hundred Pounds in collecting Books 
and Pamphlets for this Argument, ibid. 39 
(note).— Part of his Argument in this Case 
alluded to in the Articles of Impeachment 
subsequently preferred against him, ibid. 
262. 



'■ ' Proceedings in Par- 

liament against him, William Ead of Port- 
land, Edward Earl of Orford, and Chaiies 
Lord Halifax, upon an Impeachment for 
High Crimes and Misdemeanours, 1 3 Will. 
3, 1701, 14 vol. 233.— 'Articles of Impeacln 
ment against Lord Orford, ibid. 241.— His 
Answer thereto, ibid. 245.— Articles of 
Impeachment against Lord Somers, ibid. 
250.— His Answer thereto, ibid. 363.— A 
day is appointed for the Trial of Lord 
Somers, ibid. 285. — ^Articles of Impeach- 
ment against Charles Lord Halifax, ibid. 
293.— His Answer thereto, ibid. 299. — Pro- 
ceedings on the Trial of Lord Somers, ibid. 
308.— The Commons not appearing to pro- 
secute the Impeachment, the Lords resolve 
to acquit him, ibid. 310.-^A day is ap- 
pointed for the Trial of Lord Orford^ ibid. 
311. — ^The Lords resolve to acquit him, on 
the Commons not appearing to prosecute 
the Impeachment, ibid. 321. — ^No Articles 
being exhibited against Lord Portland, the 
Lords dismiss his Impeachment, ibid. 322. 
— ^The Impeachment of Lord Halifax also 
dismissed for the same reason, ibid, ib.-^ 
Proceedings in the House of Commons re- 
specting mese Impeachments, ibid. 323.-' 
Dean Swift's Account of these Proceedings, 
ibid. 234 (note).— Swift's various Opinions 
of Lord Somers at different periods, ibid, 
ib* ibid. 236 (note), ibid. 237 (note). 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



125 



SOMERSET, Edwardy Duke of, Lord Pro* 
tectbr. — Proceedings against him in Par- 
EameAt for Treason and Misdemeanours, 
3 £dw. 6y 1550, 1 vol. 509.—Proclamation 
against lum by the Council, ibid. ib. — He 
is committed to the Tower, ibid. 510. — 
Articles of Accusation delivered to him in 
the Tower, ibid. ib. — ^His first Submission 
and Confession^ ibid. 512. — ^An Act of Par- 
liament passed, imposing a Fine upon him, 
founded upon his Confession, ibia. 514. — 
His second Submission, ibid. ib. — He \s 
pardoned, and almost the whole of his 
Estate is restored to him, ibid. 516^ — ^Pro- 
. eeedings against him for Treason and Felony, 
5 Edw. 6, 1551, ibid. 516.— He is sent to 
the Tower, ibid. ib. — Examinations of seve- 
ral Witnesses against him, ibid. 516. — Com- 
mission granted to the Lord Treasurer, 
appointing him Lord High Steward to try 
him, ibid. 51 7.— Several Indictments against 
him, ibid. 518, — ^Record of the Proceedings 
on one of the Indictments, ibid. ib. — He is 
. acquitted of Treason, but is found Guilty of 
' Felony, ibid. 521. — He petitions for his Life, 
bat is beheaded, ibid. 522. — Account of 
bis Execution, ibid. ib. — ^His Speech on the 
Scaffold, ibid. 523. — Singular Occurrence 
at his Execution, ibid. 524.— It was generally 
believed that the Conspiracy on which he 
. was condemned, was a Forgery, ibid. 523 
(note).— Case presented by his 6reat Grand- 
son, the Marquis of Hertford, to the House 
of Lords, in support of his Petition to be 
restored to the Title, ibid. 526. — His Cor- 
respondence with Gardiner, Bishop of Win- 
. Chester, respecting the Reformation, ibid. 
55r. 

SOMERSET, Countess of. See Et$ex, Frmeet 
Eoward, Ccunteuqf. 

SOMERSET, Robert Carr, Earl of.— His 

Trial in the House of Lords for being 

accessary before the &ct to the Murder of 

. Sir Thomas Overbury, 14 Jac. 1, 1616, 2 

. vol.965. — ^He pleads Not Guilty, ibid. 968. 

— The Lord High Steward's Address to him 

' on his being brought to the Bar, ibid. ib. — 

■ Speech of the Attorney General (Sir Francis 

Bacon) for the Prosecution, ibid. 969. — 

Evidence agatnstbim, ibid. 978. — His Speech 

• in his Defence, ibid. 992.— The Lords find 
« him Guilty, ibid. 997. — Sentence of Death 

• is passed upon him, ibid. ib.-*-King James's 
Anxiety during the Trial, ibid. 998 (note). — 
His Letter to the King si^er his Condemna- 
tion, ibid. 999. — ^His Pardon, ibid. 1010. — 
His Petition to Charles the First for the 
recovery of his Estate, ibid. 1018. 

SOMERSET, Earl of. See Bedford, Earl of . 

SOMERSETT, James, the Negro.— His Case 
on a Habeas Corpus in the Court of King's 

. Bench, to {ry the legality of his detention as 
a Slave, 12 Geo. 3, 1771-72^.20 vol. 1.— 
Statement of the Facts of the Case, ibid, 
ib.— R^om to the Habeas Corpus, ibid. 7. 



— ^Mr. Hargrave's Argument for his Dis- 
charge, ibid. 23.-— Mr. Alleyne^s Aigument 
on the same side, ibid. 67. — Mr. V^IIace's 
Argument on the same side, ibid. 69. — Mr. 
Dunning's Argument for his Detainer, ibid. 
71. — Serjeant Davy's Argument on the same 
side, ibid. 76.— Lord Mansfield delivers the 
Judgment of the Court in fiivour of his 
Discharge, ibid. 80* 

SOUTHAMPTON, Henry, Earl of, 1 vob 
1333. See Emxj Robert, Earl of. 

SPARKES, John. See Dainon, Josqfh. 

SPARKES, Michael. See Ptym, WiUiam.-^ 
Proceedings in the Star Chamber against 
him for printing '< Histrio-mastix," 9 Car. 1,. 
1632, 3 vol. 561. 

SPEKE, Hugh, 9 vol. 1127. See BradAm, 
Lawrence* 

SPELMAN, Sir Heniy.— His Answer to ih% 
Apology for Archbishop Abbot, 2 vol. 1169. 

SPILMAN, Sir John, Judge of K. B. 26 Hen. 
8, 1 vol. 898. 

SPOTISWOOD, Sir Robert.— -Proceeding* 
V against him for High Treason, at a Parlia- 
ment holden at St. Andrew's, in Scotland, 21 
Car. 1, 1645, 4 vol. 767.— The Indictment, 
ibid. 768.— His Answer thereto, ibid. 771. 
—Replies to his Answer, ibid. 774. — ^His 
Duplies to the Replies, ibid, 778.— He 
pleads, that when he was taken Prisoner of 
War, Quarter was granted him, and there- 
fore that as these Proceedings cannot touch 
his Life, they ought to be stayed, ibid. 781. 
-—Reply to this Plea, ibid. 784.— Duplies 
to the Reply, ibid. 786.— Lord Ogilvie*8 
Defence, as referred to by him, and incor- 
porated with his own, ibid. 794. — ^Auswers 
to Lord Ogilvie's Defence, ibid. 799. — 
Reasons why he should not be called upon 
for his other Defences till the question of 
Quarter is decided, ibid. 800. — ^Answers 
thereto, ibid. ib. — ^Duplies to these Answers, 
ibid.. 802. — ^Report of the Commissioners 
appointed to conduct the Process against 
him, ibid. 803. — ^The Parliament declare 
him Guilty of Treason, and pass Sentence of 
Death upon him, ibid. 806. — His Eiacution, 
ibid. 815. — Mr. Laing's Observations upon 
this Prosecution, ibid. 767 (note). 

SPRATT, Dr. Thomas, Bishop of Rochester. 
See Seven Bi$hopt, — His Letter to the Eccle- 
siastical Commissioners, declining, to act 
any longer under the Commission, 12 vol. 
492 (note).— He was one of the Commis- 
sioners appointed to exercise ecclesiastical 
Jurisdiction in the Diocese of London during 
the Suspension of Bishop Compton, 11 vol« 
1166. — ^He was one of the Bishops appointed 
to degrade Johnson, ibid. 1350. — Proceed- 
ings against' him before the Privy Council 
concerning a Plot to restore King James 
the Second, 4 Will, and Mary, 1692, 12 vol. 
I051.«-His Fint Examination befMe aCom- 
miltee of the Council, ibid. 1055|-*Hia 



186 



Second ExaminaUoDy ilnd. 1059.— Black- 
head's Evidence against him, ibid. 1 060. — 
His Account of the Witnesses who supported 
the Charge against him, ibid. 1079. — One 
of them, under Sentence of Death for Coin- 
ing, confesses the falsehood of the Charge, 
ibid. 1165^— Some Particulars respecting 
bim, 9 vol. 362^ and (note), 12 toI. 1051 
(note). 

SPREULL, John.— His Trial with Robert 
Ferguson at Edinburgh, for Treason in 
being concerned in the Rebellion- in Scot- 
land previously to the Battle of Bothwell 
Bri^, 33 Car. 2, 1681, 10 vol. 725.— The 
Indictment, ibid. 728.— SpreuU's Exami- 
nation before the Council, ibid. 729 (note). 
— ^The Torture is applied to him, ibid. 730 
(not<i}. — ^His Counsel object that he cannot 
by Law be indicted for Offences denied by 
bim under Torture, ibid. 757.— Answer <» 
the King's Advocate to the Objection, ibid. 
756.— Sir George Lockhart's Reply for the 
Panel, ibid. 766.— The Court overrule the 
Objection, ibid. 772.— Ferguson confesses 
the Indictment, ibid. 774. — Evidence against 
SpreuU, ibid. 775. — ^His Counsel object to 
the evidence of a Witness against him, that 
be had beea previously examined on oath 
vespecting the contents of the- Indictment, 
ibid. 778. — ^The Objection is overruled, ibid. 
781.— His Counsel object to Evidence of 
his Confession before the Privy Council, 
because it was not signed by himy ibid. 785. 
—The Court refuse to admit the Confession, 
ibid. 790.— The Court, at the suggestion of 
the King's Advocate, interrogate him whether 
he thought being at Bothwell Bridge was a 
Rebellion, ibid^ ib< — He refused to answer, 
ibid, ib.— The Assize find Ferguson Guilty 
upon hn own Confession, and acquit Sprenll, 
ibid. 791.~«Extracts from Lord Fountain- 
hall's Decisions respectio|^ SpreuU, ibid. 
725 (note). — ^Wodrow's Account of the Pro- 
ceedings against him, ibid. 727 (note). 

SPROT, George.— His trial at Edinburgh for 
being concerned in the Gowrie Conspiracy, 
6* Jac. 1, 1608, 2 vol. 697. — His Confession 
respecting the Conspiracy, ibid, ib.— The 
Indictment, ibid. 701.— He confesses the 
Indictment, ibid. 704. — The Assize find him 
Guilty, ibid. 705.— Sentence of Death is 
passed upon him, ibidn ib. — His*£Secutien> 
ibid* 706. 

SPUR, John. See BaynUm^ Sarah, 

SQUIRES, Mary. See Cammg, Mitabeth. 
Gibbons, John, — Her Trial with Susannah 
Wells, at th& Old Bailey, for feloniously 
stealing a Pair of Stays firom the person of 
Elizabeth Canning, 25 Geo. 2, 1753, 19 vol. 
261 — Evidence of Elizabeth Canning, ibid. 
• 262.— Evideuoe in support of an Alibi for 
Squires, ibid«. 272. — ^The}r are both found 
Guilty, and Squires is sentenced to Death, 
ibid. 274**-*Peti4ion of the Lord Mayor to 
the Kiog on their behalf, ibid, ib.— They 



GENERAL INDEX TO 

recdve a Pardon, ibid. 275.— Trial of ihA 
Witnesses for the Prisoners for Peijury id 
their Evidence on this Trial, ibid. ib. — ^Triaj 
of Elizabeth Oanniog for Perjury in he< 
Evidence on this Trial, ibid. 283. 



STAFFORD, William, Viscount.— Proceed 
ings in Parliament against hitn, the Earl ot 
Powis, Lord Petre, Lord Arundel of Wardour, 
and Lord Bellasis (commonly called the Five 
Popish Lords), for High Treason, in being 
concerned in the Popish Plot, 30 Car. 2, 
1670, 1 Jac. 2i 1685, 7 vol. W17. — Pro- 
ceedings respecting their Arrest, ibid, ib.— 
The Commons resolve to impeach them, 
ibid. 1123, 1124. — Articles of Impeachment 
against ihem delivered to the Lords by the 
Commons, ibid. 1235. — ^The House of LoTd» 
Older that Counsel be permitted to assist 
them in matters of Law, ibid. 1240. — Names 
of the Counsel respectively assigned to 
them, ibid. 1 242. — ^Answer of Lord Bellasis 
to the Articles of Impeachment, ibid. 1244. 
— Lord Powis's Answer thereto, ibid. 1248. 
— Lord Stafford's Answer, ibid. 1251. — 
Lord Petrels Answer, ibid* 1254. — ^Lord 
Arunders Answer, ibid. 1255.— -The Com- 
mons object that the Answer of Lbrd 
Bellasis must be put in in person, and that 
the Answers of the other impeached Lords 
are evasive and argumentative, ibid. 1259. 
^-All of them, except Lord Petre, withdraw 
their former Answers, and answer genendly 
Not Guilty, ibid. 1260. — ^Debates asd Reso- 
lutions in the House of Lords ptetiminary 
to die Trial of the Impeachment, ibid. 
1266. — Commission to Heneage,Lord Finch, 
(afterwards Earl of Nottingham) to be 
Lord High Steward for their Trials, ibid. 
1^1.— Trial of Lord Stafltord, 32 Car. 2, 
1680, ibid. 1293.-~Order of the Prt>ceeding8 
for the Trial, ibid, ib.— The Lord High 
Steward's Address to him on his beings 
brought to the Bar, ibid. 1297. — Speech of 
Serjeant Mmiard for the Commons, ibid. 
1298.— Sir Francis Winnington's Speech, 
ibid. i302.-^Mr.Treby's Speech^ ibid. 1308. 
— General Evidence of the existence of the 
Plot, ibid. 1310, — Dugdale's Evidence^ ibid. 
1314. -Gates's Evidence, ibid. 1320.-— The 
Records of the Convictions of Coleman and 
others given in Evidence, ibid. 1833.-*^Par« 
ticular Evidence of Lord Stafford's ocmnexion 
with the P1g4, ibid. 1340.--Di^gdale^8 £vi« 
dence on this part of the Case, ibid. ib. — 
Oates's Evidence, ibid. 1347. — Turbenrille's 
Evidenee,ibid«1351 .—Lord StaffordlB Speech 
in his Defence, ibid. 1356.— Dugdaie is 
examined again, ibid. 1377.— Evidence to 
contradict Dugdale, ibid. 1382.— Witnesses, 
called to prove, that Dugdale had endeavour* 
ed to persuade them to swear falsely against- 
Lord Stafibrd, ibid. 1400.— Gates is ex- 
amined' again, ibid. 1407:— Evidence in 
Reply, ibid. 1449. — At the dose of the 
Evidence in Reply^ Lord Stafibrd is permit- 
ted to add to his Evsdencei ibid. 1482^— 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



137 



Speech on sumioiDg up. the Evidence 
for the Defence, ibid. 1486. — His Remarks 
upon OateSy ibid. 1488. — Several Points of 
law suggested by Lord Stafford, ibid. 1491. 
—Sir William Jones's Speech in Reply for 
the Coinmons, ibid. 1493*— Mr. Powle's 
Speech, ibid. 1516.-— Answers of the Mana- 
gers to the Points of law suggested by Lord 
StaiTord, ibid. 1519.— The Lords resolve to 
liear Lord Stafford's Counsel upon the Point 
of law, whetherin caiies of Treason, there must 
be two Witnesses to each Overt act, ibid. 
1525.— His Counsel decline to argue it, un- 
less time is given them for ])reparation, ibid. 
ib. — ^The Judges deliver their Opinions in the 
negative upon the Point of law, and that it 
is not disputable, ibid. 1528. — ^Lord Stafford's 
Remark upon the Reason given by Baron 
Atkyiis for his Opinion, ibid. 1529. — He is 
permitted by the JLords to address them again 
m his Defence, ibid. 1538. — ^His Speech, 
ibid. ib. — General Reply of the Managers 
for the Commons, ibid. 1549. — He is found 
Guilty by a Majority of Twenty*Four Peers, 
ibid. 1553.— He moves in arrest of Judg- 
ment upon a defect in his Arraignment, 
ibid* 1554.— The Objection is overruled, 
ibid. ib. — The Commons demand Judgment 
against him, ibid. ib.<— >The Lord High 
Steward passes Judgment upon him, ibid. 
1555. — Burnet says, that Lora Nottingham's 
Speech on passing Judgment upon Lord 
Stafford, was one of the best he ever made, 
ibid. 1556 (note).— The Writs for his Exe- 
cation, ibid. 1561. — ObjeetiOns made by 
the Sheriffs to the form of the Writs, ibid. 
1562.— ^Burnet's Account of his Conduct 
afteir his Condemnation, ibid. 1559 (note). 
— Burnet's Character of him, ibid. 1993 
(note). — His Speech from the Scaffold, ibid. 
1564. — Sir John Reresby's Account of Lord 

Sufford's Trial, ibid. 1293 (note) Mrs. 

Macaulay's Account of it, ibid. 1583 (note). 
— A Bill was brought into Parliament in 
1665 for reversing his Attainder, but did not 
pass the Commons, ibid. 1571. — The other 
Lords are discharged in 1685, ibid. 1572. — 
Account of Mr. Hargrave's Argument re- 
specting the validity of Lord Stafibid's 
Attainder, ibid. 1573 (note). 

STAIR, Earl of. See Glenco, Matsacre of.--' 
Apolo^ for his Conduct respecting the 
Massacre of Glenco, 13 vol. 883 (note). — 
Letters written by him to Lord Breadalbane 
pieviously to the Massacre, ibid. 888 (note). 

STANDSFIELD, Philip.— His Trial at Edin- 
burgh for High Treason and Parricide, 
4 Jac. 2, 1688, 11 vol. 1371.— The In- 
dictment, ibid. ib. — ^Debate on the Rele« 
vancy of the Indictment, ibid. 1377.— The 
Court decide that the Indictment is relevant, 
ibid. 1393. — Evidence against him, ibid. 
1394. — Evidence that, on his touching his 
Father's dead Body, the Blood flowed from 
it, ibid. 1403, |409.—*Sir George Mackenzie's 
Speech for the Prosecution, ibid. 1413, — 



He is found Guilty, and Sentence of Death 
is passed upon him, ibid. 1419. 

STANFORD, WiHiami Queeo^s Serjeant, l 
Mary, 1 vol. 869. 

STANLEY, Sir William. — Proceedings against 
him for Treason, 10 Hen. 7, 1494-5, 1 vol. 
277. — Mr. Hargrave's Introductory Note to 
this Case, ibid. ib. — ^His Offence consisted 
in saying, " that if he knew eertCHnly that 
Perkyn Warbeck was the Son of Edward 
the Fourtli, he would not bear arms 
against him/' ibid. 278, 282.*~Beasons 
of the Judges for holding these words to. 
be Treason, ibid. 282.— Some Writers say, 
that he had promised Warbeck Assfetaalsey 
and sent him Money, ibid. ib. — He con* 
fesses the Words, ibid. 278, 281 .—He is 
arraigned, condemned, and beheaded, ibidJ 
279, 281. — He is said to have been llie 
richest man in England, ibid. 281.— His 
Case is cited for the Crown on the Trial of 
Sir Nicholas Throckmorton, ibid. 893. — 
Lord Bacon's Account of the Proceedings 
against him, ibid. 280. — ^The Record of las 
Case, 3 vol. 366. 

STAPLETON, Sir Miles, But.— His Trial at 
York for High Treason, in being coneemed 
in the Popish Plot, 33 Car. 2, 1(S81, 8 vol. 
5dl. — The Indictment, ibid, ib.-— He pleods 
Not Guilty, ibid. 502.— His Trial deferped 
till the next Assizes for deiault of Jurors^ 
l!he King's Counsel refusing to pray a Tales, 
ibid. 503. — His Trial at the next Assizes, 
ibid. ib. — Serjeant Stringer's Speech for the 
Prosecution, ibid. 504.*-£vidence ibr the 
Prosecution, ibid. 505. — Bolron's Evidence 
against him, ibid. 507.— Evidence for &e 
Prisoner to contradict Bolion^ ibid. 511.-— 
Evidence in Reply, ibid. 521. — Mr. Justice 
Dolben^s Charge to the Jury, ibid. 523.—^ 
Mr. Baron Gregory's Charge, ibid. 524. — 
the Jury acquit him, ibid. 526. 

STAPLETON, Sir Phflip, Bart.--See EoUii^ 
DengiL 

STARKEY, Henry. Se^ Anderson, Lionel* 

."^TARKEY, John. See Maccksfieldp Charles, 
Earl of, 

STAUGHTON, Sir Nicholas. See StoughUm, 
Sir Nicholas. 

STAYLEY, WHliam.-.His Trial for High 
Treason, in being concerned in the Popish 
Plot, 30 Car. 2, 1678, 6 vol. 1501.— He 

J leads Not Guilty, ibid, ib.— Sir William 
ones's Speech for the Prosecu^bn, ibid. 
1502. — Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid, 
ib. — His Defence, ibid. 1505. — Chief Jus- 
tice Scroggs examines the Prisoner,, ibid. ib. 
—Evidence for the Defence^ ibid. 1508^-^ 
The Chief Justice's Charge to the Jury, 
ibid, ib.— Sentence of Death is passed upon 
him, ibid. 1510.-^He is executed, ibid. 
1511.— His Conduct at the place of Execu* 



128 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



tion, 7 Tol. 569.— Burnet's Account of this 
Trial, 6 ToL 1415. 

STEDMAN, Mary. See Moders, Mary. 

STEEL, William^ Counsel.— He is one of the 
Counsel appointed by the Commonwealth 
to prepare and prosecute the Charge against 
Charles the First, 4 vol. 1056. 

. • Attorney General for the 

Commonwealth, 4 vol. 1209.^His Argu- 

- ment for l^e Prosecution on the Trial of 
James, Dukft of Hamilton, ibid. 1167. 

STEPHENS^ Ellis. See Ccwper^ Spencer. 

STERN, John. See Cofdngmark^ Charles John, 
CounL 

STEVENSON, John.--His Trial at the Chester 
Assizes for the Murder of Mr. Francis 
Elcock, 32 Geo. 2, 1759, 19 vol. 845.— 
' Counsel for the Crown and for the Prisoner, 
ibid, ib.— Abstract of the Indictment, ibid, 
ib. — The Attorney General for Cheshire 
opens the Case for the Prosecution, ibid. 
847. — Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 
850.—The Prisoner makes no Defence, ibid. 
864.<— His Counsel argue against the validity 
of the Warrant, under which Mr. Elcock 
was .acting when the. Prisoner shot him, 
ibid. 864.^-Argument of the Counsel for 
the Prosecution in answer to the Objection, 
. ibid. 870.'— Reply of the Counsel for the 
. Prisoner, ibid. 873.-— The Jury, under the 
. direction of the Court, find a Special Ver- 
dict, ibid. 876.— Tlie Special Verdict, ibid. 
ib.--*The Court decide, that the facts stated 
on the Special Verdict, amount only to Man- 
slaughter, ibid. 878.— The Prisoner is burnt 
in the hand, and discharged, ibid. ib. 

STEWART, Alexander.— His Trial at Edin- 
burgh for maintaining the title of the Pre- 
tender, 1 Geo. 1, 1715, 17 vol. 791.— Tnfor- 
mation for the Ring^s Advocate, ibid. 792. 
— ^Infohnation for the Panel, ibid. 794. — 
The Court find the Indictment relevant, 
ibid. 796. — Evidence for the Prosecution, 
ibid. 797.— Verdict of the Assize, ibid. 798. 
—He is discharged by the Court upon the 

' Verdict, ibid. ib. 

STEWART, Arabella. See Stuart, Arabella. 

STEWART, Archibald.— His Trial at Edin- 
burgh for neglect of Duty in his Office of 
Lord Provost of Edinburgh, before and at 
the time of the Rebels taking possession of 
the City in 1745, 20 and 21 Geo. 2, 1747, 
18 vol. 863. — ^The Indictment, ibid. 867. — 
' Counsel for the Crown and for the Panel, 
ibid. 874. — The Court order Informations, 
ibid. ib. — ^Information for the King's Advo- 
' cate, ibid. 875. — Information for the De- 
fendant, ibid. 911. — Interlocutor of Rele- 
' vancy, ibid, 952. — Upon a technical Objec- 
' tion by the Counsel for the Panel, the Lord 
' Advocate abandons the first Prosecution, 
ibid. 954.— -Proceedings on the Second Trial, 



ibid. 955.— 'Evidence in support of the 
Indictment, ibid. 962. — Evidence for the 
Panel, ibid. 1042. — ^The Assize unanimously 
find him Not Guilty, ibid. 1067. 

STEWART, James.— His Trial before the 
Circuit Court of Justiciary at Inverary for 
the Murder of Colin Campbell of Glenare, 
25 Geo. 2, 1752, 19 vol. 1.— The Indict- 
ment, ibid. ib. — ^Advocates for the Crown 
and for the Panel, ibid. 14. — He j^eads Not 
Guil^, ibid, ib.— Debate on the Relevancy, 
ibid, ib.— Argument of Mr. Walter Stewart 
for the Panel, ibid. ib. — ^Argument of Mr. 
Mackintosh for him, ibid, 25. — Mr. Fraser's 
Argument for the Prosecution, ibid. 41.— 
Mr. Erskine's Argument for the Prosecn- 
tion, ibid. 50. — ^Argument of the Lord 
Advocate, ibid. 60. — Mr. Millar's Reply for 
the Panel, ibid. 81. — Interlocutor of Rele- 
vancy, ibid. 89.— Evidence for the Prosecu- 
tion, ibid.-91. — Evidence for the Panel, ibid. 
150.— The Lord Advocate's Address to the 
Jury on the close of the Evidence, ibid. 171. 
— Mr. Brown's Speech for the Panel, ibid. 
213.— The Jury find him Guilty, ibid. 243. 
•—Sentence of Death pronounced upon him, 
ibid. 248.— Address of the Lord Justice 
General to the Panel after the Sentence, 
ibid, ib.— His Dying Speech, ibid. 254.— 
Amot's Observations upon this Trials ibid. 
249. 

STEWART, William. See JEider, John. 

STIRLING, Archibald. See Stirling, James. 

STIRLING, Charles. See Stirling, James. 

STIRLING, James.— His Trial in the High 
Court ef Justiciary, vri& Archibald Seaton, 
Archibald Stirling, Charles Stirling, and 
Patrick Edmonston for High Treason, in 
taking Arms in support of the Pretender, 
7 Anne, 1708, 14 vol. 1395.— The Indict- 
ment, ibid. ib. — Warrant from the Queen 
requiring the Lord Advocate to proceed 
against them, ibid. 1398. — ^Information for 
the Panels, ibid. 1399. — Information for the 
Prosecution, ibid. 1405. — ^Interiocutor of 
Relevancy, ibid. 1414. — Evidence for the 
Prosecution, ibid. 1415. — The Assize find 
the Libel Not Proven, ibid. 1418. 

STOCEDALE, John.— His Trial on an ex- 
officio Information for a libel on the House 
of Commons, 30 Geo. 3, 1789, 22 vol. 237. 
— Introductory Remark on this Case, ibid, 
ib. ibid. 247 (note). — The Information, ibid. 
239. — ^The Attorney General's Speech for 
the Prosecution, ibid. 247^ — ^Mr. Erskine's 

. Speech for the Defendant, ibid. 250.—' 
Reply of the Attorney General, ibid. 285.-* 
Lord Kenyon's Charge to the Jury, ibid» 
291. — The Jury acquit the Defendant^ ibid. 
293. 

STODDART, Thomas. See Archer, Thomas. 
—His Trial in the Court of Justiciary for 
Treason, in being concerned in Argyle*s 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



129 



BebellioDy 1 Jac. 2, 1685, 11 vol. 889. — 
His Dying Speech, ibid. 892 (note). 

STONE, William: See Jackson, WilHam,— 
His Trial for High Treason at the Bar of 
the Court of King's Bench, 36 Geo. 3, 1796, 
25 vol. 1 155. — Counsel for the Prosecution 
and for the Prisoner, ibid. ib. — The Indict- 
ment, ibid. 1158. — Speech of the Attorney 
General (Sir John Scott) for the Prosecution, 
ibid. 1170. — Evidence for the Prosecution, 
ibid. 1207. — Speech of Serjeant Adair for 
the Prisoner, ibid. 1320'. — Evidence for the 
Defence, ibid. 1365. — Mr. Erskine*s Speech 
onsummingup the Evidence for the Prisoner, 
ibid. 1370. — Reply of the Solicitor General 
(Sir John Mitford), ibid. 1396. — Lord Ken- 
yon's Charge to the Juiy, ibid. 1423. — The 
Jury acquit the Prisoner, ibid. 1438. 

STORY, Dr. John. — He is one of the Com- 
missioners appointed to try Cranmer, Latimer, 
and Ridley, 1 vol. 772. — His Oration on 
the Trial of Cranmer, ibid. 784.— His Trial 
for High Treason, in conspiring to kill the 
Qoeen, and procure an Invasion of the 
Realm, 14 Eliz. 1571, ibid. 1087.— He is 
arrested, and sent to the Queen*s Bench 
Prison, ibid. 1089. — He escapes from thence 
into Flanders, and obtains a Commission 
from the Duke of Alba to seize the Goods 
and Merchandize of British Subjects brought 
into that Country, ibid. ib. — He is inveigkd 
on board an English Ship, and carried to 
England, ibid. ib. — He is confined in the 
Lollards* Tower, ibid.ib. — His Trial, ibid. 
1090. — He pleads that he is not a Subject 
of England, ibid.ib. — The Plea is overruled, 
and Sentence of Death is passed upon him, 
ibid. 1091. — The People revile him on the 
way to the Tower, ibid. ib. — ^His Speech at 
the place of Execution, ibid. 1092. 

STOUGHTON, Sir Nicholas.— He is ordered 
by the House of Commons into the Custody 
of the Serjeant-at-Arms, for prosecuting an 
Appeal in the House of Lords against 
Arthur Onslow, Esq. a Member of the 
House of Commons, 6 vol. 1134. 

STOUT, Sarah. See Coioper, Spencer, 

STOWE, John.— Account of the Trial of 
Edwanl, Duke of Buckingham, extracted 
from his Chronicle, 1 vol. 292. — Account of 
the Trial of Sir Edmond Knevet, extracted 
from his Annals, ibid. 443. 

STRAFFORD, Thomas Wentworth, Earl of. 
See WefUtoorthy Sir Thomas. Wentworth^ 
Thomas Lord, — He apparently promoted 
the Prosecution of Sir David Fowlis and 
others in the Star Chamber, 3 vol. 585. — 
Proceedings on his Trial in the House of 
Lords, upon an Impeachment of HigK 
Treason by the Commons, 16 Car. 1, 1640, 
3 vol. 1381. — Message from the Commons 
to the Lords, accusing him of High Treason, 
delivered by Mr, Pym, ibid. ib. — ^The Lords 
commit him to the Custody Qf the Gentle- 
VOL, XXXIV, 



' man Usher, ibid. 1385. — Seven Articles of 
Impeachment are delivered, ibid. ib. — 
Twenty-eight further Articles are delivered, 
ibid. 1387. — His Answers thereto, ibid. 
1401. — Lord Clarendon's Account of the 
Preparations for the Trial, ibid. 1413 (note). 
—The Trial, ibid. 1413.— The Eari of 
Arundel is appointed Lord High Steward, 
ibid. 1417. — The King and Queen, with 
the Prince of Wales, attend privately in the 
House of Lords during the Trial, ibid. 1414. 
— Three additional Article* are tendered 
against him by the Commons, ibid. 1418. — 
His Answers thereto, ibid. 1419. — Names 
of the Managers for the Commons, ibid. 
1421. — The Managers enforce the Charge 
contained in the Five first Articles against 
him, and he replies to them, ibid. ib. — The 
Sixth Article, charging him with illegally 
dispossessing Lord Mount norris of certain 
Lands in Ireland, ibid. 1426. — His Defence 
thereto, ibid. ib. — The Seventh, and part of 
the Eighth Articles are passed over, ibid. 
1427. — Part of the Eighth Article, charging 
him with corrupt Conduct in the matter of 
a Petition to the Council in Ireland, ibid, 
ib. — His Defence thereto, ibid. 1428 — 
Ninth Article, charging him with unjustly 
arresting persons who refused to appear to 
Ecclesiastical Citations, ibid. ib. — His De- 
fence thereto, ibid. ib. — Five next Articles, 
charging him with Offences relating to 
the Revenue, ibid. ib. — Fifteenth Article, 
charging him with arbitrarily enforcing his 
Orders against individuals by military force, 
ibid. 1433. — ^Lord Strafford objects to the 
admissibility of a Copy of his Warrant to 
the Soldiers, ibid. 1434.-— The Lords allow 
the Objection, ibid. ib. — Other Evidence 
in support of the Charge, ibid. ib. — ^The 
Earl's Defence thereto, ibid. 1435. — Six- 
teenth Article, charging him with forbidding 
Irish Subjects to Appeal to the King, and 
with issuing arbitrary Proclamations, ibid. 
1436. — His Defence thereto, ibid. 1437. — 
Nineteenth Article opened by Whitelocke, 
charging him with enforcing the administra- 
tion of a new and illegal Oath to the Scotch 
in Ireland, ibid. 1438. — His Defence thereto, 
ibid. 1439. — ^I'he Five next Articles, charg- 
ing various Acts and Declarations, showing 
a design to reduce the Kingdoms of England 
and Scotland to an arbitrary. Government, 
ibid. 1440.— His Defence thereto, ibid. 
1444. — ^Iwenty-fifth Article, charging him 
with advising the rigorous levying of Ship- 
Money, ibid. 1448. — His Defence thereto, 
ibid. 1449. — ^Twenty'Sixth Article, charging 
him with advising the King to imbase the 
Coin of the Realm, and to seize the Bullion 
in the Mint, ibid. 14.51. — His Answer 
thereto, ibid. ib. — Twenty-seventh Article, 
charging him with making unlawful Impo ' 
sitions upon the King's Subjects, ibid. 1452. 
— His Defence thereto, ibid. 1453. — The 
Managers for the Commons waive the 
Twenty-eighth Articlei and conclude their 



ISO 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



Case, ibid. 1454.— Notes of a ConTersation 
at a Meeting of the Privy Council, in which 
he took a part, commanicated to the House 
of Commons by Sir Henry Vane, ibid. 
1457 (note). — ^The Managers for the Com- 
mons propose to prove these Notes by way 
of Snpplement to tlie Twenty-second Article, 
ibid. 1458. — ^Debates upon this proposal, 
ibid. 1160.— The Managers abandon the 
proof of Sir Henry Vane's Notes, ibid. 1461. 
—The £arrs Speech in his Defence to the 
Matters of Fact, ibid. 1462. — Mr. Erskine's 
allusion to this Speech in his Defence of 
Home Tooke, 25 vol. 312. — Whitelocke's 
Remarks upon the Earl's Defence, 3 vol. 
1467 (note). — Mr. Glynn and Mr. Pym 
reply for the House of Commons, ibid. 1468. 
—The Commons propose a Bill of Attainder 
against him, ibid. 1469. — ^This is opposed 
by Selden, Holbome, and Bridgman, ibid, 
ib. — Opinions of different parties respecting 
the Bill of Attainder, ibid. 1470.— The 
Lords object to the Bill of Attainder, ibid. ib. 
— ^The EarVs Counsel argue the Matters of 
Law arising upon the Articles in his behalf, 
ibid. 1472.— Mr. St. John's Argument in 
favour of the Bill of Attainder, ibid. 1477. 
— ^The King's Speech to the Commons 
respecting this Prosecution, ibid. 1512. — 
Lord Strafford's Letter to the King, ibid. 
1516. — Doubts respecting the genuineness 
of this Letter, ibid. 1517 (note).— -The Bill 
of Attainder passes the Lords, ibid. 1514. 
— ^The King signs it, and a Commission is 
drawn up for the Earl's Execution, ibid. 
1518. — His Petition to the Lords on behalf 
of his Children, ibid, ib.— The Bill of At- 
tainder, ibid. ib. — The King's Letter to the 
Lords on his behalf, ibid. 1520. — His Exe- 
•ution, ibid. 1521. — His Address to the 
People from the Scaffold, ibid. 1522. — 
Character of him by Mrs. Hutchinson, ibid. 
1525 (note). — Mr. Fox's Observations on his 
prosecution, ibid. ib. — Mr. Laing's Remarks 
upon it, ibid. 1416 (note). — Act of Parlia- 
ment reversing his Attainder, ibid. 1525. — 
Names of the Strafford ians posted in Palace 
Yardj ibid. 1527. — His Speech to the Lords 
in the Tower before he went to Execution, 
ibid. 1528. — The Speech intended to have 
been spoken by him on the Scaffold, ibid. 
1532. — Burnet's Observations on his Case, 
13 vol. 752. 

?TRAFFORD, Thomas, Earl of.— Proceed- 
ings in Parliament on his Impeachment for 
Misconduct as British Plenipotentiary at 
the Treaty of Utrecht, 1- and 2 Geo. 1, 1715, 
15 vol. 1013. — Articles of Impeachment, 
ibid. ib. — His Answer thereto, ibid. 1025. 

STRANGE, James, Lord. — His Impeachment 
for High Treason in raising Forces, and 
endeavouring to put the Commission of 
Array in execution against the Parliament, 
18 Car. 1, 1642, 4 vol. 173.— Articles of 
Impeachment, ibid, ib.— Order of Parlia- 
ment for his AppreheDiHon, ibid. 176. — No 



further Proceedings appear to have been 
taken, ibid. ib. 

STRANGE, John Shaw.— He pleads Guilty 
to an Indictment for High Treason, in being 
concerned in the Cato Street Consptracy, 
33 vol. 1544. — He is pardoned on condition 
of being transported for life, ibid. 1566. 

STRANGE, John, Counsel, 16 vol. 7, IT vol. 
164, 637. — ^His Speeches in the House of 
Lords on opening the Defence to several of 
the Articles of Impeachment against Lord 
Chancellor Macclesfield, 16 vol. 1191,1211. 
— His Speech at the Conclusion of the De- 
fence, ibid. 1255. — His Opening Speech for 
the Plaintiff on the Trial of the Quo War- 
ranto against the Corporation of the Town 
and Port of Hastings, 17 vol. 851. 

Sir John^ Recorder of London, 17 



vol. 1093. 



• 



' — 18 vol. 469. — His Opinion 

respecting bringing an Appeal of Murder in 
the Case of William Chetwynd, 18 vol. 317. 
— His Speech for the Prosecution on the 
Trial of Francis Townley, ibid. SSd.—His 
Argument for the Crown on the Trial of 
Lord Balmerino, against an Objection made 
by the Prisoner to the sufficiency of the 
Evidence against him, ibid. 483. — His Speech 
as one of the Managers for the Commons, on 
summing up the Evidence for the Prosecu- 
tion on the Trial of the Impeachment of Lord 
Lovat, ibid. 774. 

STRANGFORD, Philip, Viscount.— Proceed- 
ings against him in the Irish House of Lords 
for acting corruptly as a Lord of Parliament, 
by offering to sell his Vote in a question of 
Appeal, 24 Geo. 3, 1784, 22 vol. 161.— He 
is ordered into the custody of the Gentleman 
Usher of the Black Rod for not obeyiog an 
Order of the House requiring him to attend 
in his place, ibid. 165.— His Letter to one 
of the parties interested in the Appeal, re- 
questing an advance of Money, ibid. Ifi^-T" 
Resolutions of the House thereon, ibid. ib. 
— A Bill is passed disablingliim from sitting 
in Parliament, ibid. 167. 

STRATFORD, John, Archbishop of Canter- 
bury. — Proceedings against him for High 
Treason, 14 Ed w. 3, 1341, 1 vol. 57.-H»s 
Letter of Advice to the King, ibid.ib.— fne 
King sends Letters of Accusation agamst 
him to the Bishop of London and the Chapter 
of Canterbury, ibid. 59.— The Archbishops 
Answer to the King's Letters, ibid. 62.-0n 
his coming to a Parliament, a Committee ot 
Twelve Peers is appointed to consider the 
Charges made by the King against him, ibid- 
65.— The Archbishop submits himself and 
receives the King's Pardon, ibid. 66. 

STRATTON, George.— Proceedings againsj 
him, Henry Brooks, Charles Floyer, ana 
George Mackay, Members of the Coancil ai 
Madras, on an Information by the Atto^ey 
General ioi a MifldCToeanour, in arrestwg 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



131 



and deposing Lord Pigot, Governor of 
Madras, 19 and 20 Oeo, 3, 1779-1780, 21 
▼ol. 1045. — Resolutions of a Committee of 
the House of Commons respecting their 
Conduct, ibid, ib.— The Commons address 
the King, praying him to direct a Prosecu- 
tioDy ibid. ib. — ^The Attorney General files 
an Information against them, ibid. 1047.-- 
The Solicitor General applies to quash the 
first Information, for the purpose of filing a 
more complete one, ibid. ib. — The Court 
suggest the entering a Noli prosequi upon 
the first Information, which is done accord- 
ingly, ibid. 1048. — ^The second Information, 
ibid. 1049.— Counsel for the Prosecution and 
for the Defendant, ibid. 1061. — Speech of 
the Attorney Genen^l (Wedderburne) for the 
Prosecution, ibid. ib. — Evidence for the Pro- 
secution^ ibid. 1094. — Mr. Dunning's Speech 
for the Defendants, ibid. 1139. — He pro- 
poses to give Evidence of the Opinion of the 
Governor and Council of Bengal respecting 
the transaction, ibid. 1188. — ^The Attorney 
General objects to the Evidence, ibid. 1189. 
— The Court overrules the Objection, ibid. 
1190. — ^Speech of the Attorney General in 
Reply, ibid. 1195. — Lord Mansfield's Charge 
to the Jury, ibid. 1219. — ^The Jury find them 
Guilty, ibid. 1226. — Account of the Pro- 
ceedings in the Court of King*s Bench on 
their being brought up for Judgment, ibid, 
ib. — Lord Mansfield's Report of the Evi- 
dence, ibid. ib. — Affidavits in mitigation of 
Punishment, ibid. 1231. — Speeches of the 
Counsel for the Prosecution in aggravation 
of Punishment, ibid. 1255.— Speeches of the 
Defendants* Counsel in mitigation, ibid. 
1257. — Mr. Erskine's celebrated Speech on 
this Occasion, ibid. 1259. — Mr. Justice Ash- 
hurst's Address on passing the Judgment of 
the Court upon the Defendants, ibid. 1282. 
—They are each fined 1,000/., ibid. 1292. 

STREATER, Captain John.— His Case on a 
Habeas Corpus sued by him out of the 
Court of the Upper Bench, 5 Car. 2, 1653, 
5 vol. 365. — The Habeas Corpus, ibid. ib. 
—The Return sets out two Cfommitments, 
one by the Council of State, and the other 
by the Speaker of the House of Commons, 
ibid. 371. — His Argument against the 
vaiiditx of the Commitment by the Council 
ofState^ ibid. 373.^ His Argument against the 
validity of the Commitment by the Speaker, 
ibid. 380.— The Court remand him, ibid. 
98$.r— He sues out an Alias Habeas Corpus, 
ibid* 388. — ^The Return thereto, containing 
the two former Commitments and the Rule 
of Court by whieh he was remanded on the 
former occasion, ibid. 389. — Discussion in 
the Court of the Upper Bench upon the Re- 
tnra, ibid. 391. — His Argument against the 
Return, ibid. 394.-- The Court discharge 
ioiD, ibid. 402.— Rule of Court for fais Dis- 
charge, ibid, ib— Styles's Report of this 
Case, ibid. 405. 

STREET; JSir Thomas, Baron of the Exche- 



quer, 33 Car. 2, 9 vol. 536.*-His Charge to 
the Jury on the Trial of George Busby for 
High Treason under the Statute of Eliza- 
beth, for remaining within the Realm as 
a Popish Priest, 8 vol. 547. — ^He gives his 
Opinion against the validity of Lord Russel's 
Challenge of a Juror for not having a 405. 
freehold within the City of London, 9 vol. 
593. 

Judge of C. P. 2 Jac. 



2, 1 2 vol. 124. — He gives his Opinion against 
the King's Dispensing Pov/er in the Case of 
Sir Edward Hales, 11 vol. 1198.— His Note 
of the Pleadings, Judgment, and Authori- 
ties, in the Case of the Earl of Macclesfield, 
V. Starkey, 10 vol. 1413. 

STRICKLAND, Mary, 13 vol. 1249. See 
Butkr, Mary, 

STRINGER, Sir Thomas, Serjeant-at-Law, 7 
vol. 261. — He opens the Indictment on the 
Trial of Green and others for the Murder of 
Sir Edmond bury Godfrey, 7 vol. 162. — ^Also 
on the Trial of Samuel Atkins for the same 
Murder, ibid. 236. 

— 33 Car. 2, 10 vol. 555. 

—He moves the Court of King's Bench for 
a Habeas Corpus to bring up Edward Fitz- 
harris to be arraigned upon an Indictment 
for the Murder of Sir Edmondbury Godfrey, 
8 vol. 249. — His Speech for the Prosecution 
on the Trial of Sir Miles Stapleton for High 
Treason in being concerned in the Popish 
Plot, ibid. 504. 

STRINGMAN, Daniel. See Oreeny Captain 
Thomas, 

STRODE, Thomas, Serjeant-at-Law.— He is 
of Counsel for the Crown on the Trial of 
Anderson and others for High Treason, in 
being concerned in the Popish Plot, 7 vol. 
834.— He defends Benjamin Harris on his 
Trial for a Libel, ibid. 928. 

STRODE, William. See Stroudy WUUam. 

STROUD, William. See Kimboltm, Edward 
I^frd, — Proceedings against him, Walter 
Long, John Selden, and others, on a Habeas 
Corpus in the Court of King's Bench, 5 Car. 
1, 1629, 3 vol. 236. — Questions proposed to 
the Judges in this Case, with their Answers, 
ibid. 237.— The Return to the Habeas 
Corpus, setting out one Warrant from the 
Lords of the Council and another from the 
King, ibid. 240. — Argiu^ients of Counsel 
against the sufficiency of the Return, ibid. 
241.— Reply of the King's Counsel, ibid. 
244. — Mr. Littleton's Argument £^ainst the 
Return, ibid. 252.-— Mr. Selden's Argument, 
ibid. 264.— The Attorney General's Reply, 
ibid. 284.— On the day appointed for the 
Judgment of the Court, they are removed 
to the Tower, ibid. 286.— The King's Letter 
to the Judges explaining the reasons of their 
Removal, ibid. ib. — ^The Court offer to bail 
them on their giving Sureties for their good 
Behaviour, ibid. 289*- -They refuse to give 
Sureties for their good Behaviour and are re« 



132 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



mandedy ibid. ib. — Stroud and Sir Miles 
Hobart are indicted for an Escape from 
Prison, but are acquitted, ibid. 291. — Reso- 
lutions of the House of Commons in 1641, 
respecting these Proceedings, ibid. 312, — 
Stroud's Body was removed from Henry the 
Seventh's Chapel at the Restoration, 5 vol. 
1338 (note). 

STRYPE, Mr.—His Account of the Death of 
Archbishop Cranmer, 1 vol. 855. 

STUART, Arabella. See Raleigh, Sir Walter. 
— Account of her Relationship to James the 
First, 2 vol. 1 (note), ibid. 769.— Wilson's 
Account of her unsuccessful Escape from 
Confinement, ibid. ib. — Proceedings against 
the Countess of Shrewsbury for refusing to 
answer Questions put to her by the Privy 
Council, respecting her Marriage and Escape, 
ibid. 769. 

STUART, Mary. See Mary, Queen of 
Scots, 

STUBBS, Francis. See Tonge, Thomas. 

SUDLEY, Lord. See Seymour, Sir Thomas. 

SUFFOLK, Henry Grey, Duke of.— His Ar- 
raignment for High Treason in being con- 
cerned in Wyatt's Rebellion, 1 Mary, 1553, 
1 vol. 761. — Account of his Execution, ibid. 
763. 

SUFFOLK, James, Earl of.— Proceedings 
against him, Francis Lord Willoughby of 
Parham, John Lord Hunsden, William Lord 
Maynard, Theobald Earl of Lincoln, George 
Lord Berkley, and James Earl of Middle- 
sex, for High Treason, in levying War 
against the King, Parliament, and Kingdom, 
23 Car. 1, 1647, 4 vol. 984.— They are taken 
into the Custody of the Gentleman Usher, 
ibid. 985. — ^The Commons impeach them, 
ibid. ib. — ^Further Articles delivered against 
them, ibid. 986.— They plead Not Guilty 
thereto, ibid. 988. — The Commons abandon 
the Impeachment, ibid. ib. 

SUFFOLK, Michael De La Pole, Earl of. 
Lord Chancellor, 10 Ric. 2. — He is im- 

Esached in Parliament by the Commons of 
igh Crimes and Misdemeanours, 11 Ric. 
2, 1388, 1 vol. 91. — Articles of Impeach- 
ment against him, with his Answers thereto, 
ibid. ib. — He is condemned and imprisoned 
in Windsor Castle, ibid. 94. — Walsingham 
says that he had nothing to say in his De- 
fence to these Articles, ibid. ib. (note). — He 
is released by the King from his imprison- 
ment, ibid. 95. — He afterwards conspires 
with Tresilian, Brambre, the Archbishop 
of York, and the Duke of Ireland, to 
urge the King to the destruction of the 
Duke of Glocester's Faction, ibid. ib. — 
They are appealed of High Treason in Par- 
liament by the Duke of Glocester's Faction, 
ibid. 97. — Articles of High Treason exhibited 
against them, ibid. Itfl.— The Eari of Suf- 
f^k escapes to Calais, ibid. ^d.-^The Lords 



upon the non-appearance of the Appellees, 
adjudge them Guilty of High Treason and 
sentence them to be drawn and hanged, 
ibid. 114. 

SUFFOLK, William De La Pole, Duke of.— 
Proceedings against him for High Treason, 
28 Hen. 6, 1451, 1 vol. 271.— Articles of 
Accusation against him, ibid. 273.- He re- 
fuses to put himself upon his Trial by bis 
Peers, but refers himself to the King's 
Award respecting him, ibid. 274. — He is 
sentenced to Banishment for Five years, not 
by the Judgment of Parliament, but by 
Order of the King, ibid. ib. — He is taken 
and killed at sea, ibid. 276. 

SURREY, Henry Howard, Earl of. See Nor- 
folk, Thomas, Iktke of — Proceedings against 
him for High Treason, 38 Hen. 6, 1546, 1 
vol. 451. — Examination of several persons 
before the Council respecting the Charges 
against him, ibid. 453. — His Arraignment 
and Trial, ibid. 455. — He is tried by a Jury, 
not being a Lord of Parliament, ibid, ib.— 
The Jury find him Guilty, ibid. ib. — Judg- 
ment is passed upon him and he is executed, 
ibid. ib. 

SWALLOW, John. See Luddites. 

SWAN, John.—His Trial with Elizabeth Jef- 
ferys at the Chelmsford Assizes for the 
Murder of Joseph JefTerys, 25 Geo, 2, 1752, 
18 vol.1193. — At the Summer Assizes in 
1751, they are both indicted for Murder, 
Swan for giving the mortal wound, and 
Elizabeth JefTerys for aiding and assisting 
therein, ibid. ib. — At the ensuing Assizes, 
an Indictment is found against them upon 
the same circumstances, charging one with 
Petit Treason, and the other with Murder, 
ibid. ib. — ^The Second Indictment, ibid. ib. 
— On being arraigned upon that Indictment, 
they plead in Abatement the pendency of 
the former Indictment, ibid. 1197.— The 
Counsel for the Prosecution demur to the 
Plea, ibid. ib. — The Court give Judgment 
against the Plea, ibid. 1198. — Mr. Justice 
Foster's Argument on that occasion, ibid. ib. 
— Confessions of the Prisoners, ibid. 1196.— 
They are both found Guilty, ibid. 1195.— 
Their Execution, ibid. 1201. 

SWENDSEN, Haagen. See Baynton, Sarah. 
—His Trialatthe Bar of the Court of Queen's 
Bench for forcibly taking away and marry- 
ing Pleasant Rawlins, an Heiress under the 
age of Eighteen years, 1 Anne, 1702, 14 vol. 
559. — On his Arraignment he states himself 
to be a Foreigner, and claims a Jury de me- 
dietate linguae, ibid. ib. — ^The Indictment, 
ibid. 560.— Speech of the SoUcitor General 
(Sir Simon K&ircourt) for the Prosecution, 
ibid. 562. — Evidence for the Prosecution, 
ibid. 564.— Evidence of Pleasant Rawlins, 
ibid. 575.-T-The Prisoner's Defence, ibid. 
577. — ^Evidence for him, ibid. 579.r— BepljT 
of the Solicitor General, ibid. 590.— Evi- 
deng^ in Reply,, ibi^, 591,-rl<ord Holrt 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



163 



Chais^e to the July, ibid. 592.--The Jury 
find him Guilty, ibid. 596. — Hesitation of 
one of the Jury to concur in the Verdict on 
account of the absence of Evidence of actual 
force, ibid. 616. — The Court argue the 
Qaestion with the Juror, ibid. ib. — He agrees 
with the rest of the Jury, ibid. 619. — Mr. 
Justice Poweirs Address to him and Sarah 
Baynton on passing Sentence of Death upon 
them, ibid. 631. — He is executed, ibid. 634. 
— Paper delivered by him at the Place of 
Execution, declaring his innocence, ibid. ib. 

SWINOCK, Samuel. See Pilkkgtony Thomas. 

SYMONDS, Henry Delahay. See Troy, 
Thomas, 

SYMPSON, James. See Green, Captain Thomas, 



TALBOT, The Honourable Charles, Solicitor 
General, 2 Geo. 2, 17 vol. 171, 314. 

TALBOT, William. — Sir Francis Bacon's 
Speech against him on an Information ore 
tenus in the Star-Chamber for maintaining 
the doctrine, that Kings excommunicated by 
the Pope might be lawfully deposed and 
killed by their Subjects, 11 Jac. 1, 1613, 2 
vol. 778. — ^The Declaration upon which the 
Charge was founded, ibid. 782. — It does not 
appear what Judgment was given by the 
Court, ibid. 778. 

TANDY, James Napper* — Proceedings against 
him and Harvey Morris in the Court of 
King's Bench in Ireland, upon their At- 
tainder for High Treason by Act of Parlia- 
ment, 40 Geo. 3, 1800, 27 vol. 1191.— The 
Attorney General prays Execution against 
them upon the Attainder, ibid. 1194. — The 
Counsel for the Prisoners request further 
time to plead, which is objected to by the 
Attorney General, and refused by the Court, 
ibid. ib. — ^The Prisoners plead in barof Exe- 
cution, that they were arrested abroad by the 
King's Command, and were thereby pre- 
vented from surrendering before the day 
limited for their Surrender by the Act of 
Attainder, ibid. 1198. — Counsel for the Pro- 
secution and for the Prisoners, ibid. 1204. 
— Mr. Curran's Speech In support of the 
Plea, ibid. 1205. — Evidence in support of 
the Plea in the Case of Tandy, ibid. 1212. — 
The Attorney Generars Speech against the 
Plea, ibid. 1219.— Mr. Ponsonby's Reply for 
the Prisoner, ibid. 1232. — Mr. Mac Nally's 
Speech on the same side, ibid. 1237.— 'Lord 
Kilwarden sums up the Evidence to the 
Jury, ibid. 1243.— The Jury find a Verdict 
for the Prisoner, ibid. 1246. — ^I'he Attorney 
General confesses the Plea in the Case of 
Morris, ibid. 1246. — Proceedings in Actions 
by Mr. Tandy in 1792, against the Lord 
Lieutenant and other Members of the Coun- 
cil, for issuing a Proclamation for his Appre- 
hension, ibid. 1246.^<-On a Suit being corn- 
menoed by him in the Court of Exchequer 
Bgainit the Lord Lieutenant, the Attorney 



General mores to quash the Writ, ibid. 1 247. 
— Mr. Butler's Argument against the Motion, 
ibid.ib. — Mr.Emmet'sArgumentonthesame 
side, ibid. 1257. — The Court grant the Mo- 
tion of the Attorney General, ibid. 1264. — 
Proceedings in other Actions commenced by 
him against Members of the Council, ibid. 
1267. 

TANFIELD, Sir Laurence, Judge of K. B. 
6 Jac.l, 2 vol.576. 

■ i Chief Baron of 

the Exchequer, lO Jac. 1, 2 vol. 770, 952. — 
His Speech on giving his Opinion in the 
Star-Chamber respecting the Punishment to 
be inflicted on Mr. Wraynham for slander- 
ing Lord Chancellor Bacon, 2 vol. 1070. 

TANKRED, Mr.— He is ordered by the House 
of Commons to pay Costs to a person 
against whom he had made a frivolous Com- 
plaint of Breach of Privilege, 14 vol. 749 
(note). 

TAPNER, Benjamin. See Jackson, William. 

TARRAS, Walter, Earl of. — Proceedings 
against him at Edinburgh for Treason in re- 
ceiving Traitors, and being concerned in 
Argyle's Rebellion, 36 Car. 2, 1685, 10 vol. 
1065.— The Indictment, ibid, ib.— His Peti- 
tion to the King for Mercy, confessing his 
Guilt, ibid. 1070. — He confesses the Indict- 
ment, ibid. 1072. — He is found Guilty, ibid, 
1 074. — His Sentence, ibid. 1075. — ^The King 
orders him to be set at liberty, upon his 
giving Security to appear when called upon, 
ibid. ib. — Act of Parliament reversing the 
Sentence of Forfeiture against him, ibid. 
l076. — Fountainhall's Notices of this Case, 
ibid. 1079. 

TASBOROUGH, John. -His Trial with Anne 
Price at the Bar of the Court of King's 
Bench, for tampering with one of the Wit- 
nesses for the Popish Plot, and for Subor- 
nation of Perjury, 32 Car. 2, 1680, 7 vol. 
881. — Indictment against them in English, 
ibid. ib. — The, same in Latin, ibid. 884 
(note).— The King's Counsel open the Case 
against them, ibid. 887. — Evidence against 
thera, ibid. 889. — Dugdale's Evidence, ibid. 
890. — Mr. Saunders's Defence of Anne 
Price, ibid. 906. — Evidence for her, ibid. 
908. — Mr. Pollexfen's Efefence of Tasbo- 
rough, ibid. 911. — Evidence for him, ibid. 
917.— The King's Counsel reply, ibid. 920. 
— Mr. Justice Jones's Charge to the Jury, 
ibid. 922. — ^The Jury find them Guilty, ibid. 
926. — ^Tasborough is sentenced to pay a fine 
of lOOZ., and Price of 200/. ibid. ib. 

TAYLOR, Alexander. See Green, Captain 
Thomas, 

TAYLOR, Daniel.--His Trial with several 
other Persons at Edinburgh for not praying 
for the King, 2 Geo. 1, 1716, 18 vol. 1363. 
— ^The Indictment, ibid. 1364.— Information 
for the King's AdroQatei ibid, 1368.— In* 



134 



OEIJERAL IKDEX TO 



fonnation for the Panels, ibid. 1373.— The 
Court find the Indictment relevant, ibid. 
1380.— Evidence against them, ibid. ib. — 
Verdict of the Assize, ibid. 1384.— Sentence 
is passed upon them, ibid. ib. 

TEMPLE, James, 5 vol. 1006, 1217. See 
Regicides, 

TEMPLE, Peter, 5 vol. 1217. See Regi- 
cides. 
THANET, Sackville, Earl of.— Proceedings 
upon the Trial of an Ex-officio Information 
at the Bar of the Court of King's Bench 
against him, Robert Fergusson, Gunter 
Browne, Dennis O'Brien, and Thomas 
Thompson, for a Riot in a Court of Justice, 
and an attempt to rescue Arthur O'Connor 
from the Custody of the Sheriff, 39 Geo. 
3, 1799, 27 vol. 821. — Counsel for the 
Prosecution and for the Defendants, ibid, 
ib.— The Information, ibid. 822.— Speech 
of the Attorney General (Sir John Scott) 
for the Prosecution, ibid. 829.--Evidence 
for the Prosecution, ibid. 835.--Mr. Ser- 
jeant Shepherd's Evidence, ibid. 836. — 
Mr. Justice Heath's Evidence, ibid. 847. — 
Mr. Erskine's Speech for the Defendants, 
ibid. 868.— The Attorney General consents ' 
to the acquittal of Mr. Browne and Mr. 
Thompson, ibid. 909. — Evidence for the 
Defendants, ibid, ib.— Mr. Warren's Evi- 
dence, ibid. 915.— Mr. Whitbread's Evi- 
dence, ibid. 922.— Mr. Sheridan's Evidence, 
ibid. 923.— The Attorney General's Reply, 
ibid. 928.— Lord Kenyon's Charge to the 
Jury, ibid. 938.— The Jury find Lord Thanet 
and Mr. Fergusson Guilty, and acquit Mr. 
O'Brien, ibid. 941 .—Lord Thanet's Declara- 
tion on being brought up for Judgment, 
ibid, ib.— His Aflidavit of the Uuth of the 
facts contained in his Declaration, ibid. 943. 
— Mr. Fergusson's Declaration and Afiidavit 
on the same occasion, ibid. 944. — The Court 
express adoubt whether, upon several Counts 
in the Information, they have power to award 
any Punishment but the specific Sentence of 
Cutting off the hand, ibid. 949.— Upon this 
suggestion, the Attorney General enters a 
Noli prosequi upon those Counts of the 
Information as to which the doubt arose, 
ibid. 951. — Mr. Justice Grose's Address on 
delivering the Sentence of the Court, ibid. 
952. — Mr. Fergusson's Observations on his 
own Case, and the points of law aiising 
upon the Information, ibid. 958. 

THELWALL, John.— He is indicted jointly 
with Home Tooke, Hardy, and others, for 
High Treason, 24 vol. 232.— He pleads Not 
Guilty, ibid. 1406.— After a Trial which 
lasts four days, he is acquitted, 25 vol. 748 
(note). 

THIRN YNGE, Sir William, Chief Justice of 
C. P. 1 Hen. 4. — He is appointed by the 
Parliament one of the Commissioners to 
pronounce Sentence of Deposition on 
Richardthe Second, 1 vol. 151.— His Ac- 



count of the Conversation between iUohttd 
and the CommissioneFs in the Tower, ibid. 
155. 

THISTLEWOOD, Arthur. See Waison, James. 
—His Trial at the Old Bailey under a 
Special Commission, for High Treason in 
being concerned in the Cato Street Con- 
spiracy, 1 Geo. 4, 1820, 33 vol.681. — Chief 
Justice Abbott's Charge to the Grand Jury 
assembled under the Special Comnaission, 
ibid. 683.— The Grand Jury return true Bills 
against him for High Treason, Murder, and 
maliciously shooting at one of the Bow- 
Street Officers who endeavoured to appre- 
hend him, ibid. 695.— The Indictment for 
High Treason, ibid. 697.— Speech of the 
Attorney General (Sir Robert Gifford)^ for 
the Prosecution, ibid. 716.— Evidence for the 
Prosecution, ibid. 736.— Robert Adams's 
Evidence, ibid, ib.— Lord Harrowby's Evi- 
dence, ibid. 788.— Mr. Curwood's Speech 
in Defence of the Prisoner, ibid. 830. — ^Evi- 
dence for the Prisoner, ibid. 840.— Mr. 
Adolphus's Speech on summing up the 
Evidence for the Prisoner, ibid. 850.— Reply 
of the Solicitor General (Sir J. S. Copley), 
ibid. 894.— Chief Justice Abbott's Charge to 
the Jury, ibid. 919.— The Jury find him 
Guilty, ibid. 956.— His Speech on being 
called upon for Judgment, ibid. 1544.— The 
Chief Justice*s Address to him and the other 
convicted Prisoners, on passing Sentence 
upon them, ibid. 1560.— He is executed, 
ibid. 1566. 



THOMPSON, Sir Alexander, Baron of the 
Exchequer.— His Address to the Grand 
Jury assembled under the Special Commis- 
sion at York for the Trial of the Luddites in 
1813, 31 vol. 966.— His Charge to the Jury 
on the Trial of John Schofield under that 
Commission, for maliciously shooting at John 
Hinchliffe, ibid. 1047. 

THOMPSON, Gabriel. See Semple, John, 

THOMPSON, Nathaniel.—His Trial with 
William Pain, and John Farwell for publish- 
ing Letters, importing that Sir Edmondbury 
Godfrey had killed himself, 34 Car. 2. 1682, 
8 vol. 1359.— The Information, ibid, ib-— 
The King's Counsel open the Charge agamst 
him, ibid. 1365.— The Letter on which the 
Prosecution was founded, ibid. 1368.— 
Evidence for there, ibid. 1378.— The Jury 
find them Guilty, ibid. 1386.— Tlieir Sen- 
tence, ibid. 1388. 

THOMPSON, Richard.— Proceedings against 
him for a Breach of Privilege of Parliament, 
in preaching a Scandalous Sermon, 32 Car. 
2, 1680, 8 vol. 1. —Evidence against him 
before a Committee of the House of Com- 
mons, ibid. 3.— The House resolve to im- 
peach him, ibid. 7.--Oldmixon's Accou"t 
of him, ibid. 1 (note).— Report of the 
Debate in the House of Commons in ">' 
Case, from Grey*s Debates, ibid. 180. 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



136 



THOMPSON, Th^Hiiai. BMThmiet,Sackvilk, 
Earlqf. 

THOMPSON, WilUam. See Cargitt, Donald, 

THOMPSON, WmianijCounsel.— His Speech 
in Defence of Tasborough for tamperiuj^ with 
Dugdale,one of the Witnesses for the Popish 
Hot, Tvol. 916. — His Speech for the Prose- 
cation on the Trial of John Giles for at- 
tempting to Murder Mr. Arnold, ibid. 1132. 
— His Speech in Defence of Bethel for an 
Assault, 8 vol. 752. 

THOMPSON, William, King's Serjeant, 2 
WilUand Mary, 12 vol. 929. — His Speech 
for the Prosecution on the Trial of John 
AshtOD for High Treason, 12 vol. 749. — He 
opens the Indictment on the Trial of Lord 
Mohun for the Murder of Mr. Mountford, 
ibid. 960. 

THOMSON, William,Counsel.—nisArgument 
of the question of Law for the Prosecution in 
Daramaree's Case, 15 vol. 595. — His Argu- 
ment for the Prosecution on the Trial of 
Willis, ibid. 645. — His Argument for the 
Prosecution in the Case of Purchase, ibid. 
683. — His Speech in the House of Lords, as 
one of the Managers for the Commons in 
support of the Third Article of Impeach- 
ment against Dr. Sacheverell, ibid. 157. — 
His Speech in Reply to Dr. Sachevereirs 
Defence to tliat Article, ibid. 438. 



■ Sir William. — ^His Speech in Reply 

as one of the Managers for the Commons on 
the Trial of the Earl of Wintoun for High 
Treason, 15 vol. 869. 

■■ Recorder of London, 

17 vol. 295. — He refuses to try Thomas 
Bunbridge on a Prosecution ordered by 
the House of Commons, on the ground of his 
having concurred in the Order as a Member 
6f Uie House, 17 vol. 566. 

THORPE, Williatn,— His Account of his Ex- 
amination on a Charge of Heresy before the 
Archbishop of Canterbury, 8 Hen. 4, 1407, 
1 vol. 176. — His Confession of Faith, ibid. ib. 
• — His Scruples at taking an Oath, ibid. 179. 
• — He refuses to publish the names of the 
Lollards, ibid. 1 80. — His conduct when re- 
qvired to recant, and threatened by the 
Archbishop, ibid. 181. — ^He confesses that he 
is a disciple of Wicliffe, ibid. 184. — He is 
charged with preaching Heresy at Shrews- 
bury, ibid. 186. — His Answers to the Arch- 
bishop respecting the lawfulness of preaching 
^ without the authority of a Bishop, ibid. 187. 
— Respecting the Sacrament, ibid. 193. — 
Respecting the Worship of Images, ibid. 
105. — Respecting the lawfulness of Pil- 
grimage, ibid. 199.^ — Respecting tlie use of 
Music in Churches, ibid. 201. —Respecting 
the lawfulness of Tythes, ibid. 202. — Re- 
specting the lawfulness of Oaths, ibid. 207. 
<^U« refuses to submit, and is taken to 



Prison, ibid. 220. — ^It is not known what 
ailerwards became of him, ibid. ib. 

THORPE, Sir William, Chief Justice of K. B. 
22 £dw. 3. — ^He is adjudged to be hanged 
for Bribery, 24 Edw. 3, 1361, 3 vol. 1273. 
—-Mr. St. John's Remarks upon this Judg- 
ment, ibid. ib. 

THORPE, William. See Mellor, George. 

THROCKMORTON, Sir Nicholas.— His Trial 
for High Treason in being concerned in Sir 
Thomas Wyatt's Rebellion, 1 Mary, 1554, \ 
vol. 869. — Names of his Judges, ibid. ib.-^Hi3 
Arraignment, ibid. ib. — He offers to address 
the Court before Plea, but is told that he must 
first plead to the Indictment, ibid, ib.— He 
pleads Not Guilty, ibid. 870. — ^The Attorney 
General shews the Jury Panel to one of the 
J udges, who notes which Jurors are to be chal- 
lenged for the Crown, ibid. 871.— Throck- 
morton remonstrates with him, ibid. ib. — ^Two 
Jurymen challenged for the Crown without 
cause shewn, ibid. ib. — He- urges the King's 
Counsel to conduct the case fairly, ibid. 872. 
— He is allowed to answer each matter of 
Accusation as it is urged against him, ibid. 
873. — ^The Confessions of various persons 
given in Evidence against him, ibid, ib.—- He 
objects to the Evidence of a convicted Traitor, 
that he is not a lawful Witness within the 
meaning of the Statute of Edw. 6, c. 12, 
§. 22, ibid. 880. — He is not suffered to pro- 
duce a Witness to disprove a part of the 
Charge, ibid. 884. — He admits that it had 
been the Custom not to allow Witnesses 
against the Crown, ibid. 887. — The Court 
refuse him Books to shew the Jury the Law, 
ibid, ibi — His Remonstrance thereupon, ibid, 
ib. — He contends that by the Stat. 1 Mary, c. 
1, all Treasons are limited to tiiose ex- 
pressed by tlie Stat. 25 Edw. 3, ibid. 888. — 
He reminds some of the Judges that they 
had spoken strongly in Parliament upon the 
danger of leaving the construction of penal 
Statutes to a Judge, ibid. 890.. — He con- 
tends that the Statute of Edward the Sixth 
had established a distinction between Words 
and Acts in Treason, ibid. 895. — He argues, 
that if the Statute of Edward the Third were 
not to be construed strictly, it were better 
that the severe Laws of Henry the Eighth 
against constructive Treasons had not been 
repealed, ibid. 896.— He is permitted to ad- 
dress the Jury after they have been charged 
by the Court, ibid. 897.— He is acquitted by 
the Jury, ibid. 899.— He is remanded into 
Custody though acquitted, ibid. 900.— The 
Jury are imprisoned and fined for their 
Verdict, ibid. 901. 

THROGMORTON, Michael. See Fole, Car- 
dined, 

THURLAND, Sir Edward, Baron of the Ex- 
chequer, 32 Car. 2, 7 vol. 1243. 

THURLOW, Edward, Solicitor General, to 
Geo. 3,-— His Speedi for the Prosecution on 



136 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



the Trial of John Miller for a Libel in pub- 
lishing Junius's Letter to the King, 20 vol. 
869. — His Speech in Reply in the same 
Cdse, ibid. 888. — His Argument for the 
Crown on the effect of the Verdict in Wood- 
falPs Case, ibid. 906. 

Attorney General, 15 



Geo. 3. — His Argument in the Case of the 
Island of Grenada, in favour of the Right of 
the Crown to impose Taxes upon a conquer- 
ed Country, 20 vol. 312. — His Argument for 
the Crown m the Trial of the Duchess of 
Kingston, that the Sentence of Jactitation 
pronounced by the Ecclesiastical Court upon 
her first Marriage, is not a conclusive Answer 
to the Charge of Bigamy against her, ibid. 
446. —His Speech on opening the Case for 
the Prosecution, ibid. 539. — His Speech for 
the Prosecution on the Trial of John Home 
(afterwards Home Tooke) for a Libel, ibid. 
667.— His Speech in Reply in the same 
Case, ibid. 745. — His Speech in Aggravation 
of Punishment in the same Case, ibid. 775. 

THWING, Thomas. See Gascoigne, Sir 
Thomas, — His Trial with Mary Pressicks at 
York for High Treason, in being concerned 
in the Popish Plot, 32 Car. 2, 1680, 7 vol. 
11^1. — The Indictment, ibid. ib. — They 
plead Not Guilty, ibid. 1163.--Bolron*s 
Evidence against them, ibid. 1164. — Fur- 
ther Evidence against them, ibid. 1166. — 
Evidence in their Defence, ibid. 1169. — Mr. 
Justice Dolben's ("harge to the Jury, ibid. 
1177.— The Jury find Thwing Guilty, and 
acquit Pressicks, ibid. 1180. — Sentence of 
Death is passed upon Thwing, ibid. 11 81. — 
He«is reprieved, but afterwards executed, 
ibid. ib. — His Speech at the place of Execu- 
tion, ibid. 1182. 

THYNN, Thomas. -Trial of Count Conings- 
mark and others for his Murder, 9 vol. 1. 

TICHBOURN, Robert, 5 vol. 1002! See 
Regicides, 

TICKLEFOOT, Tom. -Observations upon 
the Trials of Sir George Wakeman and 
others for being concerned in the Popish 
Plot, published shortly after the Trials under 
that Signature, 7 vol. 687. 

TIDD, Richard, 33 vol. 1337. See Davidson. 
William. 

TIERNEY, George.— His Evidence on the 
Trial of the Impeachment of Lord Melville, 
29 vol. 1111. 

TILLOTSON, Dr. John.— His Evidence in 
behalf of Lord William Russell, 9 vol. 
622. 

TILNEY, Charies. See Abington, Edward. 

TITCHBURNE, Chidiock. See Babington, 
Anthony, 

TOLERi John, Solioitor General for IpeUnd, 
99 vol. t040t See Norbttr^f John Lord* 



Attorney General for Ireland.-^* 

His Speech for the Prosecution on the Trial, 
of Henry and John Sheares for HighTreasoa. 
in being concerned in the Irish Rebellion,' 
27 vol. 292. — His Speech for the Prosecu-; 
tion on the Trial of Oliver Bond for being 
concerned in the same Rebellion, ibid. 536. 
— His Speech for the Crown 00 the Issue 
joined on the Plea in Abatement in the Case 
of James Napper Tandy, ibid. 1219. 

TOMKINS, Mr. See WaUer, Edmund. 

TONE, Theobald Wolfe.— His Trial at Dublin 1 
by a Court Martial for High Treason, in 
entering into the military Service of the Ring 1 
of France, 39 Geo. 3, 1798, 27 vol. 613.- | 
He Confesses the Charge, ibid. 617.— His | 
Address to the Court, ibid. 618. — He is cod- i 
demned to Death, but commits Suicide, ibid. 
623. —After the Sentence of the Court Mar- 
tial, Mr. Curran moves the Court of Kiog's 
Bench for a Habeas Corpus, on the ground 
that the Court Martial had no Jurisdiction, 
ibid. 624. — Account of Tone from the 
" Memoirs of Mr. Curran by his Son," ibid. 
613, 626 (note). 

TONGE, Thomas.— His Trial with George 
Phillips, Francis Stubbs, James Hind, John 
Sellers, and Nathaniel Gibbs for High 
Treason in being concerned in a Conspiracy 
to kill the King, 14 Car. 2, 1662, 6 vol. 225. 
—Their Arraignment, ibid. 229.— They all 
plead Not Guilty, except Hind, who con- 
fesses, ibid. ib. — Speeches of the Counsel 
for the Prosecution, ibid. 281. — Evidence 
against them, ibid. 233. — Their Defence, 
ibid. 256.— Reply of the Solicitor General 
(Sir Heneage Finch), ibid. 260.— Chief Jus- 
tice Forster*8 Charge to the Jury, ibid, 262. 
—The Jury find them Guilty, ibid.^263.— 
Sentence of Death is passed upon them, 
ibid. 264.--Their Conduct at the place of 
Execution, ibid. 265. — Remarks of Ludlow 
upon this Transaction, ibid. 271.- Proba- 
bility that the Transactions out of which 
these Proceedings arose were much exag- 
gerated by the Court, ibid. 272. 

TOOKE, John Home.— Proceedings against 
him in the Court of King's Bench on the 
Trial of an Information by the Attorney 
General against him for a Libel, 17 Geo. 3, 
1777,20 voL651.— The luformation, ibid, 
ib.— He objects to the right of the Attorney 
General to a Reply in the Case of an In- 
formation, where the Defendant calls no 
Witnesses, ibid. 661.— His Argument in 
support of the Oljjection, ibid, ib.— I^rd 
Mansfield rules that the Attorney General is 
entitled to a Reply,ibid. 664.— The Attorney 
General (Thurlow) opens the Case, ibid. 
667. — Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 
671.— Mr. Home Tooke's Speech in his 
Defence, ibid. 675.— Evidence for him, ibid. 
742.--The Attorney General's Reply, i^^* 
745.~^Lord Mansfield's Charge to the Jury, 
ibid. 769— The JU7 find him GuiUyi wd. 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



137 



764.— Proceedings in the Court of King's 
Bench on his being brought up for Judg- 
menty ibid. ib. — He moves in arrest of Judg- 
menty on an Objection to the Indictment, 
ibid. ib. — ^The Attorney General's Answer 
to the Objection, ibid. 766.— Mr. Tooke's 
Keply, ibid. 767. — The Court overrule the 
Objection, ibid. 772. — The Attorney Gene- 
ral s Speech in aggravation of Punishment, 
ibid. 775.— Mr. Tooke's Speech, ibid. 783. — 
Sentence of the Court, ibid. 787. — He brings 
a Writ of Error in Parliament, ibid. 789. — 
The Judgment of the Court of King's Bench 
is affirmed, ibid. 797. — His Trial for High 
Treason by a Special Commission of Oyer 
and Terminer at the Old Bailey, 35 Geo. 3, 
1795, 25 vol. 1.— The Indictment, 24 vol. 
224. — ^His Arraignment, ibid. 1404. — Nar- 
rative of the Proceedings against him pre- 
viously to his Trial, from Stephens*s Memoirs 
of him> 25 vol. 1 (note). — Counsel for the 
Prosecution and for the Prisoner, ibid. 2, &c. 
— ^Address intended to have been delivered 
by him upon his Arraignment, ibid. 7 (note). 
— ^The Court in consideration of bis ill state 
of health, permit him to sit near his Counsel, 
ibid. 12. — Speech of the Solicitor General 
(Sir John Mitford) for the Prosecution, ibid. 
27. — Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 71. 
— Mr. Erskine's Speech in his Defence, ibid. 
257. — Evidence for the Defence, ibid. 325. 
— ^Mr. Gibbs sums up the Evidence for the 
Defence, ibid. 449. — Reply of the Attorney 
General (Sir John Scott) ibid. 497. — Chief 
Justice Eyre's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 555. 
—The Jury acquit him, ibid, 743. — His Ad- , 
dress to the Court and Jury after his Acquit- 
tal, ibid, ib.— -The Attorney General declines 
offering Evidence against several other per- 
sons charged in the same Indictment, and 
they are discharged, ibid. 745. 

TOPHAM. See Jay and Tophmn, 

TOWNLEY, Francis.— His Trial for High 
Treason in being concerned in the Rebellion 
of 1745, 18 vol. 329. — ^The Indictment, ibid. 
332. — Speeches of the Attorney General (Sir 
Dudley Ryder), and Sir John Strange, for 
the Prosecution, ibid. 335. — Evidence for 
the Prosecution, ibid. 337. — The Defence, 
ibid; 344.— Reply of the Solicitor General 
(Mr. Murray), ibid. 346. — ^The Jury find him 
Guilty, ibid. 347. — Mr. Justice Foster's 
Report of this Case, ibid. ib. — Warrant for 
his Execution, ibid. 349. — His Execution, 
ibid. 351. 

TOWNSEND, Mr.— Recorder of Chester.— 
His Argument for the Prisoner on the Trial 
of John Stevenson for Murder, 19 vol. 864. 

TRACY, Robert, Judge of C. P. 9 Ann, 15 
vol. 547, 939. — His Argument in favour of 
the King's Prerogative respecting the Edu- 
cation and Marriage of the Royal Family, 15 
vol. 1219.-*- His Charge to the Jury on the 
Trial of Edward Arnold for ihooting at 
Lord ODfloWi 16 vol. 745. 



TRANTER, Robert. See Beaton, Hugh. 

TRAVERS, John. See Abington, Edward. 

T^REBY, George, Counsel. — ^His Speech as 
one of the Managers for the House of Com- 
mons on the Trial of the Impeachment of 
Lord Stafford, 7 vol. 1308. 



■ Sir George, Recorder of London, 34 

Car. 2. — His Argument for the Corporation 
in the. Case of the Quo Warranto against the 
City of London, 8 vol. 1099. — His Speech 
in Defence of Sir Patience Ward on his 
Trial for Perjury, 9 vol. 312. — His Ailment 
for the Defendant in the Great Case of 
Monopolies, 10 vol. 383. — His Evidence on 
the Trial of Gates for Perjury, ibid. 1171 . — 
He was one of the Counsel for the Seven 
Bishops, 12 vol. 376. 

Attorney General, 1 



Will, and Mary, 12 vol, 597. 



■ Chief Justice of C. P. 4 

Will, and Mary, 12 vol. 1248, 1379, 13 vol. 
1, 64, 139, 451. — He delivers his Opinion 
with the other Judges on several Questions 
of Law proposed to them by the House of 
Lords on the Trial of Lord Mohun for 
Murder, 12 vol. 1034, 1038, 1043, 1047.-— 
His Charge to the Jury on the Trial of Peter 
Cook for High Treason, 13 vol. 386. — His 
Argument in the Banker's Case, 14 vol. 
23. 

TRELAWNY, Sir Jonathan, Bishop of Bristol. 
See Seven Bishops, — Granger's Account of 
him, 12 vol. 187. 

TREMAIN, John, Serjeant-at-Law, 12 vol.685, 
929. 

TREMBLES, Mary. See Uoyd, Temperance, 

TRESILLVN, Sir Robert, Chief Justice of 
K. B. 11 Ric. 2. See Brambre, Nicholas, — 
Proceedings in Parliament against him, 
Alexander Nevil, Archbishop of York, Robert 
Vere, Duke of Ireland, Michael De la Pole, 
Earl of Suffolk, and Nicholas Brambre, for 
High Treason, 11 Ric. 2, 1388, 1 vol. 89.— 
He is appealed in Parliament with them of 
High Treason, ibid. 96. — Articles of Appeal 
against them, ibid. 101. — ^Tresilian, the 
Archbishop, the Duke of Ireland, and the 
Earl of Suffolk, do not appear, and*are found 
Guilty, and sentenced to be drawn and 
hanged, ibid. 114.-^Tresilian is discovered 
concealed under a Table, ibid. 115.— Frois- 
sart's Account of his" discovery, ibid. 116 
(note). — He is drawn and hanged, ibid. 117. 
— Magical Signs said to be found upon his 
person, ibid. ib. — Remarks upon Tresilian's 
Offence, by Mr. St. John in his Speech to 
the House of Lords against the Judges for 
their conduct in the Case of Ship-Money, 
3 vol. 1276. 

TREVORi Sir Thomas, Baron of the Eiche- 
qu«ri 4 Car, « 1, d fol. a59.«-NQt«i of bit 



GBNSBAI. IHPEX TO 



TEEVOR, Sir Thomas, SoUdtot General, 4 
Will, and Mar;.— His Speech for the Pro- 
Hcntion on the Trial of Lord Mohun Id the 
HouM of Lords for the Murder of Mr. 
Monntford, 13 vol. 1009. 

..-.,..- Aliorney General, 7 

Will. 3.— Hifi Argument in the Court of 
King'sBencb against the Diichargeof Kendal 
and Roe, upou a Habeas Corpus sued out 
by them, npon their CommitmeDt for High 
Treason by the Secretary of State, 13 vol. 
1366. — His Speech fbr Ihe Prosecutioo on 
the Trial of Chamock, King, and Keyes for 
High Treason, in being coocerned ia Ihe 
Auaswnation Hot, ibid. 1391. — His Speech 
on the Trial of Sir John Freind, 13 vol. IS. 
—His Speech on the Trial of Sir William 
Parkjns, ibid. TT.— His Speech on the Trial 
of Ambrose Rookwood, ibid. I4T. — His 
Speech on the Trial of Peter Cook, ibid. 
349. — His Speech in the House of Commons 
in the Debate respecting the mode of pro- 
ceeding against Sir John Fen wick, ibid. 55B, 
— His Speech for the Prosecution on the 
Trial of Ihe Earl of Warwick for the Murder 
of Mr. Coote, ibid, 965.— His Speech for 
the Prosecution on the Trial of Lord Mohun 
for the same Murder, ibid. 103G. 

-Chief Justice of C. P. 



3 Ann, 14 vol. 989. 

TRIGGE, Thomaa. See Sachevirtll, WiUkm. 

TRINDER, Henry, Seijeanl-al-Law.— He was 
one of the Counsel for the Prosecution on 
Ihe Trial of the Seven Bishops, 12 rol. 333. 

TROY, John Thomas.— Proceedings in the 
Court of King's Bench upon the Trial of an 
Action brought by him against Henry Dela' 
hay Symonda, for aLibel in the Ami-Jacobin 
Review, 45 Geo. 3, 1805, 29 »ol. 503.~ 
Chunsel for the Plaintiff and for the De- 
fendant, ibid. ib. — Mr. Ersktne's Speech for 
the Plaintiff, ibid. 505.— Evidence for the 
Plaintiff, ibid. 513. — Mr. Garrow's Speech 
for the Defendant, ibid. 519.— Lord Elli 
borough's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 546. 
The Jury find a Verdict for the Plaintiff, 
with 50f. Damages, ibid. 5S0. 

TRUSSEL, Sir William, a Justiciary, 15 Edw, 
a, laaa.^llis Address to ihe younger De- 
spenser on passing Sentence upon him, 1 
vol. 36.^ — He is appointed one of the Depu- 
tation from the Parliament to resijiin their 



39 Geo. 3, 1799, S7 toL 1137.— Evidcnoe 
foi the FiosecuLoD, ibid. ib. — Evidence in 
bis Defence, ibid. 1133.— The Jury find him. 
Guilty, ibid. 1135.— Sentenoe of Dealli is 
paned upon him, ibid. 1130.— He ia exe- 
Guled, ibid. 1138. 

TURNER, Anne.— Her Trial, as an Accessary 
before the fad, to the Murder of Sir Thomas 
Overhury, 13 Jac. 1, 1615, 3 vol. 930. — She 
pleads Not Guilty, ibid. 931. — Letter from 
Ftances, Countess of Essex, to her, ibid. ib. 
—The Jury find her Guilty, and she is e»e- 
cuted, ibid. 935. 

TURNER, Anthony. See Wlutel»tad,Tkomat. 

TURNER, Sir Christopher, Baron of the Ex- 
chequer, 12 Car. 2, 6 vol. 769, 879.— He 
tvas one of the Commissioners for the Trial 
of the Regicides, 5 vol. 986. — He refuses 
to try the Indictment against Joan Perry 
and her two Sons, for the supposed Murder 
of Mr. Harrison, because the Body had not 
been found, 14 vol. 1318. 

TURNER, Sir Edward, Counsel —His Speech 
for the Prosecution on the Trial of Harrison, 
the Regicide, 5 vol. 1015.— His Speech iu 
Reply on tlie Trial of Jdin Cook, (he 
Regicide, ibid. 1103. 

TURNER, Dt. Francis, Bishop of Ely, 
Granger's Account of him, 12 vol.165. See 
Seven BUhcps. 

TURNER, Colonel James.— His Trial with 
John Turner, William Turner, Mary Turner, 
and Ely Turner, at the Old Bailey, for 
Felony and Burglary, 15 Car. 2, 1664, 6 vol. 
566.— James, John, and William Turner 
are indicted fbr Bur|riary, and Mary and 
Ely Turner for being Accessaries after the 
fact, ibid, ib.— They all plead Not Guilty, 
ibid. 567. — Evidence against them, ibid. 
573.— Their Defence, ibid. 594. — Chief 
Justice Hyde's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 
613. — Chief Justice Bridgman's Charge, 
ibid. 613.— The Jury find James Turner 
Guilty, and acquit the others, ibid. 615. — 
His Confession, ibid. 617. — Sentence of 
Death passed upon him, ibid. 619. — His 
Conduct at the place of Execution, ibid. ib. 
— Siderfin'a Report of this Case, ibid. 615 
(note).- Kelyog's Report, ibid. 616 (note). 

TURNER, Wimam.— His Trial under a Spe- 
cial Commission at Derby for High Treason 
in being concerned in the Luddite Insur- 
rection, 57 Geo. 3, 1817, 32 vol. 957.— The 
Indictment, ibid. 755. — Speech of the So- 
licitor General (Sir Robert Gifford) for Ihe 
Prosecution, ibid. 964. — Evidence for the 
Prosecution, ibid. 975. — Mr- Serjeant Cross's 
Speech for the Prisoner, ibid. 1046.— Evi- 
dence for the Prisoner, ibid. 1068. — Mr. 
Deuman's Speech on summing up the Evi- 
dence for the Prisoner, ibid. 1059. — Keply 
of the Attorney General (Sir S. Shepherd^ 
ibid. loe4.~Mr. Justice Dallai'i Chkrg* to 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



ia» 



the Jury, ibid, 1101.— The Jury find him 
GailtXfibid.l 1 34.-— He is executed, ibid.l 394. 

TURPIN, Joseph. See SaehevereU, WiUum. 

TUBTON, Sir John, Judge of K. B. 8 Will. 
3, 13 vol. 451, 485, 14 vol. 134.— His 
Charge to the Jury on the Trial of Kidd and 
others for Piracy and Robbery, 14 vol. 211. 
— His Charge on the Trial of the same per- 
son on another Indictment, ibid. 228. 

TUTCHIN, John.— His Trial at the Guildhall 
of London, on an £x-ofHcio Information, for 
a Libel entitled " The Observator," 3 Ann, 
1704, 14 vol. 1095.— The Information, ibid, 
ib. — ^The libellous Papers, as set out in the 
Information, ibid. 109T. — Opening Speeches 
of Sir Thomas Powis and the Attorney 
General, for the Prosecution, ibid. 1102. — 
ETidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 1105. — 
At the close of the Case ibr the Prosecu- 
tion, Mr. Mountague objects for the De- 
fendant, that there is no proof of a publica- 
tion within the City of London, ibid. 1117. 
— ^The Objection is overruled, ibid. 1118. — 
Mr. Mountague's Speech in his Defence, 
ibid. 1119. — Reply of the Attorney General, 
ibid. 1124.— Lord Holt's Charge to the 
Jury, ibid. 1125. — ^Lord Holt leaves the 
question of the character of the Publications 
to the Jury, ibid. 1128. — ^The Jury find the 
Defendant Guilty of composing and pub- 
lishing the Libel, but not of writing it, ibid. 
1129. — His Counsel move in arrest of Judg- 
ment for an irregularity in the Jury-Pro- 
cess, ibid. ib. — Arguments of Sir Thomas 
Powis, the Attorney General, and Serjeant 
Darnell on moving for a Rule to amend the 
irregularity, ibid. 1135. — ^The Defendant's 
Counsel shew cause against the Rule, ibid. 
1151. — ^fteply of the Attorney General, ibid. 
1179. — The Court are equally divided in 
their Opinions upon the point, ibid. 1187. — 
The Court quash the Trial, ibid. 1194.-- He 
was never tried again on this Charge, ibid. 
1195. — His Trial at Dorchester, before Chief 
Justice Jefferies for being concerned in the 
Duke of Monmouth's Rebellion, ibid. ib. — 
Account of his Interview with Jefferies in 
the Tower, ibid. 1199. 

TWYN, John. See Brewster, 2%iwnai.— His 
Trial for High Treason, in printing a Book 
containing treasonable Doctrines, 15 Car. 
2, 1663, 6 vol. 513. — Substance of the In- 
dictment, ibid. 514. — He pleads Not Guilty, 
ibid. 515. — Serjeant Morton opens the Case 
a^inst him, ibid. 520. — Evidence against 
bim, ibid. 522.— His Defence, ibid. 531. — 
Chief Justice Hyde's Charge to the Jury, 
ibid. 533. — ^The Jury find him Guilty, and 
Sentence of Death is passed upon him, ibid. 
535. — His Conduct at the place of Execu- 
tion, ibid. 536. — Kelyng's Report of the 
Resolution of the Court in this Case, that 
the Offence charged amounted to High 
Treason in the article of Compassing the 
King's Deatbi ibid, 513 (note), 



TWYSDEN, Thomas, 8e^eiiBt«at-Law.---His 

unworthy Conduct when sent to the Tower 
by Cromwell for pleading in Mr. Cony's 
Case^ 5 vol. 936. 

Sir Thomas, Judge of K. B. 13 



Car. 2, 6 vol. 74, 206, 634, 769, 1297. 

TYRRELL, Sir Tliomas, Judge of C. P. 18 
Car. 2, 6 vol. 769. 

TYRIE, David.— His Trial at Winchester for 
High Treason, in holding a traitorous Cor- 
respondence with the French Government, 
22 Geo. 3, 1782, 21 vol. 815.— The Indict- 
ment, ibid. ib. — Counsel for the Prosecution 
and for the Prisoner, ibid. 818. — Evidence 
ibr the Prosecution, ibid. 819. — Mr. Wat- 
son's Speech in his Defence, ibid. S36. — 
Evidence for the Prisoner, ibid. 843. — He 
is found Guilty, and Sentence of Death is 
passed upon him, ibid. 844. — Letter in his 
hand-writing, containing treasonable matter, 
discovered after his Trial, ibid. ib. 

TYTLER, James. — ^Proceedings in the Court 
of Justiciary against him for publishing a 
Seditious Libel, 33 Geo. 3, 1798, 23 vol. 1. 
— ^The Indictment, ibid, ib.— He is out- 
lawed for not appearing to answer, ibid. 6. 

UCHILTRIE, James, Lord. See Rea, Donald, 
Lord, — -His Trial at Edinburgh for slandering 
the Marquis of Hamilton and other Noble- 
men, 7 Car. 1, 1631, 3 vol. 425.— Act of 
Council, commanding the Lord Advocate to 
proceed against him, ibid. ib. — Depositions 
of him and Lord Rea before the Privy 
Council, ibid.427. — Indictment against him, 
ibid. 436. — Objections by his Counsel to the 
Indictment, ibid. 441. — Lord Rea*s Rela- 
tion, ibid. 446. — He is sentenced to per- 
petual Imprisonment, ibid. 482.— Burnet's 
Observations respecting him, ibid. ib. (note). 

UDALL, John, a Puritan Minister. — Proceed- 
ings on his Trial for Felony, on the Stat. 23 
Eliz. cap. 2, for publishing a seditious Book, 
32 Eliz. 1596, 1 vol. 1271.— Upon his 
Arraignment, he applies for Counsel, which 
is denied him, ibid. 1277. — He pleads Not 
Guilty, ibid. ib. — He offers Witnesses in his 
Defence, but the Court refuse to hear Evi- 
dence against the Crown, ibid. 1281. — He 
objects to Evidence of the Testimony given 
on a former occasion by an absent person, 
ibid. 1282. — The Court decide that the 
Testimony of an absent person is sufficient, 
if proved to be his by the Oaths of others, 
ibid. ib. — He argues diat his Offence is not 
within the Statute, ibid. 1283.— The Juiy 
find him Guilty, ibid. 1290* — Judgment is 
respited upon his submission, ibid* 1295. — 
He is called upon at a subsequent Assizes, 
and pressed to make a full Submission, ibid. 
1297. — He delivers a Paper to the Judges, 
containing his Reasons why Judgment should 
be arrestedp ibid. 1298.-^Being called on 
for Judgment, he prays to be heard in arrest 



140 



GENTEEAL INDEX TO 



of Judgment, ibid. 1 300.— Sentence is passed 
upon him, but he is reprieved, ibid. 1306. 
—His points of belief, ibid. 1309.— The 
King otScotland writes^to the Queen in his 
behalf, ibid. 1314. — He offers to go as a 
Missionary to Guinea, ibid. 1316.— The 
Queen refuses to sign his Pardon, and he 
dies in Prison, ibid. ib. 

URLINESS,. Samuel. See Green, Obtain 
Thomas. 

USHER, James, Archbishop of Armagh.— His 
Scheme for the Reformation of the Church, 
6 vol. 3 (note). 

USKE, Thomas. See Blake, John, 

VALENTINE, Benjamin, See EUioU, Sir 
John. 

VANE, Sir Henry, the Elder.— Hi^ Evidence 
against Lord Strafford, 3 vol. 1442.— Lord 
Clarendon's Account of his Enmity to Lord 
Strafford, ibid. 1443 (note). 

VANE, Sir Henry, the Younger. — Proceed- 
ings of Cromwell and his Council against 
him for the publication of a Seditious 
Book, 8 Car. 2, 1656, 5 vol. 791.— He is 
ordered to find Security to do nothing to 
the prejudice of the Government, ibid. 793. 
—His Letter to the Clerk of the Council 
refusing to give such Security, ibid. 793. — 
Warrants of the Council for his Apprehen- 
sion, ibid. 795. — ^His Remonstrance with 
Cromwell, ibid. 796.-— He is imprisoned in 
the Isle of Wight, but is afterwards set at 
liberty, ibid. 799. — Ludlow's Account of 
this Transaction, ibid, ib.— His Trial for 
High Treason at the Bar of the Court of 
King's Bench, 14 Car. 3, 1662, 6 vol. 
119. — Reports of the points of Law deter- 
mined in this Case, ibid. ib. — Argument 
prepared by him for his Defence before 
the Indictment was found, ibid. 136. — 
The Indictment, ibid. 142. — He pleads 
Not Guilty, ibid. 143.— Memoranda intend- 
ed to have been used by him for an Argu- 
ment to the Court before his Plea, ibid. 
144. — ^The Attorney General opens the Case, 
ibid. 148. — Evidence against him, ibid. 149. 
-—His Defence, ibid. 152.— He suggests Ob- 
jections in law and requires Counsel to 
argue them, ibid. 153.— The Jury find him 
Guilty, ibid. 156.— His own Account of the 
substance of his Defence, ibid. ib. — On being 
called upon for Judgment, he tenders a Bill 
of Exceptions, which is refused, ibid. 169. — 
The Bill of Exceptions tendered by him, 
ibid. 171.— His Reasons for arresting the 
Judgment, ibid. 176.— Sentence of Death is 
passed upon him, ibid. 188.— His Behaviour 
at his Execution, ibid, ib.— Ludlow's Ac- 
countof him and of this Trial, ibid. ib. (note). 
—Letter of King Charles the Second to the 
Lord Chancellor respecting him, ibid. 187 
(note) — Extracts from Burnet, Clarendon, 
and other Historians, respecting him, ibid. 
198.— Mr. Fox's Remark* upon hig Case. * 
ibid. 201. 



VAUGHAN, Felix, Counsel, 22 vol. 38a— His 
Speech in Defence of Daniel Isaiac Eatoo, on 
his Trial for publishing the Second Part of 
Paine's Rights of Man, 22 vol. 767.— His 
Speech in Eaton's Defence, on his Trial for 
publishing Paine's *' Letter to the Addressers 
on the late Proclamation," ibid. 800.— His 
Speech in Defence of Briellat on his Trial 
for speaking seditious Words, ibid. 929. 

VAUGHAN, Sir John, Chief Justice of K. B. 
22 Car. 2.— His Report of Bushell's Case, 
6 vol. 999. 

VAUGHAN, Captain Thomas.— His Trial in 
the Admiralty Court for High Treason in 
taking the Command of French Ships of 
War on the High Seas, 8 Will. 3, 1696, 13 
vol. 485.— -The Indictment, ibid. 488, 489 
(note). — He pleads Not Guilty, ibid. 489. 
— Speech of Sir John Hawles (Solicitor 
General) for the Prosecution, ibid. 493.— 
Evidence against him, ibid. 494.^— Evidence 
for the Defence, ibid. 518. — Lord Holt's 
Charge to the Jury, ibid. 525. — ^TheJury 
find him Guilty, ibid. 529. — His Counsel 
take several Objections in Arrest of Judg- 
ment, ibid. 530. — He is sentenced to Death 
and executed, ibid. 536. — His Commission 
from the French King, ibid. ib. — Chief Jus- 
tice Eyre's allusion to this Trial in the Case 
of Sparenburgh v. Bannatyne, ibid. 485 
(note). 

VENNER, Thomas.— Archdeacon Echard's 
Account of the Insurrection of the Fifth 
Monarchy Men under him, 6 vol. 67 (note). 
— ^Trial of him and several other Persons 
concerned in the same Insurrection, ibid. 
105. — Burnet's Account of the Insurrection, 
ibid. 113. See James, John. 

VERE, Robert, Duke of Ireland. See 
Tresilian, Robert. Brambre, Nicholas, 

VERNON, Sir George, Baron of tlie Exche- 
quer, 4 Car. 1, 3 vol. 359. 

:^ Judge of C. P. 13 Car. 

1 . — His Opinion for the Crown in the Great 
Case of Ship-Money, 3 vol. 1125. 

VERULAM, Francis, Viscount. See Bacon, 
Sir Francis. 

VINCENT, Samuel. See Kirkb^, Richard. 

VINT, John.— His Trial with George Ross, and 
John Parry, for a Libel upon Paul the First, 
Emperor of Russia, published in the Courier 
Newspaper, 39 Geo. 3, 1799, 27 vol. 627.— 
The Information, ibid, ib.— Mr. Erskine's 
Speech in their Defence, ibid. 639.— Lord 
Kenyon's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 639.— The 
Jury find them Guilty, ibid. 642.— Sentence 
of the Court, ibid. ib. 



VOWELL, Peter. See Gerhard, John, ' 

VRATZ, Christopher, See Qmingsmarhi 
Charles, Count, . 

WADEi Cooper. See £ir%, JRuto^« 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



141 



WAITE, Thomas, 5 vol. 1006, 1217. See 
Regicides, 

WAKEFIELD, Gilbert. See Cuthell, John.— 
His Trial on an Ex-officio Information for 
the publication of a Seditious Libel, 39 Geo. 
3, 1799, 27 vol. 679.— The Information, 
ibid. ib. — Speech of the Attorney General 
(Sir John Scott) for the Prosecution, ibid. 
702. — Mr. Wakefield's Speech in his De- 
fence, ibid. 704. — Reply of the Attorney 
General, ibid. 734. — ^Lord Kenyon's Charge 
to the Jury, ibid. 735. — ^The Jury find him 
Guilty, ibid. 737, — His Speech on being 
brought up for Judgment, ibid. ib. — Mr. 
Justice Grose's Address on passing the Sen- 
tence of the Court upon him, ibid. 754. — He 
is sentenced to two years Imprisonment in 
Dorchester Gaol, ibid. 756. — He dies soon 
after the expiration of his Imprisonment, 
ibid. 760. 

WAKEMAN, Sir George.— His Trial with 
William Marshall, William Rumley, and 
James Corker, at the Old Bailey for High 
Treason, in being concerned in the Popish 
Plot, 31 Car. 2, 1679, 7 vol. 591.— Corker 
is arraigned with Whitebread and others, but 
petitions for time, ibid. 311. — ^The Indict- 
ment against him, ibid. 595. — The others 
plead Not Guilty, ibid. ib. — The Indictment 
against Sir George Wakeman, Rumley, and 
Marshal, ibid. 592. — Sir Robert Sawyer's 
Speech for the Prosecution, ibid. 597. — 
Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 601. — 
Gates's Evidence, ibid. 619. — ^Their Defence, 
ibid. 638. — Evidence for the Defence, ibid. 
644. — Rumley is not called upon for his 
Defence, there being no sufficient Evidence 
against him, ibid. 655. — Chief Justice 
Scroggs's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 681. — 
They are acquitted, ibid. 688.---Observations 
on this Trial under the fictitious signature of 
Ticklefoot, ibid. 687. — ^Answer to these Ob- 
servations, ibid. 695. — Speech of Chief Jus- 
tice Scroggs in the Court of King's Bench 
on occasion of some libels on himself, pub- 
lished in consequence of this Trial, ibid. 701 . 
— Burnet's Account of this Trial, ibid. 591 
(note). — Sir George Wakeman is examined 
as a Witness on Oates's Trial for Perjury, 
10 vol. 1175. 

WALCOT, Thomas.— His Trial at the Old 
Bailey for High Treason, in being concerned 
in the Rye-House Plot, 35 Car. 2, 1683, 9 
vol. 519. — ^The Indictment, ibid. ib. — The 
Attorney General (Sir Robert Sawyer) opens 
the Case for the Prosecution, ibid. 522. — 
Evidence against him, ibid.*526. — Rumsey's 
Evidence, ibid. ib. — His Defence, ibid. 
552.— Reply of the Solicitor General (Finch), 
ibid. 555. — Chief Justice Pemberton's Charge 
to the Jury, ibid. 558. — ^The Jury find him 
Guilty, ibid. 560.— His Sentence, ibid. 668. 
^-His Execution and Dying Speech, ibid, 
ib. — Burnet's Account of his Trial and Exe- 

. «utiQD| JiUdi (flO^'-^Tlie Juclgmeot against 



him reversed in Error in the Court of King's 
Bench after the Revolution, ibid. 560. — 
Record of the Proceedings in Error, ibid.ib. 
— Sir Bartholomew Shower's Report of the 
Proceedings in the House of Lords on the 
affirmance of the Judgment of the Court of 
King's Bench reversing his Attainder, 
ibid. ib. 

WALCOT, Sir Thomas, Judge of K. B. 36 
Car. 2, 10 vol. 151, 1197. 

WALKER, Clement.— He and Prynn exhibit 
Articles of Accusation for the Commonwealth 
against Colonel Fiennes for Cowardice in 
surrendering the City and Castle of Bristol, 
4 vol. 190. 

WALKER, Thomas.— His Trial at Lancaster 
with several other persons for a Conspiracy 
to overthrow the Government, 34 Geo. 3, 
1794, 23 vol. 1055.— The Indictment, ibid, 
ib. — Indictment against Mr. Walker for 
seditious Words, ibid. 1078.— His Corres- 
pondence with the Secretary of State pre- 
viously to his Commitment, ibid. 1055 (note) 
— Account of the Proceedings against the 
other Defendants previously to the Trial, 
ibid. 1064 (note). — Indictment against 
Cheetham, one of the Defendants, for se- 
ditious Words, ibid. 1079. — Counsel for the 
Prosecution and for the Defendants, ibid. 
1081. — ^Mr. Law's Speech for the Prosecu- 
tion, ibid.ib. — Evidence for the Prosecution, 
ibid. 1088. — Dunn's Evidence, ibid. ib. — 
Mr. Erskine's Speech for the Defendants, 
ibid. 1102.— Evidence for the Defendants, 
ibid. 1120 — On Dunn's Evidence being 
directly contradicted, Mr. Law abandons the 
Prosecution, ibid. 1164. — ^The Defendants 
are acquitted, ibid. ib. — Dunn is tried and 
convicted of Perjury in his Evidence on this 
Trial, ibid. 1165. 

WALL, Joseph, Governor of the Island of 
Goree.— His Trial at the Old Bailey for the 
Murder of Benjamin Armstrong by flogging 
him for being concerned in a pretended 
Mutiny, 42 Geo. 3, 1802, 28 vol. 51.— The 
Indictment, ibid. 1438. — Speech of the At- 
torney General for the Prosecution, ibid. ib. 
— Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 64.— 
The . Prisoner's Defence, ibid. 101. — Evi- 
dence for the Prisoner, ibid. 105. — Evidence 
for the Prosecution in Reply, ibid. 138. — 
Chief Baron Macdonald's Charge to the 
Jury, ibid. 143. — ^The Jury find him Guilty, 
ibid. 178. — ^The Recorder passes Sentence 
of Death upon him, ibid. 1439. — He is exe-> 
cuted, ibid. 178. 

WALLACE, James, Counsel. — ^His Argument 
for the Duchess of Kingston on her Trial for 
Bigamy, that a Sentence of the Ecclesias* 
tical Court is a conclusive answer to a 
criminal charge founded upon the facts 
which formed the subject matter of that 
Sentence, 20 vol. 374. — His Argument in 

Reply ia t^Q same Casej ibidi 508<«-<'Hiii 



142 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



Argument for the Defendant in the Case of 
the Island of Grenada, 20 Tol. 277. 

Solicitor General, 19 Geo. 



/ 3, 21 vol. 1061. 



■ Attorney General, 21 Geo. 

3, 22 vol. 15. — His Speech for the Prosecu- 
tion in the Case of Lord George Gordon for 
High Treason, 21 vol. 499. — His Speech for 
the Prosecution in the case of Francis De 
La Motte for High Treason, ibid. 708. 

WALLER. Edmund.'— Proceedings against 
him, Mr. Tomkins, Mr. Challoper, and 
others, before a Council of War, for a Plot 
against the Parliament, 19 Car. ], 1643, 4 
vol. 626. — The House of Commons commu- 
nicate the Particulars of the Plot to the 
Lords, ibid. ib. — Upon discovery of the 
Plot, the i Parliament order an Oath or 
Covenant to be taken by Members of Par- 
liament and the Army, ibid. 631. — ^Tomkins, 
Challoner, and others, are tried by a Council 
of War and sentenced to Death, ibid. 632. 
— Mr. Tomkins's Speech immediately before 
his Execution, ibid. ib. — Mr. Challoner's 
Speech, ibid. 633. — Mr. Waller's Speech in 
the House of Commons, ibid. 635. — ^He is 
expelled the House and condemned to die 
by a Council of War, but is reprieved by 
General Essex, ibid. 638. — He is imprisoned 
a year, pays a Fine of 10,000/. ana is dis- 
charged, ibid. ib. — Lord Clarendon's Ac- 
count of this Transaction, ibid. ib. — White- 
locke's Account of it, ibid. 650.— Letter 
from Mr. Waller to Colonel Godwin upon 
his Accusation, ibid. 652. 

WALLER, Sir Hardress, 5 vol. 995, 1220. See 
Regicides. 

WALLER, Sir William. See HoUis, DenxU. 

WALLIS, Dr. John.— Letter written by him 
on the Art of Deciphering, 16 vol. 540 
(note). 

WALLOP, Richard, Counsel, 8 vol. 561.— 
His Argument in support of the Plea in 
Abatement in Fitzharris's Case, 8 vol. 303. 
— His Speech for the Defendants on the 
Trial of Braddon arid Speke, 9 vol. 1165. — 
His Argument in Arrest of Judgment in 
Rosewell's Case, 10 vol. 269.— Chief Justice 
Jefferies's Abusive treatment of him on the 
Trial of Richard Baxter, 11 vol. 498.— He is 
assigned as Counsel to Lord Stafford to argue 
the points of law in his Case, 7 vol. 1525. 

WALMESLEY, Sir Thomas, Judge of C. P. 
43 Eliz. 1 vol. 1334.— He dissents from the 
Opinion of the Judges in the Case of the 
Postnati, 2 vol. 576. 

WALPOLE, Horatio.— His Evidence on the 
Trial of Francis Francia for High Treason, 
15 vol. 915. 

WALPOLE, Robert.— His Speech in the 
House of Commons in t!ie Great Case of 
Ashby and White, 14 vol. 774.— His Speech 
as one of the Managers for the Commons on 
the Trial of Dr, Sacheverell, 16 vol. 112. 



WALSINGHAM, Sir Francis.— He was one 
of the Commissioners appointed by Queeu. 
Elizabeth for the Trial of Mary, Queen of 
Scots, 1 vol. 1167. 

WALTER, Sir John, Chief Baron of the 
Exchequer, 6 Car. 1, 3 vol. 359. — White- 
locke's Account of the Causes of his removal 
from the Bench by Charles the First, 3 vol. 
292 (note). — Being discharged flrom ' his 
Office by a Message from the King, he re« 
fused to quit his place as Chief Baron, unless 
compelled by legal Proceedings, ibid. ib. 

WALTERS, Rowland.— His Trial with Bear- 
ing, Bradshaw, and Ambrose Cave, for the 
Murder of Sir Charles Pymm, 4 Jao. 2, 1688. 
12 vol. 113.— The Indictment, ibid. ib. — 
Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 115. — 
Mr. Baron Jenner's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 
120.— The Jury find Walters guilty of Man- 
slaughter, and acquit the others, ibid. 122. 

WARBURTON, Sir Peter, Judge of C. P. 43 
Eliz. 1 70I. 1334, 2 vol. 1, 576.— He was 
one of the Commissioners for the Trial of 
the Conspirators in the Powder Plot, 2 vol. 
159. 

WARBURTON, Peter, Judge of the Upper 
Bench during the Commonwealth, 4 vol. 
1269, 5 vol. 841. 

WARD, Edward, Counsel.— His Argument 
in support of Lord Russel's Challenge of a 
Juror tor not having a Freehold in London, 
9 vol. 589.— His Speech for the Defendant 
in the Case of Pritchard, v. Papillon, 10 vol. 
334.— His Argument for the Plaintiff in 
support of the Demurrer to the Plea in the 
Case of the Earl of Macclesfield v. Starkey, 
ibid. 1342. 



^ Attorney General, T Will. 

3. — His Speech for the Prosecution on the 
Trial of Crosby for High Treason, 12 vol. 
1293. 



• Sir Edward, Chief Baron of the Ex- 
chequer, 8 Will. 3, 12 vol. 1379, 13 vol. 144, 
451, 15 vol. 547.— His Charges to the Jury 
on the several Trials of Kidd and others for 
Piracy and Murder, 14 vol. 143, 180. 

WARD, Sir Patience.— His Trial at the Bar of 
the Court of King's Bench, for Perjury in his 
Evidence on the Trial of an Action of Scan- 
dalum Magnatum between the Duke of York 
and Thomas Pilkington, 35 Car. 2, 1683, 9 
vol. 299. — Speeches of the Attorney General 
and Serjeant Jefferies for the Prosecution, 
ibid. 300. — Evidence for the Prosecution, 
ibid. 303.— His Defence, ibid. 312.— Evi- 
dence for him, ibid. 317.— Speech of Sir 
George Treby in his Defence, ibid. 332.— 
Mr. Williams's Speech on the same side, 
ibid. 333.— Sir Francis Winningtoe's Speech, 
ibid. 336. — Speech of the Attorney General 
in Reply, ibid. 338.— Speech of Sir George 
Jefferies,ibid. 343.— Chief JusticeSaunders's 
Charge to the Jury, ibid. U6,^Jhe Jvtrj 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



148 



find him Guilty, ibid« 350.— Account of this 
Trialy from Narcissus LuttrelFs MSS., ibid, 
ib. — ^After the RcFolution, Sir Patience Ward 
was returned as one of the Members of Par- 
hament for the City of London, ibid. ib. 

WARNER, Dr. John, Bishop of Peterborough. 
See Twelve Bishops. 

WARREN, Dr. John. See Bangor, Bishop of. 

WARWICK AND HOLLAND, Edward, Earl 
of. See Mohuny Charles Lord. — His Trial 
before the House of Lords for the Mulder 
of Richard Coote, 11 Will. 3, 1699, 13 vol. 
939. — Commission to Lord Chancellor 
Somers to be Lord High Steward, ibid. 940. 
— ^The Indictment, ibid. 945. — ^The Coroner's 
Inquisition, ibid. 946. — ^The Lord High 
Steward's Address to him on his being 
brought to the Bar, ibid. 952. — ^He pleads 
Not Guilty, ibid. 954.— Speech of the At- 
torney General (Sir Thomas Trevor), for the 
ProsecutioD, ibid. 955. — Evidence for the 
Prosecution, ibid. 957. — His Defence, ibid. 
996. — Evidence in support of the Defence, 
ibid. 998.— He proposes to call Mr. French, 
who had been previously convicted of 
Manslaughter for being concerned in the 
same Transaction, and had been allowed his 
Clergy, but was not burned in the hand, 
ibid. io02.— The Attorney General objects 
to the competency of the Witness, ibid. 
1095. — His Argument in support of the 
Objection, ibid. ib. — Sir Thomas Powis's 
Argument for the Earl in favour of the com- 
petency of the Witness, ibid. 1007. — Argu- 
ment of Serjeant Wright in reply, ibid. 1011 . 
— ^The Judges deliver their Opinion against 
the competency of the Witness, ibid. 1014. 
— ^Speech of the Solicitor General (Sir J. 
Hawles), in Reply upon the Evidence, ibid. 
1026.*-*He is unanimously acquitted of 
Murder, but found Guilty of Manslaughter, 
ibid. 1031. — ^He claims the Privilege of 
Peerage and is discharged, ibid. 1032. 

WARWICK, John Dudley, Earl of. See 
Northumberland^ John Dudley, Duke of.^^ 
H Trial in the Court of the Lord High 
Steward for asserting the Title of Lady Jane 
Grey to the Crown, 1 Mary, 1553, 1 vol. 
765. — He is executed, ibid. 767. 

WARWICK, Thomas, Earl of. See Glocester, 
TJtomas, Duke of. 

WATSON, James. See Leach, Dn/den, 

WATSON, James (the Elder).— His Trial at 
the Bar of the Court of King's Bench for 
High Treason, 57 Geo. 3, 1817, 32 vol. 1.— 
Mr. Justice Bayley's Charge to the Middle- 
sex Grand Jury, ibid. ib. — ^The Grand Jury 
return a true Bill for Treason against Arthur 
Tbistlewood, James Watson, the Elder, 
James Watson, the Younger, Thomas Pres- 
ton, and John Hooper, ibid. 8. — The In- 
dictment, ibid. 10. — Counsel for the Prose- 
cvtieu and for the Prisoner; ibid. 20,-^The 



Attorney General (Sir Samuel Shepherd)' 
elects to try James Watson, the Elder, firsb 
ibid, 21. — Speech of the Attorney General 
for the Prosecution, ibidf. 26. — Evidence for 
the Crown, ibid. 56. — Examination in chief 
of John Castle, the Accomplice, by Mr. 
Gurney, ibid. 214. — His Cross-Examination 
by Mr. Wetherell, ibid. 284.— Mr. Wetherell's 
Speech for the Prisoner, ibid. 420.^-His 
Remarks upon tlie Witness, Castle, ibid. 
354, 358. — Evidence for the Prisoner, ibid. 
474. — Mr. Serjeant Copley's Speech on 
summing up the Evidence for the Prisoner, 
ibid. 499. — Reply of the Solicitor General 
(Sir Robert Gifford), ibid. 538.— Lord 
EUenborough's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 
578. — ^Tlie Jury acquit the Prisoner, ibid. 
673. — The Attorney General offers no Evi- 
dence against the other Prisoners, and they 
are discharged, ibid. 674. 

WATSON, Dr. Thomas, Bishop of St. David's. 
—Proceedings against him for Simony and 
other offences, 7 Will. 3, 1695, 14 voL 447. 
— Summary of the Irregularities alleged 
against him, ibid. ib. — Petition of several 
Gentlemen to the House of Lords against 
him, praying for leave to prosecute him, 
ibid. 452. — His Answer thereto, ibid. ib. — 
Proceedings in the House of Lords upon his 
resumption of his Privilege, after bis oepriva- 
tion by the Archbishop of Canterbury, ibid. 
454. — Arguments of his Counsel that the 
Archbishop had no power to deprive him, 
ibid. 455. — Arguments of Counsel on the 
other side, ibid. 459. — Record of the Pro- 
ceedings before the Ecclesiastical Judges, 
ibid. 463. — Burnet's Remarks upon these 
Proceedings, ibid. 467. — Accounts given 
of the Bishop by different Writers, ibid. 
470. — Burnet says that " he was one of the 
worst men he ever knew in Holy Orders," 
ibid. 468. 

WATSON, William. See Markham, Sir 
Griffin, 

WATT, John. See Semple, John. 

WATT, Robert.— His Trial at Edinburgh for 
High Treason, under a Special Commission 
of Oyer and Terminer, 34 Geo. 3, 1794, 23 
vol. 1167. — The Commission, ibid. ib. — 
Precept for the Grand Jury, ibid. 1169. — 
The Lord President's Address to the Grand 
Jury, ibid. 1171. — Precept for the Petit 
Jury, ibid. 1183. — Counsel for the Prose- 
cution and for the Prisoner, ibid. 1184.— 
Mr. Anstruther's Speech for the Prosecu- 
tion, ibid. 1189. — Evidence for the Prosecu- 
tion, ibid. 1220.— Evidence for the Prisoner, 
ibid. 1321. — Mr. Hamilton's Speech for the 
Prisoner, ibid. 1328. — ^The Lord Advocate's 
Reply, ibid. 1360. — The Court sum up the 
Evidence, ibid. 1386. — ^The Jury find him 
Guilty, ibid. 1394.— His Declaration and 
Confession, ibid. ib. — Mr. Hamilton's Ar- 
gument in arrest of Judgment, 24 vol. 192. 
—The Court overrule the Objection* in 



144 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



arrest of Judgment, ibid. 197.— Sentence 

is passed upon him, ibid. ib. — Account of 

his Execution, ibid. 198. 

• 

WEARG, Clement, Counsel. — He opens the 

Indictment on the Trial of Christopher 

Layer for High Treason, 16 vol. 138.— His 

Speech in Reply in the House of Lords in 

favour of the Bill of Pains and Penalties 

against Bishop Atterbury, ibid. 629. 

Sir Clement, Solicitor General, 10 



Geo. 1. — His Speech in support of the 
general Charge on the Trial of the Impeach- 
ment of Lord Chancellor Macclesfield, 16 
vol. 813. 

WEBB, Philip Carteret. —Note of the Pro- 
ceedings against him for Peijury in his Evi- 
dence on the Trial of the Action, brought by 
Mr. Wilkes to try the validity of General 
Warrants, 19 vol. 1172. 

WEBSTER, Augustin. See Houghton, John. 

WEDDERBURNE, Alexander, Solicitor Ge- 
neral. See Loughborough, Alexander, Lord, 
— His Argument in the Duchess of King- 
ston's Case against the conclusiveness of a 
Sentence of the Ecclesiastical Court as an 
Answer to a criminal Charge founded on 
Facts, virhich formed the subject-matter of 
that Sentence, 20 vol. 464. 

■ ■ Attorney Ge- 

neral, 19 Geo. 3. — His opening Speech for 
the Prosecution in the Case of the Madras 
Council, 21 vol. 1061.— His Reply in the 
same Case, ibid. 1195. — In 1780, he was 
Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, in 1793 
Lord Chancellor, and in 1801 was created 
Earl of Rosslyn, ibid. 1061 (note). 

WEDDERBURNE, Sir John.— His Trial for 
High Treason, in being concerned in the 
Rebellion of 1745, 20 Geo. 2, 1746, 18 vol. 
425. — Evidence against him, ibid. ib. — His 
Defence, ibid. 426. — He is convicted, ibid. 
427. — Mr. Justice Foster's Report of this 
Case, ibid, ib.— Account of his previous 
History, ibid. ib. — He is executed, ibid. 428. 

WEIGHTMAN, George.— Hi^ Trial at Derby 
for High Treason, under a Special Com- 
mission for the Trial of persons concerned 
in the Luddite Insurrection, 57 Geo. 3, 
1817, 32 vol. 1307.— The Indictment, ibid. 
755.— Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 
1316.-~His Counsel decline entering into 
any Defence, the Facts proved being the 
same upon which Verdicts of Guilty had 
been returned against three other persons 
successively by other Juries, ibid. 1380. — 
Mr. Justice Holroyd's Charge to the Jury, 
ibid. 1384.— The Jury find him Guilty, but 
recommend him to Mercy, ibid. 1386. — He 
is afterwards pardoned, upon condition of 
being transported for Life, ibid. 1394. 

WEIR, WilUam. See Lowrie, WiUiam, 

WEW>ON James.— His Trial in Ireland for 



High Treason^ in being concerned in the 
Insurrection of the Defenders, 36 Geo. 3, 
1795, 26 vol. 225.— The Indictment, ibid; 
228. — His Counsel make Objections to the 
Caption of the Indictment, which are over« 
ruled by the Court, ibid. 236. — ^The Prisoner 
pleads in Abatement a wrong Addition to his 
name in the Indictment, ibid. 237.— A 
Panel is returned instanter to try the issue 
upon the Plea in Abatement, ibid. ib. — ^The 
Jury return a Verdict for the Crown upon 
that Issue, ibid. 242. — Tlie Prisoner pleads i 
Not Guilty, ibid. ib. — ^The Attorney Gene- 
ral's Speech for the Prosecution, ibid. 243. ' 
— Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 251. I 
— Mr. Curran's Speech for the Prisoner, 
ibid. 264. — Mr. Justice Finucane's Charge 
to the Jury, ibid. 278. — Mr. Justice Cham- 
berlain's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 284.— 
Mr. Baroii George's Charge, ibid. 286.— 
The Jury find him Guilty, ibid. 289.— His 
Counsel move in arrest of Judgment upon 
a technical Objection to the Indictment, 
ibid. ib. — ^The Court overrule the Objection, 
ibid. 292. — Sentence is passed upon him, 
and he is executed, ibid. ib. 

WELLING, Thomas and Elizabeth, See 
Hathaway, Richard, 

WELLS, Susannah. See Squires, Mary, 

WENTWORTH, Sir John. See HoUis, Sir 
Jcjm, 

WENTWORTH, Sir Thomas. See Sirt^ord. 
Thomas, Earl of. --His Speech in the Debate 
upon the Liberty of the Subject, on occasion 
of the Imprisonment of several Gentlemen 
for refusing to lend upon the Commission 
of Loans, 3 vol. 61. 

WENTWORTH, Thomas, Lord. See Straf- 
ford, Thomas, Earl of. — ^He apparently pro- 
moted the Prosecution of Sir David Fowlis 
and others, on a Charge of opposing the 
King's Service, and traducing his Oflicers of 
State, 3 vol. 585.--His Judgment in the 
Star Chamber respecting the Sentence to be 
passed upon Henry Sherfield for breaking 
a Window ill a Church, ibid. 553. 

WEST, Mr.— His Speech in the House of 
Lords on summing up the Evidence on 
behalf of the Commons, on the Trial of the 
Impeachment of Lord Chancellor Maccles- 
field, 16 vol. 1057. 

WESTON, Francis. See Norris, Henry, 

WESTON, Sir Francis, Baron of the Exche- 
quer, 13 Car. 1.— -His Argument on deliver- 
ing his Judgment for the Crown in the Case 
of Ship-Money, 3 vol. 1065. 

WESTON, Richard.— His Trial for the Murder 
of Sir Thomas Overbury, 13 Jac. 1, l^lo, 
2 vol. 911.— Lord Coke's Charge lo tue 
Grand Jury, ibid, ib.— The Indictment, 
ibid. 912.— He pleads Not Guilty, Dw 
refuses to put buuself upon the CQ^mfi 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



though threatened with the Peine forte et 
dure, ibid. 913. — Lord Coke explains to 
him the Punishment of the Peine forte et 
dure, ibid. ib. — Evidence against him, ibid. 
919. — He at length puts himself upon the 
Coantiy, ibid. 923. — Further Evidence 
against him, ibid. 925.— He is found Guilty, 
condemned^ and executed, ibid. 928. 

WESTON, Sir Richard, Baron of the Ex- 
chequer, 32 Car. 2, 7 vol. 1528. — His Charge 
to the Jury on the Trial of Elizabeth Cellier 
for a Libel, ibid. 1183.— Roger North's 
Character of him, 8 vol. 166 (note). 

WETHERELL, Charles, Counsel.— His Ar- 
gument for George Easlerby, on liis Trial 
•with William Codling and others for 
feloniously destroying a Ship at Sea, in order 
to defraud the Underwriters, 28 vol. 291 .— 
His Speech in defence of James Watson, 
on his Trial for High Treason, 32 vol. 420. 

WHARTON, Thomas, Lord. See Batftunt, 
Charles, 

WHARTON, John. See Lilbum, John. 

WHISTON, William.—His Inquiry into the 
Evidence of Archbishop Cranmer's Recan- 
tation, 1 vol. 844.— Proceedings against him 
for publishing Doctrines contrary to the 
Established Religion, 10 Anne 171 1» 15 
vol. 703. — ^Address of the Archbishop and 
Bishops of the Province of Canterbury to 
the Queen, praying her to require the 
Opinion of the Judges, 'whether they have 
the power of proceeding against him in 
Convocation, ibid. ib. — ^The Queen refers 
the matter to the Judges and the Attorney 
and Solicitor General, ibid. 704.— Opinions 
of the Judges and of the Attorney and 
Solicitor General thereon, ibid. ib. — Pro- 
ceedings of the University of Cambridge 
against him, ibid. 707. — Doctrines dissemi- 
nated by him in the University, ibid. 708. 
— ^He is banished from the University, ibid. 
710. — Burnet's Account of Whiston's Case, 
ibid. 711. 

WHITAKER, Edward, Counsel.— His Argu- 
ment against the Amendment of the Record 
of the Jury Process in Tutchin's Case, 14 
vol. 1176. — His Speech in Defence of 
Dammaree, on his Trial for High Treason, 
15 vol. 562. 

■ Seijeant-at-Law, 17 

vol. 213. — His Speech in Reply for the Pro- 
secution on the Trial of Hales and Kin- 
nersley, for forging an Indorsement upon a 
Promissory Note, 17 vol. 247. 

WHITBREAD, Samuel.— His Speech as one 
of the Managers for the House of Com- 
mons on the Trial of the Impeachment of 
Lord Melville, 29 vol. 625. — His General 
Reply for the Commons in the same Case, 
ibid. 1392. 

^THITE, Charles, See Goodcre. Capium 
VOL, XXXIV, 



145 



j^omtfe/.- His Trial at the Bristol Gaol 
Delivery for the Murder of Sir John Dinely 
Goodere, 14 Geo. 2, 1741, 17 vol. 1079. — 
The Indictment, ibid. ib. — Evidence for the 
Prosecution, ibid. 1082. — His Examination 
and Confession before the Magistrates, ibid. 
1085.— His Defence, ibid. 1087.— The Re- 
corder's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 1089. 

The Jury find him Guilty, ibid. 1090.— 
Sentence of Death is passed upon him, ibid. 
1091.— He is executed, ibid. 1094. 

WHITE, Henry.— His Trial Tvith John Har- 
riott Hart for Libels upon Sir Simon Le 
Blanc and the Administration of Justice, 
contained in certain Remarks upon a Trial 
in the Admiralty Court, published in the 
Independent Whig, 48 Geo. 3, 1808, 30 
vol. 1131. — ^The Information, ibid. ib. — 
Speech of the Attorney General (Sir Vicary 
Gibbs) for the Prosecution, ibid. 1156. — 
Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 1167. — 
Mr. Adolphus's Speech for the Defendants, 
ibid. 1169.— Reply of the Attorney Gene- 
ral, ibid. 1180. — Mr. Justice Grose's Charge 
to the Jury, ibid. 1189.— The Jury find 
them Guilty, ibid. 1194.— Their Trial for 
Libels upon Lord Ellenborough and the 
Administration of Justice, contained in 
Remarks on a Trial of an Action of Assault 
in the Court of King's Bench, published in 
the Independent Whig, ibid. 1193. — The 
Information, ibid. 1194.— Speech of the 
Attorney General for the Prosecution, ibid. 
1226.— Mr. Clifford's Sjpeech for the De- 
fendants, ibid. 1247. — Tne Attorney Gene- 
ral's Reply, ibid. 1301. — ^Proceedings on a 
Motion for a new Trial, on the ground of 
the Evidence of Publication in London being 
insufficient, ibid. 1316. — The Motion is 
refused, ibid. 1319. — ^Judgment of the Court 
upon the Defendants upon both Informa- 
tions, ibid. 1321. — ^They are sentenced to 
be imprisoned respectively at Dorchester 
and Glocester Gaols for 18 Months on each 
Conviction, and to give Security, ibid, ib.— 
The Defendants bring a Writ of Error in 
the House of Lords to reverse the Judgment ^ 
of the Court of King's Bench, ibid. 1322. — ' 
Mr. Clifford's Argument for the Plaintiffs 
in Error, that the Court of King's Bench has 
no power to award imprisonment out of the 
County in "which the Offence was coinmit- 
ted, or in which the Court was sitting at the 
time of passing the Sentence, excepting in 
the immediate Prisons of the Court, and 
also that the Security required is illegal and 
excessive, ibid. 1325. — ^Argument of the 
Attorney General in support of the Judg- 
ment, ibid. 1335. — ^Argument of the Solicitor 
General (Sir Thomas Plumer) on the same 
side, ibid. 1337.— Mr. Clifford's Reply, ibid. 
1340. — The Judges deliver their Opinion 
that the Court of King's Bench has the 
power of imprisoning in any Gaol in the 
Kingdom^ and of requiring Sureties for 

good BehayiQur for a reasonable timei ibidi 



146 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



1344.^The Jadgment is unatiimously af- 
flrmedyibid. 1346. 

WHITIi, Dr.Thomas, Bishop of Peterborough. 
See Seven Bishops, 

WHITEBREAD, Thomas.— His Trial with 
William Harcourt, John Fen wick, John 
Gavan, and Anthony Turner, for High 
Treason, in being concerned in the Popish 
Plot, 31 Car. 2, 1679, 7 vol. 311.— White- 
bread and Fenwick are arraigned and put 
on their Trial with Ireland and others, but 
the Jury are discharged as to them, for want 
of Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 120. 
— Remarks on the illegality of this Proceed- 
ing, ibid. 497 (note). — ^These two object 
that they ought not by law to be placed a 
second time in jeopardy, ibid. 315.— The 
Court overrule the Objection, ibid. 316. — 
Indictment against them, ibid. 313. — ^They 
plead Not Guilty, ibid. 317. — Speech of 
Sir Creswell Levinz for the Prosecution, 
ibid. 320. — Oates's Evidence against them, 
ibid. 322. — Further Evidence against them, 
ibid. 334. — Their Defence, ibid. 357. — 
They require that their Witnesses may be 
sworn, which is refused by the Court, ibid. 
359. — Evidence for them, ibid. ib. — ^The 
King's Counsel reply, ibid. 393. — Evidence 
in Reply for the Crown, ibid. 395. — ^They 
are further heard in their Defence, ibid. 403. 
— Chief Justice Scroggs*s Charge to the 
Jury, ibid. 411. — They are found Guilty, 
ibid, 418. — The Recorder (Jefferies) passes 
Sentence of Death upon them, ibid. 487. — 
Their Conduct at the place of Execution, 
and their Dying Speeches, ibid. 491, 585. — 
Animadversions on the Speeches delivered 
by them at the place of Execution, ibid. 
543. ^ 

WHITELOCKE, Bulstrode. See Ho^ts, 
Denzil, — ^He conducts the Charge for the 
Commons on the seven last Articles of 
impeachment against Lord Strafford, 3 vol. 
1438. — Lord Strafford's favourable Opinion 
of his mode of conducting the Charge 
against him, ibid. 1456 (note). — His Ac- 
count of Lord Strafford's Defence of him- 
self, ibid. 1467 (note).-^He carefully ab- 
stains from all share in the Trial of the 
King, 4 vol. 990 (note). 

' ■■ Sir Bulstrode, Lord Com- 

missioner of the Great Seal of the Common- 
wealth. — His Argument on delivering his 
Opinion in the negative on the Question 
whether James Nayler should be put to 
Death for Blasphemy, 5 vol. 821. 

WHITELOCKE, James, Counsel.— Proceed- 
ings in the Star Chamber for a Contempt 
ia giving a professional Opinion on a 
Question of Prerogative, 2 vol. 765. — Mr. 
Margrave's Introductory Note to this Case, 
ibid. ib. — Sir Francis Bacon's Speech for 
the Pr9se€tttie»; ibid. 76^ 



Sir James, Judge of K. B. 

3 Car. 1, 3 vol. 369, 421.— His Answer in 
the House of Lords to the Charge of the 
House of Commons against him for concur- 
ring in the Judgment of the Court of King's 
Bench on the Habeas Corpus brought by 
Sir Thomas Darnell and others, imprisoned 
for refusing to lend upon the Commission 
of Loans, ibid. 161.— His Report of the 
Case referred to him and the other Judges 
by Charles the First, respecting the proposed 
Trial by Battle of an Appeal of Treason, 
brought by David Ramsay against Donald, 
Lord Rea, ibid. 495. 

WHYTE,Alexandcr.— His Trial at the Quarter 
Sessions at Newcastle-upon-Tyne for pub- 
lishing a Seditious Libel, 33 Geo. 3, 1793, 
22 vol. 1238.— Evidence for the Prosecu- 
tion, ibid. ib. — The Defendant's Address to 
the Jury, ibid, 1241.— The Jury at first 
return a Verdict of Not Guilty of Publishing, 
and afterwards a General Verdict of Not 
Guilty, ibid. 1248. 

WICKHAM, John. See PWdngton, Thomas. 

WICKLIFFE, John.— Proceedings against 
him for Heresy, 51 Edw. 3, 1377, 1 vol. 67. 
— -Articles of his heretical Doctrines, ibid. 
ib. — Bull of Pope Gregory the Eleventh to 
the University of Oxford respecting him, 
ibid. 68. — The Pope's Letter to Richard 
the Second respecting him, ibid. 70. — His 
Conclusions exhibited to the Convocation 
of Bishops at Lambeth, ibid. 71. — His 
Exposition and Defence of his Conclusioas, 
ibid. 73. — He is charged not to preach his 
heretical Doctrines again, and dismissed, 
ibid. 78. — In 1382 he is again summoned 
before a Convocation, ibid. 79. — Further 
Articles of heretical Doctrines exhibited 
against him, ibid. 80. — ^Letter of the Arch- 
bishop of Canterbury to the Bishop of 
London, enjoining .him to suppress the 
Doctrines of Wickliffe and his adherents, 
ibid. 82. — Letter from the Archbishop to 
the Chancellor of the University of Oxford, 
commanding him to forbid Wickliflfe and 
his followers from preaching their Doctrines 
in the University, ibid. 84. — Statute for 
restraining the diffusion of his Doctrines, 
ibid. 86. — ^Tbe Statute is repealed, ibid. 88. 
— ^Wickliffe's Letter to Pope . Urban the 
Sixth, with a Confession of his Faith, ibid, 
ib, — He dies at Lutterworth, ibid. 90, 225. 



WICKSTONE, Sir 
Richard, 



See Knigktlm/^ Sir 



WIDDRINGTON, WilKam, Lord. SeeDcr- 

wentwater, James, Earl of, 

WIGHTMAN, Edward. See Legatt, Bar- 
Mo/oTWcw. — Proceedings against him for 
Heresy, 10 Jac. 1, 1612, 2 vol. 727.--He is 
convicted before the Bishop of litdifield 
and Coventry, ibid. 730. — His Doctrines, 
ibid, 735. — Precept to the Lord Chancellor 
.to i9juie the Wnt. De h^eretiwo cottbwei^o, 



THE ST^ATE TRIALS. 



147 



iWd. r«4.— Writ to the Sheriff, ibid. 737.— 
He is burned at Litchfield, ibid. 730. 

WIIX30CKS, Samuel. See Green^ Captain 
Thomas. 

WILDE, George, Serjeant-at-Law. — Ilis 
Speech for the Commons in support of the 
Charge against Sir Edward Herbert, the 
King's Attorney General, 4 vol. 124. — He 
is appointed by the Commons with others, 
to manage tlie Impeachment of Archbishop 
Laud, ibid. 347. — His Speech on opening 
the Impeachment of Laud in the House of 
Lords, ibid. 353. 



■'■ Chief Baron of the Ex- 
chequer during the Commonwealth, 5 vol. 
416. 

WILDE, Sir William, Knight and Baronet, 
Recorder of London. — He was named as 
one of the Judges in the Special Commis- 
sion for the Trial of the Regicides, 5 vol. 
986. 



«————— King's Serjeant. — He 
wa8 one of the Counsel for the Prosecution 
on the Trial of Messenger and others, 6 vol. 
888. 

Judge of C. P. 20 



Car. 2, 6 vol. 899. 



Judge of K. B. 29 

Car. 2, 7 vol. 59, 261. — His Opinion in the 
Case of the Earl of Shaftesbury, 6 vol. 1296. 
— His Address on passing Sentence upon 
Green and others, for the Murder of Sir 
Edmondbury Godfrey, 7 vol. 222. 

WILKES, John. — His Case upon a Habeas 
Corpus, returnable in the Court of Common 
Pleas, sued out by him to try the legality 
of his Commitment by the Secretary of 
State for writing a seditious Libel, 3 Geo. 
3, 1763, 19 vol. 981.— The Warrant of the 
Secretary of State for his iVpprehension, 
ibid. ib. — ^He is arrested thereon, ibid. ib. 
—Serjeant Glynn moves the Court of Com- 
mon Pleas for a Habeas Corpus to the Mes- 
sengers of the Secretary of State, which is 
granted, ibid. 982. — He is committed to the 
Tower before the Writ of Habeas Corpus is 
delivered to the Messengers, ibid, ib.— 
Copy of the Warrant of Commitment to 
the Tower, ibid. ib. — ^The Messengers re- 
turn to the Habeas Corpus directed to them, 
that he was not in their Custody, ibid. 983. 
— Doubts respecting the sufficiency of this 
Return, ibid. 984. — A Habeas Corpus is 
granted' by the Court, directed to the Con- 
stable of the Tower, ibid. ib. — Mr. Wilkes 
is brought to the Bar, ibid. ib. — His Counsel 
move for his Discharge upon several Objec- 
tions to the Warrant of Commitment, ibid* 
985. — ^His Speech to the Court, ibid. 986. 
— Cbi^ Justice Pratt delivers the Judg- 
ment of the Court that he be discharged, 
npoa the gio«od that; as a Member of Par- 



liament, he is privileged from Arrest, except 
for Treason, Felonyi or actual Breach of 
the Peace, ibid. 987.-^Another Account of 
the Argument of the Chief Justice on giving 
Judgment, ibid. 990. — Resolution of both 
Houses of Parliament against the- Doctrine 
established by this Judgment, ibid. 993. — 
Protest in the House of Lords against this 
Resolution, ibid. 994. — Proceedings in the 
Court of King's Bench and in the House of 
Lords on two Informations against him for 
Libels, 4 Geo. 3, 1763, 10 Geo. 3, 1770, 
ibid. 1075. — Verdicts are found against him 
on both Informations, and on his not ap- 
pearing to receive Judgment, he is out- 
lawed, ibid. 1077.— -Before any Process is 
issued on the Outlawry, he appears in Court, 
ibid. ib. — His Speech to the Court on that 
occasion, ibid. ib. (note).— The Attorney 
General moves to commit him, and his 
Counsel move to admit him to Bail at the 
same time, ibid. 1079. — The Court refuse 
both Motions, ibid. 1081.— Mr. Wilkes 
sues out Writs of Error upon the Out- 
lawries, ibid. 1085.— He moves the Court 
to be admitted to Bail, which is refused, 
ibid. 1087. — ^Argument of the Errors assign- 
ed upon the Outlawries, ibid. 1093. — Lord 
Mansfield delivers the Judgment of the 
Court that the Outlawries must be reversed, 
ibid. 1098. — Copy of the Record of the 
Proceedings in the Court of King's Bench, 
ibid. 1382. — Upon the reversal of the Out- 
lawry, Mr. Wilkes moves in arrest of Judg<« 
ment, on the ground that the Informations 
were filed by the Solicitor General, and 
applies for a New Trial, on the ground that 
an Amendment of the Informations was 
made by a single Judge out of Court, ibid; 
1117. — ^The Court refuse both applications, 
ibid. ib. — Sentence of the Court upon him, 
ibid. 1124. — He brings Writs of Error, re- 
' tuniable in Parliament, ibid. 1126. — Reasons 
stated by his Counsel in support of the 
Errors assigned, 20 vol. 799. — Questions 
proposed by the House of Lords to the 
Judges, with their Answers thereto, 19 vol. 
1127. — ^The House of Lords affirm the 
Judgment of the Court of King's Bench 
in both Cases, ibid. 1136. — Proceedings 
in the Court of Common Pleas in an 
Action of Trespass, brought by him against 
Robert Wood, in order to try the Question 
of the validity of General Warrants, 3 
Geo. 3, 1763, ibid. 1153.— Counsel for 
the Plaintiff and for the Defendant, ibid, 
ib. — Speech of the Counsel for the Plain- 
tiff, ibid, ib.— Evidence for the Plaintiff, 
ibid. 1155. — Speech of Sir Fletcher Norton 
(Solicitor General) for the Defendant, 
ibid. 1158. — Evidence for the Defend- 
ant, ibid. 1160. — Serjeant Glynn's Reply, 
ibid. 1164. — Chief Justice Pratt's Charge 
to the Jury, ibid. 1166. — The Jury return a 
general Verdict for the Plaintiff, with 1,000/, 
damages, ibid. 1168. — ^The Solicitor General 
tenders a Bill of Exceptions; ivbzcb the 
h 2 



148 

Chief Justice refuies to accept, ibid.ib.— 

One of Ibe Witnesses for the Defeadant h 
ttfterwarda tried for Perju^ in his Eridence 
on (hia Trial, and acquitted, ibid. 1172. 

WILKINS, Thomas. See Gordon, Lord 

WILKS, William. See Maieuger, Peter. 

WILLES, Edward, Counsel.— Hia Speech 
for the Prosecution on the Trial of Eliia- 
beth Canning for Perjury, 19 vol. 311. 

Sir Edward, Judge of K. B. 8 Geo. 

3. — lie delivers his Opinion a^nst ad' 
tnitliog John Wilkes to bail on his Appear^ 
ance to reverse an Oullavtiy upon a crimi- 
nal Information, 19 vol. 1091- — He declares 
his Opinion in Wilkes's Case in favour of 
the right of the Soliciloc General (o lile 
a Criminal Information in llie absence of 
the Attorney General, and also in favour 
of the Competency of a single Judge at 
Chambers to order a formal Amendment 
in a Criminal loformation, ibid. 1133. 

WILLES, Sir John, Attorney General, 10 
Geo. 2. — His Speech for ttie Defendants 
in the Case of Ihe Quo Warranto against 
the Town and Port of Hastings, 17 vol. 



- Chief Justice of C. P. 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



20 Geo. 2, IB vol. 329, 19 vol. 673.— He 
delivers Ihe Opinion of the Judges against 
the granting a New Trial in the Case of 
Elizabeth Canning, 19 vol. 672. 



WILLIAMS, Dr. John, Bishop of tm 
Proceedings in the Star-Chamber 
him for tampering wiih the Wilnea 
(he Prosecution on an Information 
Um for publishing false News 
scandal of Government, and for re 
Secrels of State, 13 and 14 Car. 1. 
3 vol. 769.— He is defended by Gs 
Recorder of London, ibid. 771.— 
of the Attorney General (Sir John 1 
ibid. 772.-Speeches of (he Meml 
the Court on giving their Opinic 
spccting his Sentence, ibid. 783.- 
hishop Laud's Speech in givii 
Opinion, ibid. 792. — The Prow 
against him anB Lambert Osbaldal 
conspiring to spread false and scai 
Reports on political subjects, 1638-! 
804.— Letters of Dsbaldslon to 1 
which the' Charge is founded, ibid 
Speeches of the Members of the 
on giving their Opinion respecting tne 
Sentence, ibid. BIO.— The Sentence of the 
Court, ibid. aie.-Clarendon's Account of 
him, ibid. 819, — Notices of him by other 
Historians, ibid. 824.— He was afterwwls 
leatoted to bis Dignities, ibid. 8Q4 (nole). 



■ — Archbi^op of York. 

See Twelve Biihopi. 

WILLIAMS, , of Esse*.— His Case 

upon an Indictment for High Treason in 
writing seditious Books, 17 Jac. 1, 1619, 
2 vol. 1085.— Sir William Williams's allu- 
sion to this Case on the Trial of the Sevea 
Bishops, 12 vol. 328, ibid. ib. (note). 

WILLIAMS, Thomas.— His Trial in the 
Court of King's Bench for publishing a 
blasphemous Libel (Paine's Age of Reason), 
on an Indictment preferred by the Society 
for the Suppression of Vice, 37 Geo. 3, 
1797, 26 vol. 653.— Introduction to this 
Case, containing Mr. Bayley's Opipion 
that Blasphemy is an indictable OSence, 
ibid. 654.— Counsel for the Prosecution 
and for the Defendant, ibid. 656. — The 
Indictment, ibid. ib. — Mr. Erskioe's Speech 
for the Prosecution, ibid. 660.— Evidence 
for Ihe Prosecution, ibid. 669, — Mr. Stewart 
Kyd'a Speech for the Defendant, ibid. 671. 
. — Lord Kenyon's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 
703.— The Jury find the Defendant Guilty, 
ibid. 705.— His Affidavit in mitigation of 
Punishment on being brought up for Judg- 
ment, ibid. 709. — Mr. Justice Ashhurst'a 
Address on passing the Sentence of the 
Court upon him, ibid. 714. — Mr. Erskine's 
Letter to the Editor of the State Trials, 
explaining his motives for returning the 
Prosecutor's Retainer in this Case, ibid. 
714 (note). 

WILLIAMS, William, Counsel, 10 vol. 568. 
— His Defence of Ford, Lord Grey of Werk, 
and others, for a Conspiracy to debauch 
Lady Henrietta Berkeley, 9 vol. 1 59- — His 
Speech in Defence of Filkington and others, 
on their Trial for a Riot at the Election of 
Sheriffs for the City of London, ibid. 264. 
^Ilis Speech in Defence of Sir Patience 
Ward, on his Trial for Perjury, ibid. 333. — 
His Instructions to Algernon Sidney for his 
conduct on his Trial, 9 vol. 825 (uote). — 
His Speech in Defence of Mr. Hampden, 
ibid. 1078.— His Speech in Defence of 
Braddon and Speke, ibid. 1166.— His De- 
fence of Sir Samuel Bamardiston, ibid. 
1347.— His Speech for Sir S. Bamardiston, 
in arrest of Judgment, ibid. 135B. — His 
Speech for the Defendant in the Action of 
Pritchard v. Papillon for a false Arrest, 10 
vol. 332. — His Argument for Mr. Sandys 
in the Great Case of Monopolies, ibid. 495. 
—He is examined as a Witness on Oa(es'» 
Trial for Perjury, ibid. 1166. — His Argu- 
ment for the Earl of Macclesfield in the 
Action of Scandalum Magnatum brought 
by him against John Slarkey, ibid. 1387. 

Sir William, Baronet, Solicitor 

General, 4 Jac, 2, 12 vol, 125. — His Ail- 
ment in the Case of the Seven Bishops, that 
Sureties of the Pence may be required for 
the publicaUon of a. Seditious Libel, ibid. 
325'— His Speech in leply for t|)« FnNefiii 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



149 



tion on the Trial of the Seven Bishops, ibid. 
401. — Burnet says that he took very indecent 
liberties in conducting the Prosecution in 
that Case^ ibid. 201 (note). 

12 vol. 

752, 929, 1211, 1367, 13 vol. 422, 615.— 
Proceedings against him for the publication 
of Dangerfield's Narrative, reflecting upon 
the Duke of York (afterwards James the 
Second), 36 Car. 2, and 7 Will. 3, 1684-1695, 
13 vol.1369. — The Information in the King's 
Bench, ibid, ib. — He pleads that he caused 
the Paper to be printed as Speaker of the 
House of Commons, and by the command of 
the House, ibid. 1377. — Sir Robert Atkyns's 
Argument for him, ibid. 1380.— His Plea is 
overruled, and he is fined 10,000/. ibid. 1436. 
— ^The Judgment is afterwards reversed in 
Parliament^ ibid. 1441. 

WILLIAMS, WiUiam Peere, Counsel.— He is 
of Counsel for the Earl of Wintoun on his 
Trial for High Treason, 15 vol. 811. 

WILLIS, Francis. See Dammaree, Daniel; 
Purchase, George, — His Trial for High 
Treason in levying War against the Queen 
under pretence of pulling down Meeting- 
Houses, 9 Anne, 1710, 15 vol. 613. — ^The 
Indictment, ibid. 536. — He pleads Not 
Guilty, ibid. 545. — Evidence against him, 
ibid. 617. — Mr. Darnell's Speech in his 
Defence, ibid. 627. — Evidence for the De- 
fence, ibid. 630. — Reply of the Counsel for 
the Prosecution, ibid. 640. — Chief Justice 
Parker's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 646. — 
The Jury acquit him, ibid. 652. 

WILLOUGHBY, Elizabeth. See Hathaway, 
Richard, * 

WILLOUGHBY fof Parham, Francis, Lord. 
See Suffolk, James, Earl of, 

WILMER, John. — He was Foreman of the 
Grand Jury who threw out the Bill of In- 
dictment against Stephen Colledge, 9 vol. 
552 (note). — Kennet says that he was ex- 
amined before the Privy Council, and after- 

' wards obliged to fly beyond seas for his 
Conduct on that occasion, ibid. ib. — Roger 
North denies that he was obliged to fly on 
that account, but says, that he was compelled' 
to leave the country on account of his having 
kidnapped two youths, and sent them to the 
Plantations as Slaves, ibid. 557 (note). — 
Account of his Conviction for this Offence, 
extracted from Narcissus Luttrell's MSS., 
ibid. 1347 (note). — Sir John Hawles's Re- 
marks upon the Proceedings upon a Writ 
De Homine Replegiando issued against him, 
ibid. 1347. 

WILMOT, Sir John Eardley, Chief Justice o^ 
C. P. 9 Geo. 3. — Account of his Charge to 
the Jury on the Trial of an Action of Tres- 
pass and False Imprisonment brought by 
John Wilkes against Lord Halifax, His 
Majesty's Secretary of State, 19 vol. 1408. 



WILSON, James William.-2-He pleads Guilty 
to an Indictment for High Treason in being 
concerned in the Cato Street Plot, 33 vol. 
1542. — He is pardoned on condition of 
being transported for life, ibid. 1566. 

WILSON, William. See Sacheverell, WUliam. 

WINCHESTER, William, Marquis of, Lord 
Treasurer, 5 Edw. 6. — He was appointed 
Lord High Steward for the Trial of Edward 
Duke of Somerset for High Treason and 
Felony, 1 vol. 517. 

WINDHAM, Sir Hugh, Judge of C. P. 31 
Car. 2, 7 vol. 261, 609. — He delivers his 
Opinion with the other Judges against Lord 
Russets Challenge of a Juror for not having 
a Freehold within the City of London, 9 vol, 
592. 

WINDHAM, Wadham, Counsel.— His Con- 
duct on being imprisoned by Cromwell, with 
Serjeant Maynard and Serjeant Twisden 
for pleading in the Case of Mr. Cony, 5 vol. 
936. — He is ordered to attend the Consul- 
tation of the Judges previous to the Trial of 
the Regicides, as Counsel for the King, ibid. 
971. — His Speech for the Prosecution on the 
Trial of Colonel Harrison, ibid. 1023. 

Judge of K. B. 13 

Car. 2, 6 vol. 74, 769. — He is said by Sir 
John Hawles to have been the second best 
Judge in Westminster Hall since the Re*^ 
storation, 9 vol. 1003. 

WINDEBANK, Sir • Francis, Secretary of 
State. — Proceedings in Parliament against 
him for favouring Popish Recusants, 16 
Car. 1, 1640, 4 vol. 41. — ^Articles of Im- 
peachment against him, ibid. 44. — He 
escapes to France, ibid. 43. — His Letter 
from thence to the Lord Chamberlain, ibid. 
45. — He obtained his Office by the influence 
of Archbishop Laud, ibid. 41 (note). — Lord 
Clarendon's Account of the Proceedings 
against him, ibid. ib. 

WINNINGTON, Sir Francis, Solicitor Gene- 
ral, 30 Car. 2, 7 vol. 167,770.— His Speech 
in the House of Lords on summing up the 
Evidence for the Prosecution on the Trial 
of Philip, Earl of Pembroke, for Murder, 6 
vol. 1343. — His Speech on summing up the 
Evidence for the Prosecution on the Trial 
of Edward Coleman for being concerned in 
the Popish Plot, 7 vol. 61.— His Speech on 
summing up the Evidence on the Trial of 
Lord Cornwallis for Murder, ibid. 152. — 
His Speech on summing up the Evidence on 
the Trial of Sir Thomas Gascoigne for being 
concerned in the Popish Plot, ibid. 1033. 

9 vol.241, 12 



vol. 1295, 13 vol. 422.^-His Speech in De- 
fence of Henry Carr, on his Trial for publish- 
ing a Libel upon the Government and the 
Administration of Justice, 7 vol. 1121. — His 
Speech as one of the Managers for the Com- 
mons on the Trial of the Impeachment of 



150 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



Lord Stafford, ibid. 1302. — Hb Argument 
in Support of the Plea in Abatement in Fitz- 
faarris's Case, 8 vol. 296. — His Speech in 
Reply for the Prosecution on the Trial of 
Count Coningsmark and others for Murder, 
9 vol. 68. — His Speech iii Defence of ^ir 
Patience Ward on his Trial for Perjury, 
ibid. 336. — ^His Speech in the House of 
Commons in the Debate on the Earl of 
Danby's Impeachment, 11 vol. 729. 

WINTER, Robert.— His Trial at Westminster 
with Thomas Winter, Guy Fawkes, John 
Grant. Ambrose Rookwood, Robert Keyes, 
and Thomas Bates, for High Treason in being 
concerned in the Powder Plot, 3 Jac.l, 1606, 
2 vol. 159.— The Indictment, ibid, ib.— They 

, plead Not Guilty, ibid. 164. — Speech of Sir 
Edward Coke (Attorney General), for the 
Crown, ibid. 166. — ^The Jury find them 
Guilty, ibid. 185. — Judgment passed upon 
them and Sir Everard Digby, ibid. 194. — 
Account of their Execution, from the Har- 
leian Miscellany, ibid. 21 5« 

WINTER, Thomas. See Winter, Robert 

WINTERBOTHAM, William.— His Trial at 
the Assises at Exeter for preaching a sedi- 
tious Sermon, 33 Geo. 3, 1793, 22 vol. 823. 
— ^Abstract of the Indictment, ibid. ib. — 
Counsel for the Prosecution and for the De- 
fendant,ibid.ib.— Mr.SerjeantRooke'sSpeech 
for the Prosecution, ibid. 826. — Evidence for 
the Prosecution, ibid. 827. — Mr. Gibbs's 
Speech for the Defendant, ibid. 838. — Evi- 
dence for the Defence, ibid. 848. — Serjeant 
Rooke'sReply,ibid.869.— Mr.BaronPerryn's 
Charge to the Jury, ibid. 875. — The Jury find 
him Guilty, ibid. 876. — His Trial at the same 
Assizes for preaching another seditious 
Sermon, ibid. 875. — Evidence for the Pro- 
secution, ibid. 878. — Mr. Gibbs's Speech in 
his Defence, ibid. 884.— Evidence for the 
Defendant, ibid. 893.— Mr, Baron Perryn's 
Charge to the Jury, ibid. 905.— The Jury 
find him Guilty against the Opinion of the 
Judge, ibid, 906.— Proceedings in the Court 
of King's Bench on his being brought up for 
Judgment, ibid, ib.— The Sentence, ibid. 
907. 

WINTOUN, George, Earl of.— His Trial be- 
fore the House of Lords upon an Impeach- 
ment of High Treason in being concerned in 
the Rebellion of 1715, 2 Geo. i, 1716, 15 
vol. 805. — Proceedings in Parliament pre- 
vious to his Trial, ibid, ib.— Proceedings on 
his Trial in Westminster Hall, ibid. 815.— 
Lord Chancellor Cowper appointed Lord 
High Steward, ibid. 816.— The Lord High 
Steward's Address to him on his being 
brought to the Bar, ibid. 817.— The Articles 
of Impeachnfent, ibid. 818.— His Answer 
thereto, ibid. 823.— Reply of the House of 
Commons, ibid. 825.— Mr. Hampden's 
Speech for the Commons in Support of the 
Impeachment, ibid. 826. — Sir Joseph 
Jekyll's Speech on the same side, ibid. 830. 
*-Tho Attorney General, Sir Edward 



Northey's Speech on the same side, ibid, 
833. — Evidence in Support of the Impeach- 
ment, ibid. 837. — ^The Earl applies for lar-< 
ther time to bring his Witnesses, ibid. 859. 
— This is refused by theHouse^ ibid. 861.— < 
The Prisoner not entering into any Defence, 
the Managers for the House of Commons 
reply, ibid. 867. — ^Mr. Cowper's Speech in 
Reply, ibid, ib.— Sir William Tnomson's 
Speech, ibid. 869. — ^The Lords unanimously 
find him Guilty, ibid. 874. — ^He objects in 
arrest of Judgment, that the time is not laid 
with sufficient certainty in the Impeachment, 
ibid. 875. — Arguments of his Counsel in 
Support of the Objection, ibid. 876. — ^An« 
swer to the Objection by the Managers for 
Commons, ibid. 883. — Reply of Lord Win- 
toun's Counsel in Support of the Objection, 
ib^d. 888. — The Objection is overruled y ibid. 
893. — ^The Lord High Steward's Address on 
passing sentence of Death upon him, ibid. 
893. — He afterwards makes his Escape from 
the Tower, ibid. 896. 

WITHERINGTON, Sir Thomas, 5 vol. 239. 
— His Speech on presenting the Articles of 
Impeachment against Dr. Wren, Bishop of 
Ely, to the Lords, 4 vol. 38. — He abstains 
from all share in the Proceedings respecting 
the Trial of Charles the First, 4 ^ol. 990 
(note). — He refuses the oflBce of Commis- 
sioner of the Great Seal of the Common- 
wealth, not being satisfied of the authority of 
the House of Commons, ibid. 991 (note). 

WITHINS, Francis, Counsel.— His Speech in 
Defence of Thomas Knox on his Trial for 
conspiring with John Lane to suppress the 
Evidence of tho^Popish Plot, 7 vol, 801. 



— — — Sir Francis, 7 vol, 1125, 8 vol. 
778. — Resolutions of the House of Commons 
against him for presenting a Petition ex- 
pressing an Abhorrence of petitioning the 
King for the calling and sitting of Parlia- 
ments, 8 vol. 216.— He is expelled the 
House, ibid. ib. — Burnet says that "the 
merit of this raised him soon to be a Judge, 
for indeed he had no other merit,'' ibid. 217 
(note). — His Argument for the Crown on 
Fitzharris's Plea in Abatement, ibid. 269.— 
His Speech for the Prosecution on the Trial 
of Count Coningsmark and others for Murder, 
9 vol. 15. — He is raised to the Bench on the 
removal of Sir William Dolben, who was not 
satisfied to act for the Crown in the Case of 
the Quo Warranto against the City of 
London, 8 vol. 1039 (note). 



— - Judge of K. B. 35 

Car. 2, 9 vol. 310, 593, 820, 1059, 1146, 10 
vol.5, 40, 1092, 11 vol. 390, 1356.— His 
Address to Mr. Hampden on passing the 
Sentence of the Court of King's Bench upon ', 
him, 9 vol. 1125. — He is expressly excepted 
in the Act of Indemnity which passed at the I 
Revolution, 12 vol. 1241. — After the Revo- | 
lution |ie is examined by the House of Com- 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



151 



nons respecting^ the Proceedings against Sir 
Tlionias Armstrong, 10 vol. 119. 

WOLSEY, Thomas, Cardinal and Archbishop 
of York. — ^He is said not to have promoted 
the Divorce of Henry the Eighth from 
Catharine of Arragon, 1 vol. 299. — He and 
Cardinal Campejus are appointed by the 
Pope to try the validity of the King's Mar- 
riage, ibid. 304. — Their Commission from 
the Pope, ibid. 317. — ^His intrigues to secure 
the Papacy, ibid. 316. — ^The Great Seal is 
taken from him, ibid. 369.— Proceedings 
against him on the Stat, of Provisors for 
procuring Bulls from the Pope, 16 Rich. 2, 
20 Hen. 8, 1529, ibid. 370. — ^Abstract of the 
Indictment against him, ibid. 371. — He 
confesses the charge, but protests that he did 
not know that he acted against the Law, ibid, 
ib.— Sentence of Praemunire is passed upon 
him, ibid, ib, — Articles preferred against 
him in Parliament, ibid. 372. — Thomas 
Cromwell defends him in the House of 
Commons, ibid. 381. — The King pardons 
him, and restores him to his Archbishop- 
rick of York, ibid. ib. — His Revenues taken 
from him, and he is sent to his Bishoprick at 
York, ibid. ib. — He beseeches the King to 
spare theUniversity of Oxford, ibid. 382. — He 
is arrested at York by the Esu-1 of Northum- 
berland for High Treason, ibid. ib. — His 
remarkable Speech to Sir William Kingston 
just before his death, ibid. 384. — His Death, 
and Observations on his Character, ibid. ib. 

WOOD, George, Counsel, 22 vol. 380, 474, 
791, &86, 23 vol. 1081, 24 vol. 238, 25 vol. 
2, 1004, 1155, 26 vol. 8, 27 vol. 821, 29 vol. 
423. 

Sir George, Baron of the Exchequer, 



51 Geo. 3. — His Charge to the Jury on the 
TViil of John Drakard for publishing a 
seditious libel, 31 vol. 533. 

WOODBURNE, Edward.— His Trial with 
Arundel Coke at the Suffolk Assizes on an 
Indictment on the Coventry Act, for mali- 
ciously maiming and wounding Edward 
Crispe, 8 Geo. 1, 1722, 16 vol. 53.— The 
Indictment, ibid. 55. — ^They plead Not 
Guilty, ibid. 56. — Opening Speeches of the 
Counsel f>rthe Prosecution, ibid. 57. — Evi- 
dencefortheProsecution,ibid. 59. — Speeches 
of the Counsel for the Prosecution on sum- 
ming up the Evidence at the close of their 
Case, ibid. 66. — Woodburne's Defence, ibid. 
68. — Coke's Defence, ibid. 72. — Chief Jus- 
tice King's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 74.^ 
The Jury find both Guilty, ibid. 81.— On 
being called upon for Judgment, Coke urges 
that as the Evidence proved an intention 
to kill and not to maim and disfigure, the 
Offence is not within the Statute, ibid. 83. — 
Arguments of the Counsel for the Prosecu- 
tion against the Objection, ibid. 85. — Chief 
Justice King overrules the Objection, ibid. 
92.— Sentence, of Death is passed upon 
them, ibid. 93."They are executed, ibid. 



WOODFALL, Henry Sampson.— His Trial in 
London on an Ex-offioio Information for 
publishing Junius's Letter to the King, 10 
Geo. 3, 1770, 20 vol. 895.— Evidence for the 
Prosecution, ibid. 898. — Mr. Seijeant 
Glynn's Speech for the Defendant, ibid. 899. 
— Lord Mansfield's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 
900.— The Jury return a Verdict of " Guilty 
of printing and publishing only," ibid. 903. 
-"Argument of two Motions upon this Ver- 
dict ; First, Why it should not be entered up 
according to the legal import of the words ; 
Secondly, Why the Defendant should not be 
discharged from any Judgment upon it, ibid. 
903. — Serjeant Glynn's Argument for the 
Defendant, ibid. 903. — ^Arguments of the 
Solicitor General (Thurlow), Mr. Wallace, 
Mr. Dunning, and Mr. Walker, for the Pro- 
secution, ibid. 906. — Reply of Serjeant 
Glynn, ibid. 909. — Sir James Burrow's Re- 
port of the Proceedings upon these Motions,, 
ibid. 914. — Lord Mansfield delivers the 
Judgment of the Court, awarding a Venire 
de Novo, ibid. 917."*— Lord Mansfield after- 
wards reads his Judgment in this Case in the 
House of Lords, ibid. 921.— Questions pr(>« 
posed to Lord Mansfield by Iiord Camden 
respecting the Doctrine contained in the 
Judgment, ibid. ib. 

WOODWARD, Richard. See Messenger, 
Peter. 

WORCESTER, Dr. William Lloyd, Bishop 
of. See Lloyd, Dr, William, 

WRAY, Sir Christopher, Chief Justice of 
K. B. 24 Eliz. 1 vol. 1049, 1095,1128, 1251. 
—He is one of the Commissioners appointed 
by Queen Elizabeth for the Trial of Mary, 
Queen of Scots, 1 vol, 1167. — His Speech 
on delivering his Opinion in the Star- 
Chamber in the Case of William Davison,- 
ibid. 1238. 

WRAYNHAM, Mr. — Proceedings againsthim 
in the Star-Chamber for accusing Lord 
Chancellor Bacon of Injustice and Corrup- 
tion, 16 Jac. 1, 1618, 2 vol. 1059.— The 
Attorney 'General's Charge against him, ibid, 
ib. — Mr. Wraynham's Defence, ibid, 1066. 
—Serjeant Crew's Reply, ibid. 1071. — Chief 
Justice Coke's Speech on delivering his 
Opinion respecting the Sentence, ibid. 1072. 
—Speech of Chief Baron Tanfield, ibid. 1076. 
— Speech of Chief Justice Montague, ibid. 
1078. 

WREN, Dr. Matthew, Bishop of Ely. See 
Tujelve BtMopi.— Proceedings against him in 
Parliament for favouring Popish Ceremonies 
in the Church, 16 Car. 1, 1640, 4 vol. 27.— 
Articles of Impeachment against him, ibid. 
29. — ^The Commons resolve that he is un« 
worthy to hold any spiritual Office in the 
Commonwealth, and that the Lords be re- 
quested to join them in an Address to the 
King to remove him from his Service, ibid. 
36.— Sir Tliomas Witherington's Speech on 

delivering the Articles of Impeachment 



153 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



against him, ibid. 38. — ^No further Proceed- 
ings upon this Impeachment appear to have 
taken place, ibid. 42.—- Summary Account of 
Wren, ibid. ib. (note). — Lord Clarendon's 
Account of him, ibid. 27 (note). 

WRIGHT, Nathan, King's Serjeant, 13 vol. 
954, 1098. — His Argument in reply on the 
Trial of the Earl of Warwick for Murder, in 
support of an Objection to the competency 
of a Witness, who had been convicted of 
Manslaughter, and allowed his Clergy, but 
was not burned in the hand or pardoned, 

13 vol. 1011. — His Speech in reply for the 
Prosecution on the Trial of Charles Dun- 
combe, for fraudulently paying Exchequer 
Bills with false Indorsements into the 
Treasury, ibid. 1098.— His Speech for the 
Prosecution on the Trial of Mary Butler 
for forging a Bond, ibid. 1251. — His Speech 
in the House of Commons in favour of 
the Duke of Norfolk's Divorce Bill, ibid. 
1355. 

" Sir Nalhao, Lord Keeper, 2 Ann. 

14 vol. 861 (note). 

WRIGHT, Richard. See Prieit, WiUiam. 

WRIGHT, Dr. Robert, Bishop of Litchfield 
and Coventry. See Twelve Bishops, 

WRIGHT, Sir Robert, Judge of K. B. 2 Jac. 2, 
11 vol. 1352. 



' Chief Justice of K. B. 

3 Jac. 2, 11 vol. 1354, 12 vol. 124.— 
—He is one of the Sub-Commissionei?, ap- 
pointed by James the Second's Ecclesias- 
tical Commission, to examine the Vice 
President and Fellows of Magdalen Col- 
lege Oxford, respecting their refusal to elect 
Dr. Farmer President of the College, 12 
vol. 26. — He presided on the Trial of the 
Seven Bishops, ibid. 189. 

— — — — ^— His Answer in the 



House of Lords after the Revolution, for his 
concurrence in the Judgment of the Court 
of King's Bench overruling a Plea of Pri- 
vilege, in the Case of the Earl of Devon- 
shire, and imposing an exorbitant Fine upon 
him, 11 vol. 1369. 

WYATT, Sir Thomas. See Throckmorton, 
Sir Nicholas.-^lLh Trial for High Treason, 
1 Mary, 1554, 1 vol. 861. — He confesses the 
Indictment, ibid. ib. — He is executed, ibid. 
870.— Account of his Rebellion, extracted 
from Rapin*s History, ibid. 864. 

WYLDE, George, Serjeant-at-Law. See Wilde, 
George, 

WYLDE, Sir William. See WUde, Sir 
fFilliam. 

W YNDHAM, Sir Hugh, Judge of C. P. See 
Windham, Sir Hugh. 

WYNNE, William, Serjeant-at-Law.- His 
Speech in the House of Lords against the 
passing of tho Bill of PaiQS and Peqalties 



against Bishop Atterbury, 16 vol. 516.— 
His. Vindication from a reflection made by 
Lord Oxford on his Conduct on this Occa- 
sion, ibid. ib. (note). — His Defence of 
Francis Townley for High Treason, in being 
concerned in the Rebellion of 17459 18 vol. 
344. 



YATES, Sir Joseph, Judge of K. B. 8 Geo. 3. 
— His Argument on giving his Judgment in 
the Case of John Wilkes, on his appearance 
in the Court of King's Bench to reverse the 
Outlawry against him, 19 vol. 1083, 1090, 
1095. 

YELVERTON, Barry, Lord, Chief Baron of 
the Exchequer in Ireland, 37 Geo. 3, 26 vol. 
914, 27 vol. 759. — His Argument on deliver- 
ing his Judgment in the Court of Exchequer 
in Ireland against the discharge of Mr. Jus- 
tice Johnson, 29 vol. 357. 

YELVERTON, Sir Christopher, Queen's Ser- 
jeant.— His Speech for the Prosecution on 
the Trial of the Earls of Essex and South* 
ampton, 1 vol. 1336. — He opens the Indicts 
ment on the Trial of Sir Christopher Blunt, 
ibid. 1419. 



■ Judge of 

K. B. 4 Jac. 1, 2 vol. 217. — ^His Address 
to Lord Sanquhar on passing sentence of 
Death upon him on his Conviction as an 
Accessary to a Murder, 2 vol. 752. 

YELVERTON, Sir Henry.— His Argument in 
the Great Case of Impositions, against the 
power of the Crown to impose Taxes arbi- 
trarily upon the People of England, 2 vol. 
477. 



■ . Attorney General, 

16 Jac. 1. — ^His Speech on opening the In- 
formation in the Star-Chamber against Mr. 
Wraynham for slandering Lord Chancellor 
Bacon, 2. vol. 1059. — Proceedings in Par- 
liament against him for improper Conduct 
in his Office, respecting persons concerned 
in Monopolies and abuses of Patents, 19 
Jac. 1, 1621, 2 vol. 1136. — Charges against 
him with his Answers thereto, ibid. ib. — He 
is proceeded against in the Star-Chamber for 
a breach of Duty, ibid. 1141. — His Speech 
at the Bar of the House of Lords, ibid. 1142. 
—Sentence of the Lords against him for his 
Speech in Parliament reflecting upon the 
King, ibid. 1144. — Sentence against him for 
his Scandal respecting the Marquis of Buck- 
ingham, ibid. ib. — The King and the Mar- 
quis of Buckingham afterwards remit bis 
Fines, and he is set at liberty, ibid. 1146.— 
He is made a Judge of the Common Pleas 
in the Reign of Charles the First, ibid. ib. 



. Judge of C, P. 4 

Car. 1, 3 vol. 359. 

YONGE^i Sir William,-.Hi8 Speech as one of 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



153 



the Managers for the Commons on the Trial 
of the Impeachment of Lord Lovat, 18 vol. 
550. 

YORKE, The Hon. Charles, Solicitor General, 
33 Geo. 2.1— His Speech in the House of 
Lords on summing up the Evidence for the 
Prosecntion on the Trial of Earl Ferrers, 19 
vol. 945. — His Speech in Reply for the 
Prosecution on the Trial of Dr. Hensey for 
Treason, ibid. 1343. 

YORKE, Henry. See Redhead, Hemy. 

YORKE, Sir Philip, Solicitor General, 9 Geo. 
1. See Hardwicke, Philip, Earl o/*.— His 
Speech in Reply for the Prosecution on the 
Trirlof Christopher Layer for High Treason, 
16 voL 263. 



. Attorney General, 2 

Geo. 2. — His Speech for the Prosecution on 
the Trial of William Hales for forging a 
Promissory Note, 16 vol. 165.— His Speech 
for the Prosecution on the Trial of John 
Huggins for Murder, ibid. 312.r— His Speech 
for the Prosecution on the Trial of Richard 
Francklin for publishing a Seditious Libel, 



ibid. 630.— His Speech in Reply in the same 
Case, ibid. 664. 

ZiENGER, John Peter.— His Trial at New 
York for publishing a Libel against the 
Government, 9 Geo. 2, 1735, 17 vol. 675. — 
Proceedings of the Council previous to his 
Trial, ibid. 677. — ^He is arrested upon a 
"Warrant from the Council, ibid. 681. — ^He 
sues out a Habeas Corpus, and is admitted 
to bail, ibid. 682.— The Attorney General of 
the Province files an Information against 
him, ibid. 683. — His Exceptions to the Com- 
mission of the Judges, ioid. ib. — ^The At- 
torney General opens the Information against 
him, ibid. 690. — The Information, ibid. ib. 
— Mr. Hamilton's Speech for the Defendant, 
ibid. 696. — ^The Jury acquit the Defendant, 
ibid. 723. — The Corporation of New York 
present Mr. Hamilton with the Freedom of 
the City for his Defence on this occasion, 
ibid. ib. — Remarks on this Trial, ibid. 726. 

ZINZENDORF, Count. See Moravians.-— His 
extravagant Impression at a Conference upon 
some of the religious Doctrines of the 

' Moravians, 5 vol. 542 (note). 



END OF PART I.— NAMES. 



GENERAL INDEX. 



Part II.— Miscellaneous Contents. 



ABATEMENT. 

I» a Plea in Abatement, certainty to a cer- 
tain intent in general is required, 12 vol. 1194. 
—If the Prosecutor demur to a Plea in Abate- 
ment to an Indictment, the Defendant must 
join in Demurrer immediately, Layer's Case, 16 
Yol. 122.— Courts will not allow an opportunity 
ex gratii to a Plea in Abatement, ibid. 123. — 
The Statute of Anne, requiring an Affidavit of 
the truth of the matters contained in a Plea in 
Abatement, held by Lord Mansfield to apply to 
Criminal Cases, excepting Trials at Bar, 18 vol. 
399 (note).— On the Trial of John and Henry 
Sheares for Treason in Ireland in 1798, the 
Court held that the Statute applied only to 
Civil Cases, 27 vol, 267. See also Kirwan's 
Case, 3l vol. 577 (note).— Plea in Abatement 
by a person indicted for High Treason in Eng- 
land, that he is a Peer of Ireland, and ought to 
be tried by his Peers in the Irish Parliament, 
Macguire's Case, 4 vol. 663.— Plea in Abate- 
ment to an Indictment for Treason, that an 
Impeachment in Parliament for the same 
Treason is pending, Fitzharris's Case, 8 vol. 
251.— Plea in Abatement by a Peer of Par- 
liamfint indicted as a Commoner, Earl of 
Banbnrjis Case, 12 vol. 1168.— Plea in Abate- 
ment of a misnomer of the Christian Name of 
the Defendant, 16 voL 114.— Plea in Abate- 
ment to an Indictment for High Treason in 
England, that the Offence was committed in 
Scotland, and that the Prisoner resided there 
at the time of its commission, Kinloch*s Case, 
18 vol. 399.— Plea in Abatement to an In- 
dictment for a libel in England, that the 
Defendant resided in Ireland, and that the 
supposed libel was published while he was 
resident there, Justice Johnson's Case, 29 vol. 
385.— Mr. Abbott's Argument in the Court of 
King's Bench against this Plea, ibid. 388.— 
Mr. Richardson's Argument in Support of it, 
ibid. 394.— Lord Ellenborough delivers the 
Judgment of the.Court against the Plea, ibid. 
410. — Plea in Abatement to an Indictment for 
High Treason, that one of the Grand Jury by 
whom it was found is an Alien, Sheares's 
Case in Ireland, 27 vol. 267.— Sir John 
Hawles assigns as a Reason for the Abate- 
ment of a civil Action by the death of the 
Defendant, that there may be matters of 
Defence in his personal knowledge which are 
unknown to his Representatives, 1 1 vol. 476. 
—Plea in Abatement to an Indictment, that 
several of the Grand Jury by whom the Bill 
was found, held offices under the Crown, from 
which they were removable at pleasure, 



Kirwan's Case, 31 vol. 576.— Arguments in 
support of this Plea, ibid. 590, 597.— Argu- 
ments against it, ibid. 608, — The Court of 
King's Bench in Ireland give Judgment against 
the Flea, ibid. 611.— Plea in Abatement to an 
Indictment, that several of the Grand Jurors by 
whom the Bill was found have no Freehold 
within the City of Dublin, Kirwan's Case, ibid. 
577,— Arguments against the Plea, ibid. 579, 
600. — Arguments in support of it, ibid. 587. 
— Judgment of the Court against it, ibid. 
611.— The Amendment of a Plea in Abate- 
ment to an Indictment for Murder allowed by 
the Court,, before it was entered on Record, 
against the Opinion of Lord Holt, Earl of 
Banbury's Case, 12 vol. 1190. 
ABDICATION. 
Walsingham's Account of the Abdication of 
Edward the Second, 1 vol. 49.— Deed of Ab- 
dication signed by Richard the Second, ibid. 
1 38. — ^Reason assigned at a Conference between 
the two Houses of Parliament, previously to the 
passing of the Bill of Rights at the Revolu- 
tion, for declaring the Conduct of James the 
Second to be an Abdication, 15 vol. 101. 

ABDUCTION. 
In a Prosecution for Felony on Stat. 3 Hen.T, 
c. 2, for the forcible Abduction and Marriage of 
an Heiress, the offence is complete, though, 
after the forcible taking, the woman consented 
to the Marriage, Swendsen's Case, 14 vol. 595. 
^The same point was decided by Mr. Justice 
Lavn-ence, in a Case on the Oxford Circuit in 
1804, ibid. 596 (note). 

ABJURATION. 
Account of the ancient common-law practice 
of Sanctuary and Abjuration of. the Realm, 15 
vol. 145.— The Penalty of Abjuration, applied 
to Protestant Dissenters by the Stat. 35 E\h, 
was derived from this practice, ibid.'146— It 
was again abolished by the Toleration Act, 
ibid. ib. and 310. 

ABSOLUTION. 
Discussion respecting the Doctrine of Abso- 
lution at the Hampton Court Conference, 2 
vol. 72.— Account of the nature of Absolution 
as a Rite of the Church of England, and the 
power and practice of Divines respecting it, 
13 vol. 424. —Argument to show that the Ab- 
solution of a condemned Traitor at the place 
of Execution, by a Clergyman, without a 
confession of the Treason for which he was 
about to suffer, is not an Offence by the law of 
Engls^dy ibid. 42^. 



156 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



[MiSCBlX* 



ACCESSARIES. 



An Accessary cannot be convicted before the 
Principal is attainted, Sanquhar's Case, 2 vol. 
756.— By Stat. 2 Edw. 6, c. 24, if a man be 
accessary in one County to a Murder or Felony 
committed in another, he may be indicted and 
tried in the former County, ibid, ib.-— In the 
Indictment of an Accessary in Middlesex to a 
Murder committed in London, it must be stated 
directly tliat the Principal committed the 
Murder in London, and not merely that he was 
indicted for it there, ibid. 757. — If a person be 
indicted as an Accessary to two, and is found 
by Verdict to be Accessary to one only, the 
Verdict is good, ibid. 759. — ^Though the Prin- 
cipal be errpneously attainted, the Accessary 
may be convicted, unless the Attainder of the 
Principal is actually reversed, ibid. 760. — A 
Wife cannot be convicted as an Accessary to a 
Felony committed by her Husband, or by her- 
self under his direction, Turner's Case, 6 vol. 
612. — It is not necessary that an Accessary, 
though charged in the same Indictment with 
the Principal, should be tried at the same time, 
9 vol. 125. — ^When in practice the Accessary 
and Principal are tried together, the Verdict 
always is, and ought to be, returned against 
the Principal first, ibid. ib. 19 vol. 87. — ^An 
Accessary to several Principals jointlv is ac- 
cessary to each of them severally, 9 vol.126. — 
Discussion of the Question whether by the Law 
of Scotland, an Accessary can be tried before 
the conviction of the Principal, in the Debate 
on the Relevancy in Stewart's Case for Murder, 
19 vol. 24, 30, 58. — Authorities in support of 
the negative of this Question, ibid. 86. — In- 
quiry into the nature of Accessaries before the 
»ct, and the History of the Law of England 
respecting tliem, in Mr. Hume Campbell's 
Argument for the Crown in Macdaniel's Case, 
ibid.783. — It was held by all the Judges, in Mac- 
daniel's Case, that one who procures a Felony 
to be done, though by the intervention of a 
third person, is an Accessary before the fact, 
and within the meaning of the Statutes depriv- 
ing such Accessaries of their Clergy ibid. 804. 
—If it appears in Evidence on the Trial of an 
Accessary before the fact to a Felony, that the 
Crime of the Principal was not Felony, or not 
that species of Felony with which he was 
charged, the Accessary may avail himself of 
this, and ought to be acquitted, Macdaniel's 
Case, ibid. 808 (note). 

ACCOMPLICE. 

Sir Thomas Witheriagton's Argument, in 
Love's Case, in favour of the competency of 
Accomplices to give Evidence against persons 
tried for the Offence in which they are impli- 
cated, 5 vol.176. — Mr. Hale argues for the 
Prisoner in the same Case, that an Accomplice 
is not a "lawful and suflScient" Witness 
in Cases of High Treason within the mean- 
ing of the Statutes of Edw. 6, ibid. 240.— 
It was held by all the Judges in Tonge's 
Case, that an Accomplice is a good Wit- 



ness within the meaning of those Statutes, 
6 vol. 227 (note), 228 (note). — If a Pardon is 
promised to a person upon condition that he 
discovers a Plot generally, this does not destroy 
his competency as a Witness on the Trial of 
persons concerned in that Plot, Tonge's Case, 
ibid. 228 (note).— But Lord Hale thought that 
it would be otherwise, if he had been promised 
a Pardon upon condition of his giving Evidence 
against any particular person connected with 
the Plot, ibid. ib. — Discussion of Lord Hale's 
Opinion upon this point, in Layer's Case, 16 
vol. 158. — Chief Justice North says, in Lang- 
horn's Case, that it is no Objection to the evi- 
dence of an Accomplice that he receives bis 
maintenance from the Crown, 7 vol. 446. — Sir 
Robert Atkins's Remarks upon the credibility 
of an Accomplice, 9 vol. 721. — Discussion 
whether an Accomplice, already indicted for 
the same. Offence which he is called to prove 
against another person, is a good Witness for 
the Crown against that person. Murphy's 
Case, 19 vol. 702. — ^The Court in that Case 
decided in favour of his Competency, ibid. 709. 
— An Accomplice is not to be credited by a 
Jury, unless his Testimony be confirmed in 
some material points, but it is not necessary 
that he should be confirmed in every particular, 
31 vol. 980, 1123.— Mr. Serjeant Copley 's Re- 
marks upon his doctrine in his Defence of 
Watson, 32 vol. 513.— Lord Holt's Remarks 
upon the credibility of Accomplices in 
his Charge to the Jury on the Trial of Char- 
nock and others, 12 vol. 1454. — Lord Ellen- 
borough's Directions to the Jury in Despard's 
Case, respecting the mode of estimating the 
degree of credit due to the Testimony of an 
Accomplice, 28 vol. 487.— His Observations on 
the same subject, in his Charge to the Jury in 
Watson's Case, 32 rol. 583. — Chief Justice 
Abbott's Remarks on the Testimony of Accom- 
plices in his Charge to the Grand Jury, pre- 
viously to the Trials of the persons engaged in 
the Cato Street Conspiracy, 33 vol. 689. — Mr. 
Hume's Observations on the Law of Scotland 
respecting the admissibility of the Evidence of 
Accomplices, 11 vol. 1052 (note). — Mr. 
Burnett's Remark upon the same Subject, 18 
vol. 855. — It was expressly held in Downic's 
Case, that Accomplices were competent Wit- 
nesses by the Law of Scotland, 24 vol. 32. — 
Difference in the practice of English and 
Scotch Courts of Justice respecting the Exa- 
mination of Witnesses who are socii criminis, 
ibid. 30. — It is said in Quelch's Case, that by 
the Civil Law an Accomplice could not be a 
Witness, 14 vol. 1086. 

ACCROACHMENT OF ROYAL POWER. 

Mr. Luders's Account of the application of 
this phrase in ancient times, 11 vol. 623 (note). 

ACCUMULATIVE TREASON. 

Mr. Heme's humorous Remark on the doc- 
trine of Accumulative Treason, in Archbishop 
Laud's Case; 4 vol. 586 (note). 



CONMNTS.] 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



157 



ACQUITTAL. 

Acquittal in a penal Statute means an Ac- 
quittal by due course of law, and not a Pardon, 
Chetwynd*s Case, 18 vol. 327. 

ACTION. 

Definition and nature of an Action at Law, 
6 vol. 1078. — Argument of Sir Robert Atkins 
in the Case of Bamardiston v, Soames, in favour 
of the proposition, that where a wrong is done, 
and a particular Damage sustained thereby, 
the Law gives the party injured a Remedy by 
Action, ibid. 1077. — Chief Justice North's 
Reasons against the universality of this propo- 
sition, ibid. 1107. — No Action will lie against 
a Judge for any thing done by him judicially, 
ibid. 1096. — Actions in new cases are always 
received with caution by the Courts, ibid. 1108. 
— Sir John Hawles assigns as a reason for the 
Abatement of a Civil Action by the death of 
the Defendant, that there may be matters of 
Defence in his personal knowledge, which are 
unknown to his Representatives, 11 vol. 476. 

ACT OF PARLIAMENT. See Statutes. 

ADDITION. 

An erroneous Addition to the name of the 
Defendant in an Indictment cannot be taken 
advantage of in Arrest of Judgment, but must 
be pleaded in Abatement, Axtell the Regicide's 
Case, 5 vol. 1223. — The Stat. 27 Eliz. c. 7, re- 
quiring an Addition to be given to the name of 
every Juror returned, does not apply to Juries 
from the City of London, Matthews's Case, 15 
vol. 1323. — No Addition is required to the 
name of the person on whom an Offence is 
charged to have been committed, Goodere's 
Case, 1 7 vol. 1 025. — ^A general Title of Courtesy 
is a sufficient Addition in an Indictment ^ and 
therefore where a Prisoner, indicted in Ireland 
as a Yeoman, pleaded in Abatement that he 
was not a Yeoman but a Soldier, the Judges, 
upon Argument, held the Addition sufficient, 
Weldon's Case, 26 vol. 237. 

ADHERING TO THE KING'S ENEMIES. 

See Treason, 

If the rebel Subjects of a foreign Prince, who 
is at amity v^th Great Britain, invade England 
without a Commission from their Sovereign, 
they are the Enemies of the King of England, 
and English Subjects adhering to them, are 
guilty of High Treason, Duke of Norfolk's 
Case, 1 vol. 1 030. — Assisting a Government 
hostile to England in making war against an 
Ally of England, is Adhering to the King's 
Enemies within the Statute of Treasons, 
Vaughan's Case, 13 vol. 530. — Sending Sup- 
plies or Intelligence, or rendering any assist- 
ance to a Hostile Force designing an Invasion 
of England, is High Treason in the Article of 
Adhering to the King's Enemies, ibid. 531. — 
In an Indictment for this species of Treason, 
it is sufficient to allege in the words of the 
Statute that the party *' adhered to the King's 

]BQ«imeV^ wiUiQut saying << Against th^Kio^/' 



ibid. ib. — Mr. Justice Foster says, that in 
Gregg's Case the Judges were of opinion, that 
the sending Intelligence to Enemies, though it 
be intercepted before it reaches them, is an 
Overt Act of Adhering, and that this Opinion 
was adopted by the Court in Hensey's Case, 

14 vol. 1376 (note), 19 vol. 1344.— See also 
the Case of Thomas Howard, Duke of Norfolk, 
1 vol. 957. — Mr. Justice BuUer, in his Charge 
to the Grand Jury previous to the Trial of 
De La Motte, adopts this Opinion, 21 vol.808. 

ADJOURNMENT. 

Chief Justice Saunders says in Pilkington's 
Case, that a person who has authority to call 
and dissolve a Meeting, has also power to ad' 
joum it, 9 vol. 289. — A Criminal Court has 
the power of adjourning, in Capital Trials, 
after the Jury are charged and before verdict, 
where such Adjournment is necessary for the 
ends of Justice, 25 vol. 1295 (note). — Entry of 
such an Adjournment on the Record in Stone's 
Trial for High Treason, ibid. 1 296 (note).— Mr. 
Hume says, that an Adjournment of the Diet 
after the Assize is sworn, is strictly forbidden 
by the Scotch Law, 18 vol. 1068. 

ADMIRALTY. 

Observations upon the extent of the Jurisdic« 
tion of the Court of Admiralty, 13 vol. 454. — 
Antiquity and Jurisdiction of the Court of Ad- 
miral ty,and of IheOfficeoftheLordHighAdmiral, 

15 vol. 1232. — Mr.Erskine's Argument in Cod- 
ling's Case, that the Jurisdiction of the Admiral- 
ty Courtis strictly local, 28 vol. 274. — Caption 
of the Admiralty Sessions, 30 vol. 1132, 

ADULTERY. 

Mr. Emlyn's Objections to the Law of Eng- 
land for not expressly making Adultery punish- 
able as a crime, Em. Pref. 1 vol. xxxiti. — He 
states his Opinion, that in principle it is an 
indictable offence, ibid, xxxiii (note A).— 
Bishop Cozens's Argument that after a Divorce 
on the ground of Adultery, the Husband may 
lawfully marry again, 13 vol. 1332. — If a 
Husband find a Man in the act of Adultery 
with his Wife and kill him, it is Manslaughter 
only, Mawgridge's Case, 17 vol. 70. 

AFFIDAVIT. 

Instance of a New Trial being granted in a 
Criminal Case, by the Court of King's Bench 
upon Affidavits of the Jury, stating that they 
did not mean by their Verdict to find the 
criminal intent stated in the Indictment, 
Simons's Case, 19 vol. 680. 

AGENT. 

In all Cases of General Conspiracy, where 
many Agents are employed, the Acts of those 
Agents may be given in Evidence on the Trial 
of a person for being a party to that Conspiracy, 
in order to show its general nature and Objects, 
Home Tooke's Case, 25 vol. 127. — Discussion 
respecting the extent to which the Acts and 
DeclarationsofanAgentmayaffecthisPrincipal 

crimiasmyi LQr4 MelyiUe's Case, 29 vol* 747f ; 



158 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



[MlfiOBliZr. 



AIDING AND ABETTING. 

, To all Cases of burning or pulling down 
Buildings, the being present, Aiding and Abet- 
tirijg, though no Act be done by the party, is 
a capital Felony, Lord George Gordon's Case, 
21 vol. 493. 

AIR-GUN. 

Evidence respecting the construction and 
properties of the Air-Gun, 26 vol. 85. 

ALEHOUSES. 

Lord Keeper Coventry's Directions to the 
Judges, in the Reign of Charles the First, for 
their conduct on their several Circuits, re- 
specting the Regulation of Alehouses, 3 vol. 835. 

ALIEN. See Allegiance — Post'fuUi. 

An Alien may be a Witness, Duke of 
Norfolk's Case, 1 vol. 1026, 4 vol. 1177.— 
Definitioa and Description of an Alien by the 
Law of England in Lord Coke's Report of 
Calvin's Case, 2 vol. 636. — ^Incidents of 
Aliens, ibid. 639. — Reasons why an Alien 
born is not capable of inheriting Lands in Eng^ 
land, ibid. 640. — Precedents of Scotchmen, 
before the Union, being tried and executed in 
England for Treason committed in England, 
cit^ by Mr. Steele, Attorney General for the 
Commonwealth, in the Duke of Hamilton's 
Case, 4 vol. 1176. — If Alien Enemies join 
with English Rebels and are taken, the Aliens 
are to be tried by Martial law or ransomed ; 
but if Alien Friends so join, it is Treason in 
all, ibid. 1182. — An Alien Enemy coming 
into the Kingdom with a safe-conduct from 
the Kiug, has all the rights and privileges of 
an Alien Friend, Sir Robert Sawyer's Argu- 
ment in the Great Case of Monopolies, 10 
vol. 469.— -Such an Alien may maintain a per- 
sonal Action, ibid. ib. — An Alien cannot be 
naturalized by the King without the authority 
of Parliament, Mr. Williams's Argument in 
the same Case, ibid. 499.— Instances in which 
the Kings of England formerly exercised the 
power of expelling Aliens from the Realm, 
15 vol. 528 (note). — Where a party defends 
himself from a criminal Charge on the ground 
of his being an Alien, the presumption is 
against him, and he is held to strict proof of 
his birth out of the King's dominions, Lindsay's 
Case, 14 vol. 994, aud ^ueas Macdonald's 
Case, 18 vol. 860. 

ALLEGIANCE. See AUen^Fost-nati. 

Definition and Etymology of Allegiance, 
2 vol. 613, ibid. 679.-- Four different kinds of 
Allegiance by the Law of England, ibid. 615, 
4 vol. 1171.— Mr. Locke's Remarks on the 
constitutional meaning of Allegiance, 22 vol. 
1184 (note). — Allegiance and Laws are not 
co-extensive, 2 voL 569, ibid, 596.— Discussion 
of the Question whether Allegiance is due to a 
King de jure and not de facio, 6 vol. 121 
(note> — Sir Henry Vane's Argument, that 
AUegiaace is dtt« nQt to Uie natural body 



of the King, but to the King in conjunction 
with the Parliament, the Law, and the King- 
dom, ibid. 158.— Mr. Williams's Argument in 
Lindsay's Case against the universsd applica- 
tion of the Resolution in Calvin's Case, that 
Allegiance is a quality of the mind, and en- 
tirely personal and transitory, 14 vol. 1009. — 
The Allegiance due from a natural-bom Sub- 
ject to the King of England is perpetual and 
unalienable, and cannot be dissolved by his 
beine employed by a foreign Prince, iEneas 
Macdonald's Case, 18 vol. 859.— Reference to 
authorities establishing the inalienability of 
Allegiance, 5 vol. 504 (note). — Some foreign 
Jurists maintain a different Doctrine, ibid. ib. 
— Statutes at present in force respecting the 
Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy, 6 vol. 201 
(note). — Scotch Acts of Parliament relating to 
the Oath of Allegiance at the Revolution jn 
1688, 13 vol. 1450 (note). 

AMBASSADOR. 

By the Law of Nations, if an Ambassador 
compass the Death of ^ the King in whose 
country he is, it is Treason in him ; but if he 
commit any other kind of Treason, he is to be 
sent to his own Country, 2 vol. 881 and (note). 
— Argument to prove that an Ambassador to 
this Country has no privilege to exempt him 
from Trial for a Crime committed in England 
against English Laws, 5 vol. 491. — Sir Robert 
Cotton*s Relation of Proceedings against Am- 
bassadors for Misconduct, ibid. 495. — An 
Ambassador procuring a Rebellion against the 
Sovereign of that Country to which he is sent, 
has no privilege to exempt him from punish- 
ment, ibid. 499. — Opinions of eminent Civilians 
on the civil and criminal liabilities of Ambas- 
sadors, ibid. 503.— Lord Coke defines an Am- 
bassador to be a person sent from one Sove- 
reign to another, with authority, by Letters of 
Credence, to treat upon affairs of State, 20 
vol. 1115. — One who has not sovereign au- 
thority cannot send an Ambassador to another, 
ibid. ib. and 5 vol. 499. — Discussion whether 
the East India Company is entitled to send 
and receive Ambassadors, 20 vol. 1119. — 
Reason of the Privileges of Ambassadors, ibid. 
1130, 1134, 

AMENDMENT. 

A criminal Information may be amended at 
any time before Trial, but not an Indictment, 
9 vol. 1366 (note). — ^AfPlea in Abatement to 
an Indictment for Murder amended by the 
Court before it was entered on Record, against 
the opinion of Lord Holt, Earl of Banbury's 
Case, 12 vol. 1190.' — Arguments on the ques- 
tion, whether a clerical Error in the Teste of a 
Distringas Corpora Juratorum may be amend- 
ed by the Court after Verdict, Tutchin's Case, 
14 vol. 1135.— The Court of King's Bench 
are equally divided in opinion upon the ques- 
tion, ibid. 1187. — Lord Mansfield's Argument 
in giving Judgment in Wilkes's Case, that a 
Criminal Information may ba ameadad, 19 



C(annN«.]| 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



159 



vol. 1118. — The Amendment of an Infonnation 
for Misdemeanour by inserting the word 
"tcnour" instead of "purport," ordered by Lord 
Mansfield at Chambers, upon hearing the 
parties, but without the Defendant's consent, 
held good, Wilkes's Case, ibid; 1077, 1117.— 
Great clamour raised at the time against the 
conduct of Lord Mansfield in allowing this 
Amendment, ibid. 1082 (note). 

AMICUS CUBiaE. 

Mr. Justice Foster expresses an opinion, 
that if, after a Verdict of Guilty in a Case of 
Treason, any person, as Amicus Curiae, suggests 
to the Coiirt, that the Prisoner is entitled to 
the benefit of a Parliamentary Pardon, he 
ought to be heard, though the Pardon is not 
specially pleaded, Ratclifie's Case, 18 yoI. 435. 

ANARCHY. 

Tyranny said by Lord Camden to be better 
than Anarchy, 19 vol. 1074. 

ANNUAL PARLIAMENTS. 

Joseph Gerrald's Arguments in favour of 
Annual Parliaments on his Trial for Sedition 
in Scotland, 23 voL 961. 

APPEAL. 

Origin and History of Appeals, 6 vol. 314. 
■^Proceedings in an Appeal of High Treason 
in Parliament against Tresilian and others, in 
the Reign of Ridiard the Second, 1 vol. 971. 
—Opinion of the Judges and Serjeants that 
this Appeal was improperly brought, ibid. 113. 
—Wager of Battle does not lie in an Appeal 
of Treason in Parliament, ibid. 115, 6 vol. 
315. — ^Appeals of Treason in Parliament taken 
away by the Stat. 1 Hen. 4, c. 14, 6 vol. 314, 
ibid. 313 (note).— Proceedings on an Appeal 
of High .Treason in the Court of Chivalry, 
and an Award of a Trial by Duel thereon in 
the Case of Donald, Lord Rea, 3 vol. 463. — 
The King cannot pardon in an Appeal of 
Murder, because it is the suit of the party, 6 
voL 287. — Lord Holt approved of Appeals of 
Murder, 13 vol. 1199 (note).— Proceedings on 
an Appeal for Murder, Bambrtdge and Cor- 
bett's Case, 17 vol. 395-7.— The Stat. 3 Hen. 
7, c. 1, requiring the Court before whom a 
party is acquitted of Murder to remit bim to 
prison, of to take Bail for his appearance to 
an Appeal, does not apply to the case of a 
Pazdoi^, Cbetwynd's Case, 18 vol. 326. 



APPEARANCE. 

Courts of Law are not bound to take notice | 
of the voluntary Appearance of a Defendant 
upon an Outlawry, Wilkes's Case, 19 vol. 1081. 

APPROVER. See Accomplice. 

All Approver had formerly a P^iny a^ay 
for Maintenance daring bis service, 7 vol. 440. 

-"•^MdM'ji PtfiBktioii -of m i^ppr9¥er, 9 



vol. 127. — In early times, a party who had 
pleaded to Issue in a capital Case could not 
afterwards be admitted as an Approver, Kin-' 
loch^s Case, 18 vol. 410. — Reason of this 
Rule, ibid. ib. — The admission of Approvers 
was always a matter of discretion in the Court, 
ibid. ib. 

ARCHBISHOP. 

Arguments in the House of Lords in the 
Case of Dr. Watson, Bishf p of St. David's, on 
the power of an Archbishop to deprive a 
Bishop, 14 vol. 455. 

ARRAIGNMENT. 

Want of Arraignment assigned for Error in 
the Record and Proceedings against Thomas, 
Earl of Lancaster, 1 vol. 45 ; see also 5 vol. 
27. — Holding, up the hand upon Arraignment 
is merely a ceremony to show that the Prisoner 
at the Bar is the person called upon, 4 vol. 1 289. 
— ^tt seems doubtful whether a Peer should be 
required to hold up his hand on his Arraign- 
ment, 6 vol. 1319 (note).— Reference to various 
Trials of Peers as to the practice in this re- 
spect, ibid. ib. — Holding up the hand de- 
clared by all the Judges in Lord Stafford's 
Case to be merely a ceremony to show the 
Court who the Prisoner is, and the omission 
of it to be no legal exception, 7 voL.1555.— 
Blackstone's Account of the meaning and 
object of calling upon a Prisoner to hold up 
his hand at his Arraignment, 6 vol. 1319 (note). 
— It is no Plea to an Indictment, that the 
Prisoner has been previously arraigned in 
another Court upon an Indictment for the 
same Offence, unless further proceedings have 
been taken upon the former Indictment, Dr. 
Plunket's Case, 8 vol. 448. 

ARRAY. See Challenge, 

ARREST. 

Mr. Justice Foster's Observations upon the 
Law respecting Homicide upon Arrests or 
attempts to arrest, 19 vol. 873. — Discussion 
of the Question whether an Arrest under a 
Warrant, in which the Officer's Name is in- 
serted after the Warrant is sealed, is legal, 
ibid. 864.— The question decided in the af- 
firmative in Stevenson's Case, ibid, 878. — 
Remarks of Mr. Hume and Mr. Burnett upon 
the Law of Scotland respecting Homicide in 
resisting Arrests, ibid. 879. 

ARREST OF JUDGMENT. 

An erroneous Addition to the Defendant's 
name in an indictment cannot be taken ad- 
vantage of in Arrest of Judgment, but must 
be pleaded in Abatement, Axtell the Regicide's 
Case, 5 vol. 1223. — Upon a Conviction on a 
Trial at Bar in the Court of King's Bench, 
whether by Confession or Verdict, the Prisoner 
has four full days to move in Arrest of Jttdg** 
ment, Knightley's Case, 13 vqI, 403, 



160 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



DiiBrntsL. 



ARSENIC. 



Dr. Black's Account of the usual symptoms 
in Cases of Death from Arsenic, in his Evi- 
dence on the Trial of Mary Blandy for the 
Murder of her Father, 18 vol. 1140 (note). 

ART AND PART. 

Mr. Hume's explanation of the meaning of 
this phrase by the Law of Scotland, with 
Remarks upon its Origin and History, 10 vol. 
807 (note). 

ARTICULI CLERL 

Lord Coke's Observations upon the Articuli 
Cleri exhibited by Boniface, Archbishop of 
Canterbury, 51 Hen. 3, 1258, 2 vol. 131.— 
Articuli Cleri exhibited by Archbishop Ban- 
croft in the Reign of James the First, ibid. 
134. 

ASSASSINATION PLOT. 

Informations and Depositions respecting 
the Assassination Plot, 12 vol. 130;1. — ^Asso- 
ciations entered into by the Houses of Parlia- 
ment and other public bodies on tlie discovery 
of the Assassination Plot, ibid. 1462 (note). 
See Chamockj Bohert — Freindy Sir John — Par- 
hfttt, Sir WdUam-^Batikwood, Ambrose — Cran^ 
himef Oktrles — Lowick, Robert — Cook, Peter 
— Fenwick, Sir John, 

ASSAULT. 

On the/ Trial of an Indictment for a com- 
mon Assault upon a woman, Evidence of an 
Assault with intent to ravish is inadmissible, 
per Lord Mansfield in the Case of the Madras 
Council, 21 vol. 1227. 

ASSIZE. 

Manner of forming the Assize in Criminal 
Cases by the Law of Scotland, 19 vol. Ill 
(note). — Of the form in which the Assize 
deliver their Verdict by the Law of Scotland, 
11 vol. 92 ^note), 96 (note). — Mr. Hume says, 
that an Adjournment of the Diet after the 
Assize is sworn, is strictly forbidden, 18 vol. 
1068.— Instance of such an Adjournment with 
the consent of all parties, ibid. 1011. 

ASSIZE OF ERROR. 

Account of an Assize of Error against the 
Jury for finding a false Verdict by the Law of 
Scotland, 11 vol. 75 (note). — Instance of a 
Protest by the Lord Advocate, before the Jury 
were inclosed, for an Assize of Error against 
them in case they assoilzied, 10 vol. 790. — 
Instances of Proceedings on Assizes of Error, 
11 vol. 75, 101. 

ATHANASIAN CREED. 

Tillotson's Opinion of the Athanasian Creed, 
15 vol. 703 (note).— Dean Swift's Account of 
}t| ibid, ib( 



ATTACHMENT. 



Mr. Erskine's Reasons for bis Opinion re* 
specting the power of Courts of Justice to 
proceed by Attachment for Contempts, con- 
tained in a Letter to a Gentleman of the Bar 
in Ireland, 27 vol. 1019. 

ATTAINDER. 

Observations of Bishop Burnet and Lord 
Coke on the Attainders in the time of Henry 
the Eighth against persons not brought to 
Trial, 1 vol. 481. — Many of the Commons 
argued against Attainders in absence, in the 
Case of Lord Seymour of Sudley, ibid. 494 
(note). — Opinions of several eminent Writers 
respecting Bills of Attainder, 16 vol. 651 
(note).— :Lord Cromwell, in the time of Henry 
the Eighth, is said to be the first man who 
promoted Bills of Attainder, 13 vol. 726. — 
Arguments of Counsel in Sir John Fenwick's 
Case against Bills of Attainder, ibid. 631.— It 
was resolved by the House of Commons in 
that Case, that a Prisoner brought to the Bar 
to hear a Bill of Attainder read against him, 
must stand with the Mace at the Bar, ibid. 
546. — Act of Attainder against several per- 
sons concerned in the Rebellion of 1745, 18 
vol. 640. — The person of a Man under an 
Attainder by a conviction for High Treason is 
not absolutely at the disposal of the Crown, 
and until Execution is done, his Creditors have 
an interest in his person for securing their 
Debts, Mnesa Macdonald's Case, ibid. 862. — 
Mr. Cruise's Summary of the effects of At« 
tainders upon Peerages, 19 vol. 979. — ^By Stat. 
7 Ann, 0.-21, it is provided, that no Attainder 
for Treason shall work a Disherison of the 
Heir, or affect any other right than that of the 
Offender during his life, Emlyn's Pref. 1 vol. 
xxviii. 

ATTAINT. 

In Cases where an Attaint lies, the Jury 
cannot be fined by the Judge for giving their 
Verdict against Evidence, or the directions of 
the Court in matters of Law, Bushell's Case, 
6 vol. 1009. — ^Accounts by Mr. Barrington and 
other Writers of the reason why an Attaint 
did not lie against the Jury for a false Verdict 
in criminal Cases, 11 vol. 77 (note), 78 (note). 

ATTORNEY. 

Discussion respecting the origin and extent 
of the Rule, that Attornies shall not be called 
upon to divulge in Evidence facts affecting 
their Clients, which came to their knowledge 
as Attornies, 17 vol. 1224. — ^The Rule does 
not apply where the facts do not come to the 
knowledge of the Attorney in his professional 
capacity, ibid. 1239. 

ATTORNEY GENERAL. 

Remarks on the Origin and History of the 
OflSce of Attorney General, in the Judgment 
of the Court of Common Pleas in Wilkes's 
Case, 19 vel. 1128. — Home Tooke's Reraaiks 
on 4ie 0£|9e| 20 ?q1. 694.-"-Sir Fnoicis BaoQQ 






is said to hare been the first Attorney General 
"who was permitted to sit in the House of Com- 
moos, ibid. 696. — ^The Attorney-General had 
formerly no Pre-audience for any Motions but 
sach as he made for the King^ 2 vol. 881 (note). 

AUGMENTATIONS, COURT OF. 

Lord Keeper Somers's Argument in the 
Bankers' Case,that,the Court of Augmentations 
at its dissolution by Queen Mary, was united 
to the Court of Exchequer, 14 vol. 89. — Lord 
Holt denies, in his Argument in the same Case, 
that it was ever legally united to the Court of 
Exchequer, ibid. 36. 

AY3LESBURY MEN, CASE OF.—See Ashhy 

and White, 

BAIL. 

Distinction between Bailable and Replevia- 
ble, 3 vol. 91 . — In a Charge of Rape or Sodomy, 
the Prisoner cannot demand to be bailed de 
jure, but he may be bailed ex gratili. Lord 
Castlehaven's Case, ibid. 403. — A Peer com- 
mitted by the House of Lords cannot be ad- 
mitted to bail by the Court of King's Bench, 
Earl of Shaftsbury's Case, 6 vol. 1296. — 
Arguments' in the Earl of Danb/s Case, on 
the question whether a Person imprisoned by 
the House of Lords upon an Impeachment 
by the Commons, can be bailed by the Court 
of King's Bench upon a Dissolution of the 
Parliament, 11 vol. 831. — Bail cannot be 
taken in a Homine Replegiando till the party 
eloigned be produced, I^rd Grey de Werk's 
Case, 9 toI. 185. — ^An Acquittal of an Indict- 
ment for Murder is a sufficient foundation for 
admitting the Party to Bail upon an Appeal 
for the same Murder, Bambridge*s Case, 17 
vol. 396.— The Statute 5 and 6 Will, and Mary, 
authorizing a Court before which a Pardon for 
Felony is pleaded, to require Bail for good 
behaviour, 18 vol. 327. — The Court will not 
require a Party, who has been pardoned after 
a Special Verdict found upon an Indictment 
for Murder, to give Bail for his Appearance to 
answer to an Appeal ; the word '' Acquittal " 
in the Statute 3 Hen. 7, c. 1, being to be Con- 
strued strictly, Chetwynd's Case, ibid. ib. — ^A 
person in Custody on a Capias utlagatum after 
conviction of a Misdemeanour is in Execution, 
and cannot therefore be admitted to Bail with- 
out the consent of the Prosecutor, Wilkes's 
Case, 19 vol. 1089, 1094. — Recognizance of 
Bail in the King's Bench to appear and answer 
to an . Indictment for Felony in Parliament, 
20 vol. 356 (note). — A Tender of Bail on a 
charge before a Magistrate must not be con- 
ditional, but must be absolute like a Tender of 
Money, ibid. 1315. 

BAILIFFS. 

. Distinction between Bailiffs of Hundreds 
and Special Bailiffs, 16 vol. 50 (note).— Of the 
extent of protection which the Law gives to 
Bailiffs executing legal Process, ibid. 50, 
VOL, XXXIV, 



THE STATE TRIALS. 

BANISHMENT. 



161 



Distinction between Banishment and Trani- 
portation, 23 vol. 794.— Of the lejral and ety- 
mological meaning of the word Bar-ishment, 
ibid. 849.-— Argument that Transportation and 
Banishment are not distinct species of Punish- 
ment by the Law of Scotland, ibid. 861, 866. 

BANKERS' CASE. 

The Case of the Bankers in the Court of 
Exchequer, and afterwards in the Exchequer 
Chamber and Parliament, 2 Will, and Mary, 
—12 Will. 3, 1690-1696-1700, 14 vol 1.— 
Mr. Hargrave's Introductory Note to the Case, 
ibid, ib, — Account of the Case from Freeman's 
Reports, ibid. 6.— From the Fifth Volume of 
Modern Reports, ibid. S.—The Record of the 
Petition to the Court of Exchequer, ibid. ib. 
— Letters Patent from Charles the Second to 
Joseph Hornby, the Petitioner, ibid. 9.--The 
Attorney General demurs to the Petition, ibid. 
19. — The Court of Exchequer give Judgment 
for the Petitioner, upon which the Attorney 
General brings a Writ of Error, ibid. ib. — 
Record of the Writ of Error, ibid. ib. — 
Argument of Chief Justice Treby in the Ex- 
chequer Chamber against the Judgment of 
the Court of Exchequer, ibid» 23. — Chief 
Justice Holt's Argument for the Judgment, 
ibid. 29. — Lord Keeper Somers's celebrated 
Argument against the Judgment, ibid. 39. — 
Mr. Hargrave calls this Argument of Lord 
Somers's one of the most elaborate ever deliver- 
ed in Westminster Hall, ibid. 3. — The Court 
of Exchequer Chamber reverse the Judgment 
though the majority of the Judges thought it 
should be affirmed, ibid. 105. — Proceedings in 
Error in Parliament, ibid. 106. — Case of the 
Plaintiff in Error in Parliament, ibid. ib. — 
Resolution of the House of Lords that the 
Judgment of Reversal be reversed, ibid. 110. — 
Record of the Judgment of the House of 
Lords, ibid* 111. 

BAPTISM. 

Discussion at the Hampton Court Confer^ 
ence, respecting the Rite of Baptism according 
to the Liturgy of the Church of England, 2 voL 
72. 

BAR. 

The Inns of Court have merely an authority 
delegated to them by the Judges to call to 
the Bar, 20 vol. 688 (note). — It was held by 
several Inns of Court, on consultation, to be 
improper to admit to the Bar a person who 
had taken Orders, ibid. 587 (note). — Lord 
Mansfield says, in the Case of Hart, that a 
Mandamus will not lie to compel the Benchers 
of an Inn of Court to admit a Candidate to 
the Bar, ibid. 689 (note). — If a Person is ag- 
grieved by the refusal of the Benchers of an ' 
Inn of Court to call him to the Bar, the proper 
Remedy is a Petition of Appeal to the Twelvi 
Judges, ibid, ib, 



i§i 



GEi^riftAt tiiiitx f d 



(Ui^^htj. 



BAtlttSETAGE. 



Origin of the title ofBafon^t, if vol. 1023. 
—In an Itidictment fot the Murder of k 
Baronet^ it was held iinhecessary lo describe 
hira as stich^ Captain Ooodere*s Case, ibid. 
1025. 

BATTLE. 

In Appeals bf Treason in Parliament, Wager 
of Battle does not lie^ 1 vol. 115 and ibid. ib. 
(note).— Instance Of the Av^ard of a Trial by 

Eattle in the Court of Chivalry^ 3 vol. 483.— 
lackstone's Account, of the mo^e Of waging 
Battle npon Appeals, ibid. .484 (note); — 
Description and I)imensiOns of the Weapons 
used in a Trial by Battle in the Court of 
Chivalry, ibid. 511. — Particular Acfcount of 
the Trial by Battle, from Minshew's Dictionary^ 
ibid. 514. — Resolution of the Judges upon an 
Exception taken to a Trial by Battle in a 
Writ of Right, that the Chdnlpions ^ere liired 
for Money, ibid. 518. 

BENEFIT OF CLERGY.-See Cfergy. 

BENEVOLENCES. 

Mr. Hargrave's Accoudt of Benevolences, and 
the present state of the Iftw respecting thehi, 
2 vol. 899. — Mr. Yclverton'is Reniai-ks on B^he- 
voliences ih his Argument ih the Great Cas6 of 
Impositions, ibid. 485. — Mr. St. Johh'^ Argu- 
ment against a Benevolence collected tindei: 
Letters of the Privy Council, ibid. 900.— Bene- 
volences were declared to be contrary to 
Law by the Petition of Rights, i tol; 221. 

BIGAMY. 

Trial of Maty Moders for Bigainy iii the 
Reign of Charles the Second, 6 "vol. S73;— The 
Trial of the Duchess of kingstoii for Bigataiy; 
20 vol. 369.— -The history arid preseht State of 
the law respecting thfe Criihe of Bigamy, ibid. 
358 (note).— The Statute of Bigamy, 4 Ed#; 1 j 
c. 5, ibid. 361 (note).— Sir Samuel Romilly*s 
Remarks upon the Crihie of Bigamy, ibid. 362 
(note). — Discussion in the Duchess of King- 
ston's Case, whether a sentence of Jactitation, 
pronouucea by the Ecclesiastical Court upon a 
first Marriage, is not a conclusive answer to a 
Charge of Bigamy upon the party's contracting 
a second Marriage, ibid. 391. 

BILLS OF ATTAINDER.— See AttttMer. 

BILL OF EXCEJPtrONiS. 

The Stat, oir Westminster, 2 c. 31, which 
gives the Bill of Exceptions, does not ixterid 
to criminal Cases, Sir Hehry Vane's (Case, 6 
vol. 130.and (note).--Writto.the Lord Chief 
justice Pratt to confess hiis Seal to a Bill of 
Exceptions, 19 vol. 1001.— Form and ceremony 
of a Judge'^s appearance in Court to confess His 
Seal, ibid. 1003.— Lord Camden, when Chief 
Justice of the Court of Common Pleas,, refused 
to accept a Bill of fexceplions tendered to hiUk 
lifter the Verdict was recorded^ ibid. Ilig8« 



BISHOPS.— See Bimi BMt)pi. 

, biseussion of the Qaestion whether it ts 
lawful for a Bishop to hunt, 2 vol. 1167, 1174* 
— Lprd Clarendon's Notit^e of the Discusdieii 
in the House of Commons previously to the 
Trial of Lord Strafford, respecting th^ attend- 
ance of the Bishops in the House of Lords on 
the Trial. 3 tol. l3ld tnote>.— The Bishops 
voluntarily withdraw frbm th^ House on tnfe 
Triall, ibid. 1315 rtiDte).~Re&olved by thfe 
Hddse of Lords ifa tlie debates previotis to tfafe 
Trial of Lord Sttaffordj that the BiMhotis bk^b 
a right to remain iti the Hoiisfe ddririg a capital 
Trial till Judgment of De«lth is passed, f irol. 
1269. — The Bishqps witl)drew from the House 
dhrihg the Trial of Lord dtafford-, ibi^: 1^96;-^ 
So also in the Case of Siflidn Fraser, Lord Lovat, 
before Judgment was pronounced, delivering 
a Protestation, 18 vol. 824 (note). — Bishops 
could not, before the Stat. 7 and 8 Will. 8). be 
summoned to the Court of the JLord High 
Steward, ibid. 444 (note). — A Bishop pleading 
his Privilege must state it) his Plea generally, 
that " he is one of the Feeb of the ttealm,*' 
having no Letters JPatent to set out, !^rl of 
Banbury's Case, 12 vol. 1194— Qishops are 
hot to be tried by their Peei*s for Treason or 
Felony, but by a Jury, 4 vol. 744. — ^The Bisjiops 
are not named it^ the enacting part of Bills ot 
Attainder, l3 vol. 7i2. 

BLACK ACT. -^eeAmoldf kdujordi ^rmtrdf 

Wiiliam, 

In ^ Phlsebtltloh m thk Black Aet ibt 
hialicibusly shooting, it i§ hbt necessary td 
jirov^ that the Prisoner had his JPace blacked, 
or w^s otherwise disguised, Arnold'^ Casie^ l6 
vol. 744-5 and (liote).— Not is It tiecessdN- in 
sdch a Prosecution W ph)ffe exjitess ^iiuce> 
Schofldd*^ Casej 31 tol. l044, l047. 

BLANK WAttRAl*TS. 

Argumefats of Counsel in Stevenson's Case 
on the legality of an Artest iipon a Blank 
Warrant, 19 Vol. 864. 

BLASPHEMY.— See Aikenkeadi Thommt 

fetyttibtogV arid origittdl sighii5c4tioh of the 
Wbtd blasphetny, 5 Vbl. 822.— Whitelocke'i 
Argument ih Jame^l^ayleir^s Cas^, that Blas- 
phemy ought not to be capitdlly nuhished;ibid. 
82l.--Accoutit of the Offence of filasphetiiy, 
and its Ptihishmeht by the Mosaic tAw, ibitt. 
823. —Distinction between H'eresV dnd &is- 
phemy, ibid. 826.— Scotch Act of Parliament, 
ihaking Biasjihemy a bapital offence. Id vol. 
12^4 (bote).— Mr. ftayiey's Opinion itt WiU 
liams's Case, that Blasphehiy h ah ihdictabfe 
offence at Common Law, 56 vol. 654. — Re- 
ference to several Cases deciding that Blas- 
phemy is ajt Offence at Common Law, in the 
Speech of sir Vlcary Gibbs foi- the Prosectitibft 

Oh the Trial of Daniel Isaa^^ Eaton. 31 nxlL 
931. 



uMfMflMj 



3PH6 STATE TRIALS. 



lea 



BOROUGHS. 



or th§ <>Hf«l ^nd hatttfie df the Hght of 
BitfbttgH^ le %i^t iri§bif^s6ilttttiV«8 in Parlid^ 
m^ii 14 f^l. lr83.:^THidr« tir« tw« sbrtS bf 
Bdi^^ in £A^lft»d^ ibid. ib.-^In artci^nt 
Bottfteglili Vhercf iaticls are b^ld ih BUr^ag^^ th« 
BH^si^^ buf fe a feal righi ann^i^ tc^ ih^t 
iAki^ Id li^rid MdttabSH Vb ParUattietit, and 
ih tti9§6 Bbii9i3|b^ ktld Citie§ Which hate a 
right li$ «iect represetitaliVe»by tpreseriptidb di- 
dtaHef) il is ik ^^rianal right anniexed td the 
bbdy p6litie d)* edrj^fatidtt) ibid, ib^ 

fiOtJMANt 

AccouDt by Sir Walter §cott and other 
WiiteH^ of the fipecies of AgricultHrsll Tetiant 
80 called in Scotland, 19 vol. 118 (note). 

BOX-MONfeY. 

. it is a Sum of IVfohey annually distributed 
by the Leni Ghanceltor in private Charities, 16 
▼ol. 1259. 

BRIBERY.— See Hollis, Thomas Brand. 

The same ineB|>acities ensue Upon a Convic* 
tioh far Bribery at Common Law^ aa when the 
Preceedinli is by Aetibn upott the Statute, 20 

BRISTOL. 

Evidence l^sjpeetihg thd extent of the 
Boundaries of y>e Gity of Bristol, 17 vol. 
1056. 

BftittSH CONVENTION. 

Miniltes of t pdtitical Association so called^ 
feriiieQ iii Bdinburgh in 1793, 23 vol. 391.-^ 
See Skkmng^ Willwms Marglsrolf MauHces 



BULLSi 

fittti of I^6p6 Jhtihs m S^tbhd adthdritifag Ihtg 
Maifla^e df Catharine bf Arraeon to Henry 
tbfe toghth, 1 vol. 320.— Bull of Pope I'ias the 
Fifth, eitdommutiicating and det^riving Qneen 
tllikdtl«ih and abSblVing hel' Stibjects frdm their 
Allegiante, ibid. 10^6. 

BtJROLARY. 

If terend persens come to rob a House) 
ud soraci break in and ihe rest stand wateh, it 
is Bargli^ in all^ Colonel Turner's Cas^ 6 
veil 613, 4l5;-»If ft door is opened by a Piek« 
Mt^ it is as much a Burglary as if it were 
tiol4)Uy brokeii^ ibid. 614. — ^It was formeiiy 
lield that a parsen acc^itted of Burglary iii the 
House of Ai ahd stealing A^i gdods, could not 
be again indicted foe the same Burglary in the 
iMse of Ai and stealiiig B^s goods, though he 
AafiA be indicted for the Larceny of B's goods^ 
but it seefiaii now to be otherwise considered, 
>^. 616 (Bote)t*s^f Ik Footmaii open the Door 
^ hii Uia^f^ H«u^ froiLwithia in the atght, 



and admit persons for the purpose of robbing 
the House, il is JBurglary in the Fpotraan, 
Com well's Case, 1 vol . 785 (note).— If Thieves 
influence a Constable to break the Door of a 
House, and they then enter and rob, it is Bur- 
glary, ibid. 782. 

BURNING. 

In all Cases of burning Houses, the being 
present aiding, abetting, and encouraging, the 
actual Offenders, though no Act is done by the 
party, is a cat)ital Felony, 81 vol. 4981 

BUftNti^G n^ THE HAND, 

In Lord Ca^tlemaide^sCase it was determin- 
ed by the CdUtt of;Kidg's Bench, after a com* 
mUhicalidn tfrith the Justices of C* P. that a 
persoti conf itted of Felony ind burbt in the 
hadd, liiay be a Witness; otherwise, if he be 
convicted of Felony and pardoned, but not 
burht in the hand, 7 Vol. 1096.— Opinion of 
the Judges in the Earl df Warwitk^s Case, that 
i Commoner convicted df Felony, and allowed 
his clergy^ but not pardoned or burhed in the 
hElnd, is net a good Witness, 13 vol. 1014.— 
Pfeers are ekcu^ed frdin burning hi the hand by 
Stat. 1 Edw. 6, ibid, ib.— Opinion of the 
Judges in the Duchess of Kingston's Case^that 
d Peeress convicted of a clergyable Felony is 
entitled to the benefit of the Statutes id the 
same ihatiner as a Peer, without being burnt 
id the hand, 20 voL 642 (note). 

CABAt. 

Origin of the term, 6 vol. 1344 (note)."^ 
Attack upon the Ministers so called^ in the 
House of Commons, ibid« 1044. 

CAMiERONIANS.— See Covenanters ; CargiUf 
lionabii Haekstounf Davids Semple, John, 

Mr. Laing's Account of the religious Sect 
so ealled in the time of Charles the Second, 10 
vol. 868 (note).— The Apologetical Declaration 
and Admonitory Vindication, published by 
them in 1684, 11 vol. 949 (note).— The King^a 
Proclamation against it, ibid. 953 (note). — 
Wod row's Account of the Origin of this Pro^ 
clamation, ibid. 957. — Instance of a Cameronian 
in 1793 being committed by the Court of 
Justiciary for refusing to be sworn as a witness 
dn the ground of religious scruples, 23 vol; 145. 

CAMBRIDGE, UNIVERSITY OF. 

, Proceedings against Dr. John Peachell, 
Vice-Chancellor, and the University of Cam- 
bridge, for not admitting Alban Francis, a 
Benedictine Monk, to the degree of Master of 
Arts, 3 Jac. 2, 1687, 11 voL 1315.— Burnet's 
Aecount of these Proceedings, ibid. ib. (note). 
-^The Vice-Chancellor and a Deputatipn from 
the Senate are summoned to appear before the 
Ecclesiastical Commissioners, ibid. 1324. — 
Their Answer to the question proposed to 
theio, ibid. 1826.— Sentence of Deprivation 
passed en tiie Vke^^ChaoceUor. ibidi 1335«--k 



164 



GENEEAL INDEX TO 



PkflSClBZiX'^ 



Copy of the Sentence, ibid. 1339. — Proceed- 
ings of the University of Cambridge in 1793, 
against William Frend forpublishing a libellous 
Pamphlet, 22 vol. 523. 

CAPTION. 

The Caption said to be merely the style of 
the Court, and no part of the Indictment^ 23 
vol. 237. 

CARAVATS AND SHANAVESTS. 

Meaning of the Term, 31 vol. 440.— Trials 
of the Caravats and Shanavests under a Special 
Commission for the Counties of Waterford, 
Tipperary, and Kilkenny, in Ireland, 51 Geo. 
3, 1811, ibid. 413. — ^Lord Norbury's Address 
to the Grand Jury of the County of Tipperary, 
ibid. 414.— Trial of Andrew Kenvirick and 
Laurence Dwyer for robbing the Guard of 
the Cork Mail of his Arms, ibid. 418. — 
Speech of the Solicitor General (Mr. Bushe) 
for the Prosecution, ibid. ib. — Evidence for 
the Prosecution, ibid. 426. — Evidence for the 
Prisoners, ibid. 428. — The Jury acquit them, 
ibid. 430. — Trial of James Kitchen, under 
Lord EUenborough^s Act, for firing a Gun vfrith 
intent to murder, ibid. ib. — He is acquitted, 
ibid. 432. — Trial of David Lamy for a similar 
Offence, ibid. ib. — The Jury find him Guilty, 
ibid. 434. — Sentence is passed upon him, ibid. 
435. — Maurice Murphy is tried and convicted 
of Highway Robbery, ibid. ib. — Henry Hogan 
is tried for firing a Gun, and acquitted, ibid. 
436. — He is tried and convicted of receiving a 
Blunderbuss, knowing it to have been stolen, 
ibid. 381. — Patrick Dwyer and several others 
are tried and convicted for assuming the name 
of Caravats, and sounding a Horn, with intent 
to excite a Riot, ibid. 437. — ^Trial of John Cor- 
coran and others, for firing a Gun with intent 
to murder, and also for assuming the name of 
Caravats, and appearing in arms by night, il^d. 
439. — ^They are found Guilty of a Misdemea- 
nour, an error being discovered in the capital 
part of the Indictment, ibid. 443. — Thomas 
Power is tried, convicted, and sentenced to 
Death, for Murder, ibid. ib. — Michael Foley is 
tried and convicted for robbing a Soldier of his 
firelock, ibid. 446. — John Lonergan is tried, 
convicted, and sentenced to Death, for an at- 
tempt to rob a person of a Gun, ibid. ib. — 
Timothy Dwyer is tried, convicted, and sen- 
tenced to Death, for attacking a House in the 
night-time, ibid. 449. — James Lang is tried, 
convicted, and sentenced to Death, for Murder, 
ibid. 450. — Proceedings under the Commission 
for the County of Waterford, ibid. 451. — Trial 
of Thomas Blake and several others for Menaces 
and Threats, and firing a Gun with intent to 
murder, ibid.ib. — Mr. Serjeant Moore's Speech 
for the Prosecution, ibid. 452. — They are found 
guilty, and receive sentence of Death, ibid. 463. 
— ^Thomas Dwyer pleads guilty to an Indict- 
ment for stealing arms, and Sentence of Death 
is passed upon him, ibid. ib. — ^John Brown and 
jMaurice Quan sire tried for Burglary and found 



Guilty, ibid. 465. — ^The Jury recommend Brown 
to mercy ; Quan receives Sentence of Death, 
ibid. 466. — ^Thomas Welan and John Welan 
plead Guilty to an Indictment for Burglary, 
ibid. ib. — Address of the Solicitor General to the 
Court, on the close of the Trials for the County 
of Waterford, ibid. ib. — ^Lord Norbury's Ad- 
dress to the Grand Jury of the County of Kil- 
kenny, ibid. 468. — ^John Quinlan is tried for 
Robbery and Burglary, ibid. 472.— Speech of 
the Solicitor General for the Prosecution, ibid, 
ib. — Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 488. 
— Evidence for the Prisoner, ibid. 493. — ^The 
Jury find him Guilty, and Sentence of Death 
is passed upon him, ibid. 496. 

CATO STREET PLOT.— See Thutlewood, 

Arthur, 

CERTAINTY. 

Chief Justice De Grey's Explanation of the 
different degrees of Certainty required in dif- 
ferent kinds of Pleadings, 20 vol. 792. 

CERTIORARI. 

Certiorari to remove an Indictment found 
in an inferior Court to the Court of the Lord 
High Steward, 6 vol. 773. See also Balmeriao, 
Arthur y Lord; Byron, William, Lord; Ferrars, 
Laurence, Earl ; Kilmarnock, WilUam, Earl of; 
Mohun, Charles, Lord; Warwick, Edw(«rd, 
Earl of. 

CHAINS.— See Irons. 

CHALLENGE. 

There can be no Challenge of a Peer of the 
Realm in a Trial before thel^rd High Steward, 
Duke of Somerset's Case, 1 vol. 521 .—So held 
by all the Judges in Lord Castlehaven's Case, 
3 vol. 402. — ^The Challenge of a Peer disallowed 
on the Trial of the Earls of Essex and South- 
ampton, 1 vol. 1335. — In a Trial for Treason 
before the Lord High Steward, the Prisoner 
cannot challenge any of his Peers for being 
implicated in the same Treason with himself^ 
unless they are attainted, Duke of Norfolk's 
Case, ibid. 765. — ^A Challenge of a Juror 
after the Oath was administered, but before 
the Juror had kissed the Book, was held to be 
too late, Colonel Morris's Case, 4 vol. 1255. — 
It was resolved by all the Judges in the Case of 
the Regicides, that if several persons, jointly 
indicted for the same Ofience, are severally 
tried, and if, after the conviction of some, any 
of the same Jurors are called to try the others^ 
they cannot be challenged on this Account, 5 
vol. 978. — Lord Holt seems to have held the same 
doctrine in Cranburne's Case, 13 vol. 235.— 
The Objection was made on the Trial of Peter 
Cook, but was overruled by the Court, ibid. 
313. — It was held by all the Judges, in the 
Case of the Regicides, that if one Jury be 
charged with several Prisoners, and they chal- 
lenge peremptorily, and sever in their Chal- 
lenges, a Juror, who is challenged by one, is 
drawn for all, 5 vol, 979. — Peremptory Chal- 
lenges are only allowed in capitcd Casesi 



CoMTKMTaj 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



165 



&eadiDg*9 Case, 7 vol. 265 .—The same point 
-was ruled by Chief Justice Jefieries on dates's 
Trial for Perjury, 10 vol. 1080. See also 
Blackstone's Opinion, ibid» i\\, (note).—- The 
Crown may challenge peremptorily till the 
Panel is gone through, because the Law will 
have those for Jurors who are minus suspecti, 
8 vol. 334. — Chief Justice Pemberton, on the 
Trial of Lord Grey of Werk, states the rule to 
be, that the King cannot challenge without 
cause, but that he is not bound to show his 
Cause till the Panel is gone through, 9 vol. 128. 
•—In Count Coningsmark'sCase, Chief Justice 
Pemberton seems to have expressed a different 
Opinion, ibid. 12.-^ If there be a Default of 
Jarors when the King challenges, he must show 
Cause for each Challenge, Peter Cook's Case, 
13 vol. 313. — ^This Rule was objected to by the 
Counsel for the Prisoner in Layer's Case, but 
Lord Holt and the rest of the Court overruled 
the Objection, 16 vol. 134. — ^The same Rule is 
stated by the Court on Home Tooke's Trial for 
High Treason, 25 vol. 25. See also Spencer 
Cowper's Case, 13 vol. 1108. — Discussion of 
the principle and validity of the Rule, that the 
King is not to show his Cause of Challenge till 
the Panel is gone through, in the Case of 
O'Coigly and others, 26 vol. 1231. — Judgment 
of the Court in that Case, confirming the Rule, 
ibid. 1240. — ^Allowance of the Challenge of a 
Juror by the Crown, on the Trial of Sir Miles 
Stapleton for being concerned in the Popish 
Plot, because he had disparaged the Witnesses 
for the Plot by calling his Dogs after them, 8 
vol 503. — ^Arguments on the validity of a 
Challenge to a Juror on aTrial for High Treason 
in London, for not having a freehold of 405. per 
annum within the City, Lord RusselFs Case, 9 
vol. 586. — ^Judgment of the Court against the 
Challenge, ibid. 591.— Sir John Hawles's 
Remarks upon this Judgment, ibid. 795. — 
Discussion whether it is a good cause of 
Challenge to a Juror, by the Defendant, on a 
Trial for a Misdemeanour, that he holds an 
office of profit under the Crown, ibid. 1057. — 
Lord Holt holds, on the Trial of Sir William 
Parkyns, that it is no Cause of Challenge by 
the Prisoner to a Juror that he is a Servant of 
the King, 13 vol. 75. — See Mr. Hargrave's 
Note upon this Subject, 22 vol. 1038 (note). — 
It is a good cause of Challenge to a Juror that 
he has expressed an Opinion of the Prisoner's 
Guilt; but the fact must not be proved by the 
Examination of the Juror, but must be proved 
aliunde, Peter Cook's Case, 13 vol. 334. — If the 
cause of Challenge touch the honesty of the Juror, 
he is not to be examined on it, 15 vol. 898 (note). 
—Lord Holt says in Tutchin's Case, that there 
canbenoChallengeforfavouragainsttheCrown, 
14?ol. 1101. — Discussion of this Doctrine in 
the Case of Sheridan and Kirwan, in Ireland, 
3 vol. 554. — It is a good cause of Challenge to 
a Juror in a criminal Case, that he is one of 
the Grand Jury who found the Bill, Dr. Oates's 
Case, 10 vol. 1081. — It is no cause of Chal- 
lenge by the Prisoner, that a Law-suit was, 
some time previously, depending between him 



and the Juror, Francia's Case, 15 vol. 897. 
—The Prisoner cannot challenge peremp- 
torily on the Trial of collateral Issues, Rat- 
cliflfe's Case, 18 voL 432.--Upon this point a 
different Opinion appears to have prevailed 
formerly, ibid. ib. (note). — Lord Coke says 
that when the King is a party, a person shall 
not challenge the Array for favour in the. 
Sheriff, because, in respect of his Allegiance, 
he ought to favour the Crown more, 22 vol. 
1038 (note). — Mr. Hargrave's Remarks upon 
the reason given by Lord Coke for this Posi- 
tion, ibid. ib. — Lord Coke says, that if the 
Sheriff be a Vadelect, or menial servant of the 
Crown, the Array may be challenged, ibid. ib. 
— Mr. Hargrave's Note on this point, ibid. ib. 
— Discussion whether there can be a Challenge 
to a Grand Juror, in Sheridan and Kirwan 's 
Case in Ireland, 31 vol. 548. — Decided in the 
negative by a Majority of the Court of King's 
Bench, ibid. 566. — Form of the Challenge in 
that Case, ibid. 545. — Trial of a Challenge of 
the Array, ibid. 755. — Trial of a Challenge of 
a Juror, 26 vol. 1230. — ^The Rule respecting 
the time of making a Challenge in Criminal 
Cases is, that the Prisoner should declare 
whether he challenges, before the Counsel for 
the Crown are called upon, Brandreth's Case, 
32 vol. 774. — The same Rule is insisted upon 
by the Attorney General in Layer's Case, 16 
vol. 135. 

CHAMBERS, 

The Benchers of the several Inns of Court 
have the sole Privilege of making Rules 
respecting the letting of Chambers, subject to 
an Appeal to the Lord Chancellor and the 
Twelve Judges, 20 vol. 689 (note), 

CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER. 

The Chancellor of the Exchequer said to be 
a Judicial Officer, 15 vol. 1320. 

CHANCE-MEDLEY. 

If one, shooting at Wild Fowl, happen to 
kill a Man, this is Chance-medley, 16 vol. 80. 
— If a Parent or Master, being provoked by 
some miscarriage of a Child or Servant, cor- 
rects him with a moderate weapon, and 
happens to kill him, it is Chance-medleys but 
if he uses an improper instrument for the 
purpose, it is Murder, Mawgridge's Case, 17 
vol. 67. 

CILARACTER. 

On a criminal Charge Evidence of the good 
Character of the person accused, has no weight 
ao^ainst Evidence of the fact, 6 vol. 613.— 
Observations of Lord Holt respecting the value 
of Evidence of Character, 14 vol. 596. — Chief 
Justice Parker's Remarks on Evidence to 
Character, 15 vol. 604.— .Mr. Erskine's Ob- 
servations on the proper object and e0ect of 
Evidence to Character, 24 vol, 1073, 1076, 
1079. — On a criminal Trial, Evidence of 
Character; where the facts are not disputed; U 



166 



OBNERAL IKDEX TO 



irrelevaDt as to the Verdict, but it is ^^missible 
in mitigation of Punishment, Draper's Case^ 
30 vol. 1018, 1019.— Evidence of Character 
must be general, and particular facts establishing 
it are not admissible, Davison's Case, 31 vol. 
18f. — Lord Ellen borough says in that Case, 
that " the correct mode of examining a Witness 
to Character is to ask him, whether, from his, 
knowledge of the Defendant's general Charac-^ 
ter, he thinks him capable of comraittipg the 
Offence charged against him/' ibid. ib. and 189. 
-—On the Trial of Lord Stafford, Evidence of par- 
ticular acts of misconduct committed by the Pri. 
soner's Witnesses was admitted, for the purpose 
t)f discrediting them, 7 vol, 1459, 1478.— Lord 
Holt lays down the Rule in Rookwood's Case, 
that Evidence may be given of the general bad 
Character of a Witness, but that Evidence of 
particular Crimes is inadmissible, 13 vol. 211. 
—Chief Justice Pratt asserts the same Rule in 
Layer's Case, 16 vol. 246.— Rule of the Civil 
Law respecting the limits of the examination 
into the Character of Witnesses, 7 vol. 1484, 
—By the law of Scotland, infamy of Chs^racter 
disqualifies a Witness, but he must be shown 
to be infamous by a legal conviction of some 
crime inferring infamy, 12 vol, 551 (note).— 
Instance of the allowance of Evidence in 
support of the Character of a Witness after his 
credibility had been impeached by Evidepcc 
on the other side, Murphy's Case, 19 vol. 724. 
—Mr. Justice BuUer says iu De La Motte's 
Case, that the proper question to be put to a 
Witness, who is called to impeach the veracity 
of another Witness on the ground of bad 
Character, is, whether from his knowledge of 
bis general Character, he considers him as 
deserving belief upon his Oath, 81 vol. 811.— 
See the form of the question in Watson's Case. 
32 vol. 495. > 

CHARITIES.— See flcwd/ey, WUliam, 
Indictment against a Clergyman for collect- 
ing Money for Charities without being 
authorized hy Letters Patent or Briefs, 15 vol. 
1409.— Sir Littleton Powis's Account of thp 
Trial of this Indictment, ibid. 1414.— His Ac- 
count of the Arguments of Counsel, and his 
own Opinions on the Offence, as expressed by 
him in his Charge to the Jury, ibid. 1415. 

CHARTERS.^8ee Corpwatum$ London, 

tity of, 

Roger North's Account and Vindication of 
the Proceedings respecting the Surrender and 
Seizure of Charters in the Heign of Charles the 
Second, 8 vol. 1041 (note). 

CHEAT.^See Hathaway, Riehard. 

Lord Holt'5 Definition of a Cheat, 14 vol. 

^*4- — Porra of a Criminal Information against ' 

a Man for a Cheat in pretendipg to be bewitched, 

ibid. 641 (note). ^> 

CHIEF JUSTICES. 
It was resolved by all the Judges in J^rd 
mortey'i Case, that the Chief Justices were to 



wei^r t^eiF Colkir« of $^, i^ the C^uft of ti|9 
I^ord High Sltf>^ar4 pn the Trial ^ % fe^^ 9 

CmVAtRY,CQUIlT OF.--See fl^a, Aw^ 

Blackstone's Aeeount of the Qouft of Cbi^ 
valry, 3 vol. 483 (note). 

CHRONICLES. 

Lord Coke sa^s that Chrppicle I^w is not to 
be regarded, 3 vol. 953. 

CHURCH.r>See Sheffield^ Henry. 

Acta and Canons respectiqg th^ repiiiriBg 
and internal arrangement of Churches, ^ y^\, 
53d.-^ContrQversy between the Bishopa 91^4 
the Presbyterian! at ^he ReatQrativkntTespe^t^pi; 
th§ Keforots^tioQ of the ChnrfiJ^, ^ vpl, t. 

CINQUE PORTS.^^e |r«irti^i; ^i^ 

Account of an aqcient GostQiQiury q( the 
Cinque Ports^ IT vol. 849. 

CLARENDON. 

Articles of the Copstitutiops of Cl^re^^oPy 
Z vol. 546, 

Ignorance of |he Clergy in gucient tjnaf^j |2 
vol, 632 (note).-^]VIr. Barrington dou^t^ wh%. 
the? the Parochial Clergy could read m th^ 
Reign pf Edward the First, ibidt §§^ (ePts)? 

CLERGY, BENEFIT OF. 

It was resolved by all the Judges \n Lord 
Castlehaven's Case, that if a Prisoner stood 
mute on his Trial for Rape or Sodomy, he w^s 
entitled to his Clergy, 3 vol. 402,-^The Reasop 
of this RjBSolution, jbid. ib. (note).— The Law 
in this respect was altered by the Statute 3 
and 4 Wil). and Mary, c. 9^ ibfd. 4Q3 (note).— 
It was also resolved in Lord Casdehaveq's 
Case, that if a Prisoner, instead of pleading, 
prayed the Benefit of Clergy, this amounted to 
a Confession, ibid, 4Q3,^r-Women were nev^r 
entitled to Benefit of Clergy, 6 vol. 281,2Qvoj. 
6?6. — ^Statutes extending a similar Privilege to 
Benefit of Clergy to Woinen, vol. 281 (note), 
20 ?ol. 631. — It appears that anciently Nuns 
profipssed were admitted to the Benefit of j 
Clergy, 6 vpl. 282 (note).— Reference to varioi|s ' 
Cases and authorities respecting Benefit of 
Clergy, 12 vol. 631 (note).--Mr. Barrington's 
Observations thereon, ibid. ib. — Phief Justice 
Kelyng fiues a Clergyman for ni.a)f:ing ^a un- 
true Report respecting the reading of a con- 
victed Felop praying bis Clergy, Ibid. 683.— 
By Stat. 5 Ann. c, 6. the Benefit of Clergy 
shall be allowed to all who .^re entitled to ^k 
it, without requiring them tp read, ibid. 634 
(note).— Discussions ^n the effect of4lhf «Hov- 
auce of Clergy to a peruon coovicted of Frfoey ■ 



CgM!W»¥.!i 



?IfE STATP TRJAXa 



167 



i«j. lQD^..T-vl^ief.Jja|tice Treby's Obsery^tipns 
pB tb» Prigin and bistpry of the Bepefit of 
Ckrgy, ii» delivfifipg tb^ opinion of t^e Judges 
in ti»Q fCp« pf Lord Warwick, ibig. lOloT— 
Vr. Q^rriDgtop says tbat the Du^e of Somerset's 
Ca$9 i|s the only jin^taoce he found of ^ 
CrijviinM's not praying' tbfs Benefit of Clergy, 
ibid. 1032 (note). — Voltaire's Remarks upon 
tbe B«i)$fit of JD)ergy, 20 vol. 650 (npte).— R^- 
iDaH^ OP the ^t^t|aes giving tfie Privilege of 
Ciergy to Peers, in the Argument of the At- 
torney G^f^^ral (Thuriow) ii^ th^ pughess of 
Eiqgslo^'s Case, ibid. 637.— Biscnssipn of t^e 
Question ^hethj^ a Repress i^ within those 
S^tltt^9> ibid, ib.— Qpin^pn of th^ Judges that 
I BeeT»99 W entitled tP the i\i\l b^p/jfit of tho§e 

CLERGYMEN. 

Jirgmf^isn% th^i it i^ p^mfi^l for Pl^rj^ymen tp 
bi^t, ^ yoi. ll^.T-^elm^'s Ar^umeDt ^n 
fvppori of a cpntr4|ry Poctrine in his Answer 
tp the Apology for A^chbishqp Abbot, ibid. 
1171. — Clergymj^p p^ay be pmpelled by the 
King tp ^Ve arms^ if \t l^e nepessary for the 
Defence pf tlie Realm, 3 vo|. 939' — Proceed- 
ings of the Commissioneri; appoipted by Oliver 
CfOfpwell for ejecting scandalous and in^u$- 
gien^ Clergymen, 5 vol. 539,633. — Account of 
the Prpceedings pn the Degradation of a Cler- 
gyinan in the Rieign of James the Second, 11 
Vo|. ^^5!^. — for other Ii^stances of the Pegr^da- 
tion pf Cl^rgyix^eny see l vol. iJU ^bid. 0O4> 
HU 

CLERK OF THE CUSTODIES. 

letters Patent making ^ gppointm^pt to 
this Office, 16 vol. «44. 

C?OIN.— See Mo^* 

COLONY. 

Di^linptiop between ^ Colony and a pop- 
qfiere4 Country as to th^ right pf the I^ing to 
ipalp new f^lfs for, or impose Taxes upop the 
Inhabitants; 2p vol. 326.-r-Mr. Nolan*^ Ar^u- 
mept ip Goyprno): Pipton's Ca^e^ that the Kipg 
paniu^^ IpajcQ or continue Laws ip a Cplpny or 
QQA^pefed Cpuptryi^hiph are inconsistent with 
the ^indapi^ntal laws of Great Britain. 30 vqI. 
^^d.-'-ColoniaTOovernments are iostifpted by 
Ch^ter Of by Con^ni^sion, ibid. 937. 

COMBAT.— See Battle. 

OOMMISSIOM OF LOANS. 

I^ropeedings ip the Court of Kipg's Benphon 
a Habeas Corpus broug[ht by oir Thomas 
jbam^ll and others for refusing to lepd upon 
jlhe Commission of Loans, ^ yo). 1. 

COMMISSIONS. 

CoipmissipD of Aichard the Secopd to the 
Cl^unqi pf Thirteen, 1 yql. ;i5.— Cpmpiission 
from Pope Glpm^Pl the Pev^plh t9 Cardinals 

WoiMjr »94 C9mpiiiH9 Ui Uy tbe jrjijdii/ of 



the IVf^rrfage of JJenry the pighti and Qneen 
Catherine Howard, ibid. 317^ — Commission ap- 
pointed hy Edward the Sixth tq receive Bishop 
Banner's renunciation of Popery, ibid. 631. — 
Commission issued by Queen Elizabeth for the 
Ex^imination and Trial of Mary Queen of 
Scots, ibid. 1166. — Commission for the Execu- 
tion of Mary Queen of Scots, ibid. 1202. — Lil- 
burn's Argument agi^iinst extraordinary Com- 
missions of Oyer and Terminer, 4 vol.' 1275. — 
Alteration of the st^le of Con^missions during 
the Commonwealth on the assjimption of the 
Pr9tectorate by Cromwell, 5 vol. 480 (note). — 
Coniroissipns are determined by the death of 
the ting who grapts them. 6yol. 12t. — Eccle- 
siastical Commissiop in me Reign of James 
the Second, 11 vql. ^143.— Sir Robert Atkyns's 
Argument against it, ibid. 1148 (note). — Roger 
Cokeys Remark on the incopsistency of the 
form of this Commission, 12 vol. 26 (note).— 
The Ecclesiastical Coipmission e:|ercised a 
Jurisdiction in ca^ises matrimonial, 11 vol. 
(144 (note). — Fo^ms of Commissions to Masi 
ter^ in Chancery in the Reigns of Edward the 
Sixth and George the First, 16 vol. 831, 633, 
835.rr-Comraission fropi Queen Elizabeth to 
Lord Burleigh for the manumission of certain 
Villeins, 20 vol. 1371. — Special Commission of 
Oyer and Terminer under the Stat. 7 Ann. c. 
21, to try High Treason committed in Scot- 
land, 23 vol. 1167. — It was resolved in San- 
quhar's Case, that Commissioners of Oyer and 
Terminer and Goal Delivery could pot, by the 
poinmon Law, sit during Terni in the same 
County with the iCourt of King's Bench, 2 vol. 
759. — A Tales cannot be i^ranted under a Com- 
iplssion of Gaol Delivery, 13 vol. 322, 326^ 18 
yplt 863.— Difference in the Practice respect- 
ing the 'Jury Process, under Compoissions of 
Gaol Delivery, and of Oyer and Terminer, 13 
vol. 326.--rBy the worps of their Commie- 
sion, Justices pf Oyer and Terminer may 
inquire by other ways and means than by In- 
di9tment, |0 vol. 1357. — Qn Special Commis- 
sions of Oyer and Terminer it is not the prac- 
tice to return the Depositions taken before the 
oon^mitting Magistrates, 26 voU 1192. 

COMMISSIONS OF HIGH STEWARDS, 

Commission to Edward, Earl of Clarendon, 
to bf High Steward on the Trial pf Lord 
Morley for Murder, 6 vol. 772. — Commission 
to Heneage, Lord Finch, for the Trial of the 
Earl of Stafford and the other Popish Lords, 7 
vol. 1291.— To Thomas, Marquis of Carmar- 
then, for the Trial of Charles, Lord Mohun, for 
Murder, 12 vol. 953.— To Lord Chancellor 
Somers for ^he Trial of the Earl qf Warwick 
and Lord Mohun fpr Murder, 13 yol. 940.— To 
Lord Chancellor Cowper for tbe Trial of the 
Earl of Dervyentwater, and the other Lords 
concerned in the Rebellion of 1715, 15 vol. 
777. — To Lord Chancellor Cowper for the 
Trial of Robert, Earl of Oxford, on his Im- 
peachment for IJigh Treason, 15 vol. 1050.— 
To Philip, Lord Hardwiicke, for the Trial pf the 
Eftr) pf KilwiU^i^Qci ^n4 tb$ Q^W l^ordf 900* 



168 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



[M18CBU14 



remed in the Rebellion of 1745, 18 vol. 449.— 
To Lord Hardwicke for the Trial of Simon 
Fraser, Lord Lovat, ibid. 541. — To Lord 
Keeper Henley for the Trial of Earl Ferrers for 
Murder, 19 vol. 887.— To Lord Chancellor 
Northington for the Trial of Lord Byron for 
Murder, ibid. 1178.— To Lord Chancellor 
Bathurst for the Trial of the Duchess of King- 
ston for Bigamy, 20 vol. 358. 

COMMITMENT. 

Argument of Serjeant Bramston for Sir 
John Heyeningham against the validity of a 
Commitment under the hands of two L^rds of 
the Council, by the Special Command of the 
King, without stating a Cause of Imprison- 
ment, 3' vol. 6w — Mr. Noye's Argument against 
a similar Commitment in the Case of Sir Walter 
Ea'-l, ibid. 11. — Mr.Selden's Argument against 
a similar Commitment in the Case of Sir 
lidmund Hampden, ibid. 16.— Mr.Calthrop's 
Argument against a similar Commitment in the 
Case of Sir John Corbet, ibid. 19. — Argument 
of the Attorney General (Heath) in Support of 
the Commitments, ibid. 30. — ^Judgment of the 
Court of King's Bench in favour of the Com- 
mitments, ibid. 51. — Mr.Selden's Argument 
in the House of Commons in the Debate pre- 
vious to the Petition of Rights against the 
legality of Commitments without a specified 
Cause, ibid. 78.— Mr. Littleton's Argument 
against such Commitments at a Conference 
between the two Houses of Parliament, ibid. 
85.- Mr. Selden's Argument on the same 
occasion, ibid. 94. — Sir Edward Coke's Argu- 
ment on the same occasion, ibid. 126. — Objec- 
tions to these Arguments made by the Attorney 
General (Heath) before a Committer of both 
Houses of Parliament, ibid. 133. — Serjeant 
Ashley's Argument in support of the Commit- 
ments, ibid. 148. — Mr. Littleton's Argument in 
the Case of William Strbud against Commit- 
ments by the Privy Council and the King for 
Contempts and Sedition generally, ibid. 252. — 
Mr. Selaen's Argument in his own Case against 
similar Commitments, ibid. 264. —Argument of 
the Attorney General (Heath) in favour of the 
Commitments, ibid 280. — ^Arguments in the 
Earl of Shaftsbury's Case against a Commitment 
by the House of Lords for Contempts generally, 
6 vol. 1276. — Arguments in favour of the Com- 
mitment, ibid. 1290.— The Court of King's 
Bench give Judgment in favour of the Com- 
mitment, ibid. 1296. — General Reference to 
Pamphlets and Treatises on the subject of the 
power of the House of Commons to commit 
for Breach of Privilege, 8 vol. 13.— Reports of 
a Select Co<nmitiee of the House of Commons 
appointed to consider of the Proceedings re- 
specting the Commitment of Sir Francis Bur- 
dett for publishing a Libel upon the House, 
ibid. 14, 21.— Instances of the Claim and Re- 
cot^nition of the power of the House of Com- 
mons to commit for Breach of Privilege, ibid. 
27.— Judgment of the Court of Common Pleas 
in Crosby's Case affirming this power, 19 vol. 
1146.— Precedents of Commitments by the 



House of Commons for Publications and 
Speeches reflecting on the Proceedings of the 
House, 8 vol. 23. — Argument of Mr. CliflTord 
in the Court of King's Bench in Flower's Case 
against the power of the House of Lords to 
commit any person not an QjSBcer of the House 
for a Contempt committed out of the House,' 
ibid. 1027. — Judgment of the Court affinning 
this power in the House, ibid, 1062.— Refer- 
ence to Cases on the Question whether the 
legality of a Commitment by either House of 
Parliament can be questioned in a Court of 
Law, 13 vof. 1371 (note). — A Commitment by 
a House of Parliament said to be a Commit- 
ment in Execution, 27 vol. 1065. — In the Case 
of Captain Streater, the Court of King's Bench 
held that they had no power to discharge a 
Prisoner committed by an Order of Parlianient, 
5 vol. 365.— Argument of Sir Bartholomew 
Shower in the Case of Kendall and Roe against 
the power of a Secretary of State to commit for 
Treason or Felony, 12 vol. 1359. — Lord Holt 
seems to have been of opinion that a Secretary 
of State had such a power, ibid. 1367, 1376. 
— Lord Camden's Observations on Lord Holt's 
Opinion upon this Subject, 19 vol. 1058.— 
Report of the Case of the Queen against 
Derby, in which the Court of King's Bench 
expressly decided that a Secretary of State 
has power to commit for a seditious Libel, 
ibid. 1014. — It has been doubted whether the 
Lord Chancellor or Lord Keeper has a power 
of Commitment except in a Court of Equity, 
12 vol. 1361. — Lord Coke says that a lawful 
Commitment must either be when the Offence 
appears upon Record, as a Capias upon an 
Indictment, or when it appears on Oath that 
the Offence has been committed, ibid. 1364.— 
Lord Camden says, in his Judgment in-Wilkes's 
Case, that a Magistrate ought not tocommitupon 
his own knowledge that an Offence has been 
committed, without an Information upon Oath, 
19 vol. 988. — It is unnecessary to set forth 
in a Warrant of Commitment the Information 
or Evidence on which it was granted, but the 
species of the Offence charged must appear 
upon it, Wilkes's Case, ibid. ib. — See also ibid. 
1016 (note). — In a warrant of Commitment for 
writing a seditious Libel, the libel itself need 
not be set out, Wilkes's Case, ibid. 988.— Of 
the power of Courts of Justice to commit for 
Contempts, 8 vol. 34. — Cases of Commiiments 
for Contempts in Courts of Justice, ibid. 49. 
— Mr. Erskine's Opinion on Commitments by 
Courts of Justice for Contempts contained in a 
Letter to a Gentleman of the Bar in Ireland, 8 
vol. 83, 27 vol. 1019.— Mr. Fox's Answer to 
certain Queries proposed to him by Mr. Perry, 
\ the Editor of the Morning Chronicle, upon this 
I subject, 8 vol. 89. — Mr. Eralyn's Remarks 
[ upon Commitments and upon the Remedies 
; provided by the Law ot England for illegal 
j Imprisonment, Em. Pref. 1 vol. xxvi. — LHsciis- 
sion in the Case of the Seven Bishops, respect* 
I ing the validity of a Commitment made by the 
; Lords of the Privy Council, but not stated in 
I the Warrant to be made in CouncO, 12 vol. 20€. 



C0NTBKT8.3 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



I6d 



COMMON LAW. 

The Judges have no power or authority to 
alter the Common Law, 6 vol. 1095, 1116. 
— A general immemorial usage, not incon- 
sistent with any Statute, is part of the Common 
Law, 18 vol. 1331. 

COMMON-PRAYER BOOK. 

Account of the Composition of the Common- 
Prayer Book, 1 vol. 640.— Act of Parliament 
establishing the same, ibid. ib. — Discussions 
respecting it at the Hampton Court Confer- 
ence, 2 vol. 72. — Discussions respecting it 
between the Church of England and Presby- 
terian Commissioners at the Conference in the 
Savoy at the Restoration, 6 vol. 28. 

COMMONS.— See Hotae of Comnum. 

COMPARISON OF HANDS. 

Evidence of hand-writing by a Comparison 
of writings is not admissible, 9 vol. 864 (note). 
—The Evidence of hand-writing in Sidney's 
Case was not entirely by Comparison of Writ- 
ings, ibid. ib. — Discussion of Evidence of this 
kind in the Case of the Seven Bishops, 12 vol. 
296. — In that Case the Court were divided in 
their opinions respecting the admissibility of 
such Evidence, ibid. 305. — Lord Eldon's Re- 
marks on this subject, in his Judgment in the 
Case of Eagleton v. Kingston, ibid. 305 (note). 

COMPASSING THE KING'S DEATH. 

See Treason, 

Mr. Luders's Illustration of the probable 
meaning of the words Compaissing and Imagin- 
ing in the Statute of Treasons, 7 vol. 961 
(note). — On th^ Trial of Thomas Howard, 
Duke of Norfolk, the Attorney General con- 
tends, that an attempt to marry a Person 
claiming a present title to the Crown, ad- 
Tersely to the reigning Sovereign, is an overt 
act of compassing the Death of that Sovereign, 
1 vol. 1003. — Opinion of the two Chief Jus- 
tices and the Chief Baron, on the Trial of the 
Earls of Essex and Southampton in the House 
of Lords, that when a Subject attempts to put 
himself into such force that the King may not 
be able to resist him, and thus to compel the 
King to govern otherwise than he wishes, it is 
a compassing the Death of the King, ibid. 
1355. They also gave it as their Opinion, 
that the law intends the compassing the Death- 1 
and Deprivation of the King as a necessary | 
consequence of a Rebellion against his au- 
thority, as foreseeing that a Rebel will not 
suffer him to live who might punish his Trea- 
son, ibid. ib« — On the Arraignment of Sir 
Christopher Blunt and others, Chief Justice 
Popham declared, that if a Subject attempts 
forcibly- to overrule the Royal will, the law 
intends his compassing the Death of the 
King, judging not of the fact by the intent, 
but of the intent by the fact, ibid. 1410, and 
ibid. 1417 (note).-^By the Law of Nations, if 



an Ambassador compass the Death of the 
King in whose Country he is, it is Treason, 
2 vol. 881. — An attempt to imprison the King^ 
though his Death be not intended, is High 
Treason in the Article of compassing his 
Death, Williams's Case, ibid. 1087.— On the 
Trial of Sindercome for Treason against the 
Protector, the Court held, that compassing 
the Death of the Chief Magistrate, by what* 
soever name he is called, is High Treason, 5 
vol. 848. — It was resolved at a Meeting of the 
Judges in 1663, that a Conspiracy to levy 
War, though no War be actually levied, is an 
overt act of compassing the King's Death 
within the Statute of Treasons, ibid. 984.— 
In Layer's Case this was said to have been 
decided a hundred times, 16 vol. 312. — In Sir 
Henry Vane's Case the Court held that the 
consultation and advising together of the 
means of destroying the King and Govern- 
ment, is an overt act of compassing the 
King's Death, 6 vol. 122.— The same point 
was resolved at a Meeting of the Judges in 
Tonge's Case, ibid. 225 (note). — 'The Court 
hold in Sir WUiiam Parkyns's Case, that a 
Conspiracy to invade the Realm, or to depose 
the King, are overt acts of High Treason in 
the Article of compassing the King's Death, 
13 vol. 110, 113. — See also the language of 
Lord Holt in Freind's Case, ibid. 61; and 
of Chief Justice Eyre in Home Tooke's Case, 
25 vol. 725.— Lord Ellenborough adopts this 
Doctrine as undoubted law in Watson^ Case, 
32 vol. 579. — Lord Mansfield says, in Dr. 
Hensey's Case, that levying War is an overt 
act of compassing the Death of the King, 19 
vol. 1344. — Mr. Justice Foster says, that every 
Conspiracy to levy War for the purpose of 
dethroning or imprisoning the King, or to 
oblige him to alter his measures of Govern- 
ment, or to remove evil CouncillorS| is an 
overt act of compassing the King's Death, 
21 vol. 490. — Mr. Justice Buller says in De 
la Motte's Case, that the sending intelligence, 
or collecting intelligence for the purpose of 
sending it to an Enemy, for the purpose of 
enabling them to annoy us, or defend them- 
selves, is an overt act of compassing the 
King's Death, ibid. 808.— Mr. Erskine's Argu- 
ment, in his Defence of Hardy, on the nature 
of the Offence of compassing the King's 
Death, 24 vol. 894. 

CONFERENCE. 

Proceedings in a Conference of Divines at 
Hampton Court, in 1604, summoned by James 
the First to discuss certain Reformations of the 
Church, 2 vol. 69. — Proceedings at a Con- 
ference in the Savoy, at the Restoration, be- 
tween the Clergy of the Church of England 
and the Presbyterians, respecting a Review of 
the Liturgy, 6 vol. 1. 

CONFESSION. 

On the Trial of Babington and others for 
High Treason in 1586; the Case for the Pfose- 



ivd 



GBFE&AL 



eutioii vai provtd ia detail, though tht 
Pmoners comeysed the*lDdictiQent by p)ead- 
ilig Guilty, 1 vol. 1187.—- The ConfessioQ of a 
CQuicied Tnutor, implicating another penoo 
in biff Guilt, read in Byidence against the 
latter on his Trial for the same Treason, ibid. 
1146.— In Sir Cbi'istopher Blont's Case, the 
pourt frould not permit the Prisoners to con- 
fess a part of the Indictment and plead Wot 
G^iltyto the residue, ibid. 1^10, 1417.— It 
ivas resolved by all the Judges In Tonge's 
Case, that if a person before a Privy Counsel- 
lor or |i Justice of the Peace confesses Trea- 
son, and afterwards at his Trial denies it, it 
will be suiScient at his Trial to prove his Con- 
fession by two Witnesses, without any proof 
of the actual Comi^aission of the Treasons 
charged, the Confession being within the exr 
ception in th^ Statute of Bdward the Siith, 
requiring two Witnesses to Pfove the actual 
Treason, 6 vol. 227 (note).rr-The Judges ^Iso 
held, that a Confession before a Priyy Counr 
sellor. though he l)e not a Justice of the Peace, 
b within the meaning of that Statute, ibi4* 
828 (note).^But the Court, jn Willis's Case, 
doubted whether ^videoce of a Confession 
would supply the want of two Witnesses re- 
quired by the Stat. 7 Will. 3, to every oyert 
act of Treason, though they tbopght that such 
Evidence is admissible in coofirniation of 
them, 15 vol. 623. See Mr. Justice Foster's 
doubt upon this point in Berwipl^'s Case^ 
18 vol. 369. — Chief Justice Eyre says in 
Crossfield^ Case, that there U no rule of 
Law making it imperative on the Prose- 
cutor to prove an overt act by two Witnesses 
before Evidence of a Confession c^n be ad- 
mitted. 26 vol. 4»7. — A Confession by a Pri- 
soner pefbre the Privy Council re(ince4 into 
writing, but not read over to him, nor signed 
by him, cannot be given in Evidence against 
him as a Writing, Layer's Case, 16 vpl. 214--;:t^ 
But a person who took Minutes of the Exan^i- 
naliop before the Council, may prove the Coq- 
fession by Parql, and refresh his memory by 
the MiniUes, ibid, ib.— It seems not to be 
necessary that tl^e Corpus Delicti should be 
proved befojre Evidence of a Confession is 
• admitted, 26 vol. 57.-T-Eeasons for receiving 
Evidence of (Confessions in arimina) mattpfs 
with Caution, ibid. 108.— Opinions of Blac^- 
stooe and Foster respecting Confessipps as 
proving^ Crimes, ibid. 111. — Argument that 
by the Law of Sicotland a Confessioo elicited 
by a promjse of Pardoq is only a conditional 
aiid qualified Confession, and cannot be used 
against the Prisoner unless the Condition i^ 
performed, 6 vol. 1250. — It seems, that by thq 
Scotch Law, ^ Confession of Guilt cannot b^ 
given in Evidence against a Prisoner, unless i^ 
has been subscribed by him, and m^de b^for^ 
a competent Tribunal, 10 vol. 785. 

CONFIRMATION. 
Discussion respecting Confirmation as ^ 
Cereift9Py pf the Church pf ^ngian^ at th^ 



Lprd Coke say^, ^l>at it ^ly^ renqtffi^ J?y all 
the Judges in Calvin's Ca^e pat |f ^ m^^ 
come to a ^ngdom by Conquest, be n)iy alter 
the I^vj of that kingdom, s^ that }^ti%jit\i 
makes the alteration the ancient Lawe of the 
Kingdom remain; but if he come to the 
Kingdom by descent; k^ canno^ ^er the 
laws without the consent of Parliament, 20 
vol. 336. — Lord if ansfi^eld adopts ibis Reso- 
lution as law in giving the Judgment of the 
Court in the Case of the Island of Grenada, 
ibid. 320. — Difference between a cpoquered 
Country and a Colony, with respect tq the 
power of the King to make new Laws or im- 
pose Taxes upon the inhabitants^ ibid. 326.«-* 
Discussion respecting the power of the |Ung 
to impose Taxes on a conanered Country, ibid. 
239d — Mr. Baron Maseres^ Doubts reapefiting 
the Doctrine laid down by Lord Mansfield in 
the Case of the Island of Grenada, ibid. 333. 
— A]^ument that ^ f^^T of a iCojiptiy c^iigi^r- 
ed by Great Britain, Tyhicji {s i^l4.if» »^ le^ 
instantly ceases ppon the Conquest, 30 voL 
741. — Mr. Nolan's Argunient l|i Goyernof 
t^icton's Case ag^in^t the pQwer of the ^ing 
9f Great Britain to Rake o^ cpiitinpje I^ws ia 
^, conquered Conntry ^hic)} are incppsistjei^^ 
i^it}^ the fundan^eot^ L^w^ of England, ibid. 
^99. ■ ' T 

CONSERVATORS QF THP PSAP)?, 

The power of Consei'vators of the Peace at 
Common Law was very short of the authority 
of Justices of the Peace at present^ 12 vol. 
1376 (no^e). — Discus3ion whether a Secre- 
tary of State is a Copserv^tof qf t|)e Peece |t 
Comnjon Law, 19' vp}. iQlgTip??.— Ii?d 
Cap^den del)y e|r^ the Judgment of' the Coi^rt 
of pommon Pleas in theC^se of £ntick^a4 
Carrington in the negatiye^ ibi4. 1P48. 

PPWSPIR4.CY. 

If several persons conspire \f> cpmigil a 
crime in one manner, and ^oi|ie qjf tliein, in 
fact, execute it in another, yet tli^ act of the 
latter, though differei)^ in manper, is t|ie 9ft 
of all who conspire, by reasop of the general 
malice of the inteni, per Pppltam d, J. ii^ Sir 
Phristopher JQlunt^s Case. 1 vql. 1412.— :A 
Cpnspiracy may be thp subject of an Indict- 
ment Of Action, (jio^gh i( does not take effect, 
10 vpl. 1344* — ^4p ^ct 4one by que pf s^ver^l 
parties to ^ Cqnspiracy p)^y be given in Eyi- 
depce for the Prosecution on th^ fmi of 
another pfirty to the Conspiracy, for the jp9r- 
pose qf proving a qrcumstanpo in the Coo- 
spiracy, bqt not tp affect the person on his 
Tris^l criminally lyith tj^t Act, i}ar4y> C^s^y 
24 vol. 438.>-In 9\\ c^es pf general tpn* 
spiracy, ^here many Agents are epaployed, 
the acts of those Agents m^f be givei^ ;f^ ffVi- 
dence on the Tri^l of ^ person for heiqg & 
party tq the Conspiracy, in qrder (p snow its 
gdperai nature fin4 Objects, Qprne jmff^ 
Paw, ?« fPlt W*-A C9^mt^][ fo. tW 



THE S<PATE TRIALS. 



in 



War is oot Treason in Iteelf, but a Conspiracy 
|p dfi{iQSf or kill th& Ki^g^ Of to |n)prison or 
^\ aqj^'r^trfiint uppi^ ^|m l^y levying War i^ 
^ overt ac( or comp^i^iDg t]^e King's Deat^, 
£r *Jol)fi i'rm^'s Case, 13 vo). 61, 11Q> i^' 
^Se^ ^so Chief Justice Eyre's Charge to* the 
pf^D4 •^H^y Fevipws IP tfee Tf rials of flar4y 
and Hori^e Took% ^%\ yql. ^03.rrA^<p6?^( 
Ugaimii this ^ctriuei 9 vol. 698. 

CONSTABLE.— See Arrest, Warrant, 

Constables having a legal Warrant to arrest 
for a t)irf»aph of the Pe^ce, inay break open 
Doors after l^a^ng demanded admission and 
given i^otice of their Warrant, 15 vol. 744 
(no^e). — ^And if they are afterwards resisted 
imd ]ulled| it is Mufderi ibid. ib. 

CONSTIXUTIPfJAJi SOCIETY. 

Sir John Scott's Account of the Origin and 
Proceedings of the Qpi^stitptional Society in 
his Speech for the Frosecution on the Trial of 
Home TodsB, 25 vol. 3?,r-Evidenee on that 
Tfialf iffispectiBg the nature and objects of the 
Soeieiy, ibid. 82^. 

CONSTITUTION OP ENGLAND. 

Remarks upon the limits within which the 
pow«r of the tDrown was confined during the 
early part of the History of England, 22 vol. 
448(note). 

CQNSTaUCTlVE TREASON. 

Lord Strafibrd's Observations in his Defence 
i^ainst Constructive Treason, 3 vol. 1466. — 
Mr. Luders's Strictures upon the Doctrine of 
Constructive Levying Wa^, as laid down in 
the Cases of Messenger, and of Dammaree 
and Purchase, 6 vol.902 (note), 15 vol. 522 
(noteV — Mr. Erikine*s Argument against Con- 
struetive ^reason in his Defence of Hardy, 24 
vol. 87f. — Mr. Wetherell's allusion to the 
Cases establishing the Doctrine of Construc- 
tive licvying War. in his Defence of Watson, 
82 vol. 431.— See also the Arguments of Mr. 
Cross an J Mr. Denman, in Defence of Brand- 
reth on his rfrial for High Treason, ibid. 865, 
889. 

CONTEMPT.-^ee CommUment. 

Of the power of Courts of Justice to com- 
nuit for Contempts, 8 vol. 34 (note).— Prece-. 
4ents of sucti Commitments, ibid. 49.— Mr. 
£rs]cine's Opinion on Commitments by Courts 
of Justice for Contempts, 'in a Letter to a 
Gentleman of the Bar in Ireland, 27 vol. 
1019. — Argument of Mr. Cliflford, in Flower'i^ 
* Case, against the power of the House of Lord^ 
to commit a person, not ati Officer of the 
House^ for a Contempt committed out of the 
Hopsf, ibid. 1027.— Proceedings in the Star 
Chamber against Mr. Whitelocke for a Con- 
^pipt in giving a professional Opinion against 
t^e King's Prerogative, 2 vol. 765. — ^Proceedr 
IBM against th^ Countess of Shrewsbury for 
ft uoiiiWpt HI r^fosing to answer iMlf b^for^ 



the Privy Council, ev to subscribe her Exami- 
nation, ibid. 769.— The Court fine the Editor 
of the Observer Newspaper 5662. for a Con- 
tempt in publishing the Proceedin|s on the 
Trial of Thistlewood and others 'for kigh 
Treason, in contravention of an Order of the 
Court, 33 vol. 1564. ' 

CQNTft4 PAQPf. 

l^egal sigmfication qf the words Contca 
Pacem, 19 vol. 1107. * 

CONVOCATION.' 

Opinions of the Judges, and the Attorney 
and Solicitor General in the ^eign of ^ueen 
Anne respecting the power of Courts of Con- 
vocation, without a licence from the Crown, 
to cite persons before them ibr Heresy, 15 vol. 

COPY OF INOJCTMENTj 

Chief Justice JefTeries says, in Rosewell's 
Cas^, that t|ie Court fiave U|f po^^r, |t pom- 
mon Law^ of granting a uopy of an Indict- 
ment to a Prisoner in capital Cases, upon 
reasonable cause being shown, IQ vol. 866. — 
A Copy of the Indictment was cefoaed oy tM 
Court in Fitzharris'sCase, 8 vol 262..— rQpinion 
of Lord Chipf Justice North, Barop Thurland, 
and Levinz, Attorney General, in the House of 
Lords, in the Case of the Five Popish Lords, 
that no Prisoner indicted for a capital Ofence 
can have a Copy of the Indictment except 
by leave of the Court, 7 vol. 1 243.-r-The Stat. 7 
Anne, c. 21, sec. 11, allowing a Copy of the 
Indictment to persons a^ciised of Treason, or 
Misprision of Treason, 10 vol. 268 (note).-^It 
was said by Lord Holt to bp a settled point at 
Common Law that no Prisoner for Treason 
or Felony could have a Copy of the Indict- 
ment, or Counsel to assist him in his Defence, 
12 vol. 660, 1382.-:-By the Stat. T Will. 3, 
c. 3, a party indicted for High Treason is 
entitled to a Copy of the Indictment ten days 
before his Arraignment, 21 vol. 648.<rTln the 
Case of Charnock, King, and Keyes, whose 
Trial for Hig|i Treason took place aliter tbe 
passing of the Statute of William the Third, 
and before the day on which it was to eon^e 
into operation, a Copy of the Indiotm^t was 
deniea by the Court, 12 vol. 1381. 

COPY QF JURY PANEL, AND WST OF 

^ ' ' WIT NESSE3. 

Stat. 7 Anne, c. 21. sec. 11, aM(hori?(ipg tl^e 
delivery of a Copy ot the Ji^ry P^R^l, ap4 a 
List of the Witnesses fpr the Prosecution, to 
persQi)s accused of jr^^^on or Misprj^ipn pf 
Treasoi?, 10 vol, J263 (note).-«-Th^ Copy of 
the Jury Panel requife4.l5y ^^^ ^\^^* 9^ Will. 
3 to be delivered to persons accused of High 
Treason, m^y be 4elivered before the return of 
the Venire facias, Rookwood^s Case, 1 3 vol. 152. 

CO&QIIATION. 
Edward the Third acted as King ^fore hii 






172 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



[Hl80ELli« 



Coronation^ 1 vol. 49.— Lord Coke, in Calvin's 
Case, says, that Coronation is merely a solem- 
nization of the descent of the Crown, and 
conveys no power to the King which he had 
not before^ 2 vol. 626. ' 

CORONER. 

It was formerly a part of the Coroner's duty 
to summon a Jury where a person had been 
desperately wounded, 16 vol. 27 (note). — Mr. 
Barrington's Observations upon the object of 
imposing this duty on the Coroner, ibid. ib. — 
As to the admissibility in Evidence of Exami- 
nations taken before a Coroner, see the Reso- 
lutions of the Judges in Lord Morley's Case, 
6 vol. 770. 

CORONOCH. 

Account of the two kinds of Coronoch in 
the Highlands of Scotland, 14 vol. 367. — Mr. 
Scott's Account of the Coronoch, 18 vol. 714. 

CORPORATION.— See Hastings^New 

Romney, 

Arguments of Counsel in the Case of the 
Quo Warranto against the City of London on 
the Question whether a Corporation can be 
forfeited by Misuser, 8 vol. 1087, 1101, 1155, 
1240. — Argument that a Corporation cannot 
commit a capital Crime, or any Crime against 
the Peace, ibid. 1137. — Remarks on the ques- 
tion whether a Corporation can be surrendered, 
ibid. 1283. — Mr. Kyd's Account of the legal 
meaning and nature of a Corporation, ibid. 
1102 (note). — His Account of the sense in 
which a Corporation is said to be immortal, 
ibid. 1104 (note). — Account of the various 
Proceedings against Corporations at the end 
of the Reign of Charles the Second, 10 vol. 
29 (note). — It was said in the Great Case of 
Ashby and White to be usual and proper that 
Corporations should have interests granted to 
them which enure to the advantage of the 
Members in their private capacities, 14 vol. 
783. — It was decided in Milward v. Thatcher, 
that where a person, being in possession of a 
corporate OfiSce, accepts another Office incom- 
patible with it, the former Office becomes 
vacant, 17 vol. 845 (note). 

CORPUS DELICTI. 

It seems not to be necessary by the law of 
England that the Corpus delicti should^ in 
criminal Cases, be fully proved before Evidence 
of a Confession is admitted, 26 vol. 57. — By 
the civil law, the Corpus delicti must be proved 
by positive Testimony before presumptive Evi- 
dence can be admitted to ascertain the Offender, 
14 vol. 1229, ibid. 1246. 

CORRUPTION OF BLOOD. 

Mr. Cruise's Summary of the effects of the 
Corruption of Blood on the descent of Dig- 
nities, 19 vol. 98Q. , 



COSTS 



The disproportion of the Costs recovered in 
Civil Suits by the Law of England to those 
actually incurred complained of by Mr. £mlyn, 
Em. Pref. 1 vol. xxi v.— Instance of the House 
of Commons ordering one of their Members, 
who had made a groundless Charge of a Breach 
of Privilege, to pay the accused person the 
Costs of his attendance upon the House, 14 
vol. 749 (note). 

COVENANTERS. 

Wod row's Account of the Prosecutions of 
them during the latter part of the Reign of 
Charles the Second, 10 vol. 851 (note). — Lord 
Fountainbairs Account of the Prosecution of 
several of them, ibid. 877 (note). See CargiU, 
Donald — Hackstoun, David-^Semple, Johnn-^ 
Skene, James^Lanerkshire Men, 

COUNSEL. 

Collections of State Trials said to be useful 
in doing justice to the memory of eminent 
Counsel, Em. Pref. 1 vol. xxiii,— Thomas 
Howard, Duke of Norfolk, was refused the 
assistance of Counsel on his Trial for High 
Treason, ibid. 966. — In the Case of Chamoclj, 
King, and Keyes, Lord Holt says, that it was 
the invariable practice at Common Law to 
refuse Counsel to Prisoners in Cases of Trea- 
son, 12 vol. 1382.— By the Stat, 7 Will. 3, c. 
3, a person accused of High Treason is en- 
titled to a full Defence by Counsel, Em. Pref. 
1 vol. xxviii, and 5 vol. 467 (note). — ^By the 
Stat. 20 Geo. 2, c. 30, the provisions of the 
Statute of William the Third, respecting the 
allowance of Counsel in Cases of Treason aie 
extended to Parliamentary Impeachments, 5 
vol. 467 (note), 15 vol. 814 (note), ibid. 818, 
862, 18 vol. 535 (note).~Summary of Cases 
in which Counsel have been allowed or refused 
before and since the Statute of William the 
Third, to Prisoners on their Trials for Treason 
or Felony, 5 vol. 471 (note).-^ln Trials for 
Felony. Prisoners are not entitled to a full 
Defence by Counsel, ibid. 468 (note). — Mr. 
Emlyn's Remarks upon this Rule, Em. Pref. 
1 vol. xxxi. — Mr. Justice Foster approves of 
the Rule, 5 vol. 468 (note).— Whitelocke ex- 
presses an Opinion that the Law ought to be 
reformed in this respect, ibid. 469 (note). — Mr. 
Justice Blackstone and Professor Christianas 
Animadversions on the Rule, ibid. ib. — Sir 
Robert Atkins says, that he always considered 
this Rule as a severity in our Law, 9 vol. 
724. — Chief Justice Jefferies, in Rosewell's 
Case, admits the hardship of it, 10 vol. 
267.— Sir John Hawles's Remarks upon the 
insufficiency of the Reasons usually assigned 
for refusing Counsel to Prisoners in capital 
cases, and upon the injustice of the Rule, 8 
vol. 726. — He states it as his Opinion, that 
it probably arose from the poverty of Pri* 
soners, and consequent non-usage, ibid. ib. 
•—Lord Nottingham, in Lord CornwalUs's 



€aNTBMl<8.J 



THE STATE TRIAL«. 



m 



Case, 8^8, that the only good reason alleged 
for the Rule is, that the proof of the facts 
establishing the Prisoner's guilt should be so 
dear, that no possible doubt can be suggested, 
7 vol. 149. — On collateral issues. Prisoners on 
their Trial for Treason or Felony were allowed 
the full assistance of Counsel, Ratcliffe's Case, 
5to1. 467 (note), 18 vol. 434. — In Cases of 
Felony, Counsel may be assigned to Prisoners 
on incidental Motions, Bambridge's Case, 17 
vol. 574. — On Captain Goodere's Trial at 
Bristol for Murder, before Mr. Serjeant Foster, 
the Prisoner's Counsel were not permitted to 
put Questions for the Prisoner to the Wit- 
nesses, . ibid. 1022. — On the -Trial of Lord 
Lovat on an Impeachment for High Treason, 
his Counsel were not permitted to examine or 
cross-examine the Witnesses as to matters of 
Fact, 18 vol. 544, 578.— Soon after Lord 
Lovat's Trial the Statute 20 Geo. 2, c. 30 was 
introduced into the House of Commons by 
Sir William Yonge, the leading Manager of 
his Impeachment, 5 vol. 468 (note). — If a 
Prisoner in a capital Case desire the assistance 
of Counsel in matters of law, the points which 
he suggests must appear to the Court to be 
doubtful, 7 vol. 1523, 8 vol. 570, 11 vol. 525. 
— The Prisoner must plead to the Indictment 
before the Court will assign him Counsel to 
argue matters of Law, 5 vol. 63. — In the Case 
of David Lindsay, the Court assigned the 
Prisoner Counsel before he pleaded, 14 vol. 
989. — On the Trial of Lord Treasurer Middle- 
sex, upon his Impeachment by the Commons 
for Misdemeanours, the House refused to 
allow him Counsel to plead for him at the 
Bar, 2 vol. 1200.— Counsel were allowed to 
the Earl of Bristol on the Trial of his Impeach- 
ment for Misdemeanours, ibid. 1380. — It was 
resolved upon debate in the House of Lords, 
in the Case of Sir Edward Herbert, that he 
should be allowed his full Defence by Counsel 
on a Charge of Breach of Privilege, 4 vol. 
126.— rPrecedents respecting the allowance of 
Counsel in the House of Lords to persons 
impeached of Misdemeanours, 6 vol. 797. — 
Counsel are allowed to make a full Defence 
in an Appeal of Murder, Bambridge and 
Corbett's Case, 17 vol, 430. See also 8 vol. 
726.— Explanation of the meaning of the 
maxim, mat in capital Cases the Judge is of 
Counsel for the Prisoner, 5 vol, 466 (note), 
6 vol. 516, and ibid. ib. (note). — A Judge is 
to be of Counsel for a Prisoner, who cannot 
by law have Counsel, to prevent him from 
losing any advantage by his ignorance of the 
Law, of which he might otherwise legally avail 
himself, ibid.ib. and 4 vol, 1274. — But in 
jCranborne's Case Lord Holt says, that where 
^e Law allows Counsel, the Judges are to be 
indi£ferent between the Crown and the Pri- 
soner, and his Counsel are to take care that 
he loses no legal advantage, 13 vol. 237. — The 
tei»e in which Judges are Counsel for Prisoners 
by the Scotch Law, 23 vol. 805.— On the Trial 
ei Braddon and Speke .for a Misdemeanpur, 

Vlu«f /uitige Jeffenes admonished oqq of the ^ 



Defendants, who asked permission to make 
his own Defence, that if he did so, his Counsel 
would be discharged from making any Defence 
for him, 9 vol. 1171.— On the Trial of Redhead 
Yorke for a Misdemeanour in 1795, . Mr. Jus- 
tice Kooke called upon the Defendant to make 
his election whether he or his Counsel would 
address the Jury, and refused to permit him 
and his Counsel to examine the same Wit- 
nesses, 25 vol. 1021. — Instance in 1681 of 
Counsel for a Defendant on his Trial for Mis- 
demeanour being permitted to address the 
Jury on opening and on closing his Evidence, 
8 vol. 752. — See also the Trial of the Seven 
Bishops, 12 vol. 392. — Lord Holt seems to 
have allowed this practice on the Trial of 
Denew and odiers for an Assault and Con- 
spiracy, 14 vol. 929. — ^The same practice was 
allowed by Chief Justice Lee on the Trial of 
Owen for a Libel in 1753, 18 vol. 1227.-^In« 
stances in the time of Lord Mansfield of Coun«> 
sel for Defendants in Cases of Libel address- 
ing the Jury on summing up as well as opening 
their Evidence, 20 vol. 835, 885, 899.— Pro- 
fessor Christian's Remarks on the Conduct 
proper to be observed by Counsel in conduct- 
ing criminal Prosecutions, and in Cases in 
which their own Opinions are against the merits 
of the Cause in which they are engaged, 6 vol. 
134 (note). — Mr. Emlyn's Remarks upon the 
same subject, Em. Pref. 1 vol, xxix. — Mr. 
Erskine's Reasons for his Opinion, that Coun« 
sel ought not to refuse to defend a Prisoner 
because they are satisfied of his Guilt, 22 vol. 
412. — See the Opinion of Mr. Henry Erskine, 
Dean of the Faculty of Advocates, on this 
subject, 23 vol. 806 (note). — Lord Chancellor 
Nottingham says, that " Counsel should speak, 
not as abetting the Guilt of their Clients, but 
as advocating their Innocence," 8 vol. 1131.— 
After the Court have delivered their Opinion, 
it is irregular for Counsel to argqe against it, 
10 vol. 1186. — Counsel cannot be heard by 
the Judges in Cases where their extra-judicial 
Opinions are required by the King, without 
the King's Consent, 15 vol. 1201 . — ^It is lawful 
for Counsel to give a professional Opinion 
upon any Question of Prerogative, which a 
Subject may contest with the Crown in a Court 
of Justice, but they must not, under colour of 
an Opinion, utter private or public Scandal, 
2 vol. 766. — So also Counsel may plead their 
Client's Cause against the King, but if, under 
colour of that, they utter Sedition, they are 
punishable for it, 6 vol. 540 (note), ibid, 548. 
— Counsel are protected from an Action of 
Slander for saying anything in Court which 
is pertinent to their Case, and within the 
range of their Instructions, 13 vol. 1386. — 
Reasons why Counsel should not be compelled 
to give Evidence of facts which come to their 
knowledge in their profe9sional character^ 
even with the express consent of their Clients, 
21 vol. 358.r— In the Case of the Regicides, 
the Counsel for the Crown were permitted tp 
manage the Evidence before the Grand Jury^ 

5 yol< 972,-^11 Jobii llawles's AQi^^^^i^ioxi^ 



iU 



GKNfiEAL IMDEX TO 



on the t>nMitle« of tdtnitttiig Coanwl befert 
tbe OfaAd Jury, ibid* ib. (note).-^The Inns of 
Cottft baf « m%t%\f an autbority delegated to 
tbtm from the Jndgea to call persons to tbe 
Bari 3d vol. 688 (DOte).-'The seteral Inns of 
Conn determined in tbe Case of Home Tooke, 
tbat it would be improper to admit a person 
in Holy Orders to the Bar, ibid. 68f (note). 

COUNTS. 

Doubts respectihg th6 universality of the 
llule in eivU Actioos, where there is a Verdict 
tipon several Counts and one is defective, that 
the Judgment must be arrested upon the whole 
Declaration^ 22 vol. 124. 

COtJNTt.-See Veiure. 

Mr. Justice Foster says that thie most proper 
£videnee to prove fit particular plaee to be 
Within the bounds of a County is the constant 
eftefeise of Jurisdiction, and the execution of 
legal process in the place in question, by the 
municipal Officers of thd County, IT vol. 1064^ 

lor*. • 

COURTS. 

Account of the Court of Chivalry, 3 vol. 
483 (note). — Colonel Lilbume's Argument 
against Extraordinary CoUrts of Oyer and 
Terminer ferebted for special purposes, 4 vol. 
1275._Act of Parliament for erecting a High 
Court of JusticU for the Trial of Charles the 
Firsti ibidi 1045.— Arguments agkinst the 
legality of the Hi^h Court of Justicis established 
in 1680, 6 VOL 13.--tleason given by Sir John 
Hawles why all the Proceedings in Courts of 
Justice should be public, 11 vol. 46d.— Mr. 
Barrington remarks that in ancient times the 
Courts wero not open in the sense in which 
they are now understood to be so^ 23 vol. 681 
(bote).-— Mr. Emlyn mentions the publicity of 
our Courts Of Justice as one of the excellent 
eies of oUIr Law^ Em. Pref. 1 Vol. xxv.— Mr. 
Justice F<;»ster*s Account of the Court of thd 
King in Parliament^ and its distinction from 
the Cdurt of the Lotd High Steward, 19 vol. 
961.— Mr. £mlyn*s Objections to the Eccle- 
siastical Courts in England^ Em. Pref. 1 vol. 
XXIV* 

COWARDICE.— See Tieiines, C0IOMBI 
KatkanaeL 

t'receclents of Prosecutions for Cowardice 
and Neglect of Duty in Governors of towns and 
Castles^ 4 vol. 298. 

CtlEDiBlLlTV.-See Witnem. 

CHIMES. 

Argument of Mh Steele, in the Cas6 of the 
Duk^ of Hamiltob, respecting the extent to 
which a person actitag under the authority of> 
ikhd in obedience to the commands of Another, 
will be excused fW)m responsibility for the 
Cl<mittiiisitm of CHiiket, 4 voi. lloe.^Ali 



Crimes are, by the law of England^ eevcrri | 
and if in att Indictment^ a Crimfe is charged M 
be committed by several^ it Will be snppetted 
by proving that onO committed it^ per Lorti 
Holt, in I^wick's Case^ 18 vol* S78.— By lfa9 
Law of England a Crime of an inferior degree 
is merged in a superior dne^ but this doetrinCs 
does not exist in the Law of Scetlandj 33 toL 
593i--Mr. Ftolyn*s Remarks on the PBniab^ 
ment of Crimes by th% Law of £ng1and| £bba 
Pref. 1 vol. xxxii. 

CRIMINAL CONVERSATIONt*^ee 

If the form bf At^tion for Criminal Convei^st- 
tion be Trespass, the tim^ of limitation by tBd 
Statute of Janaes ii four years, if Cilse, ^it 
years, 13 vol. 929 (note).— t^rbceediUgs in aii 
Action for Crim. Con. brought by HCttfy, 
Duke Of Norfolk, against John Germaine^lt>id« 
927. 

CIltMlNAL LAW. 

The ISuperiority of the Law of England eon^ 
sists principally in the excellence of the Cri- 
minal part of it, Jtm. Pref. vol. 1, p. xxv. — 
Comparison of the Criminal Law of Itngtand 
with that of other Countries, ibid. ib. 

CROSS EXAMINATION. 

Bdmett'ft Remarks upon the practice bf 
Counsel in English Courts of Justice with 
respect to the CrosSAExaminatien of Witnesses^ 
34 vol. 648 (note).— In Criminal Trials in Bcot- 
land| leading questions are not allowed bn 
Cross-Examinatton, ibid. 659 (note). — JjxtA 
Chief Justice Evre says, in Hardy^s Case^ thit 
it Was contrary io his practice, and his opinion, 
to put the Words into a Witness's [Moiitfa, 
even on Cross-Examination, ibid. Odd, 7BB, 

CUSTOMAL. 

Account of an Ancient Customal bf Uie 
Cinque Ports, 17 Vol. 849.— ArgumOnts against 
the Admissibility of this Costomal in Evidence 
on the Trial of a Mandamus to the Corporation 
of Hastings, ibid. 833, 887.— Lord HardVricke 
admits it in Evidence, ibid. 854, 916. 

CtJSTOMS. 

At the Common Law there were no (justotns 
due to the King except of wool, wdelfell^ and 
leather, 10 vol. 378. 

CtJlTtNCJ OTp tHE hAND.-See 

Striking in Courts, 

Mh Hdi-grave says that this is a t^fH Fnnish^ 
iUent by the JBnglish LaW^ 1 Vol. 44g.-'-a)etail 
of the Preparations for the EiEecutloU of thi 
Sentence in Sir EdUiond Khetet's bailey ibid. 
444.— The only Offenceis to which this Ptitti^ 
ment is affixed, are drawing a Weilpon on oat 
of tbe Rin2*s Judges, or striking in thO Kibg'b 
Court dr Palace, ibid. 443.'^tnstatae6 t«lat4d '• 
ill Btow's Annab of ^ iiafiiethHI H iht JhttyiU 






mUft 6TATB TRIALR 



lU 



flitlfli of CaiHiif i^ff tltd tlltha fot stnkiftg ti 
p^lstiti befi^tig dne 6f the Riiig's Judged at 
WfeBtminsteh ll YOl. 1356 (hbtfe).^Mr. Fet- 
gittioii^s Cotiectidii Of setetdl Cases in Vfhich 
oistussibhs krose r^specti^g this Sentetice^ l^ith 
his Cdnittiehts tipbii theid, 27 vol. 96d.— The 
Judges i^fd^^d to order f elton's hand to be 
. feat off, #beii he w%ib conticted of the Mtirdisr 
of the Duke of Buckinghatn, ttiotigh at th^ 
eipress suggestion of the King^ 3 vol. 372^ 

DAMAGES. 

Chief Justice Jefieries's Directions to a Jury 
teji|)ectiii&f th6 ihOd^ of asb6rtai»ing theDdtil&ges 
ifi ab Abtibti of false ItnpHsonttieiit^ 10 vol. 
iira.^ti) all Cdsel ^hete the lAit dOe§ hot 
ftlfhbh d paftvinjiit^d ^iih dh AbtiOh to f^cdrbt 
tin specific thing lost hf ihH wi-On^fhl act of 
ifibth^t', he itlay r^^over I)attlagei$ iii lieu 
thfetfeof, case of Ashby and White, 14 Vol. 794. 
s-SitJohtiHa^iessays, thsit the giving ^«^t- 
ngeohS 13aiiiages in Cased arisihg out Of 
boiitichl Disptit^^, was boe Of the dailies of th^ 
disaffbction of the Nation to th^ Stliart Govern- 
tiieiit, 8 Vol. 426.~Lotd Caitideii, itt his Charge 
tb the JUiry iti the Case of Wilkes t). Wood, says 
that DaiAiages '^ere designed not only as a 
Satisfaction to the party injured, but as a 
Punishment to thb Gtiitty, atid that, therefore, 
the Jury have the power of giving Damages 
beyonii the amount of the injury actually sus* 
tained. 19 vol. 11^7. — See also 10 vol. 370. — 
Chief J ustice t)e Grey's Account of the I^rac- 
tice of Courts in granting or refusing New 
Trials on the ground of excessive t)amages, 20 
vol. 175. — ^In the Case ofPersonal Wrongs the 
Jurv are' the Judges of the amount of Damages, 
iBifl. l8ii 

DANEOELT* 

Mr. St. John's RbMftirks tlpoil the tiature attd 
origin of the Imposition called Danegelt in his 
Argdllii^ht itk the 6t^at Case of Ship-Money, 
3 vol. 906.— He <ibtit«tids that Danegelt was 
imposed in Parliament^ ibid. 907*. 

t)AV. — See truUcinmitf thne. 

It l«raS hdd bv thfe Court in Sir Henrj^ 
Vi,n^*i Case, ihat the day laid iil tia Indictmetii 
is imtuatekial, and that the Jury might ebhvict 
upon it, dbough tlie Dfifence Were proved to 
hafe b^h cominittied on ati learlleror lAt^erday 
thdSi Ukttt kid in the Indiictment, 6 vol. 131 .-- 
LM Holt ^aysj Oh the Trial of Chiaraock, 
lUhg^ aUti Keyes, that for the sake of foriA 
there Ss a partitiuiar day laid in the Indictttient, 
bm \ht OToof is ttot to be tied up to that d^y ; 
if the Qtence be ptoVed at any time b^pfore or 
afteV, pn>vid«rd it be before the Ibdittmetitpre- 
ht^, it is well fenoughj 12 vol. 1396;— Dis- 
atssion wke^er iii ati I&pi^chment for IVfeaion 
it is necessary to charge the Oflfence to have 
btoin tmhmitt^ oh a patticulat day, 15 vol. 
i^6.-^tn Indictments for capital ofifences it is 
t^et^saty to state a particular day to whith 

tte faamtt lim v^f m, ^,^Ko in- 



dictm^nt ekn bO gOOd Hlpithoiit pttdsdy show- 
ifig a certain day and year of the facts alleged 
in it, 13 vol. 275 (tiote).—t)pililOft of all the 
Judges in 'Lord Balmerifio'i Cafte that it i^ 
unnecessary to prbve an overt Act of T reastiO 
to hate been comniitted ofa the particular day 
laid in the tndictirtent, 1^ vol. 485. 

DfiATH-BEO bECtA&AtlONS. 
See Dj^ing DeclarcUioni, 

DECLARATIGN.-^See Pkm ttnd JPkading, 

DBCLAIlATIONS. 

Deelarhtioti bf Chafles thb Seeotid to the 
People of England soon after th^ SneOUtiOft Of 
his Father, 5 vol. 959. — His Declaration on 
the same occasion to th^ l^eople of Scotland, 
ibid. 962k— The Duke of Monmouth's De- 
claration on his landing ai Lyme iii Dorsetshire, 
11 vol. 1032 (note). — James the Second's 
Declaration for Liberty of Conscience, 12 vol. 
231. — Declaration of the I'rince of Orange on 
his appearing in arras in England| 15 voh 

28(:). 

fiEGYPhERlNO* 

Letter of the celebrated t)r, Wallis on the 
Science of Decyphering, 16 vol. 540 (note). 

D£f AMATlON^See Slanekr, 

Narcissus Luttrell's Account of this freqUehcy 
Of PrOsecutibbs for Defamation during the 
latter part of the Itbign of Charies the SebOnd> 
10 vol. 125 (note). 

DEFENCE.— Sfee C&iMkei-^ttidL 

DEFENDERS. 

Proceedings on the l^riais of the defenders 
in Ireland, 36 Geo. 3, ,1795, 26 vol. 225.— Se« 
Olehnan^ Andrew — ffetr/,' Patnck—KeHnetfy^ 
Thomas-^ Leary^ Jbhn — Weldon, Jame$. 

DEGRADATION OF CLERGYMEN^ 

I^roceecling:s On th6 Degradation of William 
Satitre for lleresy, 2 hen. 4, 1400, 1 vol. 171. 
— t>egradation of Cratthler, Archbishop of 
Canterbiiiry, ibid. 804. — Form of degrading an 
Archbishop, ibid. 841.— tbrm of the Degrada- 
tion of a Ciergyihan in the Reign of Jaines thii 
Second, 11 vol. 1352. 

DEGRADATION OF A KNIGHT OF THE 

GARTER. 

iPfbceedirtgsoh the Degradation of EdwatJ, 
Duke of Buckingham, from the Order of thb 
■Garter, 13 Hen. 8, 1522 1 vol. 297. . 

DEGRADATION OF A PEEIt. 

History of the Degradation of George NeviHej 
Duke of Bedford, by Act of Parlianient, in thd 
Wign t>f fid%^ tfe^ fV>totb> « voli U9^ 



176 GENERAL INDEX TO 

DE HOMINE REPLEGIANDO. 



pfi8esz«Zf< 



In a Writ De Homine Replegiando there is 
an exception of a Commitment by the Special 
command of the King, 3 vol.43. — ^Two Records 
of Proceedings on Writs de. Homine Replegi- 
ando, 8 vol. 1350 (note). — Sir John Hawles's 
Remarks upon the Writ De Homine Replegi- 
ando in the Case of Wilmer, ibid. 1347. — A 
Commitment upon this Writ is merely until 
the Body is produced, 9 vol. 185. — ^The person 
eloigned is' properly the Plainti£f in a De Ho- 
mine Replegiando^ ibid. ib. 

DELINQUENT AND MALIGNANT. 

: Oldmixon's Explanation of the meaning of 
these Terms, 4 vol. 857 (note). 

DEMURRER. 

In Cases of Misdemeanour thelre is a four- 
day Rule to join in Demurrer, but in Capital 
Csiises, the Party must join in Demurrer imme- 
diately, Layer's Case, 16 vol. 116, 122. 

DEPOSITIONS.— See Examinatiom, Evidence, 

Informatiom, 

Instances in former times of Depositions of 
Witnesses -v^o might have given their Testi- 
mony viv& voce, being admitted in Evidence 
for the Crown on Criminal Trials, 1 vol. 985, 2 
vol. 10. — Resolved by all the Judges in Lord 
Morley's Case, that Depositions taken before a 
Coroner upon proof of the death of the Wit- 
nesses, or their inability to travel, and Oath 
made by the Coroner that the Depositions are 
unaltered, or upon proof that the Witnesses 
have been withdrawn by the Prisoner, may be 
admitted in Evidence for the Crown on a Trial 
for Murder, 6 vol. 770, 776.— Such a Deposi- 
tion admitted in Evidence by Lord Holt on 
Harrison's Trial for Murder, where there was 
reasonable ground for suspicion that the Wit- 
ness had been kept out of the way by the pro- 
curement of the Prisoner, 12 vol. 852, and 
(note). — Discussion in the House of Commons 
in Sir John Fenwick's Case, respecting the ad- 
missibility in Evidence against a person under 
a Criminal Charge of a Deposition taken before 
a Magistrate in the absence of the accused 
person, 13 vol. 591, et seq. — A Prisoner upon 
his Trial is not entitled as of right to see the 
Depositions taken before the committing Ma- 
gistrates, Dr. Sheridan's Case, 31 vol. 835. 

DIGNITIES. 

The Case of Dignities from Coke's Reports, 
2 vol. 741.— Mr. Cruise's Summary of the 
effects of Attainder upon Dignities, 19 vol. 
979. 

DILATORY PLEA.— See Ahatemeni. 

Where a Dilatory Plea is pleaded by the Pri- 
soner in a Capital Case, and demurred to, the 
Court will not indulge the Prisoner with time to 
join ift Pemurrer, Layer's Case, 16 vol 122,— i 



TheCourt willTgrant no opportuaity ex gratiA 
to a Dilatory Plea, ibid. 123.— An AfiSdavit ol 
the truth of the matters contained in a Dilatory 
Plea said not to be necessary in Criminal Cases, 
Sheares's Case, 27 vol. 267. — See also Kirwaii*a 
Case, 31 vol. 577 (note). — ^The Statute requir- 
ing such an Affidavit, held by Lord MansfieI4> 
to apply to Criminal Cases, excepting Trials 
at Bar, 18 vol. 399 (note), 

DISABILITY.— See Witnesi. 



DISCONTINUANCE. 

Arguments in Tatchin*s Case, whether a 
Discontinuance occasioned by a clerical error 
in the teste of a Distringas*Corpora Juratonim 
may be cured by the amendment of the Teste 
by the Roll, 14 vol. 1120.— The Court of Riqg's 
Bench are equally divided in Opinipn upon the 
Question, ibid. 1187. — In case of a CrimiDal 
Trial at Bar, where a Venire is returnable on th^ 
first general Return of the Term, the appearance 
day for the Jury, is the Quarto die post, but the 
Court may adjourn the Jury to any day before 
the next Return without any entry on Record 
of such Adjournment, and it will not be a Dis- 
continuance, Layer's Case, 16 vol. 307. 

DISCRETION. 

Lord Coke's Definition of legal Discretioo, 
23 vol. 990. — Meaning of judicial Discretion 
explained by Lord Mansfield, 19 vol. 1089.— 
Danger of intrusting Judges with discretionary 
power, 8 vol. 56 (note). 

DISGUISE. 

On a Trial for an Ofience under the Black 
Act, it is not necessary to show that the Of* 
fender was disguised at the time of its Com- 
mission, 16 vol. 745 (note). 

DISPENSING POWER.-^ee Eak$^ 
Sir Edward. 

Lord Coke's Opinion in Calvin's jCase in 
favour of the Dispensing Power, 2 vol. 632. — 
If a Statute directs a Penalty incurred by the 
Coijdmission of an Offence to be divided be* 
tween the King and the Poor of the Parish, the 
King can only dispense with his own part of 
the Penalty, 3 vol. 1179. — Mr. Hargrave's 
Note on the Question of the King's Dispensing 
Power, 11 vol. 1187 (note).— His Reference to 
Treatises and Cases illustrating the Controversy 
on this Subject, ibid. 1190 (note). — Sir Robert . 
Atkyns's Inquiry into the King's Power of J 
dispensing with penal Statutes, ibid. 1200. — ] 
Mr. Northey's Argument in the Case of Sir 
Edward Hales against the Dispensing Power, 
ibid. 1187. — ^^Sir Thomas Powis's Argument in 
the same Case in support of it, ibid. 1192. — 
Chief Justice Herbert delivers the Judgment of 
the Court of King^s Bench in favour of it, ibid. 
1195. — His Account of the Authorities on 
which this Judgment was founded, ibid., 1251. 
—Sir Egbert Atkyns's Aiumadrersio&s thi^repOi 



ibid. 1267. — ^Mr. Attwood's Remarks upon 
Chief Justice Herbert's Defence of the Ji^g- 
ment, ibid. 1280.— Arguments of Sir Robert 
Sawyer^ Mr. Finch, Mr. Pollexfen, and Serjeant 
Pemberton, against the Dispensing Power, in 
6eir Defence of the Seven Bishops, 12 vol. 
362, 367, 370, 371 .—Sir Robert Sawyer declares 
his Opinion in favour of the Dispensing Power 
in his Argument in the Great Case of Mono- 
polies^ 10 vol. 473. — ^Mr. Justice Powell's 
Dedauation against the dispensing Power in 
the Case of the Seven Bishops, ibid. 427. — ^The 
Exercise of the Dispensing Power respecting 
tiie Test and P6i^ai Laws, said by Sir John 
Hawles to be one of the chief causes of the dis- 
affection of the nation to the House of Stuart, 
8 vol. 427. 

DISSECTION. 

.IMssection in Cases of Murder forms part of 
the Sentence, 18 vol. 1201, 19 vol. 959. — 
Statute directing the delivery of the bodies of 
persons executed in London and Middlesex for 
Murder to the . Company of Surgeons to be 
dissected and anatomized, 19 vol. 979 (note). 

DISSENTERS. 

Proceedings respecting Presbyterian Dis- 
senters at the Restoration, 6 voL 1.— -Proceed- 
ings respecting Dissenters after the Revolution, 
ihtd. 47. — Persecution of Protestant Dissenters 
during the Reign of Charles the Second, ibid. 
996. — ^The Penalty of Abjuration of the Realm 
derived from the ancient Common Law prac- 
tice of Sanctuary and Abjuration applied to 
Dissenters by 35 Eliz. and afterwards abolished 
by the TolerationAct, 15 vol. 146, andibid.310. 

DISTRINGAS. 

Arguments in Tutchin's Case, whether an 
Error in the date of the teste of a Distringas 
Corpora Juratorum be amendable by the Roll 
80 as. to avoid a Discontinuance, 14 vol. 1135. 
^— The Court of King's Bench are equally di- 
vided in Opinion on the question, ibid. 1187. 

DIVORCE. 

Proceedings relating to the Divorce of 
Catharine of Arragon from Henry the Eighth, 
1 voL 299. — Opinions of Melancthon and other 
Divines concerning Impotence as a cause of 
Divorce, 2 vol. 796. — Account of Bury's Case, 
containing a Decision against the validity of a 
second Marriage, under which there was Issue, 
the first Marriage having been dissolved on the 
ground of impotence, ibid. 849, 850 (note).—' 
The Duke of Norfolk's Divorce Bill, 13 vol. 
1283. — Bishop Cozens*s Argument in Lord 
Bms's Case, that a Man divorced from his 
Wife may lavefully marry again, ibid. 1332. — 
Sir Thomas Fowis's Argument in the Duke of 
Norfolk's Case, against Bills of Divorce, ibid. 
1345.-*Piscussion in the Dt^chessof Kingston's 
Case^ whether a Sentence of Divorce in the 
Bcdesiastioal Court upon a first Marriage is a 
coQclusive Bnswer to a Chai^^ ^ Bigamy, 20 
Tol. 391. 

yoL, XXXIV, 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



177 



DROWNING. See QfU^, Spencer. 

Evidence respecting 'the inference to be 
drawn from the sinking or floating of a dead 
body, as to whether the death was occasioned 
by drowning, or whether death had taken place 
before the body came into the water, 13 vol. 
1131, 1158, 1160, 1162.— Opinions of Dr. 
Sloane and others upon the immediate cause 
of death from drowning, ibid. 1155. — Opinions 
of medical men that it is not necessary that the 
body should have much water in it where dieath 
has been caused by drowning, ibid. 1158, 1159. 
— Further Observations on the immediate 
causes of death from drowning, ibid. 1202. 

DRUNKENNESS. 

Drunkenness cannot be pleaded in extenua- 
tion of Crimes^ Dammaree's Case, 15 vol. 603, 
690, 17, vol. 1092. — Fielding's Opinion respect^ 
ing the effect of Drunkenness on the Character, 
15 vol. 604 (note).— -Discussion respecting the 
effect of Drunkenness in extenuation of Crimes 
by the Law of Scotland, 17 vol. 1001.— Mr. 
Locke's Opinion of the reasonableness of not 
admitting Drunkenness as an excuse for crimes, 
22 vol. 520 (note).— 'Although Drunkenness 
does not excuse from criminal responsibility, 
no inference of crime can arise from the con- 
duct of a man when in a state of intoxication. 
26 vol. 122. 

DUELS. SeeBaHle. 

The Case of Duels in the Cou;rt of Star^ 
Chamber, 13 Jac. 1, 1615, 2 vol. 1033.— Sir 
Francis Bacon's Argument against them in that 
Case, ibid. ib^-^Decree of the Star-Chamber 
against them, ibid. 1042. — ^Lord Holt says, in 
delivering the Judgment of the Court in Maw-< 
gridge's Case, that if two persons appoint a 
time to fight, and meet and fight accordingly, 
and one of them is killed, it is Murder in the 
other, 17 vol. 66. — He also says, in the same 
Case, that if two persons are fighting a Duel 
upon malice prepense, and a third person ac- 
cidentally comes up, and ignorant of the malice, 
takes part with the one who he thinks has the 
disadvantage, or who is his Friend, and one is 
killed, it is Manslaughter, ibid. 69.— See 
J^ron, WUliamf Lord; Mohun, Charles, Lord; 
Warwick and Bollandy Edward, Earl of, 

DURESS. 

If a Prisoner dies in consequence of Duress 
of Imprisonment, it will be Murder in the 
Gaoler, 17 vol. 453 (note). — ^The only Duress 
which will avoid responsibility for Criminal 
Acts, is a force upon the person inducing a pre- 
sent fear of Death, Mac Growther's Case, 18 
vol. 394, 

DYING DECLARATION. 

Instance of a Dying DeclaratTon being re« 
ceived in Evidence wiSiout previously shewing 
that the party examined was in expectation of 
Death, 6 vol. 1325.— Mn Fox's Remarks upon 
the mode of estitaating the degree of creditaue 



.■k 



IVd 



GENERAL IKDEX TO 



£lkC2fl6VIitf 



to Dying Dficl^tkmi, 11 vol. 885.*--The prin* 
ciple upon which Djring Peclarations are ad« 
inissihle in Evidence in Cases of Murder, 16 
vol. 24 (note). — ^tt is a question for the Court 
and not for the Jury, whether the party whose 
Dying Declaration is offered in Evidence, was 
conscious of the immediate approach of Death 
at the time he made it, ibid. 25 fnote). — Re-> 
marks on the Admissibility of Evidence of 
Dying Declarations, by the Law of Scotland, 
ibid. 2T (note). 

DYING SPEECHES 

Of John Eisher, Bishop of Bochester, ex- 
ecuted for Treason, A. D. 1535, 1 vol. 406. — 
Of Queen Anne Boloyn, ezeouted A. D. 1536, 
ibid. 410.— Of Thomas Cromwell, Earl of 
Esset, executed A. D. 1541, ibid. 48r.— Of 
Edward, Duke of Somerset, executed A.D. 
1552, ibid. 523.— Of Lady Jane Grey, ex- 
ecuted A. D. 1553, ibid, T28.*-Of lliomas 
Howard, Duke of Norfolk, executed A.D. 
1572, ibid. 1032.— Of Sit Christopher Blunt, 
Sir Gilly Merrick, and Henry Cuile, executed 
A.D. 1600, ibid. 1412.— Of Sir Walter 
Baleieh, executed A.D. 1618, 2 toI. 41. — 
Of Henry Garnet, executed A.D. 1606, for 
being concerned in the Gunpowder Plot, ibid. 
856. — Of Sir Jervis Elwes, executed A.D. 
1615, fbt the Murder of Sir Thomas Orerbury, 
ibid. 942. — Of Mervin, Lord Audley, executed 
A.D. 1631 for Rape and Sodomy, 3 vol. 
417. — Of Fittpatrick and Brodway, executed 
A. D. 1631, for Sodomy, ibid. 421, 423.— Of 
Lord Strafiord, executed A. D. 1641, for Trea- 
son^ ibid. 1^21. — Of Archbishop Laud, ex- 
ecuted A. D. 1644, for Treason, 4 rol. 618.-^ 
Of Charles the Firet, King of England, ex- 
ecuted A.D. 1649, ibid. 1137.— Of James, 
Duke of Hamilton, executed A. D. 1649, ibid. 
1 186.^-Of the Earl of Holland, executed A. D. 
1649, ibid. 1220.— Of Arthur, Lord Capel, 
«Xecuted A.D. 1649, ibid. 1282«-^Of Chris- 
topher Love, executed A. D. 1651, 5 rol. 252. 
— Of John Gerhard, executed A.D. 1654, 
ibid. 586.-«Of Peter Vowell, executed A.D. 
1654, ibid. 53r.--Of Colonel Penruddock, 
executed A.D* 1655, ibid. 778.— Of Dr. 
Hewet, executed A.D. 1658, ibid. 93a— 
Dying Speeches of the Regicides, executed 
A. D. 1660.— Of General Harrison, ibid« 1235. 
—Of John Carew, ibid. 1241.— Of John Cook, 
ibid. 1252.— Of Thomas Scot, ibid. 1275— Of 
Colonel John Jones, ibid. 1285v-^0f Colonel 
Daniel Axtcll, ibid. 1291;-^-Of Colonel Francis 
Hacker, ibid. 1294.*^ Of Colonel Adrian 
Scroop, iW. 1300.-HOf Colond John Okey, 
executed A. D. 1662y ibid. 1319^^^^! Miles 
Corbet, ^id. 1822.— Of Colonel John Bark- 
stead, ibid. 1325.— Of Archibald, Man|Uttof 
Argyle, executed A. D. 1661, ibid. 1505.— Of 
John James, exeeuted A. D. 1661, 6 vol. 98. 
-— Of Sir Htnry Vane, exeiiuiled A. D. 1662, 
ibid« 193.^*-*<af Thomas Tonge, Geoige I%H. 
lips, Francis Stubbs, and I^thaaiel Gibbs, 
executed A.D. 1662* ibid. t6& .^fJQi John. 
Tlryji^ tMfM^ iWD^ 1668^ ibid, m^^fl 



Colonel James Turner, executed A. D, 1664* 
ibid. 620.— Of James MitohtU, executed »l 
Edinburgh, A.D. 1681, ibid. 1261.— Of Wil* 
liam Ireland and John Groves, executed A. D« 

1678, 7 rol. 142.*^Of Lawrence Hill, execatot 
A. D. 1679 for the Murder of Sir Edraondboij: 
Godfrey, ibid. 226.^0f David Lewis, 9!^ 
eouted A.D. 1679, ibid. 256.*<^Of ThomW 
Whitebtead and four others, commonly oalled 
the Five Jesuits, executed A. D.'1679 fojp being 
concerned in the Popish Plot, ibid. 481.— *Of 
Richard Langhom, executed A. D. 1679, ibid. 
502. — Of Francis Johnson, exeoutod A.D* 

1679, ibid. 750.— Of William Ples»ngto% 
executed A.D. 1679, ibid. 762.-<*Of Thonuw 
Tfawing, executed A.D. 1680, ibid. 1182.>»*^ 
Of Lord Stafford, executed A. D. 1680, ibid« 
1564. — Of Edward Fitzharris, executed A.D* 
1681, 8 vol. 395.— Of Dr. Oliver Flunkey 
executed A» D. 1681, ibid. 495.<***Of Stephen 
CoUedge, executed A.D. 1681, ibid. 71 7v**- 
Of William, Lord Russell, executed A.O. 
1683, 9 rol. 512, 683.— Of Captain Wah»t, 
executed A. D. 1688, ibid. 668.^0f Williatt 
Hone, executed A. D. 1683, ibid. 674.— Of 
John Rouse, executed A.D. 1683, ibid. 675. 
— Of Cplonel Algernon Sidney, executed A. D. 
1683, ibid. 907.— Of Sir Hiomaa Amstrong, 
executed A. D. 1684, 10 vol. 115.— Of Donald 
Cargill, executed A.D. 1681, ibid. 891.— Of 
Walter Smith, executed A.D. 1681, ibid. 
895.— Of James Boig, executed A. D. 1681, 
ibid. 900. — Of William Thomson, executed 
A.D. 1681, ibid. 902— Of William Cuthil, 
executed A.D. 1681, ibid. 905. — Of Lady 
Alice Lisle, executed A.D. 1685, 11 yoI. 380. 
—Of Henry Cornish, executed A.D. 1685, 
ibid. 451.— Of Elizabeth Gaunt, executed 
A.D. 1685, ibid. 452.— Of Robert Frances, 
executed for the Murder of Thokas Danger- 
field, A.D. 1685, ibid. 507.— Of Ei^ard 
Rumbold, executed A. D. 1685, ibid^ 879.-^ 
Thomas Archer, executed A.D. 1689, ibid. 
906. — Of James Reaw\ck, executed A.D. 
1689, 12 vol. 583. — Of John Ashton, aecuted 
A.D. 1691, ibid. 817.— Of Captain Henry 
Harrison, executed A. D. 1692 for the Murder 
of Dr. Clenche, ibid. 874.— Of Robert Young, 
executed A.D. 1700 for Coining, i^td. 116^* 
— Of William Anderton, executed A.D. 1693, 
ibid. 1265. — ^Of Robert Charnoek, Edward 
King, and Thoi&as Keyes, executed A.D. 
1696, ibid. 1462.— Of Sir John Frie&d and Sir 
William Parkyns, execttted A. Di 1696, for 
being concerned in the Assass! nation Plot, 
1 3V0I. 1 36.<— Of Robert Lowick and Ambrose 
Rookwpod, executed A. Dv 1696, ibid. 310.^ 
Of Sir John Fenwiok, executed A. D« 1697, 
ibid. 757^^--Of Thosms Aikeuhead, executed 
in Scotland 'for l^aspiiemy, A. D. 1697, ibid. 
930.— Of Haagen Swendsen, executed A.D. 
1702 for feloniously abdueiug an Heiress 
14 nA. 634.-<-Of John Quelch, John Lambert, 
Christopher Scudamore, J(^n Miller, Erasmas 
Peterson, executed A. P. 1704 for Piracy and 
Murder^ ibid. 109l»«— Of WiUiaiB Gtmi «•- 
ecuted A, D, 1708, ibid, J39J,'*-Of RvM 




THE STATE TRIALS. 



I7d 



exficnted A.B, t713, 15 vok. 7S0.--Of 
iUtfmr, Loffi Baimerino, executed A. D. 1746, 
§m bemg coBeeraed ia ihe Rebetlioa of 1746, 
im rol. 523.-^f SimoB Fraser, Lord Lovat, 
MDKBtod A.D. 1747, ibid. a54.--Of William, 
Atfl of Kilmariioek, executed A.D. 1747, 
Mi. 517.*rOf Mary Blaady, executed A. D. 
ir53» for die Murderof her Fati^, ibid. 1102. 
«t-ef Johi» Baibot, exeooted A. D. 1763, in 
Ae Island of {ftcChiislopher, for MuTder, ibid. 
1321 .--^f Jaines Stewart, executed in Scot- 
fand for Murder, A. D. 1762, 19 vol. 254.— 
Of J}t, Archibald Cameron, executed A D. 
%fS9f 3Md» 744. — Of Xames Aitken, executed 
JUI>- 1777 for setting Fire to the Fortsmoi^ 
Hock Yard, 20 vol. 1368.~^f David Mac- 
hine, executed A. D. 1797, 26 vol. 827.— Of* 
lames O'Coiglyy executed A.D. 1798, 27 vol. 
2M 

EAST-INDJA COMPANY. 

The Great Case of Monopolies between the 
laat India Company and Thomas Sandys, 
vespecting the validity of the Company's 
Charter ror the exclusive Privilege of trading 
to India, 10 vol. 371. — Mr. Holt*s Argument 
for the Company, ibid. lb.«!— Sir Geoi-ge Treby's 
Atjpxment for Mr. Sandys, ibid. 383* — Argu- 
jaent of Solicitor General r inch for tlie Com- 
pany^ ibid. 405. — Mr. PoUexfen's Argument 
iot Mr. Sandys, ibid. 414.— Sir Eobert Saw- 

Sr's Argument for the Company, ibid. 457. — 
r. Wniiam^'s Argument for Mr. Sandys, 
ibid. 495. — ^Tbe Court give Judgment for the 
Company, ibid. 516. — Qiief Justice Jefferies's 
Argument on giving his Judgment, ibid. 519. 
f— Roger Nortlrs Notice of this Case, ibid. ib. 
(note). — Remarks upon it from Anderson's 
''History of Commerce," ibid. 374 (note). — 
Discussion whether the East India Company 
ire entitled to send and receive Ambassadors, 
20 vol. 1119. 

ECCLESIASTICAL COMMISSIONS. 

Act of Parliament in the Reign of Queen 
Elizabeth, empowering the Crown to issue 
Ecclesiastical Como^issions, 11 vol. 1123. — 
Form of such a Commission issued by Queen 
Elizabeth, ibid. 1139.— Stat. 16 Car. 1, c. 11, 
removing from the Crown the power of issuing 
tuch Commissions, ibid. 1141.— Ecclesiasticsd 
Commissions are one of the subjects com- 
plained of in the Petition of Grievances, pre- 
sented to James the First in 1610, 2 vol. 522. 
—The Ecclesiastical Commission issued by 
James the Second, 11 vol. 1143.— Sir Robert 
Adnms'ji Argument against it, ibid. 1 1 48 (note). 
•— litis Commission exercised a Jurisdiction 
la Causes Matrimonial, ibid. 1144 (note). — 
Jtoger Coke's Remark on the inconsisteticy of 
1B^ form of this Commissions 12 vol. 26 (note). 

ECCI-ESIASTICAL COURTS. 

. Mr. Emlyn S9grs, ihctt the sttperiority of the 
BiflMh l^ doe$ not QOMist in the exeeUence 



xxiv.— Mr. Jufttice Potter's R^nMoia lOn the 
respective Authoiity of the Eeclesiastkad and 
Temporad Courts, 2 vol. 157 <note).-~^Sir 
Robert Atkyns's Discourse concening Ecde- 
siastical Jiuriadictio& in Eogkad, 11 toI. 1148 
(note).— Discussion whether a eentenceol Jac« 
titation in the Ecclesiastical Court is a con- 
clusive Aoftwer to a (Hsniaal Charge founded 
upon the validi^ of the Marriage svhich is 
the subject of such Sentence, and whether the 
e^Qt of such Sentence may not be avoided 
by proving it to have been procured by fraud, 
20 vol. 391. — Opinion of ^ Judges in the 
negative upon the first Question, am in the 
affirmative upon the Second, ibid. 537 (note). 
— Opinions of the Judges in 1637^ thuX Pcoceas 
may issue from the Ecclesiastical Courts in the 
name^ of the Bishops, and that a Patent under 
the Gr/&at Seal ia not veeessary for holding such 
Courts, 3 vol, 714, 

ElKON BASILIKE* 
Remarks upon it, 4 vol. 1154. 

ELECTIONS. 

The merits of Election9 are determinable in 
Parliament^ though the Writs of Election are, 
by Stat. 7 Hen. 4, returnable in Chanceiy, 2 
vol, 1 04 .-— Argument of Chief Justjkie North 
that the Sheriff presides as Judge as to declar- 
inj; the majority at an Election for Members 
of Parliament, 6 vol. 1096. — The Speaker's 
Account of the different Statutes relating to 
the Return of Members at Elections, in the 
Debate in the House of Commons on the Case 
of Ashley and White, 14 vol. 703. — ^Instances 
of summary Proceedings adopted by the House 
of Commons against persons misconducting 
themselves at Elections, ibid. 711 (note), — 
Debates in the House of Commons in the Case 
of Ashby and White, upon the Question 
whether an Action at Law lies by an Elector 
whose Vote has been refused at an Election, 
ibid. 696. — Sir Thomas Powis's Argument for 
the negative, ibid. 712.— Statement of the 
Reasons upon which ^e House of Lprds 
decided in the Affirmative, ibid. 781. —Argu- 
ment that the House of Commons has an 
original and exclusive right to determine all 
matters relating to the Election of their own 
members, ibid. 733.-*Strong Argument against 
this Doctrine, arising from the different nature 
of the Rights of the Electors and Elected, 
ibid. 792. — Resolutions of the House of Com- 
mons, on occasion of the Case of Ashby and 
White, asserting this right, ibid. 776.— By 
Stat. 7 and 8 WiU. 3, c. 7, if any person shall 
return a Member to serve in Parliament eon-« 
trary to the last determination of the House 
of Commons of the Right of Election in the 
place for which the . Return is made, it is a 
ialse Return, ibid. 781 (note).— The respectire 
rights of Election in Counties and Boroughs 
exphiined,. ibid. 782.— Every Freeholder has 
an original and fundamental right, which is 

Sart of his Freehold^ to vote at Elections for 
Lmghta of die Skm, ibidt ib»— Of the OnfiHk 



im 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



[IfisoBuL 



and Nature of the right of Boroughs to elect 
Members to senre in Fariiament, ibid, ib^ — Ii^ 
ancient Boroughs whose Lands are held in 
Burgage, the Burgesses have a real right an* 
sexed to their estates to send Members to Far- 
liamenty and in those Cities and Boroughs 
that have a right to elect Representatives by 
prescription, or Charter, it is a. personal right 
annexed to the body politic, or Corporation, 
ibid. ib. 
ELEVEN MEMBERS.— See HoUU, Jkrml 

^iiBARGOES. 
Mr. Hargraye's Reasons why the King's 
Prerogative of laying Embargoes should not 
be restricted to time of War, Harg. Pref. 1 vol. 
lii. — Sir John Davis's Remarks on the Pre- 
rogative of layitig Embargoes, in his Argu- 
ment in the Great Case of Impositions, 2 vol. 402. 

ENGLISHlttE. 

Meaning and Origin of the Law so called, 
explained by Lord Holt on delivering the 
Judgment of the Court in Mawgridge's Case, 
17 vol. 60, 

ENGLISH LANGUAGE. 

Specimen of the elegance of the English 
Laneuage in the Reign of Richard the Second, 
1 vol. 131.— When Criminal Proceedings were 
in Latio, the Indictment was read to the 
Prisoner in Eoglish before he pleaded, 6 vol. 
132 and (note). 

ENTRIES. 

Entnr of Venire and Postea on the Record 
of the Proceedings on the TVial of Thomas de 
Berkele for the Murder of Edward the Second, 
1 yol. 56. — Entry of the impannelling a Jury 
of Matrons to inspect a Woman in a Case of 
Divorce, 2 vol. 802. 

EQUIVOCATION. 

Remarks on the Popish Doctrine of the 
lawfulness of Equivocation, 7 vol. 545. — 
Opinions of several eminent Catholic Divines 
on the subject, ibid. 557. 

ERASTLA.NS. 

Account of the Founder of the Sect so call- 
ed, and of his Opinions, 10 vol. 871 (note). 

ERROR. 
The Errors assigned in Parliament in the Re- 
cord of the Proceedings against Thomas, Earl 
of Lancaster for High Treason, in the reign 
of Edward the Second, were that he was not 
arraigned, and that he was not tried by his 
Peers, 1 vol. 45.— If there be Error in Proceed- 
ings on the Trial of a Peer in Parliament 
for Treason, the Judgment may be reversed 
by a Writ of Error in the Court of King's 
Bench, per Whitlocke, J. in Sir John Elliott's 
Case, 3 vol. 308.— It was said by Lord Chief 
Justice North that the principal use of Writs of 
Error was to preyent any change of the Law, 
6 yol. 1094. — ^A Writ of &ror does not lie upon 
the refusal of a Habeas Corpus, 14 vol. 848.— 
BeioWed by Tea Judgei out of Twelve, that a 



Writ of Error, returnable in Parliame&t, oogU 
to be granted by the Crown of right and not ol 
fayour, ibid. 861 (note).— Since that Resoluticm 
it ought not to be denied in any Case undei 
Treason and Felony, where there is probable 
Error, of which Uie Attorney General is to jadge 
before he grants his Fiat, 19 vol. 1099. — Mr. 
Hargrave's Statement of the result of the 
authorities on the subject of Writs of Error in 
criminal Cases, ibid. 1136 (note). 

ESCAPE. 

Distinction between an Escape and Breach 
of Prison, 3 vol. 293. — ^It is an Offence by Law 
for . a person to depart from Prison with the 
^Gaoler's Licence, ibid. ib. — ^It is an Escape to 
bring a Prisoner in Execution out of the Kolea 
of a Prison, though it be done by an Order of 
the Court in order that he may give his Bti* 
dence, 7 yol. 1201, 10 yol. 1081. 

EVIDENCE. See WUnm. 

In the Case of Sir Nicholas Throckmorton, 
the Evidence of a person convicted of Treason 
was admitted for the Prosecution, though ob- 
jected to by the Prisoner, 1 yol. 880. — A per- 
son confessing Treason, but not attainted, held 
to be a sufficient Witness to prove Treason 
against others, Duke of Norfolk's Case, ibid. 
1023.— Evidence on oath of the Testimony of 
an absent person on a former occasion allowed 
against a Prisoner on his Trial for Felony, 
Udairs Case, ibid. 1283. — ^An Examination 
not signed by the party examined, but attested 
by others, allowed to be Evidence against a 
Prisoner on his Trial for Treason, Sir Walter 
Raleigh's Case, 2 vol. 15. — It was resolved by 
all the Judges in Lord Castlehaven's Case,' 
that a Wife may be a Witness against hec 
Husband to prove his aiding and abetting the 
commission of a Rape upon herself, 3 toL 
402. — In a Prosecution on the Statute ol 
Henry the Seventh, for forcibW marrying 
Wpman of Substance, the Wife may gii 
evidence of the facts against her Husban< 
even though she afterwards acquiesced in tl 
Marriage, Swendsen's Case, 14 yoL 575.- 
Opinion of the Court of Exchequer in Ireli 
in the Case of Annesley v. Lord AngU 
that a Wife may give evidence as to her Hi 
band's credibility upon his Oath, but not 
points affecting his property, 17 yol. 1376. 
By the Law of Scotland, a Wife cannot in 
Case be a Witness for or against her Husband 
18 vol. 580 (note).— It was resolved by all 
Judges in Lord Morley's Case, that De^ 
sitions taken upon a Coroner's Inquisitioi 
upon proof of the death of the Witnt 
and oath made by the Coroner that the De] 
sitions are unaltered, or upon proof that 
Witnesses are withdrawn by the procuremel 
of the Prisoner, are admissible in Evidence ~ 
the Prosecution on a Trial for Murden 6 1. 
776.— On the Trial of Harrison for nfurdf 
before Lord Holt, the Deposition of a Whm 
before the Coroner was admitted' in £yid< 

for the Crowsi on reasonable proof being i 



Commm.] 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



181 



dial the Witness badbMQ k«pt out of the way 
.^the Prisoner, 12 vol. 851. See also ibid. 
jS52 (note), and some discussion on this sub- 
ject in Sir John Fenwick's Casey 13 vol. 591. 
— In a criminal Case, where a Paper is proved 
to come from the Custody of the Prisoner, it 
my be read in Evidence against him without 
proof of his hand-writing. Layer's Case, 16 
f ol. 206. — Remarks upon the degree of caution 
with which Evidence of Hand-writing should 
he received by Juries in criminal Cases, 21 
▼ol. 779.— Evidence to belief is sufficient to 
prove Hand-writing, Layer's Case, 16 vol< 205. 
—Evidence of hand-writing by a comparison 
of hands is inadmissible, 9 vol. 864 (note). — 
Discussion on this subject i|i the Case of the 
Seven Bishops, 12 vol. 296. — Summary of the 
Cases and the Law upon this Subject by Mr. 
Wynne, in his Speech m Defence of Bishop At- 
teriiury, 16 vol. 546.-- >Lord Chancellor Eldon's 
Remarks on the mode of proving hand-writing 
in the Case of Eagleton v. lUngston, ibid. 
3(M» (note)^ — ^Mr. Serjeant Peake's suggestion 
as to the reason of the Rule respecting the 
proof of hand-writing, ibid. 306 (note). — 
Lord Chief Justice North says in CoUedge's 
Case, that the^ effect of the evidence in a 
criminal Trial is matter of Law for the Court, 
and that the truth of the evidence is matter 
of Fact for the Jury, 8 vol. 710.— Judge 
Jenkins says, that examinations in Court, not 
upon' Oath, are merely communications, and 
not Evidence, 4 vol. 932. — Evidence of the 
general bad Character of the Defendant ad- 
mitted for the Prosecution on the Trial of 
Major Faulconer for Perjury during the Com^- 
monwealthy 5 vol. 354. — Mr. Justice Foster's 
Bemarks on the reasonableness of the Rule, 
that in criminal Trials no evidence should be 
allowed which is foreign to the point in Issue, 
ibid. 978 (note).— On the Trial of Count 
Coningsmark and others for Murder, Chief 
Justice Pemberton would not admit in evi- 
dence the Examination of one of the Prisoners 
before a Magistrate, because it implicated the 
others, 9 vol. 23.-«On the Trial of Lord Grey 
de Werk and others for a Conspiracy to de- 
bauch Lady Henrietta Berkeley, the Lady was 
admitted as a good Witness for the Defend- 
ants, ibid. 173. — Before evidence of any thing 
done on a Trial can be admitted, the Record 
of the Trial must be produced, 10 vol. 1163. 
—Chief Justice Jefferies held, on the Trial of 
Gates for Perjury, that the Journals of the 
House of Commons were not Evidence, be- 
cause that House cannot administer an Oath,, 
and the Journals are not a Record, ibid, ib.-r- 
But ip Lord George Gordon's Trial for Trea^ 
ion before Lord Mansfield, sworn copies of 
the Journals of the House of Commons were 
admitted in evidence, 21 vol. 650, — The 
printed Journals of the Houses of Parliament 
are not Evidence, and only examined copies 
are admissible, 29 vol. 685. — Instances in 
which the Journals of Parliament have been 

!iTen in evidence, 7 vol. 1408, 12 vol. 376.— 
t is PQt • general Rule that copies of no 



Documents but Records are admissible in 
Evidence, if the Originals exist, 21. vol. 650 
(note). — ^The correct principle appears to be, 
that wherever an Original is of a public nature, 
and would be evidence if produced, an inmie« 
diate sworn Copy thereof will be Evidence, 
ibid. 651 (note). — See Lord Erskine's Opinion 
on this subject, on Lord Melville's Trial, 29 
vol. 695. — Chief Justice Jefferies refused to 
hear a Witness who was called to prove that 
he had perjured himself on a former occasion, 
10 vol. 1185w— On the Trial of Elizabeth Can- 
ning for Perjury, Mr. Baton Legge refused to 
admit such Evidence, 19 vol. 632. — In former 
times. Evidence of particular acts of miscon* 
duct by Witnesses was admitted for the pur- 
pose of discrediting them, 7 vol. 1459, 1478, 
1485.— The maxim of the Civil Law respecting 
this practice, ibid. 1484. — ^Instance in modem 
times of Evidence in support of the Character 
of a Witness being admitted for the purpose 
of establishing his credibili^r» Murphy^s Case, 
19 voU 724. — ^Probable Evidence is sufficient 
to authorize a Grand Jury to find a Bill, 13 
vol. 455. — Original Orders and Rules of Court, 
containing the names of theCounsel who moved 
them, held to be good Evidence to prove that 
that particular Counsel was, at the time they 
were moved, at the place where the Court 
then sat. 18 vol. 177.— ^Doubts resnecting the 
infallibility of circumstantial Evidence, and 
its value in comparison with positive Testi- 
mony, 19 vol. 73 (note).— Selling a libel by 
a servant in a shop is presumptive Evidence 
of a publication by the Master, 20 vol. 838, 
839. — ^It was held by a majority of the Court 
on Hardy's Trial, that a Letter written by a 
party to a Conspiracy, and rdating to it, is 
admissible in evidence to show the nature and 
object of the Conspiracy against a person 
charged with being concerned in it, 24 vo1« 
473i— In all Cases of general Conspiracy, 
where many Agents are employed, the acts of 
the Agents may be given in evidence against 
a party to the Conspiracy, in order to show 
its nature and objects, per Eyre, C. J. in 
Home Tooke's Case, 25 vol. 127. — On a Pro- 
secution for High Treason in sending intelli- 
gence to an Enemy, a Letter sent by one Con« 
spirator in pursuance ol the common design 
is Evidence against all engaged in the same 
Conspiracy, Stone's Case, ibid. 1268,^ ibid. 
1277 (note).— The fact that one of several 
parties to a Conspiracy brings a Paper to a 
Printer to be printed, is Evidence against other 
parties to the same Conspiracy to prove a cir- 
cumstance in the Conspiracy, but not to affect 
the latter criminally with the publication of 
the Paper, Hardy's Case, 24 vol. 438.«-*It was 
doubted by the Court in Watson's Case« 
whether Papers found in the possession of a 
party to a treasonable Conspiracy might not 
be given in Evidence against aperson charged 
with participating in it^ in order to show the 
object of the* Conspiracyi without express Evi- 
dence that the Papers were to be used in 
furthenMAce of the desi^i di vol dGO^-^By 



1st 



^ENEllAX INDEX TO 



fKflMIU» 



Hhe Cvni Law, tlie Cofrpiis ]>elicti mnst be 
proved by positive testimony before Evidence 
can be adfoutted to ascertain the Offender, 14 
▼oL 1229, 1246. — ^Discassion of this subject 
on die Trial of Captain Green and others in 
Scotland for Piracy and Murder, ibid. tK--^ 
Declarations or ConYersations of a Defendaxtt 
npoil a speculative subject, connected with 
criminal acts charged against hhn, are Evidence 
to show thai h» general Opinions upon that 
subject are inconsistent with a criminal inten- 
tion in the particular acts upon which the 
Charge is founded, Hardy's Case, 24 vol. 
1094.— There is no Rule of Law that in Cases 
of Treason the Overt Act tttust be proved by 
two Witnesses before evidence of a uonfession 
Is admissible, Crossfield's Case, 26 vol. 57.--^ 
In an Action for a Libel in a weekly Paper, 
Evidence of the publication of the same Paper 
to* other parties and at other times than those 
Btated in the DecYwration is admissible to show 
that the Ltbel was pubtisbed deliberately and 
in the ordinary course of business, and not 
accidentally, or by mistiifl^e, Plnnkett tr. Cob- 
bett, 29 vol. 69 (note)<-^Probable Evidence of 
the destruction of a written document h suf^ 
ficient to let in secondary Evidence of its cofr- 
tents. Justice Johneon's Case, ibid. 437.— On 
Franeia's Case for Treason^ where one of the 
Overt Acts charged tras the vrriting certain 
Letters, the contents of which were not set 
out in the Indictment, an Objection by the 
Prisoner to the admissibility of the Letters in 
Evidence was overruled, 15 vol. 931 ^-^In 
Watson*s Case, Evklence of seditious Speeches 
by the Prisoner was admitted for the Prosecu- 
tion, though they were not set out in the Ih" 
dictmeitt, 32 vol. 87. — In a Case of Treason, 
where the Prisoner was proved to have taken 
a portion of certain printed Placards from a 
Printer, it was held that all of thefn were 
Duplicate Originals, and therefore, that a Copy 
remaining with the Printer might be read in 
Evidence for the Prosecution, to show the Pri- 
soner's knowledge of their contents, withoat 
a .Ndtice to the Prisoner to produce the por- 
tion taken away by him, Watson's Case, ibid. 
86.— The existence of Peace or War between 
England and a foi^ign Country is matter of 
notoriety, and need not be expressly proved. 
Lord George Gordon's Case, 22 vol. 230.— See 
- also what is said as to this by Lord Ellenboroue fa, 
in Peltier's Case, 29 vol. 616.—- Discussion whe- 
ther the receipt of a Letter in the County of Mid* 
dlesex, in the hand-writing of the Defendant, 
and bearing the Dublin Post-mark, is suffi-i 
cient Evidence to charge the Defendant vnth a 
Publication of the Letter in Middlesex without 
proof of its actual transmission from Dublin, 
Judge Johnson's Case, ibid. 448.— Sir Samuel 
RomiUy's statement of the presumptions which 
the law makes, in civil cases> against a partv 
to a Suit who has destroyed Evidence, ibid'. 
119d.-^LaWs of a ibreigu Countty milst be 
proved by an authenticated Copy of them, 30 
v«l. 49t.-Bookt of History ire, in some 
CAses, ftdmiliible la Etidenoe^ ibid. 4^t)^The 



Rntes of Evideitee aW Ithe stnie in erii^tiid 
and in civil Cases, 25 Vol. 1314, 29 vol. 7d4. 
— Instance of a Declaration of a dying penmt 
being received hi evidence, vrithout previous 
Evicknce that the party examined was ifi im- 
mediate apprehension of death, 6 vol. 1325. — 
The principle upon which the Declarations of 
dying persons are atdmiesibfe va Evidence in 
Cases of Murder, 15 vol. 24 (note). — It is a 
question for the Court, and not for the Jury, 
whether the patty whose dying Declamtion is 
offered in Evidence, was conscious of fans im- 
mediate danger at the time he made it, ibid. 
25 (note). — Remarks on the admissibility of 
Evidence of the Declarations of dying persons 
by the law of Sc(4land, ibid. 27 (note}.-*Tbe 
London Gaxette is evidence of all acts of State, 
and the production of it is sufficient to prove 
an Averment} in na Infornialion, that ceHaia 
Addresses have been presented to the Kingj 
because being received by the King in Im 
puUio capacity, they become Acta of -State, 
Holt's Case, 21 vol- 1218 (note).-— Notice in 
the Gaiette of the ratification of Treaties of 
Peace with a foreign Country, held to be 
evidence of the existence of Peace with that 
Country, Quekh's Case, 14 vq). 1084. 

EXAMINATION OF WETNESSES. ---Set 
Witneiij Crim^Examkiation. 

EXAMINATIONS. See ^vid^noe; 
DqfoiUiont, 

An Examination not signed by the party 
examined, but attested by others, allowed in 
Sir Walter Raleigh's Case to be Evidence 
against a third person, on his Trial for High 
Treason, 2 vol. 15. — Examinations in Law are 
upon Oath, and if made in Court not upon 
Oath, are merely Communications, and not 
Evidence^ 4 vol. 932.^-Hume's Account of the 
Precognitions or Examinations taken previously 
to Trial, by the law of Scotland, 10 vol. 783 
(note)d — Examinations before a Coroner, or 
Magistrate, may be admitted in Evidence 
against a Prisoner if the Witnesses be dead) 
or withdrawn by the procurement of the Pri- 
soner, 6 Vol. 776. See also 12 vol. 852, and 
(note), and 13 vol. 593. — Discussion in Sir 
Johti Fenwick's Case, respecting the admissi<* 
bility in Evidence against a Prisoner, of Ez^ 
aminations taken in his absence before a Ma* 
gistrate,13 vol. 591. — A Prisoner is not entitled 
to demand copies of the Examinations before 
the committing Magistrates, either in Cases of 
Felony or Misdemeanour, 31 vd. 574. 

EXCEPTIONS. See BiU of EtapHm. 

Mr. Emlyn's Reason why Defendants m 
Crimiual Cases ought not to be deprived of 
the opportunity of making even captions Ex- 
ceptions, 1 vol.xxxi. — Exceptions to an Indki- 
ment cannot be taken after the Jury are sworoi 
IS vol. 161. 

EXCHEQUER, C*OURT OF. 
Reference to Treatises at ^e<;ottrt of £r« 



OtmnamJ 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



183 



diequer, 14yol. 37.-**^Loid Chief Justice Treby^s 
Aigiiment in the Backers' Case, respecting Uie 
power of the. Barons of the Court of Exchequer 
.10 dispose of pr to control the Kin^s Revenue, 
•ibid; 23.— Lord Somers's celebrated Argument 
«pon this Subject, in the same Case, ibid. 46. 
—Lord- Jiolt's Argument, in the same Case, 
Hhat the Court of Augmentations was not in- 
'^orporated with the Court of Exchequer, ibid. 
36. — ^Lord Somers's Argument to the Contrary, 
ibid. 8i>.-*Lord Somen maintains that the 
Barons are subordinate Officers of the Court of 
Exchequer, ibid« 64. 

£XCH£QU£IUCHAMB£B, COURT OF. 

Opinion of the Majority- of the Judges in the 
Bankers' Case, that in the Court of Exchequer- 
Chamber, erected by Stat. 31 £dw. 3, c. 12, to 
determiDe Writs of Error from the Common - 
Law side of the Court of Exchequer, the Lord 
Keeper, or Lord Chancellor, may give Judg- 
fiieet according to his own Opinion, though it 
differs Drom that oi the majority of the Judges, 
H Yol. 105. 

EXCOMMUNICATION. 

The practice of the Eoclesiastical Courts in 
pronouncing Sentence of Excommunication 
upon ininute Offences, animadrerted upon by 
Mr. Emlyn, 1 vol. xxt. — Discussion respect- 
ing Excommunication in Ecclesiastical Courts 
at the Hampton Court Conference, 2 vol. 72. — 
Donald Cargili's Excommunicatiolk of Charles 
the Second, and other enemies of the Covenant, 
commonly called the Torwood Excommunica* 
tion, 15 vol 672 (note). 

EXECUTION. 

Lord Bacon's Remarks on the King's power 
to alter the Execution of a Sentence in cases 
of Treason and Felony, 7 vol. 1539 (note). — 
Remarks on the Execution of persons convicted 
of capital crimes by the Law of Scotland, 10 
vol. 844 (note). — Discussion of the Question, 
whether in Criminal Cases the manner of Exe- 
cution may vary from the Judgment, 1 1 vol. 
376 (note). — Mr. Emlyn commends the prac- 
tice of some foreign Cfountries that the Magis- 
tmte sbottKi be present at the Execution of a 
Sentence atid give directions about it, i vol, 
xxxvi, 

EX-OFFICIO INFORMATIONS. 

See It^onnaUoTh 

' ObennatloBS on Et-Officio Informations, 
in the celebrated Letter ascribed to Lord C«n- ; 
den, respecting ^ Seicure of Papers, &c. by the 
ftrther of Candour,*' 20 vol. 677 (note).— Mr, 
Home ToMce*s Animadversions upon them, 
ibid. 677%—* Argument against them intended 
\o bave been delivered in the Court of King's 
Bench %y Mr. Earberry, ibid. 856. — ^The Court 
wiH not tjoash aii £x-(>fficio Information, but 
Will leave it to the Attorney General to enter 
ft noh pioseq«i| 91 ^» 10484--4q the Absence 



of the Attorney General a Criminal Informa- 
tion may be filed ex-officio by the Solicitor 
General, 19 vol. 1102. — ^Reasons against this 
doctriUQ^ assigned in support of the Writ of 
Error, in Wilkes's Case, 20 vet. 799.— Opinion 
of the Judges in the House of Lords, in Wilkes's 
Case, that an Information nay be filed by the 
Solicitor General, and that it is tiot necessary 
to aver upon the Record that the ofiice of ^ 
Attorney General is vacant, 19 vol. 1127. — 
Outlawry lies upon an fo-Officio Infonnation, 
ibid. 1104. — Mr. BattiAgt(m expresses au 
Opinion that the power of the Attorney General 
to file Informations ex-officio is borrowed from 
the Civil Law, 1^ vol. 1371 (note). 

EXTORTION. 

Mr. Emlyn's Remarks upon the Extortion 
commonly practised by Gaolers upon their 
Prisoners in his time, 1 vol, xxxvii. 

FALSE IMPRISONMENT. See Papilhth 
Thanms; Lswh^ Dryden. 

FALSE RETURN. 

Argumetits of Sir Robert Atkins and Sir 
William Ellis, in the Case of Bamardiston 
against Soames, that an Action will lie against 
the Sheriff, or Other returning Officer, for 
making a double Return to a Writ of Election, 
6 vol. 1070.— Lord Chief Justice North's cde- 
brated Argument in the same Case, to the 
contrary, ibid. 1092.— By Stat. 7 and 8 Will. 
3, c. 7, if any person shall return a Member to 
serve in Parliament contrary to the last deter- 
mination of the House of Commons, of the 
right of Election in the place for which the 
Return is made, it shall be adjudged a false 
Return, 14 vol, 781 (note). 

FEALTV. 

Renunciation of Fealty by the Prelates. 
Earls, and Barons, to Edward the Second, 1 
vol. 48.— Resignation of Fealty and Homage 
by the States of the Realm to Richard the 
Second, ibid. 152. 

FEAR. 

The Fear of having Hpuses burned or Goods 
spoiled, is no excuse in Law, for joining and 
marching with Rebels, Macgrovnher's Case, IB 
vol. 893, and (note).— The only Fear which will 
excuse is a present Fear of death, and this Fear 
must continue all the time the-party remains 
with the Rebels, ibid. 394. 

FEES. 

Mr. Emlyn's Auimadversiens upon the prac- 
tice of allowing Fees to Gaolers, 1 vol. :|xxvii« 
— Injustice and illegality of compelling persons 
arrested by order*of the House of Cqmmons to 
pay Fees to tlie Seijeant at Arms, 8 vol. 10. — 
Question respecting the right of the Strjeael 
at Arms to take Fms, ibid. ib> 



184 



GENERAL INDEX TO [Miaemi.* 

FELONY. FOBCE. 



Argument that a person attainted of Felony, 
though pardoned, cannot be a Witness, 7 vol. 
1085.— >£ffect of burning in the hand for Felony, 
in restoring the competency of a Witness^ ibid. 
1090. — Disabilities consequent upon a Convic- 
tion for Felony at Common Law, 13 vol. 1016. 
-^The term Felony at common law said to 
import nothing more than an enormous Crime, 
8 vol. 209. — Mr. Emlyn's Observations on 
Trials for Felony, by the Law of England, 1 
vol. xxxi. 

FEME COVERT, See Hmbandand Wife. 
FETTERS. See Irofif. 

FIERY CROSS. 

Amot's Account of the ancient method of 
summoning the Clans of the Chieftains in the 
Highlands of Scotland by the Fiery Cross, 14 
vol. 354.— Description of it by a Witness on 
the Trial of Lord Loyat, 18 vol. 676. 

FIFTH MONARCHY MEN. See Jama, John. 

Echard's Account of the Insurrection of the 
Fifth Monarchy Men under Venner soon after 
the Restoration, 6 vol. 67 (note). See also a 
further Account, ibid. 104 (note). — Burnet's 
Account of Venner's Tumult, and its conse- 
<][uences, ibid. 113. 

FINES. 

* 

Mr. Emlyn's Remarks on Excessive Fines, 
Em. Pref. 1 vol. xxxv. — ^The Imposition of ex- 
orbitant lines was said by Sir John Hawles to 
be one of the causes of the disaffection of the 
Nation to the Stuart Government, 8 vol. 426. — 
Remarks on the illegality of excessive Fines 
imposed by Courts of Justice, 11 vol. 1361. — 
The distinction between a reasonable Fine and 
^ Fine certain in Admittances, &c. 17 vol. 
914. 

FIVE JESUITS. See Whitchread, Thomai. 

FIVEMEMBERS.SeeKi»i6o/r(m,Et/t«>flrd',Xord 

FIVE POPISH LORDS. See ^ord, 
WUliam^ Vmount. 

FLEET MARRIAGES. 

Mr. Cruise says, that in the Case of the 
Barony of Sajand Sele, a Certificate of Mar- 
riage by the SSinister of the Fleet was offered 
in Evidence, and though it does not appear 
whether it was received as Evidence, the Mar- 
riage was held good, 14 vol. 1367 (note).— 
Before the Marriage Act, Fleet Marriages were 
clearly legal, 14 vol. 1367 (note). 

FLIGHT.* 

.1 

Lord Mansfield says, in his celebrated Judg- 
ment in Wilkes's Case, that in Criminal Cases, 
Fli(;ht is in itself a Crime^ 19 vol. 1098^ 



The fear of having Houses burned or goods 
spoiled is no excuse in law for joining Rebels, 
Macgrowther's Case, 18 vol. 393.^-The only 
force which excuses from criminal responsi- 
bility is a force upon the person and present 
fear of death, ibid. 394. 

FORCIBLE MARRIAGE. 

Trial of Haagen Swendsen for forcibly 
marrying Pleasant Rawlins, 14 vol. 559. — It 
was held by Lord Holt in that Case, that if the 
first taking away were forcible, Ihe offence 
under the Statute of Henry the Seventh is com* 
plete, though the woman afterwards consents 
to the Marriage, ibid. ^95. — The same point 
seems to have been held by Mr. Justice Law* 
rence in a late Case, ibid. 596 (note). 

FOREIGNERS. SeeJ^ien. 

Instances in which the Kings of England 
formerly exercised the power of sending Fo- 
reigners out of the Realm, 15 vol. 528 (note). 
— Discussion of the Question, in the Case of 
Fabrigas v. Mostyn, whether a Foreigner can 
maintain an Action in the Courts of this 
Country for a personal wrong sustained by him 
in his own Country, 20 vol. 194. — Discussion 
of the Question, whether a Foreigner resident 
in his own Country is responsible to the Laws 
of England, for an offence against those Laws 
in England, Mr. Justice Johnson's Case, 29 
vol. 394. — On the Trial of a Foreigner for pri- 
vately stealing in a Shop, Mr. Justice Foster 
directed the Jury to acquit him of that charge, 
because the Prisoner could not be presumed 
to know of the existence of the Statute creating 
the Offeuce, ibid. 398. — But in Mr. Justice 
Johnson's Case, this Decision was said by the 
Court not to be Law, ibid. ib« 

FOREIGN LAW. 

The vnritten Laws of foreign Countries most 
be proved by authenticated Copies of the 
Laws, 30 vol. 491. 

FORFEITURE. 

Mr. Hume's Observations on the Law of 
Scotland respecting Forfeiture9 on Convictions 
for Capital Offences, 10 vol. 1009. 

FORGERY. 

Proceedings in Parliament in 1647 in a Case 
of the Forgery of a private Act of Parliament, 
4 vol. 951. — indictment at Common Law, for 
forging a Promissory Note, 17 vol* 162.— On 
the Trial of an Indictment for Forgery at dom- 
mon Law, it was held, that where there was no 
direct proof of the Forgery, but circumstances 
were proved partly in one County and partly 
in another, the Venue is rightly laid in either 
County, Hales't Case, ibid. 202.— It was for- 
merly doubted whether the making use of the 
name of another penoi^ for a different {>urpos9 



CoKmm.] 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



185 



Aan that deaigaed by himself, was Forgery, | were, sworn, ibid, ih.-*Mr« Emlyn's Remarks 
ibid. 243. See Hales^ William; Kmnertl^^ I on the true design of Gaol Dehveries, 1 tqL 
Thma»: Murphy, Timothy ; Nundocomar* zxxviii. 

FRAUD. 

Frauds which would only be the subject of a 
CiTil Action if committed against an . Indi?i- 
doal, become indictable when committed 
against the Public, Bembridge's Case, 22 vol. 

FREEHOLD. 

It was decided upon Argument in the Case 
of Lord Russel, that the want of freehold is no 
gnmnd of Challenge to a Juror in London, 9 
vol. 591;-*-Sir John Hawles's Remarks upon 
das DecisioD, ibid. 795.— Discussion of the 
Qiestion, whether in Counties or Corporate 
Cities, the want of Freehold is an Objection 
lea Grand or Petit Juror, 31 toI. 579. — ^In 
Sheridan's Case it was held by the Court of 
King's Bench in Ireland, to be no Objection, 
ftid. 611.— It was held in Townley's Case, 
nace the Statute 4 and 5 Will, and Mary, c. 
24, S.15, that if a Juror had a Freehold and a 
C(^hoid Estate, which taken together 
amounted to 10/. a year, it was a sufficient 
qoaiificatioD, though the Freehold alone was 
under 10/. 18 vol. 348. 

FREEHOLDER. 

Id ancient times the Freeholders had the 
right of electing Sheriffs, Conservators of the 
Peace, and Lora-Lieutenants, 13 voL 1406. — 
Every Freeholder has an original and funda- 
mental right, which is part of his freehold, to 
vote at Elections for the Knights of the Shire, 
14 vol. 782. 

FRIGIDITY. See Impotence; Divorce, 

GALLOWAY MEN. 

Proceedings in the Court of Justiciary in 
Scotland against several persons of the Shire of 
Galloway for High Treason, in being concerned 
in the Rebellion of Bothwell Bridge, 34 Car. 
2, 1682, 11 vol. 909. — Evidence against them, 
ibid. 938. — They are found Guilty, and sen- 
tenced to death, ibid. 945. — ^Wodrow's Account 
of these Proceedings, ibid. 909 (note). 

GAOLDEUVERY. 

The Judges. of the Court of Riug's Bench 
are Sovereign Justices of Oyer and Terminer 
aod Gaol Delivery, 2 vol.758.— Commissioners 
pf Oyer and Terminer and Gaol Delivery cannot 
by the Common Law sit during term in. the 
same County with the Court of King's Bench, 
ibid, 759. — A Tales cannot be granted under 
a Commission of Gaol Delivery, 13 vol. 322, 
326. See also 18 vol. 863. — Practice respects 
i^g the Jury Process under a Commission of 
Gaol Delivery, 13 vol. 326. — In a Court of 
Gaol Delivery,.if a Trial goes off for default of 
Jarors, the Trial may afterwards be had by a new 
Jury Panel^ though several of the first Jurors 



GAOLS AND GAOLERS. See 

Oppressions and Extortions of Gaolers not 
sufficiently guarded against by the Law of Eng- 
land, Em. Pref. 1 vol. xxxvii. — Gaolers should 
be paid by regular salaries, and not by fees 
taken from their Prisoners, ibid. ib. — Evil 
Consequences of the common management of 
Gaols, ibid, xxxviii. — Fetters should not be 
used in Gaols unless where there b danger of 
an Escape, ibid, xxxix.— Report of the Com- 
mittee appointed by the House of Commons in 
1729, to inquire into the state of Gaols in Eng* 
land, 17 vol. 297. — If aPrisonerdies by duress of 
the Gaoler, it is Murder, ibid. 375. — If a Gaoler, 
knowing that a Prisoner with an infectious 
disease lodges in a certain room in the Gaol, 
confines another Prisoner in the same room 
against his will, in consequence of which the 
latter catches the disease and dies, it is Murder 
in the Gaoler, Bambridge and Corbet's Case, 
ibid. 453 and ib.(DOte).— -Many recent improve- 
ments in the Management of Gaols, ibid. 
617. — ^Lord Coke's Opinion respecting the 
mode of treatment proper to be observed 
with regard to Prisoners, ibid. 618. — Discus* 
sion oh a AVrit of Error in the House of Lords 
in the Case of Hart and White, respecting the 
power of the Court of King's Bench to sentence 
persons convicted of Offences in that Court, to 
imprisonment in other Gaols than those belong- 
ing to the Court, or to the Counties in whidi 
the Offences were committed, 30 vol. 1325. — 
Opinion of the Judges on that occasion, that 
the Court of King's Bench has the power of 
imprisoning in any of the King's Gaols in 
England, ibid. 1344. See Huggini, John; ActoUf 
WUliamj Bambridge, Thomas* 

GAZETTE. 

Notice in the London Gazette of the Ratifi- 
cation of Treaties of Peace vnth a foreign 
Country, held to be Evidence of the existence 
of Peace with that Country, Quelch's Case, 14 
vol. 1084. — ^The Gazette is Evidence of all Acts 
of State; and the production of it is sufficient 
to prove an Averment in an Information that 
certain Addresses have been presented to the 
King, because being received by the King in 
his public capacity, they become Acts of State, 
Holt's Case, 22 vol. 1213 (note). 

GENERAL CONVENTION. 

Minutes of a political Association in 1793 
at Edinburgh, called the General Convention 
of the Friends of the people, 23 vol. 391. See 
Margaroty Maurice; Skirving, WUUam; Oer* 
rddf Joseph ; Muir, Thomas, 

GENERAL WARRANTS. See Secretary of 

State, 

Arguments upon the validity of General 
W'arr^ts in Sir Thomas DameU's CasQj a vqI. 



166 



GENERAL IKDtlX TO 



CHMSLt. 



6.-~Argam^nts on the isame subject in 
Stroud's Case, ibid. 241. — ^Discussions of the 
Question whether General Warrants are legal, 
in tiie Case of Leach v. Money, 19 vol. 1018, 
103Q»-*Lord Mansfield seems to have con- 
sidered them to be illegal, ibid. 1026.— The 
Judgment of the Court of Common Pleas 
delivered by Lord Camden, declaring General 
Warrants for the seizure of t^apers illesal, ibid. 
1044. — Lord Camden*s Opinion to the same 
effect, given in his Charge to the Jury in 
the Case of Wilkes t?. Wood, ibid. 1167.— 
There appears to have been no direct decision 
of the (Jourts of Law that General Warrants 
are universally illegal, ibid. 1076. — ^The House 
of Commons resolve in 1766, that General 
Warrants are universally illegal, ibid. 1075. 

GLENCOE, MASSACRE OP. 

Proceedings in the Parliament of Scotland 
respecting the Massacre Of Glencoe, 7 Will. 3, 
1695, 13 vol. 879, — Commission of Enquiry, 
ibid.j ib, — ^Report of the Commissioners, ibid. 
896. — Particular Account of the Massacre,*ibid. 
900.— Resolved by the Parliament of Scotland 
to be a Murder, ibid. 911. — Address of the 
Parliament to the Ring respecting it, ibid. 913. 
— ^^Mr. Laing*s Remarks upon the Massacre 
and these Proceedings, ibid. 881 (note). 

GOOD BEHAVIOUR. 

Opinion of the Judges in the House of Lords 
in the Case of Hart and White, that the Court 
of Ring's Beneh has the power of requiring 
sureties for Good Behaviour for a reasonable 
time from persons convicted of Crimes in that 
Court, 30 vol.1334. 

GOWRTE CONSPIRACY. 

Proceedings of the Parliament of Scotland 
respecting the Gowrie Conspiracy, 42 Elix. 
1600, 1 vol. 1359.— Depositions of the Wit- 
nesses before the Lords of the Articles, ibid. 
t363.^Ac0ount of the Conspiracy from Lord 
Somers's Tracts, ibid. 1383. 

PRAND JURY. 

In the Case of the Regicides, it was resoWed 
by all Ihe Judges that the Counsel for the 
Crown taiight conduct the Evidence before the 
Grand Jury, 5 vol. 972.— Sir John Hawles's 
Animadversion on the practice of admitting 
Counsel before a Grand Jur^, ibid. ib. (note). 
— In Hardy^s Case the Solicitor for the Crown 
attended the Grand Jury at their desire, 
and by leave of the Court, ibid. ib. (note). 
— In Crossfield's Case the Solicitor for the 
Treasury applied to the Grand Jury to be 
permitted to be present while the Witnesses 
on an Indictment for Treason were examined, 
but the GrandJury, upon deliberation, refused 
the Application, 8 voK 773 (note).— In the 
Earl of Shaftesbury's Case the two Chief Jus- 
tices, Pemberton and North, decland that ithad 
always been the>praetice to examine the Wit- 
neiseg before the Grand Jury in open Court, 
if the Counsel for the Prosecution desired it, 



iWd. 771, 7t5.— Instance in the Reign of 
Charles the Second of an Exception being 
taken by a Prosecutor to some of the Grand 
Jury supposed to be favourable to the Prisoner, 
and allowed by the Court, 7 vol. 249. — Vio- 
lent Conduct of Jeflferies when Reoorder of 
London, to a Grand Jury on their throwing 
out a Bill of Indictment for a Political Libei, 
ibid. 942.-^ir John Hawles's Ranarks upon 
the necessity and importance of Grand Juii^, 
and on their duties respecting the finding of 
Indictments, 8 vol. 838.— -These Remarks 
quoted by Mr» Home on his Trial for a Libel 
before Lord Mansfield, 20 vol. 682.— ^BUelt- 
stone's Account of the Qualificationa and 
Duties of Grand Juries, 8 vol. 821 (note). — ^A 
Grand Jury may present all matters wtthib the 
scope of their Charge and Authority, which 
they either know themselves^ or are infoniicd 
of by others, without confining ihemeelves tv 
Bills formally presented to them, 10 vol. 1350^ 
-—Probable Evidence i^ sufficient for a Grand 
Jury to find a Bill upon, 13 toL 4J»5.«^^Fona 
of the Oath administered td a Grand Jury, 8 
vol. 759, 772 (note).--Sir John Hawlea's Bt- 
marks on the Oath, ibid. 8S9.«-rotm of a 
Challenge by a Prisoner to a Grand Joior for 
holding an Office under the Crovro^ 31 vol< 
548. — Discussion in Dr. Sheridan's Case in the 
Court of King's Bench in Ireland, upon 
the validity of such a Challenge, ibid. 549. — 
A Majority of the Court decide against the 
Challenge, ibid. 566.-— >Discussion wfaetiier in 
Counties of Corporate Cities the want of Free« 
hold is an objection to a Grand Juror, ibid* 
579.--*-Plea in Abatement to an Indictment 
that several of the Grand Jurors who found the 
fiiU were not Freeholders, within the City of 
Dublin, ibid. 576.— The Court of King's 
Bench in Ireland decide that it is not a good 
Objection, ibid. 611. — Arguments on the re* 
quisite qualifications of Grand Jurors^ ibid. 
580, — ^In Watson's Case Lord Ellenborongh 
expresses a doubt whether a Witness may not 
give Evidence of what he swore before the 
Grand Jury, 32 voL 107. 

GREENWICH HOSPITAL. See Bt^Ue, 

Captain Thomat. 

Proceedings in the House of Lbrds in l779i 
upon an Inquiry into certain alleged Abuses 
and Mismanagement by the Directors of Green- 
wich Hospital, 21 vol. 72.— Evidence before a 
Committee of the House, ibid. 76. — Evidence 
upon the charge of introducing Powers and 
Authorities into the new Charter without the 
sanction of a General Court of Governors, 
ibid. ib. — Evidence upon the Charge Of ap* 
pointing Officers in the Hospital who wei« net 
seafaring Men, ibid. 106.-^£vidence uponth^ 
Charge of appointing Landmen in the Council 
of the House, ibid. 125.*-Evidence upon Ike 
Charge of renewing Contracts for Meat with a 
Butcher who had been convicted of fraUdn* 
lently supplying bad Meat to the Hospital, ibid. 
128.^£vidence upon the Charge of adnftUng 
Clerks and ServaQts^ not being teafiirkig Mes^ 



CoMMnw/] 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



187 



into Apattments ii^ the Hospital, atid into the 
Wards of the Pensioners, ibid. 160. — Evidence 
on the Chs^e of giving Money instead of 
Provisions to a large proportion of the Pen- 
sionets, ibid. 168. — Evidence on the Charge 
that this Abuse had been represented by the 
Council of the House to the Directors without 
effect, ibid. 170. — Evidence upon the Charge 
of misapplying the Fund, called the Charity 
Stock, ibid. 176. — Evidence upon the Charge 
of Abuses in the Clothing and Washing of the 
Pensioners,ibid. 180.— I^idence on the Charge 
of providing bad Provisions and Beer for the 
Hospital, ibid. 197. — Evidence respecting 
Abases in the Linen supplied to the Hospital, 
ibid. 216. — Evidence on the Charge ot not 
adopting proper Regulations with respect to 
security against Fire, ibid. 229. — Evidence 
respecting the origin and conduct of the Pro- 
secutions against Captain Baillie, ibid. 236. — 
Evidence respecting proposals from Captain 
Baillie to Lord Sandwich to quit l)is situation 
in the Hospital on having an equivalent pro- 
vided for him, ibid. 332. — Evidence on behalf 
of the Governors of the Hospital, ibid. 417. — 
Resolutions proposed by the Duke of Rich- 
moud negatived by the Committee, ibid. 477. 
"-Resolutions of the Committee negativing all 
the Charges of Mismanagement and Corrup- 
tion, ibid. 484. 

GRENADA, ISLAND OF. 

The Case of th« Island of Grenada, being 
an Action for Money had and received, to try 
the Validity of a duty imposed by the Crown 
upon exports from the Island, 20 vol. 239.'-* 
The Pleadings, ibid. ib.--The Special Verdict^ 
ibid. 241 .^^Mr. Alleyne's Argument for the 
Plaintiff, ibid. 258.— Mr. Wallace's Argument 
for the Defendant, ibid. 277. — Mr. AUeyne*s 
Reply, ibid. 281.^ — ^The Court order a second 
Argument, ibid. 287."— Mr. Macdonald's Aiv 
gument for the Plaintiff, ibid. ib.-^Mr. Har- 
grave's Argument for the Defendant, ibid. 293. 
—Mr. Macdonald's Reply, ibid. 303.— The 
Court grant a Third Argument, ibid. 306. — 
Serjeant Glynn's Argument for the Plaintiff, 
ibid. ib. — ^Argument of Mr. Thurlow (Attor- 
ney General) for the Defendant, ibid. 312.-* 
Seijeant Glynn's Reply, ibid. 307. — Judgment 
of the Court for the Plaintiff delivered by Lord 
Mansfield, ibid. 820.— Criticism of this Judg- 
ment by Mr. Baron Maseres, in the Canadian 
Freeholder, ibid. 333. 

GUARDS. 

Discussion of the legality of the King's keep* 
iog Guards^in time of Peace for the preserva- 
tion of his person, 9 vol. 765. 



GUNPOWDER PLOT.— See Winter, Robert ; 
. Dighy^ Sir Everard; Gametty Henry. 

History of the Gunpowder Plot, written by 
James the, First, 2 vol. 195.— Deposition of 
Guy Fawkes respecting it, ibid. 202. 



HABEAS CORPUS.^See DameU, Sir 

Mr.Emlyn*sRemarksupontheWritofHabea^ 
Corpus a Provision by the Law of England 
for the Liberty of the Sul^ect, Em. Pref. 1 vol. 
xxvii. — In a Return to a Writ of Habeas Corpus 
the Officer must return the primary, and not 
merely the subsequent, cause of the Imprison'* 
ment, ibid. 13. — ^Arguments On the question 
whether it be sufficient to return to a Habeas 
Corpus generally that the party was committed 
by the special Command of the King, ibid. 6. 
— Mr. Serjeant Bramstou's Argument ft)r Sir 
John Heveningham, against the Sufficiency of 
such a Return, ibid. 6. — Mr.Noye*s Argument 
to the same effect for Sir Walter Eari, ibid. 11. 
— Mr. Selden's Argiftnent for Sir Edmund 
Hampden against such a Return, ibid. 16»— 
Mr. Calthorp's Argument for Sir John Corbet 
against the Return, ibid. 19.— Argument of the 
Attorney General (Heath) in support of the 
Return, ibid. 30. — ^Judgment of the Court in 
favour of the Return, ibid. 51* — Argunaents 
on the validity of a similar Returt^, and that 
the Prisoners were couimitted by the Lords of 
the Council for Contempts generally, ibid. 241. 
— ^Argument that the same degree of certainty 
is not required in a Return to a Writ of Habeas 
Corpus as in a Count or Plea, ibid. 248. — 
Captain Streater'sAr^ment against the validity 
of a Return to a Wnl of Habeas Corpus that 
the Prisoner was committed by an Order of 
Parliament, 5 vol. 3 73. —Form of a Writ of 
Habeas Corpus from the Upper Bench during" 
the Commonwealth, in 1653, ibid. 365.-— Form 
of a Writ of Habeas Corpus from the same 
Court after the commencement of the Protec- 
torate in 1654, ibid. 389.— The Habeas Corpus 
said to be a Writ of Right, and issuable with* 
out an Affidavit of the parly, 18 vol. 19.— It h 
an Escape to bring a Prispwer in Execution 
out of the Rules of the Prison Without a Habeas 
Corpus, though for the purpose of being a Wit- 
ness, and by order of the Court, 7 vol. 1201, 
10 vol. 1081.— A Writ of Error does not lie 
upon a Habeas Corpus, 14 vol* 648. — The 
Court of Common Pleas doubted in Wilkes's 
Case, whether it was a sufficiently certain 
Return to a Writ of Habeas Corpus to the 
King's Messengers, that the Prisoner was not 
at the time of coming of the Writ, and had not 
been at any time since, in their Custody, when 
it sufficiently appeared that he had been in 
their Custody at the time of the issuing t}f the 
Writ,19Vol.983.—PrivateDiscussions between 
Mr. Justice Foster and other Judges, respect- 
ing the issuing of Writs of Habeas Corpus 
during the Vacation, 20 vol. l&74.-r*Argu- 
ments in the Case of the Seven Bishops, npon 
the regularity of charging persons with a 
Criminal Information upon their being brought 
into Court by Habeas Corpus, 12 vol* 202* 

HAMEStrCKEN. 
Explanation of the nature of the Offence so 
called by the Law of Scotland, 99 voU iOt 
(note). 



188 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



CMuflSlX.* 



HAMPTON COURT. 

Proceedings at the Conference at Hampton- 
Coarty gamnraned by James the First respecting 
the Reformation of Religion, 2 toI. 69. 

HANDWRITING. 

In Coleman's C^e, in 1 678, Hand-writing was 
proved bj Evidence as to belief, 7 vol. 34. — 
Evidence to belief as to Handwriting held suf- 
ficient in Laser's Case, 16 vol. 205.— Evidence 
of Handwriting by a comparison of writings is 
not admissible, 9 vol. 864 (note), 15 vol. 923. 
— Discussion of this point in the Case of the 
Seven Bishops, 12 vol. 296.— Summary of the 
Cases and I^w on this Subiect by Mr Wynne 
in his Speech in Defence of Bishop Atterbury, 
16 vol. 546. — Remarks on the proof of Hand- 
writing in Sidney's Case, 9 vol. 864 (note). 
— ^Lord Chancellor Eldon's Remarks in the 
Case of Eagleton v. Kingston,on the mode of 
proving Hand-writinff,, 12 vol.305 (note). — 
Mr. Serjeant Peake's Observation on the reason 
of the mode of proving Hand-writing now in 
use, ibid. 306 (note).— In a Criminal Case, 
where a Paper is proved to come from the 
custody of the Prisoner it may be read in Evi- 
dence against him without proof of his Hand- 
writing, Layer's Case, 16 vol. 906.— Caution 
with which Evidence of Hand-writing should 
be acted upon by Juries in Criminal Cases, 21 
vol. 779.— There is no difference in the degree 
of Strength of Evidence necessary to prove 
Hand-writing in Civil and Criminal Cases, 
jbid. 810. — Remarks upon the liability to mis- 
take in Evidence to Hand«writing, 29 vol.475. 

HANGING IN CHAINS. 
Hanging in Chains is not made a part o^ 
the Judgment, but the Judge before whom the 
party is tried, makes a Special Older to the 
Sheriff, pursuanttoapowerfortbat purpose con- 
tained in the Act of Fariiament, 18 vol. 1201. 

HASTINGS, TOWN AND PORT OF. 

Trial of the Right of Henry Moore to be 
admitt^ as a Freeman of the Town and Port 
of Hastings, on a Mandamus to the Mayor, 
Jurats, and Commonalty, 10 Geo. 2, 1736, 17 
▼ol. 845.*— The Mandamus, ibid. ib. — ^Answer 
thereto, ibid. 847.-— The Counsel for the 
Plaintiff open their Case, ibid. 848. — Evidence 
for the Plaintiff, ibid. 853.— Objection to 
reading in Evidence an ancient Customal 
of the Cinque Ports to prove a Custom 
within the Town of Hastings, ibid, ib.— Lord 
Hardwicke receives the Evidence, ibid. 854.— 
Speech of the Attorney General (Sir John 
Willes) for the Defendants, ibid, 886.— Serjeant 
Skinner's Speech on the same side, ibid. 893. 
—Evidence for the Defendants, ibid. 895.— 
The C^nsel for the Plaintiff reply, ibid. 906. 
—Evidence in reply^ ibid. 908.— Mr. Strange 
snms up the Evidence in reply, ibid. 910.— 
Lord Chief Justice Hardwicke's Charge to the 
Jury, ibid. 915.— The Jury find a Special 
Verdict fgr the Pl^intiffa which is afterwards 



argued and determined by the Coiiit ia his 

favour, ibid. 924. 

HEARSAY EVIDENCE. 

Evidence of the Testimony of an absent 
person on a former occasion, allowed against a 
Prisoner on his Trial for Felony, 32 Eliz. 1 vol. 
1282. — Chief Justice Jefferies's rejection of 
Hearsay Evidence in the Case of Hraddon and 
Speke, 9 vol. 1189. — Discussion respecting the 
admissibility of Evidence of the Declaration of 
a deceased person made ante litem motam 
respecting her being Godmother to a Child, 17 
vol. 1160. — ^The principle upon which the 
Declarations of dying persons are admissible 
in Cases of Murder, 16 vol. 24 (note). 

HEIRESS. 
Trial of Haagen Swendsen under the Stat. 3 
Hen. 7, for forcibly abducing an Heiress, 14 
vol. 559. 

HERESY. 

Particulars of Wickliffe's Heresies, 1 vol. 67, 
71. — Stat. 5 Rich. 2, c. 5, enjoining Sheriff^ to 
apprehend Heretical Preachers, ibid. 86. — ^The 
two first Statutes against Heresy are 5 Rich. 2, 
c. 5, and 2 Hen. 4, c. 15, ibid. 174 (note). — 
Other Statutes relating to Heresy, and the state 
of the Law on this subject at the present day, 
ibid. ib. — Reference to Authorities respecting 
the Law of Heresy, 2 vol. 729 (note). — ^War- 
rant of James the First to the Lord Chan- 
cellor to issue the Writ de Heretico Com- 
burendo in the Case of Wightman and Legatt, 
ibid. 731, 734.— Form of the Writ, ibid. 732, 
736. — Opinion of Whitelocke that Heresy was 
never punishable by the Common Law. with 
Death, notwithstanding the Writ De Heretico 
Comburendo, 5 vol. 825. — Difference between 
Heresy and Blasphemy, ibid. 826. See Thorpe, 
Waiiam ; Badby, John ; WickUffe, John ; Satdre, 
William; OlddatU, Sir John i Crammer^ Thomas; 
Legatt f Bartholomew, 

HIGH COMMISSION COURT, 
-^ee EcdesiaUical Commitnom. 

Account of a Court so called, established by 
Stat. 1 Eliz. c. 1, for the Superintendence of 
Ecclesiastical Affairs, 11 vol.1123. — Form of 
a Commission issued by Queen Elizabeth under 
this Statute, ibid. 1132.— Stat. 16 Car, 1, c. 1 1, 
abolishing this Court, ibid. 1141. 

HIGH CONSTABLE. 
By the Attainder of Edward, Duke of Buck- 
ingham, in 1522, the Office of High Constable, 
which was hereditary in his family, reverted to 
the Crown, and has ever since remained 
dormant, except when granted for particular 
occasions, 1 vol. 298, 3 vol. 483 (note). 

HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. 

Act of Parliament for erecting the High 
Court of Justice for the Trial of Charles the 
First, 4 vol. 1045.— Arguments against the 
Validity of the High Court of JusUce esti^ 






CtfURini] 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



id9 



lisbed in 1650, 5 toI. 13. — ^Account of the 
Establishraentof High Courts of Justice duriug 
the Pirotectorate, ibid. 942. 

HIGH STEWARD.— See ConmiukmsofHigh 

Stetoardi, 

It was declared by the House of Lords in 
the Course of the Debates previous to the Trial 
of Lord Stafford^ that the Office of Lord High 
Steward is not necessary upon Trials of Peers 
upon Impeachments^ and that the House may 
proceed to the Trials though the King refuse to 
appoint a fiigh Steward^ 7 toI. 1278.-^ Dis- 
cussions in the House of Commons, in.theEarl 
of Danby^s Case, respecting the necessity of 
appointing a Lord High Steward on the Trial 
of an Impeachment by the Commons, 1 1 vol. 
792. — Id Lord Delamere's Case Lord Chan- 
cellor Jefferies says, that in the Trials of Peers 
during the Recess of Parliament, the Lord High 
Steward is the sole Judge of the Court, though 
he is not entitled to vote on the Issue of Guilty 
or not Guilty, but that in Trials during a Ses- 
sion of Parliament, he acts only as Chairman to 
the Court, and votes with the other Lords, 
ibid. 562. — Mr. Barrington's Opinion that the 
Lord High Steward need not be a Lord of 
Parliament, 19 vol. 964. 

HIGH STEWARD'S COURT. 

Mr. Justice Foster's Account of tbe distioo* 
tion between the Court of the Lord High 
Steward and the Court of the King in Parlia- 
menty 19 vol. 961. — Serjeant Maynard states 
the same distinction in the Debate previous to 
the Trial of the Impeachment of tne Earl of 
Danbv, 11 voL 792. — Lord Chancellor Jef- 
i&ness Observations on the difference between 
these two modes of Trial in the Case of Lord 
Delamere, ibid. 562. — It was held by the 
Judges in Lord Audley's Case, that on a Trial 
in the Court of the High Steward the Lords might 
eat and drink before they were agreed, but that 
they could not separate or adjourn till they 
gave their Verdict, 3 vol. 403. — Discussion 
respecting the propriety of the Adjournment of 
a Trial in the nigh Steward's Court at the ap- 
plication of the Prisoner, in the Case of Lord 
Delamere, 11 vol. 560. — Resolved in Lord 
Audley's Case, that the Verdict cannot be given 
by a lets number of Lords than Twelve, and 
that if Twelve are for a Conviction, and Thir- 
teen for an Acquittal, the Prisoner must be 
acquitted, 3 vol. 403. — ^If there be Error in 
the Proceedings of this Court, a Writ of Error 
may be brought in the King's Bench, per 
Whitlock, J. in Sir John Elliott's Case, 3 vol. 
308. — The Summons to the Peers in the Case 
of the Countess of Somerset was signed by 
the Lords of the Council, 2 vol. 951.— Lord 
Chancellor Jefferies says in Lord Delamere's 
Case, that the Peers are convened by the Sum- 
mons of the High Steward, 11 vol. 562. 
— Detail of the ceremoiiial of the Court by 
Mr. Gregory King^ Lancaster Heraldi 15 vol. 
771(note), 



HISTORY. 



Chief Justice Jefferies in Lady Ivy*s Case, 
refused to admit a printed History to show the 
date of the resignation of the Emperor Charles 
the Fifth, 10 vol. 625. — Books of History said 
by Lord Ellenborough in Governor Picton's 
Case, to be sometimes admissible in Evidence, 
30 vol. 492. 

HISTRIO-MASTIX.— See Ptynn, WilUam. 

HOMICIDE.— See Chanee^UBdUy; 
MamUmghter; Murder. 

Discussion in the Case of Archbishop Abbot, 
whether involuntary and casual Homicide be 
an irregularity by 4he Canon Iaw, 2 vol. 1165, 
1169. — ^Argument in the.Information^n Carne- 
gie's Case, that involuntary Homicide was not 
a capital Offence \)y the Mosaic Law, 17 vol. 
98. — ^Argument that it was not capital by the 
Roman Law, ibid. 106.— Abstract of several 
Scotch Acts of Parliament upon the Subject, 
ibid. 151. — Difference between tbe Law of 
England and Scotland respecting the degree 
of provocation which justifies Homicide, 16 
vol. 10 (note). — If Bailiffs kill a Prisoner 
under a reasonable apprehension that he is 
about to rescue himself forcibly from their 
lawful Custody, it is justifiable Homicide, 
Reason and Tranter's Case, ibid. 52. — Blows 
given in the first instance by the deceased 
said Ito be a sufiicient Provocation to reduce 
the Offence from Murder to Manslaughter, 
ibid. 53. — ^Remarks of Hume and Burnett upon 
the Law of Scotland respecting Homicide in 
resisting Officers, 19 vol. 879. — ^Mr. Justice 
Foster observes that ancient Writers of English 
Jurisprudence are to be read with great caution 
on the subject of Homicide, ibid. 814. — See 
Carnegie, Jamet; Mawgridge, John; [Oneby, 
John ; BMKn^ Bugh. 

HOST, ABSENCE FROM THE. 

Proceedings in Scotland against several 
Heritors of the Shire of Fife for absenting 
themselves from the King's Host after a Royid 
Proclamation, 32 Car. 2, 1680, 11 vol. 1. — 
Fountainhall's Account of these Proceedings^ 
ibid. 40. — ^Wodrow's Account of the Nature of 
this Offence, and of the several Prosecutions 
for it, ibid. 1 (note). 

HOUSE OF COMMONS. See Parliament. 

Arguments and Precedents to show that the 
House of Commons had always the power of 
trying and determining the merits of Elections, 
though the Election Writs, by Stat. 7, Hen. 4, 
are returnable in Chancery, 2 vol.104. — Confer- 
ences between the House of Lords and Uie 
House of Commons in Floyde*s Case, upon the 
Question whether the House of Commons has 
any power of Judicature excepting in Cases 
relating to their Privileges, ibid. 1159. — ^Ar- 
gument of Judge Jenkins that the House of 
Commons is not a Court, and has no power 
of Trial for Offencesi oor authority to ad^ 



* 



100 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



I^MfMOIXttf* 



minister an Oath, 4 toI. 933. — ^The House of 
Commons have claimed to be a Court of 
Record^ 6 to1.1121 (note). — ^Disputes between 
the House of Commons and the House of 
l^rds respecting the right of the latter to 
receive and determine Appeals from inferior 
Courts where a Member ot the House of Com- 
mons is concerned, ibid. 1121. — Proceedings 
of the House of Commons, in the Reign of 
Henry the Eighth, in the Case of a Breach of 
Privilege by the Arrest of a Member for Debt, 
8 vol. 8. — ^Frequency of Commitnents by the 
House of Commons for breach of Privilege' 
during the latter part of the Reign of Charles 
the Second, ibid. 7. — Reference to Treatises 
and Authorities on the power of the House of 
Commons to commit for Breadi of Privilege, 
ibid. 13. — Report of a Committee of the House 
of Commons respecting the 6tate of the Law 
and Practice of the House in Cases of Pro- 
ceedings against Members fpr any thing done 
or spoVen in the House, or against the Ser- 
vants of the House, ibid. 14. — Precedents of 
Commitments by the House of Commons for 
Libels on the Proceedings of the House, ibid. 
23. — Precedents of Prosecutions of persons 
for Libels on the House of Commons or any 
of its Members, ibid. 26. — Precedents of the 
claim and recognition of the power of the 
House of Commons to commit for Breach of 
Privilege, ibid. 27. — Precedents of the Pun- 
ishments inflicted by the House of Commons 
for Breach of Privilege, ibid. 61. — RefK^ c^ 
a Committee of the House of Commons in 
1771 respecting Privilege, ibid. ^^. — Sir 
Robert Atkins argues, in the Case of Sir William 
Williams, that tiie House of Commons has 
always, from the first constitution of the King- 
dom, been a part of the Parliament of Eng- 
land, 13 vol. 1389. — Debates in the Great 
Case of Ashby and White on the Question 
whether the House of Commons has an origi- 
nal and exclusive Right to determine matters 
relating to the Election of their own Members, 
14 vol, 704. — Resolutions of the House of 
Commons on occasion of this Case, assert- 
ing the affirmative of this Question, ibid. 776. 
^—Courts of law cannot discharge or bail a 
person committed by the House of Commons 
for a Breach of Privilege, 19 vol. 1146.— -Ob- 
servations of Chief Justice De Grey on the 
power of the House of Commons to commit 
for Breach of Privilege, in delivering the 
Judgment of the Court of Common Pleas in 
the Cafie of Brass Crosby, ibid. ib. — ^There are 
DP Journals of the House of Commons extant 
before the time of Edward the Sixth, 14 vol. 
734- 



HOUSE OF LORDS. SeeP^r^wwn^; -Btm, 

Order of thfe ijouse of Lords in 1624 that 
a Member of that House cannot, without 
licence, answer any complaint ag^nst him in 
the House of Commons, either in person or 
Jby Counsel, 2 vol. 1185.— Tti? Ga^e of the 
^is^ictiou pl (he House of JUpc^A b^tveei^ 



I 



Thomas Skinner and the East liidift Company, 
18 Car. 2, 1666, 6 vol. 709.— Diseussiooa be* 
tween the House of Jiords ai^d the House of 
Commons respecting the Jurisdiction of the 
former to take oognizance of AaUars b^iigbt 
before tliem judicially by way of original 
Complaint, and not by Writ of Error, or s^iy 
process of Appeal, ibid. 725, — ^Reasons and 
Precedents against their Jurisdiction in this 
respect, ibid. 730. — Reasons and Precedents 
in favour thereof, ibid. 733. — ^Judgments of 
the House of Lords are in force, notwithstand- 
ing tl^ rising of Parliament, ibid. 747.---The 
Kinfsits in the House of Lords in a legisla- 
tive and a judicial capacity, ibid. 752,^ — Dis- 
putes between the House of Commons and 
the House of Lords respecting the right of 
the latter to receive and determine Appe^s 
from inferior Courts where a member of the 
House of Commons is concerned, ibid. 1121. 
— Blackstone lays it down that a Commoner 
cannot be impeached in the House of Lords 
for any capital Crime, 8 vol. 236 (note). — 
Observations upon that Opinion, ibid. ib. — 
The House of Lords have no Jurisdiction to 
try a question of Peerage, except by the King's 
reference to them of the Petition of the party, 
12 vol. 1196.— Difference in the Style of the 
House of Lords when they act in their legis* 
lative and judicial character, ibid, 1200* — ^The 
House of Lords is not a Court of Record when 
acting in their legislative capaefty, ibid. 1195. 
— Lord Hale's Chapter on the Jurisdietion of 
the Lords' House in criminal Causes, ibid» 
1218 (note).— Argument of Mr. Clifford in 
Flower's Cage against the power of the Hou^e 
of Lords to commit for Contempts committed 
out of the House, 27 vol. 1027, 

HUNTING. 

Discussion in Archbishop Abbot's Case, 
whether Hunting be unlawful in a Clergyman 
by the Canon Law, 2 vol. 1164, 1167. — Spel- 
man's Argument in support of a contrary 
doctrine, in his Answer to the Apology for 
Archbishop Abbot, ibid. 1171. 

HUSBAND AND WIFE. 

A \yife cannot be a Wituese for or agatost 
her Husband, 14 vol. 624.--.But a Wife may 
be a Witness against her Husband to prove 
that he aided and abetted in the commissiiQn 
of a Rape <m her, 3 vqI. 402,--This Opiom 
said by Sir B. Shower not to be Lav, 13 vol^ 
582.— If a Feme Covert commit ^i A^ 
which in soother would be Felony, it is not so 
in her, ^be«ause she is tub pHesioie virt, 4 vol. 
1 ia9.-^Argu»epts in Sir John Fenwiuk's C^e 
that the Words or Actions of a Wife oann^Kl 
be evidence against her Husband, 13 ^l. 581. 
—In a Prosecution on the ^tgtiite «l Hmiry 
the Seventh for forcibly carrying ^mvy aod 
marrying a woman of Snbstanae^ the Wifo 
may give Evidence against the Offender, 14 
vol. 575.—- Qplnion tliat ^ Wifid n^y be asked 
in Evidence whether h^r Hasban4 ji $^ U 



CdHMtna.] 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



101 



bfUttvtd iipen his Oath, though she may not 
gife aYidenee on points affeoting bis property, 
If vol. 1276.*-*By the law of Scotland at pre- 
aent « Wife cannot in any Case be a Witness 
for or agminat her Husband, 18 vol. 580 (note). 
--Jt is said in Mawgridge'a Case, that if a 
Haibaad takes a Man in Adultery with his 
Wife, and kilb the Adulterer, it is Manslaughter 
0Bly» 17 Tol. 70.<^In such a Case the Court 
ti Jnalioiary in Scotland admitted the Wife 
to give evidence that the Panel discovered 
Ibe deceased in the act of Adultery with her, 
ibid. ib. (note). 

IDENTITY. 

Singular instance of the detection of a mis- 
.lake by a Witness in swearing positively to an 
article of wearing Apparel, 19 vol. 494 (note). 
•-Cttfious Anecdote of Sir Thomas Daven- 
port's mistake in swearing to the identity of a 
person who was charged with having robbed 
huBf US vol. 819. 

IMAGES. 

WiOkm Thorpe's Answers respecting the 
Worship of Images, in his Examination before 
the An^biahop of Canterbury in 1407, 1 vol. 
m^. — Lord Cobham's Answers respecting 
linages, ibid. 244.— Defence of the Worship 
of Imagea by Gardiner, Bishop of Winchester 
in 1561, ibid. 555.— Letter of the Council of 
Edward the Sixth to the Archbishop, ordering 
the abolition of Images in the Churches within 
his Proviaee, ibid. 636.— Archbishop Laud's 
Account of their first introduction into 
Churclws, 3 vol. 549« 

IMAGINING.— See Composting the Kin^s 

Death. 

Mr. Luders's Illustrations of the probable 
meaning of the word in the Statute of Trea- 
sons^ 7 vol. 961 (note). 

IMPEACHMENT. See IPardm ; Parliament ; 
Peert; Hmae^ Lords, 

General Reference to modem Pamphlets 
upon the question of the duration of PaHia- 
meptaty Irapeachnents after the dissohitioD 
©f t^ Parliament in which they were coaa- 
wenced, 2 vol. 1446 (note).— It was said by 
Sir Francfis Winington, in Low! StalFoid^s 
Case, to have been declared at a Conference 
between both Honses of Parliament that an 
Impeachment once lodged in the House of 
Lords remains in the same state, notwithstaad- 
ing the dissohition of tSie Parliament, 7 vol. 
15!^l.*^Resolution of the Hoose <yf Loids in 
167§ to Ihat tfifect, ibid. 1230.— In the year 
IW it was Tesolved by both Houses of Par^ 
liamentyin the Case of Warren Hastings, that 
an Ittpeadifnent is not determined by a dis-» 
sohttion of Pariiament, ft vol. 1446 (note)» 13 

1^ tt9e<Ml^f**S>ebflitf» in A* Ilowt of 



Commons in the Earl of Danby's Case respect- 
ing the validity of a Plea of a Pardon under 
the Great Seal to a Parliamentary Impeachment, 
ll|vol. 769. — Mr. Justice Blackstone's Remarks 
upon this Subject, ibid. 742 (pote). — Precedents 
respecting the allowance of Counsel to a Peer on 
hisTrial on an Impeachment for Misdemeanour, 
6 vol. 797.— Precedents respectingfthe method 
of proceeding by the House of Lords against 
persons impeached for Misdemeanours by the 
House of Commons, ibid. 675. — Report of 
the Lords' Committees previous to Lord Std*- 
ford's THal respectins; the form of the Pro- 
ceedings on the Trial of a Peer upon an Im« 
peachment for Higli Treason, 7 vol. 1272.— 
Form of the Oadi administered to Witnesses 
on such a Trial, ibid. 1274. — ^The Axe is not 
to be carried before the Prisoner on the Trial 
of an Impeachment for Treason, Lord Straf- 
ford's Case, 3 vol, 1417. — Precedents of the 
House of Lords respecting the manner of pro- 
ceeding on Impeachments, as reported to the 
House in 1701, 14 vol. 279. — Precedents of 
the manner of delivering Articles of Impeach- 
ment by the Commons, ibid. 275. — Precedents 
of the Imprisonment of Members of ^e House 
of Commons, when impeached in Parliament, 
8 vol. 155. — Resolution of the House of Corn** 
moos in Fitsharris's Case that it is the un- 
doubted right of that House to impeach before 
the Lords in Parliament any Peer or Com* 
moner Ibr Treason or any other crime, ibid, 
236. — Blackstone says, that a Commoner can- 
not be impeached in the House of Lords for 
any capital Offence, ibid. ib. (note).— Obser- 
vations upon that Opinion, ibid. ib. — Report 
made to the House of Lords in Sir Adam 
Blair's Case of Precedents of Impeachments 
from the Journals and the Records in the 
Tower, 12 vol. 1218. — Mr. Justice Foster 
says, that it is doubtful whether, in the Case 
of an Inpeaehment, the House of Lords do 
right to discharge a party accused without 
hearing the Commons, ibid. 1238 (note).--^ 
Extract from Lord Hale's Treatise on the 
Jurisdiction of the House of Lords re;spectiog 
Parliamentary Impeachments, ibid. 1218 (note). 
— Essential difference between an Indictment 
and an Impeachment, 8 vol. 284.— Mr. Wil* 
liams's Argument in Fitzharris's Case, that a 
person indicted in the King's Bench, may 
plead to that Indictment <he pendency of an 
Impeachment in the House of Lords for the 
same Offence, ibid. 2B2.-rForm of the Plea 
in Fiteharris's Case, ibid, 251.— The House of 
Lords resolve in Dr. Sadwverell's Case, that 
in an Impeachment lor Words spoken or wnt- 
ten, it is Bot necessary to set out the Woids, 
15 vol. 39, 473.^Pro4est with Reasons :a:gaiast 
this Besc^tion, ibid. 30. — ^Discussion in the 
Eail of Winlouin's Case, wiiedior the same 
Coitainty as to the statement of tlve is neoes- 
sary in Impeachments as in Indictmeote, ibid. 
B7€.-^By Stat. 120 Geo. 2, c. 30, persons im- 
peached by the House of Commons of Hi|^ 
Treason were fint admitted. to make their 
foil P«teoe b|F CoRDMl^ td T4»l, 436 <Qfite)» 



102 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



[MlMKit.* 



IMPUCD MALIC£.— See Maiice. 

Malice is implied where the act charged is 
unlawful, 6 vol. 547, 7 toI. 1124, 9 vol. 1349. 
—Malice is implied so as to complete the 
crime of Murder where one man without 
reasonable cause or proTOcation kills another, 
Kidd's Case, 14 vol. 145.— The distinction 
stated between express and implied Malice, 
Oneby's Case, 17 toI. 44. — ^The law implies 
Malice so as to constitute Murder where a 

Esrson is killed by Duress of Imprisonment, 
uggins's Case, ibid. 375.— Where a person 
is charged with maliciously doing an unlawful 
Act, the Malice is presumed from the illegality 
of the Act, and therefore evidence of express 
Malice is irrelevant, Ficton's Case, 30 toI. 
488. 

IMPOSITIONS.— See Prerogative ; King ; 
Taxet; Ship^Money, 

The Case of Impositions, on an Information 
in the Exchequer by the Attorney General 
against Mr. John Bates, 4 Jac. 1, 1606-1610, 
2 Yol. 371. — Mr. Hargrave's introductory Note 
to the Case, containing his Remarks upon the 
Claim on the part of the Crown to impose 
Taxes by Prerogative, ibid. ib. — Argument of 
Baron Ulark, in favour of the King's Prero« 
gative, ibid. 382. — Argument of Chief Baron 
fleming on the same side, ibid. 387.— Ail- 
ment of Sir Francis Bacon in the House of 
Commons in favour of the King's Prerogative 
to make Impositions upon his Subjects, ibid. 
395.— Sir John Davis's Argument on the same 
side, ibid. 399. — Mr. Hakewill's Argument 
against the Crown, ibid. 407. — Mr. Yelverton's 
Argument against the Crown, ibid. 477. 

IMPOSTOR.— See Hatkawctt/, Bkhard. 

IMPOTENCE. 

Opinions of Melancthon and other Canon- 
ists respecting Impotence as a ground of 
Divorce, 2 vol. 796.— Account of Bury's Case, 
containing a decision against the validity of 
a second Marriage, under which there was 
Issue, the first Marriage having been dissolved 
on the ground of Impotence, ibid. 849, 850 
(note). 

IMPRISONMENT. 

Mr. Emlyn's Observations on the punish- 
ment of Imprisonment, Em. Pref. 1 vol. xxxv. 
— ^Imprisonment is accounted in law Civil 
Death, 5 vol. 374. — Precedents of the Im- 
prisonment of Members of the House of Com- 
mon8upQnbeingimpeachedinParliament,8vol. 
1 55. — ^If a persoti dies under Duress of Imprison- 
ment, itisMurder in the Gaoler, Huggins s Case, 
1 7 vol .375. — Instance of a person being confined 
as a State Prisoner forty Years without a Trial, 
13 vol. 788. — ^Account of the Scotch Act of 
Parliament against vnrongous Imprisonment, 
20 vol. 19 Cnote). — Argument against the law- 
fulness and necessity of imprisonment for 
Debt, 22 vol. 330. — Opinion of the Judges in 

th^ House of Loid9> in Wilkes's Case, that a 



Judgment of Imprisonment against a Defend^ 
ant to commence from and after the deter- 
mination of an Imprisonment to which he 
was before sentenced lor another Offence, is 
good inlaw, 19vol. 1132. — ^Discussion on a 
Writ of Error in the House of Lords in the 
Case of Hart and White, respecting the power 
of the Court of King's Bench to sentence con* 
victed Offenders to Imprisonment in other 
Gaols than those belonging to the Court, or 
to the Counties in which the Offences 'were 
committed, 30 vol. 1325. — Opinion of the 
Judges that the Court of King's Bench have 
the power of imprisoning in any of the King's 
Gaols in England, ibid. 1344. 

INCLOSURES. 

Lord Keeper Coventry's Directions respect- 
ing Inclosures to the Judges in the Star 
Chamber in 1635, previously to the Circuits^ 
3 vol. 832. 

INCOMPETENCY.— See WUneu, Infamy, 

Evidence. 

INDENTURE. 

Indenture of Confederacy between the Earls 
and Barons against the Despensers in the 
Reign of Edward the Second, 1 vol. 23. 

INDEPENDENT WHIG.-See fFhke, Hemy. 

Proceedings on the Trial of the Editors of 
the Independent Whig for a Libel on the ad« 
ministration of Justice, 30 vol. 1131. 

INDICTMENT.-^ee Copy oflndktment. 

Mr. Emlyn's Statement of the Objections to 
Indictments being in Latin, Em. Pref. 1 vol. 
xxix.-— Mere words of form not to be unneces- 
sarily introduced into Indictments, ibid. xxx. 
— Remarks on the introduction of the words 
^'falso et malitiose'^ into Indictments for 
libel, ibid, ib.— In an Indictment of an Ac- 
cessary in Middlesex to a Murder committed 
in London, it is not sufficient to allege that 
the Principal was indicted in London, but it 
must be alleged that he committed the Mur- 
der there. Lord Sanquire's Case, 2 vol. 757.-— 
Lord Coke says, that it was resolved on the 
Trial of Weston for the Murder of Sir Thomas 
Overbury, that the manner of killine is not 
the point of an Indictment for Murder, and 
that if the Indictment charge the Death to 
have been caused by a Dagger, and in proot 
the blow appears to have been given with a 
Sword, it IS sufficient, ibid. 1031.-- If in an 
Indictment for an Offence prohibited by 
Statute, the Offence be not chained according 
to the Statute in the body of the Indictment, 
the words contra formam Statuti at the con- 
elusion will not be sufficient, 5 vol. 219.— 'A 
defect in the Indictment cannot be supplied 
by the Evidence, ibid. 230. — ^The time laid in 
an Indictment is not material, and the Jury 
may find the Offence to have been committed 
before or after the day alleged. Sir Henry 
Vaae's C«e| Q rol^ 13U-«ii*Tbe time and [rface 



CoHCBMn.] 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



193 



laid in an Indictment are merely form, and 
Evidence of the Offence charged on any other 
day, before the Bill was preferred, or at any 
other place within the County, will support 
the Indictment, per Holt, C. J. in the Case of 
Chamock, King, and Keyes, 12 toI. 1398. — 
No Indictment can be good unless it charges 
the Offence to have been committed on a cer- 
tain I>ay and Year, 13 vol. 275 (note). — The 
Reason assigned for this Rule is the necessity 
of stating some Day to which in Cases of 
Pelony and Treason the forfeiture may relate, 
15 Tol. 880. — ^In Indictments, Certainty to a 
common intent is not sufficient, 16 vol. 
315. — It was held by Lord Holt, Chief Jus- 
tice PoUexfen, Chief Baron Atkins, and Mr. 
Justice Eyre, after Argument in Matthew 
Crone's Case, that a mistake in the Indorse- 
ment by the Grand Jury of their Return upon 
an Indictment is immaterial, as it is no part 
of the Indictment, but merely a direction to 
the Clerk, ibid. 1244. — ^'Dominus Rex'' in an 
Indictment always means the King of Eng- 
land, without any fuller description, Cran- 
hnme's Case, 13 vol. 223. — ^It is sufficient in 
an Indictment for High Treason to conclude 
** against the duty of his allegiance*' without 
saying of his ^'natural'' Allegiance, Cran- 
I hmiie*s Case, ibid. 224. — In an Indictment 
I for Treason, if the word '^proditorie^'is ap- 
plied to the Treason generally, it seems un- 
necessary to repeat it in the statement of each 
; of the Overt Acts, Cranburne's Case, ibid. 
231. — ^It is not necessary to prove all the 
Averments in an Indictment if the Offence 
charged is sufficiently clear without them, 17 
vol. 639. — Opinion of the Judges in Dr. 
Sacbevereirs Case, that in all Indictments 
for Crimes in speaking or writing, the Words 
charged to be criminal must be expressly 
set outy 15 vol. 466. — Discussion whether it is 
necessary in ' an Indictment for High Treason 
to aver mat the person charged was a Subject 
of Great Britain, 26 vol. 819.— The Caption 
is merely the style of the Court, and no part 
of the Indictment, 23 vol. 237. — A Judge at 
Nisi Prins is not called upon to decide respect- 
ing the sufficiency of an Indictment, when the 
Objection to it appears upon the Record, 31 
vol. 1235. — ^Mr. Williams's Argument in Fitz- 
harris's Case, that it is a good Plea to an 
Indictment in the King's Bench that an Im- 
peachment for the same Offence is depending 
in the House of Lords, 8 vol. 282. — ^Opinion 
of all the Judges in Bishop Atterbury's Case, 
that a person indicted for Treason may plead 
in bar to such Indictment a Bill of Pains and 
Penalties passed against him for the same 
Treason, 16 vol. 465. — ^The pendency of another 
Prosecution for the same Offence is not a good 
Plea to an Indictment, 21 vol. 1048, and ibid, 
ib. (note).— -On a joint Indictment against 
several persons, the Venire, and consequently' 
the Trisdy may be several, 9 vol. 126.— Justices 
of Oyer and Terminer may inquire by other 
ways and means than by Indictment, 10 vol. 
1357.<— Difference between Jodictm«Dt9 a&d 
VOL, XXXIV. 



Informations as to Amendments, 19 vol. 1120. 
— It is irregular to move to quash an Indict- 
ment after Plea, and after the Jury are charged 
and sworn, Rookwood's Case, 13 vol. 161, 
168, 223. — It was formerly the practice not to 
quash Indictments for great Crimes upon 
motion, but to leave the party to move in 
Arrest of Judgment, ibid. 168. See also 27 
vol. 266. — Sir John Hawles says, that it is 
good ground for a Motion to quash an Indict- 
ment that it contains Offences of several 
natures, 8 vol. 729. — ^A Motion by a Prose- 
cutor to quash an Indictment is by no means 
a Motion of course, 19 vol. 1173. See also 
21 vol. 1048. — Mr. Justice Buller says, tiiat 
the only cases in which the Court has interfered 
to quash Indictments have been where they 
were insufficient, 21 vol. 1048. — ^An Indict- 
ment may be quashed by consent, though no 
defect appears upon the face of it, 18 vol. 
1198. — Form of Indictments during the Com- 
monwealth, 5 vol. 335, 419. 

INDORSEMENT. 
It was held by Lord Holt, Chief Justice 
PoUexfen, Chief Baron Atkins, and Mr. Justice 
Eyre, after Argument, in Matthew Crone's 
Case, that a mistake in the Indorsement by 
the Grand Jury of their finding upon an Indict- 
ment is immaterial, as it is no part of the 
Indictment, but merely a direction to the 
Clerk, 12 vol. 1244. 

INDUCEMENT. 
In Treason it is not necessary to have two 
Witnesses to matter of Inducement, 13 vol. 535. 

INFAMY.— See Witneu, 

By the Law of Scotland, Infamy of Cha- 
racter disqualifies a Witness, but he must be 
shewn to be infamous by a legal Conviction 
of some Crime inferring Infamy, 12 voL 551 
(note). 

INFANT. 

Infants of the age of 13 and 10 years per- 
mitted to be examined in a Case of Murder 
in the Court of Justiciary in Scotland at the 
request of tlie Jury, but not to be sworn as 
Witnesses, 11 vol. 1410. — ^Mr. Hume's Remarks 
upon the Law of Scotland respecting the admis- 
sibility of Infants as Witnesses, 12 vol. 559 
(note). — In the Case of Spencer Cowperit was 
held, that an Infant who is by law the Plaintiff 
in an Appeal of Murder, may be nonsuited on 
his own application, without the consent of his 
Guardian, 13 vol. 1195. — Chief Justice Jef- 
feries's Examination of an Infant previously to 
his being sworn as a Witness, 9 vol. 1148. 

INFIDEL. 

Lord Coke's Doctrine, as laid down in 
Calvin's Case, that Infidels are considered by 
the Law of England to be perpetual Enemies, 
2 vol. 638.— Sir George Treby's Remarks upon 
this Doctrine in his Argument in the Great 
Case of Mooopolifi^i 10 voU 391,-«^Lord Mans, 

Q 



104 



GENERAL INDEX TQ 



tH 



ISC 



field's Opiiuon of this Doctrine, in the Argument 
en the Case of the Island of Grenada, 20 yol. 
294. — Arguments in the Gr^at Case of Mono- 
polies upon the lawfulness of trading with 
Infidels without licence from the King, 10 vol. 
373, ihid. 409. — It was adjudged in die Court 
of King's Bench, in 1678, that an Action of 
Trover might be maintained for Negroes, being 
Infidels, ibid« 51, and ibid. 52 (note). 

INFORMATION.— See Ex-offkio Information. 

At the Eevoltttion the House of Commons 
appears to have been desirous to abolish all 
Informations in the Court of King's Bench, 13 
Tol. 1369 (note). — A Criminal Information 
anay be amended at] any time before Trial, 9 
Tol. 1366 (note). — ^The Amendment of a Cri- 
minal Information for a Misdemeanour by 
inserting the word " tenor'' instead of ^^ pur- 
port allowed by Lord Mansfield at Chambers 
upon hearing the parties, but without the con- 
sent of the Defendant, held good, Wilkes's 
Case, 19 vol. 1077. — ^In the absence of the 
Attorney General, a Criminal Information may 
be filed by the Solicitor General, ibid. 1102. — 
Heasons against this Doctrine assigned in sup- 
port of the Writ of Error in WiUkes's Case, 
20 vol. 799. — Opinion of the Judges in the 
House of Lords m Wilkes's Case, that an In- 
formation may be filed by the Solicitor General 
in the absence of the Attorney General, and 
that it is not necessary to aver upon the 
Becord that the Attorney General's Office is 
vacant, 19 vol. 1127. — ^An Outlawry will lie 
upon a Criminal Information, Uiid. 1104. — ^The 
Jury process on Criminal Informations is 
returnable on a day certain, Tutchin's Case, 
14 vol. -1132. — Tbe Attorney General cannot 
proceed by Information in the case of anOfi*eDce 
of which the Punishment extends to Life or 
limb, 27 vol. 980. 



INGROSSING. 

Of the nature of the Offence of Ingrossing 
at Common Law, 10 vol. 421. 

INNOC£NC£. 

OjHnio&s of several eminent Writers upon 
the maxim in Jurisprudence, '* that it is better 
that ten guilty persons iihould escape than that 
one innocent man should suffer," 7 vol. 1529 
(note). — Sir Samuel Romill/s Vindication and 
Explanation of the Maxim, ibid. ib. — Lord 
Gillies says, in M'Kinley's Case, that the 
presumption of Innocence in Criminsd Cases 
js not to be overturned by suspicion, but that 
there must be legal Evidence of Guilt, carry- 
ing a conviction little short of absolute cer- 
tainty, 33 vol. 506. 

INNOVATIONS. 

Lord Norih^a Opinion against Innovations 
m Law, 6 vol. 1109, 

INNS OF COURT. 
The Inns of Court have merely an au&ority 
delegated to them Irofipi the ^Mges to call 



persons to the Bar, 20 vol. 6S8.-— If a pesasoo 
is aggrieved by a decision of the Benchers of 
an Inn of Court, the proper application for 
redress is by a Petition of Appeal to the 
twelve Judges, ibid* 689 (not^). 

INNUENDO. 

Discussion in Fitzbarris's Case of tUe nature 
and object of an Innuendo, 10 vol. 26p, — "Ljord 
Coke*s Report of the Case of James v. Rutleck 
on this subjeict, ibid- 272, 273 (note)-- — An 
Innuendo cannot give certainty to that wjiich 
was not previously made certain by Avermeci, 
ibid. 274. — An Innuendo must not assign ^ 
meaning to words which tlie words themselves 
do not express, ibid. 27&.— An Innuendo that 
certain words meant a certain person, will nQt 
support an Action or Indictment for those 
words without a previous distinct Avernient 
that they were spoken of and concerning that 
person, ibid. 271 .—"The Bishops'^meaning the 
English Bishops) held to be a good Innuendo, 
Baxter's Case, 11 vol. 502. — An Innuendo is 
merely to refer or point to a matter sufficiently 
expressed before, per De Grey, C. J. in lioine^s 
Case, 20 vol.793. 

INQUIRY. 

On the Execution of the Writ of Ipquiry in 
an Action of Scandalum Magnatum broug(it \fy 
James^ Duke of York (afterwards Janaee the 
Second), against Dr. Gates, fifteen Juryzaea 
were sworn, 10 vol. 129. 



INQUISITION. 

Account of a Coroner's Inquisition upon the 
death of the Earl of Northumbeiland, 27 Eiix. 
1585, 1 vol. 1111. — The Coroner's Inquisition 
ou the death of Arthur, Earl of Essex, i|i 1^84, 
9 vol. 1132. — The Coroner's Inquisition on the 
death of William Jackson, a Clergyman, w}>q 
took poison in Prison after his conviction (or 
High Treason in Irdand, 35 vol. 890. 

INSANITY. 

Sir John Hawles's Remarks upon the Lav 
respecting the Trial of Lunatics for Crimes, 
11 vol. 476. — Argument of the Solicitor 
General (Mr. Yorke) on the Trial of Lord 
Ferrers respecting the kind and degree of In- 
sanity which will excuse from criminal respon- 
sibility, 19 vol. 945. — ^Further Disc«ssion of 
this subject in Hadfield's Case,' 27 vol. 1307. 
— ^Mr. Erskine's Doctrine in Had^eid's Case, 
that it is sufficient to excuse from <arijBDdn]d 
responsibility, if there l)e a prevailing delusion 
on the mind .upon a particular subject, and 
if the act charged come within the rae^ 
of that delusion, even though on general aob- 
jects the reasoning powers may be ««ini- 
paired, ibid. 1309. — A Defenoe agaiost a 
criminal Charge on the ground of Insanity, 
must be received by a Jury with great caintion, 
16 vol. 764. — Mr. Justice Tracy's directions to 
the Jury upon this subject on the Trial oC 
Edward Arnold for shooting at Lord Onslow, 
ihid« ib^«i4Qitaoce vi a Jmt^ Uinff swoib; on 



C^HfinpRu]! 



THB STATE TRIAtS. 



Ids 



mt AtmigBineiit kit High Treasop, to inquire 
whether the PrisQiier were of sound mind or 
not, rrith's Case, 22 vol. 311. — Mr. Hume's 
reasoning on the practice of Scotch Courts of 
JnstiGe in Cases where persons accused of 
Climes are suggested to be insane, 22 vol. 
12^4. — ^DiscDSsion of the Law of Scotland on 
this subject on the Trial of Sir Archibald Gor- 
men Kinloch foi the Murder of his brother, 
i$ Tol. 9€d. — ^Eemarks on the Law of Scotland 
respecting the Disqualification of Witnesses 
on the ground of Insanity, 12 vol. 559 (note^. 

INSPECTION. 

Eoti^r of an Award of Inspection of a Woman 
by a Jurj of Matrons in a Case of Divorce, 2 
Tol. 802. 

INSURRECTION.— See Levying War; 

Mr. Justice Foster's Summary of the several 
species of Insurrections which, by the Law of 
Sugland, amount to High Treason, 21 vol. 490. 
— Triab of various persons concerned in the 
Irish Insurrection in 1803, 28 vol. 683. 

INTlBNTION.-.Sqo Life/. , 

A erimioal Intention to do one act may in 
some Cases be carried over to another act done 
in proseeittioa thereof^ so as to constitute the 
latter a Felony^ Woodbume and Coke's Case, 
16 Tol. 79.— A criminal Intention is an indis- 
pensable constituent in all Fdonies, ibid. ib. — 
Lord Mansfield says, in WoodfalPa Case, that 
where an act, indiflTerent in itself, becomes 
crhnina! in consequence of a criminal Intent, 
the Intent must be proved ; but nvhere the act 
is in itself unlawful, a criminal Intent is im* 
plied, 20 ToL 919. — Lord Chief Justice King, 
in the Case of Woodbume and Coke, says that 
the Intent of the party in Felony is alwajs a 
Question for the Jury, 16 vol. 79. — His diireo* 
lions to the Jury, in that Case, respecting the 
means of arriving at the Intention with which 
a criminal action is committed, ibid. ib. — 
Where the Intention with which a Crime is com- 
milled constitutes a distinct species of Crime 
from that charged in the Indictment, no Evi- 
dence of that Intention is admissible, per Lord 
Mansfield, in the Case of the Madras Council, 
31 vol. 1*^7* — It is a rule in Criminal Judi- 
cature, that the punishment should be in pro- 
portion to the malignity of the Offender's In- 
tention, ibid. 1291. — Arguments of Mr. Ford 
and Mr. I^ratt (afterwards Lord Camden) on 
the Trial of Owen for Libel in 1752, that the 
Jmy are to judge of the Intention of the De- 
iendant in Cases of Libel, IS yd. 1223, 1227. 
-^Lord Mansfield says, in WoodfaH's Case, 
that in Cases of Libel a criminal Intention is 
presumed from the fact of publication, 20 vol. 
919.— Opinion olthe Judges in the House of 
Ix>rd8, daring the Debates on the Libel Bill, 
that the criminal Intention in prosecutions for 
libel, is gener^ly matter of fonn, and requires 
no proof on the part of the Prosecutor, 22 rei. 
miU-Xh^ idtow^d, tiaw«v«r^ that th«ie 



might be Exceptions to iht Bulfi> ibid. 301.— 
Mr. Erskine's Argument in Perry's Case, that 
since the Libel Act, the Intention of the De- 
fendant in (]|uestions of Libel, is material for 
the Jury, ibid. 999. — Mr. Erskine's celebrated 
Argument in Cuthell's Case, on the necessity 
of showing a criminal Intention, in order to 
make a party criminally responsible for pub«f 
lishing a Libel, 27 vol. 660. 

INTERDICTION. 

Bull of Interdiction against England isllifd 
by the Pope in the Beign of iOag John, 3 vol, 
550. 

INT£ES$T.*-S«« WUvm. 

A person not immediately, but consequen* 
tially interested in the event of a Suit is a good 
Witness in that Suit, 17 vol. Il58.<-*lllustra« 
tion of this Rule, ibid» ib. 

INTERNATIONAL LAW.— See Law of 

Naikms. 

INTEHPBETIiR* 

Instructions of the Coortto an Interpreter 
on the Trial of several Foreigners for Murder, 
9 vol. 7.— Form of the Oath administered to an 
Interpreter on the Examination of a. foreign 
Witness, 9 vol. 1090.— On the Trial of Swend^ 
sen, a Foreigner, for a capital Felony, one of 
the Jury was sworn to interpret the Evidence 
of a foreign Witness, 1^ vol. 580, 



IRELAND. 

In the Case of Mixed Money it is said that 
Ireland was merely a Member of the Imperial 
Crown of England, 2 vol. 126. — ^The King of 
England has exercised the Prerogative of coin* 
ing Money in Ireland ever since the twelfth 
year of King John, ibid. 119.— A Peer of Ire- 
land might formerly be tried by a Jury in 
England for Treasons committed in Ireland, 
Lord Ma(:giure's Case, 4 vol. 664.— Mr. 
Prynne's Argument on ^s point, ibid. 689. — 
His Argument in that Case that the Trial of 
Irish Offenders in England for Offences com- 
mitted in Ireland took place in very ancient 
times, ibid. 694. — Stat. 44 Geo. 3, e. 92, s. 3 
and 4, authorizing the apprehension of persons 
in England, who have committed Offences in 
Ireland, ibid. 664 (note). — Letters Patent 
creating Titles of Honour do not extend to 
Ireland, unless specially named, 12 vol. 1200. 
— Killing a Man wiUi malice said in former 
times to be Treason in Ireland, 12 vol. 619.— 
There is no Petit Treason in Ireland, ibid. 618. 
—It was said by Chief Justice Keating, in 
1689, that Richard the Second was the only 
King who had visited Ireland since the time 
of Henry the Second, ibid. 619. — Letters and 
Papers illustrative of the state of Ireland in 
1689, ibid. 636. — Historical- Remarks on the 
acquisition of Ireland by England in the Ar- 
guments in the Case of the Island of Gk'enada. 
20 voL 268.*<-Mr. Haigrave's Accomnt of the 
ions ^ <tiiei«Dil Antbois le^pteiing tht 
% 



106 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



[M 



mode in which the Laws of England were in- 
troduced into Ireland, in his Argument in the 
Case of the Island of Grenada, ihid. 296. — 
IMr. Prynne's Remarks on the introduction of 
English Laws into Ireland, 4 vol. 696.— Mr. 
Kichardson's Remarks on this Subject in his 
Argument in support of the Plea in Abatement 
in Justice Johnson's Case, 29 vol. 402.— 'Cha- 
racter given by Giraldus Cambrensis in the 
Reign of Henry the Second, of the native Irish, 
and of their Deportment towards England, 4 
vol. 695w — Discussion whether the Lord Lieu- 
tenant of Ireland is liable to an Action for 
AcU of State, 27 vol. 1250.— The Case of 
Mixed Money in Ireland, 2 vol. 114. — 'Ihe 
Case of Prsmunire in Ireland, ibid. 534. — 
Trials of various persons for being concerned 
in the Rebellion in Ireland in 1798, 27 vol. 
255.— Trials of persons concerned in the Irish 
Insurrection in 1803, 28 vol. 683. See De- 
finders ; Caraiu<Us and Shanavests, 

IRONS. 

Irons ought not to be used in Gaols unless 
when there is danger of an Escape, Em. Pref. 
1 vol. xxxix.— When a Prisoner comes to the 
Bar to be tried, his Irons ought to be taken off, 
but not when he comes to plead, 16 vol. 100, 
5 vol. 979. — ^Reference to Cases and Authori- 
ties respecting the taking off a Prisoner's Irons 
upon his Triad, 5 vol, 979 (note). — It seems 
that Prisoners are not entitled to have their 
Irons removed during the Trial of collateral 
Issues, 18 vol. 435 (note). — Lord Coke's 
Hemarks on this Subject, 17 vol. 618. 

IRRELIGION.--See Bhuphem; Eeligion; 
WhistoHf WUUam; Eaton, Vaniel Isaac; 
WilUami, Thomas. 

Mr. Barrington's Quotation of the Emperor 
Titus's Opinion against Prosecutions for Irre- 
ligion, 15 vol. 716. — Mr. Lookers Letter to Sir 
Francis Masham, pn the Execution of Thomas 
Aikenhead in Scotland for denying the Doc- 
trine of the Trinity, 13 vol. 928. 

ISLE OF MAN. 

Questions respecting Lands in the Isle of 
Man may be tried in Uie Courts there ; but a 
Question respecting the Seigniory must be tried 
in some of the Courts in England, 20 vol. 230. 

ISSUE. 

On the Trial of collateral Issues, a Prisoner 
is not entitled to challenge peremptorily, Rat^ 
differs Case, 18 voL 432. — Mr. Justice Black- 
stone expresses an Opinion that formerly he 
was allowed to do so, ibid. ib. (note). — On 
collateral Issues, Prisoners on their Trial for 
Treason or Felony, were allowed the assistance 
of Counsel, Ratcliffe's Case, 5 vol. 467 (note). 
18 vol. 434. 

JACTITATION. 
Argument of the Question, whether a Sen- 
tence of Jactitation in the Ecclesiastical Court 
is mi concltt^iTe Evideoce agaiost a fomier 



Marriage on an Indictment for Bigamy, 
Duchess of Kingston's Case, 20 vol. 391. 

JAMAICA. 

Account of the Settlement of the Cotistitu- 
tion of the Island of Jamaica after its conquest 
by Cromwell's Forces in 1655, 6 vol. 1349.— » 
Opinion of the Attorney and Solicitor General 
in the Reign of George the Second, in favour 
of the right of the King to impose a Tax upon 
the Inhabitants of Jamaica without the author- 
ity of Parliament, 20 vol. 301. 

JEOFAILS. 

Arguments in Tutchin's Case, upon the 
question whether a Clerical Error in the teste 
of a Distringas Corpora Juratorum be witbin 
the Statutes of Jeofails^ 14 vol. 1135. 

JESUITS.— See Abington, Ec^bard ; Atkins, 
William; Babingtoriy Anthomf ; Brompnick, 
Andrew; Busby, George; Campion, Edmund; 
Garnet, Henry; Goodman, John; Kerne, 
Charles; Lewis, David ; Ogilvie,John; Wake- 
man, Sir George; Whitebread, Thomas, 

Sir Edward Coke's Account of their Prin- 
ciples on the Trial of the Conspirators in the 
Gunpowder Plot, 2 vol. 171. — Animadversions 
upon some of their Principles and Doctrines, 7 
vol. 543. — Speech of Henry the Fourth, KiDg 
of France, in behalfof the Jesuits, ibid. 536. — 
Stat. 27 Eliz. c. 2, against Jesuits and Sen»inary 
Priests, 4 vol. 59 (note), 7 vol. 724. — This 
Stat, seems to be provisionally repealed by 31 
Geo. 3, c. 32, s. 4, 7 vol. 724 (note). — In Pro- 
secutions upon this Statute it was sufficient to 
shew that the party accused had acted as a 
Priest, without proving that he had taken Orders 
from the Pope, ibid. 838, 870.— The Court 
doubted, in Lumsden's Case, whether a person 
born in Scotland was within the Statute of Eliz., 
and directed the Jury to find a Special Ver- 
dict, ibid. 871. 

JEWS. 
Whitelocke states it to be his Opinion that 
none of the Laws of the Jews are binding upon 
any other Nation, except their Moral Law, 5 
vol. 823. — Precedents of Legal Proceedings 
respecting Jews in early periods of the English 
History, 10 vol. 408.— Mr.Pollexfen's allusion 
to their treatment by the Kings of England in 
ancient times, ibid. 444. — Argument that they 
were always considered as Alien Friends, ibid. 
445.— Wodrow's Account of a Convert to 
Judaism in Scotland in 1681, 13 vol. 938. — ^In 
ancient times they had Special Justices assigned 
for the purpose of determining their Suits in 
the parts where tuey dwelt, 10 vol. 409. 

JOINDER. 

Mr. Serjeant Hawkins's Observations on the 
Joinder of several persons as Defendants in 
one Indictment, 16 vol. 70 (note).— Where - 
three Defendants were joined in one Indict- 
ment for an Assault, and on the close of the 
CasQ foK the ii^rpsecutio^ jit appeared that ytve 



C0inS19T8.J 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



I9f 



no Evidence against two of them, the 
Court, on the application of the Counsel for 
She Defendants^ directed the Jury to return 
their Verdict as to the latter immediately, in 
order that, if acquitted, they might be com- 
petent Witnesses for the other Defendant, 
18 vol. 259. — A great latitude in joining several 
Charges in one Indictment is allowed by the 
Law of Scotland, 19 vol. 1252 (note). — ^Mr. 
Fergusson*s Argument that Offences which infer 
different Punishments cannot be joined in the 
same Indictment or Information, 27 vol. 978. 
—A Charge of Petit Treason against one Per- 
son, and of Murder against another, may be 
joined in the same Indictment, 18 vol. 1193. 

JOURNALS.— See Evidence. 

The Journals of the House of Lords are not 
Records, 12 vol. 1201. — ^There are no Journals 
of the House of Commons extant before the 
time of Edward the Sixth, 14 vol. 734.— 
Sworn Copies of Entries in the Journals of the 
House of Commons produced and read as 
Evidence, in the Case of Lord Geoi^e Gordon, 
21 vol. 650. — Copies of the Journals of Parlia- 
ment are said by Lord Mansfield to be Evi- 
dence, ibid. 651 (note). — ^The printed Journals 
of Parliament arenot Evidence, unless examined 
with the Originals, Lord Melville's Case, 29 vol. 
685. — Chief Justice Jefferies held, on the Trial 
of Dr. Oates for Perjury, that the Journals of 
' the House of Commons were not Evidence, as 
they are not Records, and that House cannot 
administer an Oath, 10 vol. 1163. 

JUDGES. 

Collections of State Trials said to be useful 
in doing justice to the memory of Judges, Em. 
Pref. 1 vol. xxii. — ^Mr. Emlyn says that the 
arbitrary Proceedings of bad Judges have given 
occasion to some of the best Provisions for the 
security of the Subject, Em. Pref. ibid, xxviii. 
—Some of the Doctrines most obnoxious to 
Liberty said to have begun in the times of 
some of the best Judges, 30 vol. 1272. 
—In ancient Statutes the Judges are reckoned 
amongst the Magnates Regni, 3 vol, 1374. 
—Account of the Statutes passed in modem 
times for securing the independence of the 
Jodges, 15 vol. 1199. — ^The Judges of the 
Court of King's Bench are Sovereign Justices 
of Oyer and Terminer and Gaol Delivery, 
Lord Sanquire^s Case, 2 vol. 758. — Lord 
Coke's Doubts respecting the propriety of 
the Judges giving their Opinions on any 
subject extrajudicially at the command of 
the King, 2 vol. 872. — In his Institutes he 
says that the Judges ought not to give their 
Opinions on such Occasions, ibid. 880. — Mr. 
Justice Whitelocke highly disapproved of the 
practice of the King's requiring the Judges to 
give extra-judicial Opinions, 3 vol. 288 (note). — 
Violent Assault upon a Judge on the Bench in 
the Reign of Edward the Third, 27 vol. 973.-— 
Precedents of Prosecutions for Libels upon the 
Jodges, in Petitions to the King, 2 vol. 1074. — 
Preoedents in earlv times, of Punishments for 



speaking slanderous Words against the Judges, 
ibid. 1080. — Precedents of Proceedings against 
persons for insulting Judges, 3 vol. 1 375.— Re- 
marks upon Prosecutions for Libels on Judges 
in later times, 30 vol. 1290.— Advantages de- 
rived from a free discussion of the conduct of 
Judges, ibid. 1272,— In the Earl of Bristol's 
Case, the King commands the Judges, by the 
Attorney General, not to answer any general 
questions proposed to them by the House of 
Lords, 2 vol. 1 307,— Though the King is, by the 
Constitution of England, considered to be the 
Fountain of Justice, he cannot give Judgment 
without.the Judges, 3 vol.861. — Explanation of 
the meaning of the maxim, that in capital Cases 
the Judge is to be of Counsel for the Prisoner, 5 
vol.466 (note), 6 vol. 516, and ibid, ib.(note).— 
A Judge is to be of Counsel for a Prisoner who 
cannot by Law have Counsel, to prevent him 
from losing any advantage by his ignorance o£ 
the Law, of which he might otherwise legally 
avail himself, ibid. ib. and 4 vol. 1274.— But in 
Cranburne's Case Lord Holt says, that where the 
Law allows Counsel, the Judges are to ba 
indifferent between tlie Crown andtJbe Prisoner^ 
and the Counsel are to take care that the latter 
loses no legal advantage, 1 3 voL237.—^The sense 
in which Judges are Counsel for Prisoners by 
the Scotch Law, 23 vol. 805.— Judges are 
compellable to take Arms for the Defence o£ 
the Realm, 3 vol. 929. — ^Where a Judge directs 
a Jury respecting the Verdict which they 
ought to give upon a fact to be found by them, 
the direction should be hypothetical as to the 
finding of the fact, Busheirs Case, 6 voU 1008. 
— Mr. Hargrave*s Note on the respective Pro- 
vinces of the Judge and Jury, m deciding 
matters of Law and Fact, ibid. 1013 (note). — 
Chief JusticOsJefferies admits that the Judge's 
Opinion in matters of fact ought not to weigh 
at all with the Jury, 10 vol. 1144. — Where 
Judges have considered a question to be of such 
difficulty as to allow it to be argued before 
them, they ought, in giving Judgment, to give 
their Reason publicly, 8 vol. 434. — ^And they 
ought to abide by such Reasons, and not make 
good their Judgments by after thoughts, ibid, 
ib. — It was formerly the practice for the Judges 
to reduce Acts of Parliament into form, 6 vol. 
1104, 16 vol. 1389. — Reference to numerous 
Passages in the State Trials, from which it 
appears that formerly the Judges took no notes 
of the Evidence, 17 vol. 1420 (note). — ^An 
Action will not lie against a Judge for any 
thing done by him in bis judicial Character 
within the limits of his Jurisdiction, 6 vol. 
1096, 20 vol. 203, 228.— Judges have been in 
all ages punishable for giving corrupt Judg- 
ments, but their ability and fitness for their 
Office, can only be questioned by the King, 
6 vol. 1004. — Severe Punishment formerly 
passed on Judges who violated their 
judicial Oath, 3 vol. 1274. — ^Discussion, of 
several Points relating to the criminal respon- 
sibility of Judges for their judicial Acts, in 
Governor Picton's Case, 30 vol. 748, 776. — 
General Rules respecting the mod« of ^tiinat-« 



109 



OENEftAL I^DEX TO 



\ltlBCiitJL* 



Jug fhfl de(^ee of audioiity doe to Jadicial Deci- 
sions on pointB of Law^ from Mr. Baron 
lifaseres'B Canadian Freeholder, 20 vol. 350. 
*-*Oanger of Judges attempting to strain the 
Law by their own notions of Justice, 20 vol. 642. 
i**Proceeding8 in Pailiament in 1640, against 
the Judges for their Judgment in the Case of 
Ship-Money, 3 toI. 1260. — Mr. Luders^s 
Bemark on the Ship-Money Judges, 6 vol. 
906 (note) — On the Trial of Hacker, otie of 
the Regicides, it was resolved that two of the 
Judges named in the Commission were good 
Witnesses for the Crown, 6 vol. 1181 (note). 
•«-A Judge may give Evidence in a Cause tried 
heforepiimself,!! vol.459. — Judges ought not, 
upon a Trial, to declare any fact which they 
.know of their own knowledge, unless they are 
sworn as Witnesses, 7 vol. 874. — On a Trial 
in the Court of the Lord High Steward, if a 
question of Law is proposed for the Judges, it 
must be stated in the presence of the Prisoner, 
7 vol. 156 and (note), 18 vol. 1011.— Danget 
at intrusting Jndges with discfetionary powerj, 
9 vol. 56 (note). — ^Meaning of Judicial Discre- 
lion explained by Lord Mansfield, 19 Vol. 1089. 
— ^It iifOA held 1>y a Majority of the Judges in 
the Bankers' Case, that in the Court of Exche- 
quer Chamber^ the Lord Higli Treasurer and 
the Lord Keeper are to give Judgment accord- 
ing to their own Opinion, though the Opinion 
of the greater numbei: of the Judges is against 
them, 14 vol. 105. — ^Favpurable circumstances 
in the Conduct of the Judges at the beginning 
of the Reign of Charles the First, 3 vol. 333. 
— Conduct of the Judges at the commence- 
inentof the Commonwealth, 4 vol. 1251 (note). 
— Form of the Oath of the Judges, as settled 
by the Parliament during the Commontvealth, 
ibid. ib. — Names of the Judges during the 
Protectorate, 5 vol. 946. — Account of the order 
of succession of some of the Judges during the 
latter part of the Reign of Charles the Second, 
15 vol. 1198. — Setjeant Haywood's Historical 
Kotices of the Judges in the Reigns of Charles 
the Second and James the Second, 12 vol. 257 
(note). — Roger Coke says that the Judges in 
the time of James the Second, with the excep- 
tion of Atkins and Powell, were " such a pack 
as never before filled Westminster Hall," 8 vol* 
196 (note). 

JUDGMENT. 

Mr. St; John argues, in the Great Case of Ship- 
Money, that though the King is by the Constitu- 
tion the Fountain of Justice, he cannot give 
Judgment In any Court without the assistance of 
the Judges, 3 vol. 861.— In Murder the Judg- 
xnent by the Common Law is always the same, 
and therefore, in Felton's Casie for stabbing 
the Duke of Buckingham, the Court refused to 
order the Prisoner's hand to be cut off, though 
required so to do by the King, 3 vol. 372. — 
"Where the Judges have considered any question 
to be of sufficient difficulty to be argued before 
them, they ought, by the Common Law, in 
giving Judgment, to publish their Reasons, 8 
vol, 434.--IO ancient times, the Reasons for 



Jadginents were put upon the Record in CaiM^ 
of difficulty, ibid. ib. (note).— The Judgnaent in 
Fitzliarris's Case was said bjr Sir John Hawles 
to be the first mute Judgment in Westminster 
Hall, ibid. 435.— Lord Mansfield gave it as his 
Opinion that it was of great importance lo ex- 
plain the Reasons of Judgments in open Court, 
19 vol. 1098.— A Judgment of Imprlsonxtient, 
to commence in fuluro after the determination 
of an Imprisonment on a former Sentence for 
another Offence, held on Error in the House of 
Lords in the Case of White and Hart, to be good 
in Law, ibid. 1132.— Argument of the question 
whether a Judgment of Jactitation ih the ^Eccle- 
siasticalCourtis not conclusive Evidence against 
a former Marriage,onanIndictmentfor Bigamy, 
Duchess of Kingston's Case, 20 vol. 391. — On 
an Outlawry for High Treason, the Outlawry is 
the Judgment, and the practice of the Court pf 
King's Bench, when the Prisoner is brought 
into Court, is not to give Judgment,, biit 
merely a Rule for Execution, HoUoway's Case, 
10 voU 5.— When a person is convicted of 
Treason on a Trial at Bar in the Court of King's 
Bench, whether by Confession or Verdict, 
Judgment ought not to he pronounced imme- 
diately, but uie Prisoner has four full days to 
move in Arrest of Judgment, if there be so 
tiiany days of the term remaining ^ if not, then 
the longest time that can be had in the Term 
is allowed, Alexander Knightley^s Case, 13 
vol. 403. — instance of Judgment for a^ Misde- 
meanour being postponed till a subsequent 
Term because there were not four full days 
remaining in the Term in which the Convic- 
tion took place, 9 vol. 185.— -Mr* Justice 
Foster^s Remarks upon the question whether 
the King has the power by his Warrant, of 
ordering the Execution in capital Cases to 
vary from the Judgment, 11 vol. 376 (note).— 
Lord Bacon doubts whether thiB King has in 
strictness such a Power in Cases of Fetony, 
7 vol. 1539 (note).— -Precedents of a variation 
of the Execution from the Judgment in capital 
Cases, laid before James the Second on behalf 
of Lady Alice Lisle, 11 vol. 378.— Sir Samuel 
Romilly'sRemarks on the difrereiice between the 
Judgmentand£xecutionInTreasoh,l8 vol.838. 

JUDICIAL OFFICES, 

Antiquity of the practice of selling Judicial 
Offices, 16 vol. i 088.— Arguments for the 
legality of the practice, ibid, 1089, 1109, 1273. 

JURISDICTION.— See Ahaiement; DihtOfy 
Plea; Admiralty. 

The Case of the Jurisdiction of the House 
of Lords on a Petition by Thomas Skinner 
against the East-India Compatiy, 18 Car. 2, 
1666, 6 vol. 709. — Discussions between the 
House of Lords and the House of Commoiis, 
respecting the Jurisdiction of the former tO 
take cognizance of matters brought before 
theta judicially by way of original Complaint 
and not by Writ of Error or any Process of 
Appeal, ibid. 725.— -Reasons aricl Precedents 
against their JuHsdietion ioi this respect; ibid- 



C<>KTEKTS.j 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



19» 



730. — ^Reasons and Precedents in favour 
thereof^ ibi<L 733. — ^Precedents to show that 
ivl^re a party does not plead to the Jurisdiction 
of the Court, the Court may proceed, even in 
Cases not within its jurisdiction, ibid. 733. — 
Hie Court of King's Bench have no Juris- 
dictiba to inquire upon a Habeas Corpus 
into the validity of a Commitment by either 
House oi Parliament during their Session, 
ibid. 12^6. — ^It is a general rule that a person 
who in pleading impeaches the Jurisdiction of 
one Court, must point out some other Court 
to which the Jurisdiction belongs, 14 vol. 791, 
20 vol. 229. — This Rule discussed in Mr. 
Justice Johnson's Casfe, 29 vol. 388. — Discus- 
sion in Fitzharris*s Case, whether the pendency 
of Proceedings in a Superior Court takes away 
the Jurisdiction of an Inferior Court, which 
had an original Jurisdiction of the cause, the 
person^ and the fact, at the time of the fact 
committed, 8 vol.281. — An Action will not 
lie against a Judge for any thing done by him 
Id his judicial character within the limits of his 
Iurisdiction,j5 vol. 1096, 20 vol. 203, 228. — 
Hie JurisdicSonof the Privy Council is limited, 
and therefore the causes of a Commitment by 
them ought to appear upon the Warrant, 3 
vol. 28. — ^A Plea to the Jurisdiction is not 
iaToiired in Law, and therefore no time is 
allowed for making it, but the party must be 
ready to maintain it presently. Lord Dela- 
roere's Case, 11 vol. 524. — Plea to the Juris- 
diction of the Court in Fitzharris's Case, that 
an Impeachment was depending in Parlia- 
ment for the same Treasons, 8 vol. 251. — 
Argument upon tlie Validity of this Plea, 
ibid. 281. — Sir John Hawles's Remarks upon 
it, ibid. 431.-— Local Jurisdictions said to be 
inherent in the nature of the Feudal Institu- 
tions of this Country, 28 vol. 275. — ^The King's 
Courts in England have Jurisdiction to try an 
Action of Trespass and False Imprisonment 
brought against a Governor of a Colony ap- 
pointed by Letters Patent from the Crown, 
Most^n V. Fabrigas, 20 vol. 226. — ^Reference to 
Cases and Au^k|iities respecting the Jurisdic- 
tion of Courts piPCommon Law to punish blas- 
phemous and obscene Libels, 17 vol. 157 (note). 
:— Judgment of the Court of King's Bench on 
ihis subject in. Curll's Case, ibid. 160. — It is 
laid down by Lord Holt that there ought to be 
no Plea to the Jurisdiction after an Imparlance, 
and that a Special Imparlance admits the 
Jurisdiction, 20 vol. 210. — Argument in the 
Case of Fabrigas v, Mostyn, that after an lin- 
parlance the C[uestlon of Jurisdiction cannot 
be gone into, ibid. 208. — Discussion in the 
fianJLers' Case, respecting the Jurisdiction of 
the Barons of the Exchequer over the Revenues 
of the Crown, 14 vol. 1. 

JURY.— See CWZengc; Grand Jury; Lihel; 

Jury-PaneL 

Juries often rnisled by the introduction of 
words of course into Indictments, 1 vol. xxx. 
r~instanoes of acquittals by Juries in State 
Prosecutions very rare in ancient times, ibid. . 



407. — ^Instances of qtiestiomag and punishing 
Juries for their verdicts, 1 vol. 901, 5 vol. 445, 
6 vol. 967, 18 voK 313 (note).— Remarks of 
Lord Hale and Blackstone upon the practice 
of arbitrarily punishing Juries fof finding a ver- 
dict contrary to the directioi^ of the Judge, 5 
vol. 445, 6 vol. 967 (note).-*-Chief Justice 
Vaughan's Argument against the ^actice of 
fining or imprtsoning Juries lor their Verdicts, 
on delivering th« Judgment of the Conn m 
Bushell's Case, 6 vol. 99^— -Mr. Erskii^e's 
allusion to Bushell's Case, in kis Defence of 
the Dean of St. Asaph, 21 vol. 925. — Resolo* 
tion of the House of CcMnmons in 1667 against 
the practice of fining Juries for their Verdicts, 
6 vol. 995. — Chief Justice Vaugban argues 
in Bushell's Case, that a Jury may foui^d uieir 
Verdict upon their own personal knowledge, 
independently of the Evidence given in Court, 
ibid. 1011, 1012.— 'Mr. Barrington observes 
that the Witnesses to a Deed seem to have 
been in ancient times a neces^ry part of the 
Jury which was to try its validity, ibid. 1013 
(note).— On the Trial of Blixabeth Cellier for 
a Libel, the Jury were not permitted to take 
the Libel out of Court trlth tlieiii^ when they 
retired to consider theif verdict, without the 
cotisent of the Defendant, 7 vol. 1207. — Juries 
are not at liberty to act arbitrarily in finding 
their Verdicts, but are bound by the dictates of 
conscience, informed by reasonable proofs, 13 
vol. 455. — Juries may if they please, determinei 
both the Law and the Fact, 4 vol. 1284 
(note), 6 vol.1017 (note), 21 vol. 995.— Mr. . 
Hargrave's Note on the respective provinces of 
the Judge and Jury in deciding questions of 
Law and Fact, 6 vol. 1013 (note). — See what 
is said by Lord Mansfield on this subject in 
the Case of the Dean of St. Asaph, 21 vol. 
1037. — fiy the Law of Scotland Jurors had 
always the power of deciding the Law as well 
as the Fact, 23 vol. 114,— Mr. Erskine's Argu* 
nient in the Case of the Dean of St. AsapR 
upon the rights and powers of Juries in Cri«* 
minal TrislTs in general, and particularly in 
Cases of Libel, 21 vol. 961, 971.—OfUe Dif- 
ference in Civil and Criminal Proceedings as 
to the rights and powers of Juries, ibid. 977. 
—Debates in the House of Lords respecting 
Juries previously to the passing of Mr. Fox's 
Libel Act, 22 vol. 294.— Paper on the Poweril 
and Duties of Juries circulated by the Consti- 
tutional Society in 1783, 21 vol. 851.— An 
Action will not lie against a Juror for what he 
does as a Juror, being sworn in a Court of 
Justice upon a matter cognizable by that Court, 
10 vol. 1344, 1359, 1414.— Mr. Emlyn's 
Animadversions On the practice of requiring 
unanimity in Juries, Em. Pref. 1 vol. xxix.— 
Mr. Baron Maseres's Observations on the same 
subject, 14 vol. 617 (note). — Bracton says that 
it was anciently the practice to add to the 
number of the Jury when the twelve could not 
agree, ibid. 618 (note).— Mr. Barrington's 
Opinion on the probable cause of the abolition 
of the practice mentioned by Bracton, ibid* 
619 (note),— Mr, Bavringtoa's Remarks on the 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



300 

practice of inclosing Janes, 12 vol. 473 (note). 
— Instance of the Discharge of a Jury by the 
Court as to two of several Prisoners in aCapi- 
tal case^ after the Evidence was concluded on 
the part of the Crown, in order to^ give an 
opportunity of supplying a Deficiency in the 
Evidence for the Prosecution, Whitebread's 
Case, 7 vol. 120. — Remarks upon that Case, 
ibid. 497(note). — ^Reference to various authori- 
ties upon the question whether a Jury once 
charged and sworn in a capital Case can be 
discharged under any circumstances till they 
have given their Verdict, 7 vol. 497 (note). — 
Instance of a Jury being discharged in a Case 
of Murder in Ireland, because they could not 
agree in their Verdict, 28 vol. 646. — Form of 
the Rule for discharging a Jury in that Case, 
ibid. 647.— The same Prisoner was afterwards 
tried upon the same Indictment and acquitted, 
ibid. ib. — Arguments in the Case of the Kin- 
lochs respecting the power of the Court to 
discharge a Jury in a capital Case, 18 vol. 402. 
— Mr. Justice Foster says that whena Piisoner 
is indicted for Murder, and the proof amounts 
to Petit Treason, he should make no difficulty 
of discharging the Jury of that Indictment, and 
ordering anoUier Indictment for Petit Treason, 
18 vol, 1200. — Opinion of the Judges in the 
House of Lords in Lord Delamere's Case, that 
a Jury once charged and sworn in a Criminal 
Trial cannot by Law adjourn until they have 
given their Verdict, 11 vol, 561. — Mr. Emlyn's 
Opinion upon this point in the Case of Eliza- 
beth Canning, 19 vol. 671 (note). — But the 
Court may adjourn the Trial where there is an 
actual necessity for such an Adjournment, 
Hardy's Case, 24 vol. 414, Home Tooke's 
Case, 25 vol. 129, 1295 (note). — En try of such 
an Adjournment upon the Record in Stone's 
Case, ibid. 1296 (note). — On the Trials of 
Home Tooke and Stone, the Jury were not 
permitted to separate till they had given their 
Verdict, but retired, upon the Adjournment of 
the Trial, to an adjoining Tavern, and Bailiffs 
were sworn to keep them in the usual manner, 
ibid. 745, 1296 (note). — Allowance of an Ob- 
jection to a Juror by the Crown on the Trial 
of Sir Miles Stapleton for being concerned in 
the Popish Plot, that he had disparaged the 
Witnesses for the Plot by calling his Dogs after 
them, 8 vol. 503. — Arguments on the Trial of 
Lord Williaip Russel for Treason upon the 
validity of an'Qbjection to a Juror that he had 
no Freehold in the City of London, 9 vol. 586. 
"—Judgment of the Court against the Objec- 
tion, ibid. 591. — Sir John Hawles's Remarks 
upon this Decision, ibid. 797.— Discussion in 
Dr. Sheridan's Case, in Ireland, whether in 
Counties of Corporate Cities, or Corporate 
Towns, the want of Freehold is a good ground 
of objection to a Juror, 31 vol, 579. — ^The 
Court of King's Bench in Ireland decide 
against the Objection, ibid. 611. — In a Case of 
Treason or Felony, if a Juror^have previously to 
the Trial, declared his opinion respecting the 
Prisoner's guilt, it is a good cause of Challenge, 
but the fact must be proved aliunde and not 

I 



[Mrdcsxx* 



by the examination of the Juror, Peter Cook'k 
Case, 1 3 vol. 334. — Instance of a Juror being 
committed by a Judge for saying after he was 
returned and before he was sworn, that he 
would not find a Verdict for the Crown, 7 vol. 
715. — A Juror cannot be asked upon the Voir 
dire any question which touches his honour or 
character, 15 vol. 898 (note). — Chief Justice 
Parker, on an objection made by a Prisoner, 
refused to allow any persons to be on his Jury 
who had pronounced a Verdict upon the same 
facts in another Case, Willis's Case, 15 vol. 
615. — It is a good ground of Objection to a 
Juror in a criminal Case, that he is one of the 
Grand Jury who found the Bill of Indictment, 
Oates's Case, 10 vol. 1081. — It is no Objection 
to a Juror that some time previously to the 
Trial, a Law-suit was depending between him 
and the Prisoner, Francia's Case, 15 vol. 897. 
— Discussion whether it be an Objection to a 
Juror on a Trial for Misdemeanour, that he 
holds an office of profit under the Crown. 9 
vol. 1057.— Lord Holt holds on the Trial of 
Sir William Parkyns, that it is no cause of 
Challenge to a Juror that he is a Servant of 
the King, 13 vol. 75. — See Mr. Margrave's 
Note on this point, 22 vol. 1038 (note).— 
It is in some respects unreasonable that 
several persons charged in one Indictment 
should be tried by the same Jury, 1 vol. 1050 
(note). — Instance of a Juror being sworn to 
give Evidence in a Cause to the Court and bis 
fellow Jurors, 6 vol. 1012 (note), 18 vol. 123. 
— Instance of Jurors on a Criminal Trial being 
asked on their Oath whether they had been 
applied to by the Prisoner respecting their 
Verdict, 15 vol. 735. — A Jury set aside on 
proof that thay had been tampered with by the 
Prisoner, ibid. ib. — In a Trial for Treason if a 
Juror have a Freehold and Copyhold amounting 
together to 10/. a year, it is a suf^cient quali- 
fication, Townley's Case, 18 vol.348. — 'Affida- 
vits of the Jury were received by the Court on 
a Motion for a New Trial in the Case of Simon 
the Jew, 19 vol. 684. — ^The AfiBdavit of a Jury- 
man with regard to his Sentiments on a point 
of Law is not admissible on a Motion for a 
New Trial, Almon's Case, 20 ^l. 851.— Rea- 
sons against the admission of Affidavits of 
Jurymen to rectify or alter their Verdict, ibid. 
911 (note). — Cases in which the Affidavit of a 
Juryman may be received, ibid. 919.— An 
Affidavit by a Juryman of what he thought or 
intended can never be received, ibid. ib. — Tlje 
Stat. 27 Eliz. c. 7, requiring an Addition to be 
given to the name of every Juror returned on 
the Jury Panel, does not apply to London, 15 
vol. 1323.— On the Execution of a Writ of 
Inquiry in an Action of Scandalum Magnatum 
brought by James, Duke of York (afterwards 
James the Second) against Oates, fifteen Jurors 
were sworn, 10 vol. 129. — Account by Mr. 
Barrington and other Writers of the probable 
reason why no Attaint lies against a Jury for a 
false Verdict in Criminal Cases, 11 vol. 77 
(note). — Upon a default of Jurors in a Case of 
Felony before Commissioners of Oyer and 



QarrrnKTB.'} 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



301 



Terminer, there may be a Tales, but not before 
Commissioners of Gaol Delivery odI^, 13 vol. 
322y ibid. 326. — ^Reason of this distinction^ 
ibid. 326. — Practice respecting the Jury Pro- 
cess under a Commission of Gaol Delivery, 
ibid. ib. — In a Court of Cktol Delivery, if a 
Trial ^es off for defaalt of Jurors there may 
afterwards be a new Jury Panel, though some 
of the Jurors -who first appeared were sworn, 
ibid, ib.— Form in which the Jury deliver their 
Verdict by the Law of Scotland, 11 vol. 92 
(note), ibid. 96 (note). — Manner of forming 
the Jury by the Law of Scotland in criminal 
Cases, 19 vol. Ill (note). — If, after a Special 
Jury bas been struck, the Cause goes off for 
default of Jurors, no new Jury can be struck, 
but the Cause must be tried by the Jury first 
appointed, Franklin's Case, 22 vol. 981 (note), 
ibid. 983.— Instance of the claim of a Jury 
de Medietate Linguae by several Foreigners, 
on their Trial for Murder in 1682, 9 vol. 8. 

JURY PANEL. 

The Copy of the Jury Panel required by 
the Stat, of Will. 3 to be delivered to persons 
accused of High Treason, may be delivered 
before tbe Return of the Venire facias. Rook- 
wood's Case, 13 vol. 152.— Stat. 7 Anne, c. 
21, s. 11, authorizing the delivery of a Copy 
of thft Jury Panel to persons charged with 
Treason or Misprision of Treason, 10 vol. 268 
(note). — ^In a Court of Gaol Delivery, if a Case 
goes off for default of Jurors, the Trial may 
afterwards be had by a new Jury Panel, 
though some of the first Jurors were sworn, 
13 Tol. 326.— A person indicted for Treason 
is entitled to a List of the Jury ten days be- 
fore his Arraignment, 21 vol. 648. — Mode 
adopted in the Case of Lord George Gordon 
of procuring the List from the Sheriff, ibid. ib. 
—Mr. Emlyn says, that it would be reasonable 
to allow a List of the Jury to the Prisoner in 
Cases of Felony, Em. Pref. 1 vol. xxxi. — Mr. 
Justice Foster expresses a doubt whether the 
famishing a Prisoner, in Cases of Treason, 
with a List of tbe Jury is not liable to much 
abuse, 26 vol. 14.~The Stat. 27 Eliz. c. 7, 
requiring an Addition to be given to the name 
of every Juror returned on the Jury Panel, 
does not apply to London, 15 vol. 1323. 

JUS REGIUM. 

Mr. Hargrave's Account of a Pamplilet so 
called, published in 1701, upon the Right of 
the King to alienate the hereditary Estates 
and Revenues of the Crown, 14 vol. 5. 

JUSTICE, COURTS OF. 

Mr. De Lolme's Remarks on the public ad- 
vantages to be derived from the notoriety of the 
Proceedings of Courts of Justice, 30 vol. 1258. 

JUSTICE-CLERK. 

The Justice-Clerk was not originally one of 
the Judges, but only a Clerk of the Justice 
Court, 10 vol. 989 (note).— The earliest Se- 
derunt of Justiciary in which his name is 
mentioned as a Judge, is in 4663, ibid. ib. — 



Mr. Hume's Conjecture as to the mode in 
which this Officer obtained a Seat and Presi- 
dency in the Court, ibid, ib* 

JUSTICES*— See Gaol Delivery: Oyer and 

Terminer, 

JUSTICES OF THE PEACE. 

Justices of the Peace are not Justices of 
Oyer and Terminer within the meaning of 
those Words in a penal Statute, 2 vol. 758.—- 
The authority of Justices of the Peace is de- 
rived not from the Common Law, but from 
Statutes, 12 vol. 1376. — Their powers are 
much larger than those of Conservators of the 
Peace in ancient times, ibid. ib. — Said to be 
an unwarrantable practice in Justices of the 
Peace, under the pretext of considering the 
propriety of bailing a Person charged with 
Murder, to examine particularly the Witnesses 
for the Prosecution, ibid. 998. — Lord Chan-i 
cellor Macclesfield says, that according to 
some old Statutes, Justices of the Peace are to 
be named by the Lord Chancellor and the 
Council, but that the usage was for the Chan* 
cellor alone to name them, 16 vol. 1270. — ^It 
is the duty of Justices of the Peace to attend 
the Assizes, 15 vol. 1421* 

JUSTICIARY. 

Judgments of the Court of Justiciary in 
Scotland are final, and not subject to the Re- 
view of any other Court, 19 vol. 1334. 

JUSTIFICATION. 

Truth is no Justification of a Libel, and 
therefore, in Francklin's Case, Chief Justice 
Raymond would not receive Evidence of the 
Truth of a Statement charged to be libellous, 17 
vol. 658. — Mr. Hamilton's Argument in Peter 
Zenger's Case, tliat Truth is a Justification of 
a Libel, ibid. 700. — See the Opinion of the 
Judges in the House of Lords during the 
Debates on Mr. Fox's Libel Bill, 22 vol. 298. 
— ^Whatever is a Justification in the place 
where the wrongful Act charged is done, ought 
to be a Justification where the Cause is tried> 
20 vol. 232. 

KEEPER OF THE GREAT SEAL. 

It has been doubted whether the Lord 
K,eeper has a power of committing, except in 
a Court of Equity, 12 vol. 1361. 

KENTISH PETITION. 

History of the Kentish Petition to the House 
of Commons in the Reign of William th« 
Third, 14 vol. 895 (note). 

KILLING NO MURDER. 

Harris's Account of the Tract so called, pub« 
lished during the Protectorate, 5 vol. 852 (note). 

KING. 

See Compassing the King's DeaUi; Conquest i 
Dispensing Potoer; Prerogative; Treason, 

Summary of the Prerogatives of the King of 
England, 3 vol, 1023, 1083.-'By the Law of 



302 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



CMlSCElt. 



England, the care of the Defence of the Realm 
is introsled to the King, ibid. 859.—- Means 
afforded by the Law to the King to conduct the 
Defence of the Realm, ibid. 864. — Of the two- 
fold power of the King of England, called *^ Vo- 
luntas in Camera," and " Voluntas per Legem," 
ibid. 861. — ^The King cannot himself impose a 
Fine, but it must be done judicially by his 
Judges, ibid. 129. — ^Though the King is, by the 
Constitution of England, the Fountain of Jus- 
tice, he cannot give Judgment in any Court 
without the assistance of the Judges, ibid, ib., 
5 vol. 991. — The King cannot alter the Law 
without the assistance or consent of Parliament, 

2 vol. 483, 3 vol. 862, 11 vol. 1206. — Discussion 
in the Case of Ship Money of the power of 
the King of England to impose Taxes upon his 
Subjects without the concurrence of Parliament, 

3 vol. 856. — Discussion in the Great Case of 
Impositions of the power of the King, without 
the aid of Parliament, to impose Taxes on 
Merchandize at the Ports, 2 vol. 382. — Mr. 
Hargrave's Remarks in his Introductory Note 
to the Case of Impositions, upon the history of 
the Claim by Kings of England of the Prero- 
gative of imposing Taxes, ibid. 371. — It is a 
Prerogative of the King of England to make 
Proclamations, ibid. 726. — Discussion of the 
pature and extent of this Prerogative in the 
tase of proclamations, ibid. 725. — Sir John 
Davis's Remarks on the King*s Prerogative of 
laying Embargoes, in his Argument in the Great 
Case of Impositions, ibid. 402. — Of the sense 
in which the Ports and Havens of the Realm 
are said to belong to the King, ibid. 474. — It 
is the exclusive Prerogative of the King of 
England to make Money within the Realm, 
and no other Person can do it without a special 
Licence from the Crown, ibid. 116. — Mr. Jus- 
tice Foster's Argument in support of the 
King's Prerogative of Pressing Seamen, 18 
vol. 1331 . — Mr. Hargrave's Note on the King's 
Dispensing Power, 11 vol. 1187 (note). — His 
Reference to Treatises and Cases illustrating 
the Controversy on this subject, ibid. 1190 
(note). — iDiscussion of the subject in the Case 
of Sir Edward Hales, ibid. 1187.- The King 
of England has the whole and sole power of 
pardoning Treason and Felony, 4 vol. 929. — 
The King cannot naturalize an Alien without 
the concurrence of Parliament, ibid. 499. — 
Lord Coke says, that it was resolved by all 
the Judges in Calvin's Case, that if a King 
come to a Kingdom by Conquest, he may alter 
the Laws of that Kingdom, and that until he 
makes the alteration the ancient Laws remain ; 
but if he come to the Kingdom by Descent, 
he cannot alter the Laws without the consent 
of Parliament, 20 vol. 326.— Lord Mansfield 
adopts this Resolution ii^delivering the Judg- 
ment of the Court in the Case of the Island 
of Grenada, ibid. 320.— Difference between a 
xonquered Country and a Colony, with re- 
spect to the power of the King to make new 
Laws or impose Taxes upon the Inhabitants, 
ibid. 326.— Full Discussion in the Argument 
of the Case of the Island of Grenada; respect- 



ing the power of the King to impose Taxes 
on a conquered Country, ibid. 258. — Mr. 
Baron Maseres's Doubts respecting the Doc- 
trine laid down hy Lord Mansfield in the Case 
of the Island of Grenada, ibid. 333.~Mr. 
Nolan's Argument in Governor Picton's Case 
against the power of the King of Great Britain 
to make or continue Laws in a conquered 
Country, which are inconsistent with the funda- 
mental Laws of England, 30 vol. 899.— Dis- 
cussion whether the King of England has the 
power of keeping Guards or Soldiers, for the 
preservation of his Person in time of Peace, 
9 vol. 765. — Argument of Mr. Holt, in the 
Great Case of Monopolies, that the King has 
the power of granting by Charter an exclusive 
Licence to trade with lofidels^ 10 vol. 377. 
— Sir Robert Sawyer*s Argument to the same 
point, ibid. 407.— Sir George Treby's Argu- 
ment in the same Case against this Doctrine, 
ibid. 390. — Mr. Pollexfen's Argument in the 
same Case, that the King cannot impose 
general restrictions on Trade, ibid. 419.— 
Proceedings in 1718 upon the King's Claim to 
a Prerogative riespecting the Education and 
Marriage of the Royal Family, 15 vol. 1195- 
— Opinions of the majority of Judges that 
the King has the Prerogative of ordering the 
Marriage and Education of his Gratid-childreD, 
ibid. 1223.— Mr. Baron Price and Mt. Justice 
Eyre dissent from this Opinion on the point of 
Education, ibid. 1224. — ^Arguments of the 
several Judges upon the subject, ibid. 1206. 
— ^The King's Prerogative is a part of the 
Law of England, 3 vol. 68.— Of the sense 
in which the term "King" is to be under- 
stood when used by Writers on the Law 
of Nations, 20 vol. 289, ibid. 308.— The Body 
natural and Body politic make one indivisible 
Body in the person of the King, 4 vol. 928.— 
Argument of Cook, Solicitor General to the 
Commonwealtli, that the King of England has 
only a limited power to govern by Law, ibid. 
1019.— Argument that the King of England 
is responsible for Offences against the Law, 
ibid. 1034. — In passing Judgment on the Regi- 
cides, Sir O. Bridgman declares, that the people 
of England have not representatively or col- 
lectively any coercive power over the King, 
5 vol. 1226.— Discussion whether persons can 
be punished for adhering to the King de focto 
agamst the King de jvre, 6 vol. 121 (note).— 
It was resolved in Sir Henry Vane's Case, that 
Charles the Second, before his Restoration, 
and not in actual possessioti of the OflSce of 
King, was Kitig both de jure and de factOf 
ibid. 121.— Remarks upon the Statute lUfen* 
7, c. 1, declaring ihat no person for assisting 
a King de facto shall be attainted of Treason, 
ibid. ib. (note).— The King sits in the House 
of Lords in a Legislative and Judicial capacity, 
ibid. 752.— Shiels's Vindication of the Condurt 
of those who refuse to pray for a tytoWicM 
King, 10 vol. 912.— Lord President Brads^ws 
Assertion of the Right of the People of- Eng- 
land to call their Kings to account for MiJCQO- 
duct, in his Address to Charles the First pi«* 



C()KTSN3%I.] 



Wt^ 



'viousiy to passing Sisntenee upon him in the 
High Court of Justice, 4 vol. 1008. — Opinion 
ftf the Judges in the time of James the Second 
that the Kings of England are absolute Sove« 
feigns^ 11 vol, 1198 (note).— See also the Ar- 
|[ument of Sir John Banks CAttorxiey General) 
ID the Great Case of Ship Money, 3 vol. 1022. 
— Mr, Selden says* that the King of England 
is an Emperor, and that the Realm of England 
is an Empire, 15 vol. 1212.— Sir John Scott's 
Account of the Constitutional Character of a 
King of England, 24 vol.243.— « DominuSRex/' 
in pleading, always means the King of England, 
13 vol. 223. — The King may charge or alienate 
those parts of his Revenue in which he has 
an unrestrained Estate of inheritance, 14 vol. 
23, 29. — Mr. Hargrave's Account of a Pamph- 
let on this subject, called '' Jus Regium," pub- 
lished in 1701, 14 vol. 5.-— Remarks upon the 
limitation of the power of the Crown in the earlier 
periods of English History, 22 vol. 448 (note), 

KING'S ADVOCATE. 

Mr. Hume's Account of the Powers and 
Duties of ^he King's Advocate by the Scotch 
Law, 11 vol. 268 (note). 

KING'S BENCH. 

The Court of King*s Bench is the highest 
Court of ordinary Justice in criminal Causes 
within the Realm, and piaramount to the au- 
thority of Justices of Oyer and Terminer and 
Oaol Delivery, Lord Sanquire's Case, 2 vol. 
758 ; see also 3 vol. 306. — ^The Judges of the 
Court of King's Bench are Justices of Oyer 
and Terminer and Gaol Delivery within the 
Stat. 2 and 3 Edw. 3, c. 24, authorizing Jus- 
tices of Oyer and Terminer to proceed against 
Accessories in the County where they are 
accessory, 2 vol. 758. — At Common Law, 
Commissioners of Oyer and Terminer and 
Gaol Delivery could not sit in the same County 
where the Court of King's Bench was sittings 
ibid. 759. — If there be Error in Proceedings on 
the Trial of a Peer in the Court of the Lord 
High Steward, the Judgment may be^eversed 
in the Court of King's Bench, 3 vol. 308. — 
Lord Coke says, that the Court of King's 
Bench is higher thah the Chancery, 3 vol. 
127.— Style of the Court of King's Bench 
during the Commonwealth, 4 vol. 1251 (note). 
— In the Court of King's Bench, the second 
Judge in point of seniority pronounces Sen- 
tence in all criminal matters except High 
Treason, 7 vol. 222. — Opinion of the Judges 
in the House of Lords, in the Case of Hart 
and White, that the Court of King's Bench 
may imprison persons convicted of Crimes 
in that Court in any Gaol in the Kingdom, 
and may also require Sureties for Good Beha- 
viour for a reasonable time^ 30 vol. 1344. 

KING'S COUNSEL. 

Formerly the Attorney General had no Pre- 
audience for any Motions but such as he made 
ior the King, 2 vol. 881 (note). 



THE STAtE TRIALS. ios 

KING'S EVIL. 

Observations on the popular Superstition 



respecting the removal of this Disease by the 
Eoyal touch, 11 vol. 1060 (note). < 

KNIGHT OF THE GARTER. 

Degradation of Edward, Duke of Bucking- 
ham, from the Order of the Garter, 13 Hen. 8, 
1522, 1 vol. 297. 

LANCASHIRE PLOT. 

Minutes from the Crown Office respectiiig 
the Trials at Manchester in 1694 for the Lah- 
cashire Plot, 12 vol. 1284.— Tindal's Account 
of the Plot, ibid. 1265. 

LANERKSHIRE MEN. 

Proceedings in the Conrt of Justiciary 
against several persons of Lanerkshire for 
Treason in harbouring Traitors, and beidg 
Gonperned in the Rebellion of Bothwell Bridge, 
33 Car. 2, 1681, 11 vol. 245.— The Indictment^ 
ibid. ib. — ^They are found Guilty, and Sentence 
of Death is passed upon them, ibid. 295. — 
Lord Fountainhairs Notice of these Proceed- 
ings, ibid. 245 (note). — ^Wodrovf's Account of 
them, ibid. 247 (note). 

LARCENY. 

If a Man steal Goods in one County, and 
carry them into another, it is Larceny in every 
County through v^hich he takes them, 14 vol. 
1006, ibid. 1026. — Under some circiimstancW, 
a man may be guilty of a Larceny in stealing 
his own Goods, 19 vol. 803. — It is of the 
essence of a Larceny that the Goods be taken 
against the will of the Owner, ibid. ib. 

LATIN. 

Mr. Emlyn's Objections to Indictments and 
other Proceedings in Codrts of Justice being 
in the Latin language, Em. Pref. 1 vol. xxix. 
— By Stat. 4 Geo. 2, c. 26, it is enacted, that 
all Proceedings shall be in English, Ibid. ib. 
(note). — When the Proceedings in criminal 
Cases were in Latin, the Indictment wsls read 
to the Phsoner in English before he pleaded, 
6 vol. 132, and ibid. ib. (note). 

LAW. 

Superiority of the English Law not so ob- 
vious in Civil Suits as in Criminal Proceed- 
ings, Em. Pref. xxv. — Mr. Emlyn suggests 
several points in which the I^w of England 
will admit of improvement, ibid. xxix. — The 
Law of England too voluminous, ibid. JlL— 
Laws are not founded upon the presumption that 
mankind will act rightly, but on the apprehen- 
sion of the evil they may do, 8 vol. 45 (note). 
— Blackstone fixes the Year 1679 as the point 
of theoretical perfection of the Law of Eng- 
land, ibid. 242. — Mr. Fox's Reflections upon 
this Remark of Blackstone, ibid. 243. — ^Argu- 
ment on the Origin and Authority of Laws 
in general, 11 vol. 1204. 

LAW AND FACT.— See Jwj/; libel. 
On the Trial of John-Udall for Felony, on 



304 

the Stat. 23 Eliz. c. 2, -in writing a Libel on 
the Queen, the Jury were told by the Court, 
that the only Question of Fact for them to 
consider was, whether the Prisoner wrote the 
Book, and that whether the writing it amount- 
ed to a Felony under the Statute was a Ques- 
tion of Law for the Judges, 1 vol. 1289. — 
Chief Justice Vaughan's Opinion respecting 
the mode in which the Judge ought to direct 
the Jury as to the Law before the Fact is found, 
Bushell's Case, 6 vol. 1008. — Lord North says, 
in Colledge*s Case, that the effect of the Evi- 
dence in Criminal Trials is matter of Law for 
the Judge, but that the truth of the Evidence 
is matter of Fact for the Jury, 8 vol. 710. — Mr. 
Hargrave's Note on the respective provinces of 
the Judge and Jury in deciding matters of Law 
and Fact, ibid. 1013 (note). — By the Law of 
Scotland, Juries had always the right of deciding 
Questions of Law and Fact, 23 vol. 114. — ^Juries 
may, if they please, take upon themselves to 
decide both liiw and Fact, 4 vol. 1284 (note), 
€ vol. 1017 (note), 21 vol. 995. — In Murder, 
the Court are Judges of the Malice and not 
the Jury, Oneby's Case, 17 vol. 49. 

LAW OF NATIONS.— See Qmrter. 

Lord Coke says, that it was resolved by all 
the Judges in Calvin's Case, that if a King 
come to a Kingdom by Conquest, he may alter 
the Laws of that Kingdom, and that until he 
makes the alteration, the ancient Laws of the 
Kingdom remain ; but if he come to the King- 
dom by Descent, he cannot alter the Laws 
without the consent of Parliament, 20 vol. 
326. — ^Lord Mansfield adopts this Resolution 
as Law in delivering the Judgment of the 
Court in the Case of the Island of Grenada, 
ibid. 320. — Mr. Baron Maseres^s Doubts re- 
specting the Doctrine laid down by Lord 
Mansfield in the Case of the Island of Grenada, 
ibid. 333. — Argument that a Law of a Country 
conquered by Great Britain, which is tnalwn 
in se, instantly ceases upon the Conquest, 
30 vol. 741. — ^Mr. Nolan's Argument in Gover- 
nor Picton's Case, against the power of the 
King of Great Britain to make or continue 
Laws in a conquered Country, which are incon- 
sistent with the fundamental Laws of England, 
ibid. 899.— Of the sense in which the Term 
** King" or "Sovereign*' is to be understood 
when used by Writers on the Law of Nations, 
20 vol. 289, ibid. 308. — By the Law of Nations, 
if an Ambassador compass the Death of the 
King in whose Country he is, it is Treason, 2 
vol. 88U — Discussion, in the Case of Golding 
and others, whether persons acting as Privateers 
under a Commission from James the Second, 
after his Abdication, were by the Law of Nations 
Pirates or Enemies, 12 vol. 1269. — ^The Law 
of Nations cannot be altered by the Statutes of 
any particular Kingdom, ibid. 1278. 

LAW OF PARLIAMENT.— See Parlia. 

mentaary Law, 

LEADING QUESTIONS. 
Chief Justice Jefferies, in Rosewell's Case, 



GENERAL INDEX TO ^^^ CMxbcsm;. . 



prevents the Defendant from patting Leading 
Questions to his own Witness, 10 voll 190. — 
Chief Justice Eyre says, in Hardy's Case, , 
that it was contrary to his practice and his 
opinion to put the Words into a Witness's 
mouth, even on Cross-Examination, 24 yoI. 
659, ibid. 755. — ^In criminal Trials in Scot- 
land, leading Questions are not allowed on 
Cross-Examination, ibid. 659 (note). 

LEAGUE. 

Lord Coke's Account of the Leagues which 
by law the King of England may contract 
with an Infidel Prince, 10 vol. 409. 

LEASING-MAKING.— See Sedition. 

Observations on the nature of the Offence 
of Leasing-Making by the Law of Scotland, 
23 vol. 681 . — Distinction between real Sedition 
and verbal Sedition or Leasing-Making, ibid. 
855. — Mr. Hume*8 Remarks npon this Dis* 
tinctioni 33 vol. 124. 

LEGISLATURE. 

In Cases where the intention of the Legis- 
lature is evident, the duty of Courts of Justice 
is, to put the Law into execution, and to leave 
all considerations of inconveniencies to the 
Legislature, 18 vol. 400. 

LEGITIMACY. 

Proceedings relating to the proof of the 
Legitimacy of the Pretender as the Son of 
James the Second, 12 vol. 123. 

LETTERS. 

Letter from the Pope to Henry the Eighth 
respecting a Dispensation for his Marriage 
with Catharine of Arragon, 1 vol. 330. — ^Thc 
Pope's Letter to Henry the Eighth, exhorting 
him to renew his intercourse with Queen 
Catherine, ibid. 352. — Letter from the Arch« 
bishop of York and the Bishop of Durham to 
Henry the Eighth, reporting their Interview 
with Queen Catharine respecting her renun- 
ciation of her Title, ibid. 365.— Letter of 
Queen Catharine to the King shortly before 
her Death, ibid. 368. — Archbishop Cranroer*s 
Letter of Intercession to the King for Anne 
Boleyn, ibid. 41 5. — Letter from the Lieutenant 
of the Tower respecting the deportment of 
Anne 3oleyn on the day of her Death, ibid. 
420.— The Earl of Norihumberiand's Letter 
to Cromwell, denying any Contract of Mar« 
riage between Anne Boleyn and himself, ibid. 
426. — Anne Boleyn's last Letter to the King, 
ibid. ib. — Her Letter to Cromwell in favour . 
of a persecuted Protestant, ibid. 428. — Letter 
of Thomas Howard, Duke of Norfolk, to 
Henry the Eighth, from the Tower, ibid. 456. 
— ^Bishop Thirleby's Letter respecting the 
Duke of Norfolk and his Son, ibid. 465.— The 
Duke of Norfolk's Letter to the Lords of the 
Council after his Examination in the Tower, 
ibid. 466.— Correspondence of the Lady Mary 



CoKTKKW.] 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



205 



(afterwards Queen of England) with the King, 
and the Lord Protector, and the Council, re- 
specting her Religion, ibid. 527. — ^Letter of 
Edward the Sixth to the Lady Mary, ibid. 533. 
— Correspondence between Stephen Gardiner, 
Bishop of Winchester, and the Lord Pro- 
tector respecting the continuance of certain 
Popish Ceremonies, ibid, 557. — Queen Mary's 
Letter to the Lords of the Council on the 
Death of Edward the Sixth, ibid. 7t7.— 
Answer of the Lords of the Council thereto, 
ibid. 718. — ^Lady Jane Grey's Letter to her 
Father, ibid. 725. — ^Her Letter to her Sister, 
written at the end of a Greek Testament the 
night before her Execution, ibid. 726. — ^Arch- 
bishop Cranmer's Letter to Queen Mary on 
his Citation to appear at Rome, ibid. 823. — 
Letter from Archibald Douglas to Mary, Queen 
of Scots, respecting the Death of Damley, 
ibid. 953. — Correspondence between Mary, 
Queen of Scots, and Anthony Babington, re- 
specting .the Conspiracy against Queen Eliza- 
beth, ibid. 1174.— Singular Letter of Mary, 
Queen of Scots, to Queen Elizabeth, from 
Murdin's State Papers, ibid. 1202 (note).— 
Letter from Sir Francis Walsingham to Sir 
Amias Paulett, ibid. 1241 (note).-— Queen 
Elizabeth's Letter to Sir Amias Paulett, ibid. 
1206. — Her Letter to the King of Scotland 
(afterwards James the First) upon being in- 
formed of the Execution of Mary, ibid. 1211. 
— ^James's Letter to Queen Elizabeth on behalf 
of John Udall, a Puritan Minister, ibid. 1314. 
— Sir Walter Raleigh's Letter to James the 
First the night before his Execution, 2 vol. 38. 
—His Letter to his Wife, ibid. 39.— Letters 
of Sir Dudley Carleton respecting Sir Walter 
Raleigh's Plot, ibid. 47.— Letter to Lord 
Monteagle, discovering the Gunpowder Plot, 
ibid. 197. — ^Letter of James the First to Arch- 
bishop Abbot, respecting the Divorce in the 
Case of the Countess of Essex, ibid. 860. — 
Letters of Sir Francis Bacon to the King re- 
specting Peacham's Case, ibid. 871. — Mr. St. 
John's Letter to the Mayor of Marlborough, 
respecting Benevolences, ibid. 900. — Lord 
Bacon's Letter to King James some years 
after the Proceedings in Parliament against 
him, ibid. 1113 (note). — ^Letter of Charles the 
First to the Judges respecting Ship-Money, 3 
vol. 842.— The Earl of Strafford^s Jitter to 
.the King after the passing of the Bill of At- 
tainder against him, ibid. 1516. — ^The King*s 
Letter to the Lords on behalf of Lord Strafford, 
ibid. 1520. — ^Letter to Colonel Penruddock 
from his Lady, the night before his Execution, 
6 vol. 783.— His Answer thereto, ibid. ib. — 
Letters of Charles the Second from Breda 
immediately before the Restoration, ibid. 947. 
— Sir Francis North's Letter to Siir Leoline 
Jenkins reporting the Examination of Bedloe 
respecting the Popish Plot, taken by him at 
Bristol, 6 vol. 1496.— Letters of Sir Robert 
Atkyns respecting the Trial of Lord William 
Russel, 9 vol. 719. — ^Letter to a Member of 
the House of Commons on the Case of the 
£vl of Daiiby^ It tqI, 634,^ir Robert 



Howard's Letter, containing an Account of 
the Revenue, as it. was left by the Earl of 
Danby in 1679, ibid. 694.— Letter of the 
Mayor of Lyme to James the Second, an- 
nouncing the Landing of the Duke of Mon- 
mouth, ibid. 1042 (note). — Letter of the Duke 
of Monmouth, written in Holland shortly be- 
fore his Expedition against England, ibid. 
1096. — Letter of the Princess of Orange to 
Archbishop Sancroft previous to the Revolu- 
tion, 12 vol. 433.— Copy of the Archbishop's 
Answer, ibid. 434. — Dr. Stanley's Letters to 
the Archbishop previous to the Revolution, 
ibid. 436. — Letter of Sir John Fenwick to his 
Lady on his being arrested, 13 vol. 627. — Mr. 
Locke's Letter to Sir Francis Masham on the 
Execution of Aikenhead in Scotland for deny- 
ing the Doctrine of the Trinity, ibid. 928. — 
The Hertford Letter, containing Remarks upon 
the Trial of Spencer Cowper and others for 
the Murder of Sarah Stout, ibid. 1202. — Reply 
to the Hertford Letter, ibid. 1217.— Letter 
written by Lord Kenmure to a Nobleman the 
day before his Execution, 15 vol. 803. — Letter 
written by Sir Littleton Powis to Lord Chan- 
cellor Macclesfield after the Summer Circuit 
in 1719, ibid. 1414 — ^The Earl of Kilmarnock's 
Letter to his Son immediately before his Ex- 
ecution, 18 vol. 516. — ^Lord President Forbes's 
Letter to Lord Lovat previously to his openly 
joining the Pretender, ibid. 709 (note). — Lord 
Lovat's Answer thereto, ibid. 712. — His Letter 
to the young Pretender, ibid. 751. — His Letter 
to the Laird of Lochiel, ibid. 754. — Corres- 
pondence between him and his Sop, ibid. 
759, 766. — His Letter to his Son, written the 
day before his Execution, ibid. 843. — ^Junius's 
celebrated Letter to the King, as set out in 
the Information against John Almon, 20 vol. 
805. — Mr. Justice Foster's Letter to Chief 
Baron Parker on the subject of traversing a 
Return to a Writ of Habeas Corpus, ibid. 
1378.— The Duke of Richmond's Letter to 
Colonel Sharman, on Parliamentary Reform, 
24 vol. 1048. — Mr. Erskine*s Letter to a Gen- 
tleman of the Bar in Ireland on the Power 
of Courts of Justice to imprison for Contempts, 
27 yol. 1019.— Lord Erskine's Letter, explain- 
ing his Reasons for cancelling his Retainer by 
the Proclamation Society in WilHams's Case, 
26 vol. 714 (note). — Letter from Robert Em- 
mett to Mr. Curran previously to his Trial, 28 
vol. 1100 (note). 

LETTERS PATENT. 

Lord Holt says, in the Earl of Banbury's 
Case, that Titles of Honour began to be 
created by Letters Patent in the time of 
Richard the Second, 12 vol. 1200.— The King 
cannot countermand his Letters Patent creat- 
ing a Dignity, ibid. 1195. — Questions respect- 
ing the effect or extent of the King's Letters 
Patent can only be tried in the King's Courts 
in England, 20 vol. 230. — It is said to be un- 
lawful to collect Money for Charity, or other 
purposes, without Letters Patent, 15 vol. HlS^ 
ibidi ib. (QOte). See Bendky, wmm. ; 



206 



GENERAL JNDEX TO 



{;Mt8CS|«(i« 



LEVYING WAR.— See Confessing the Bng's 
Death; Treaso7i. 

Sir Edward Coke says, in the Case of the 
Barls of Essex and Southampton, that if a 
Subject continues an armed Power after the 
King has commanded him upon his allegiance 
to dissolve it, it is a Levying War and High 
Treason, 1 vol. 1337. — Opinion of the two 
Chief Justices and the Chief Baron, on the 
Trial of the Earls of Essex and Southampton 
in the House of Lords, that when a Subject 
attempts to put himself into such force that 
the King may not be able to resist him, and 
thus to compel the King to govern otherwise 
than he wishes, it is a Iievying War against 
the King, ibid. 1355.— If several persons con- 
spire to levy War, and only some of them 
appear in Arms, it is Treason in all, 5 vol. 
983. — It was resolved at a Meeting of the 
Judges in 1663, that a Conspiracy to levy 
War is an Overt Act of Compassing the King's 
Death, though such a Conspiracy is not Trea- 
son in the Article of Levying War, ibid. 984 ; 
^ee also 13 vol. 61, 23 vol. 1194.-^In 
Layer's Case this was said to have been de* 
cided a hundred times, 16 vol. 312. — It was 
also resolved, at the meeting of the Judges in 
1663, that if War be actually levied the parties 
may be indicted for Compassing the King's 
Death, and the Levying War may be laid as 
an Overt Act, 5 vol. 984. — ^Lord Mansfield 
says, in Dr. Hensey's Case, that Levying War 
is an Overt Act of Compassing the fong's 
Death, 19 vol. 1344. — Mr. Justice Foster says, 
that every Conspiracy to levy War, for the 
purpose of dethroning or imprisoning the King, 
or to oblige him to remove evil Councillors, 
or to alter his measures of Government, is an 
Overt Act of Compassing the King's Death, 
21 vol. 490. — Insurrections for public and 
general purposes amount to Levying War 
within the Statute of Treasons, ibid. ib. — It 
was resolved in Messenger's Case, that an In- 
surrection with intend to pull down Bawdy 
Houses in general, or to break open Prisons 
in general and let out Prisoners, was a Levying 
War within the Statute, 6 vol. 901. — In Dam* 
maree's Case it was held, that the Insurrection 
for the purpose of destroying all Meeting 
Houses, after Dr. Sacheverell's Trial, was a 
Levying War, 15 vol. 605, — Mr, Luders's 
Observations upon the doctrine of Constructive 
Levying of War, contained in these and other 
similar Cases, 6 vol. 902, 15 vol. 522. — Mr. 
Wetherell's adlusion to the Cases establishing 
the doctrine of Constructive Levying War, in 
his Defence of Watson, 32 vol. 431. See also 
the Arguments of Mr. Cross and Mr. Denman 
in Defence of Brandreth, on his Trial for 
High Treason at Derby, ibid. 865, 889.*-Lord 
Hale says, that in order to constitute a Levy- 
ing of War amounting to High Treason, there 
must be a Species BeUif 15 vol. 525 (note). — 
Lord Mansfield, in his Charge to the Jury on 
the Trial of Lord George Gordon, says, that 

the Covurt Qt IMl'^'s fi^Dich were uxwunonsly 



of opinion, that an attempt by a multitude 
with violence to force the repeal of a Statute, 
was a Levying of War and Treason, ibid. 52T 
(note), ibid. 606 Tnote), 21 vol. 644.— Volun-i 
tarily joining with Kebels in any Act of Re- 
bellion is a Levying of War, though the party 
be ignorant of the intent, 15*yol. TOl, 7<& 
(not^.—Holding a Castle or Fort against ^e 
king or his Troops, if actual force be used to 
keep possession, is Levying War, 24 vol. 260 
(note). — ^Discussion whether a mere Detainer of 
a C astle or Fortress, by shutting the Gates agai nst 
the King or his Troops, without any other force 
from within, be a levying of War^ ibid. ib« 

LEX ET CONSUETUDO PARLIAMENTI. 

See ParUamentary Law, 

LIBEL. 

Proceedings against John Udall lor Felony 
on the Stat. 23 Eliz. c. 2, in publishing a Libel 
upon Queen Elizabeth, 1 vol. 1277. — Tlie Jury 
were told by the Court in that Case, that the 
only matter of fact for their consideratkn 
was, whether the Defendant was the Author 
of tlie Libel, and that whether the Writing it 
was a Libel wa^ a Question of Law for the 
Court, ibid. 1289.*- Sir Edward Coke says, \n 
Wraynham's Case, that a Libel upon a dead 
person was censurable in the Star Chamber, 
** for Justice lives, though the party be dead," 
2 vol. 1073. — Precedents of Prosecutions for 
Libels on the Judges, contained in Petitions 
to the Crown against them, ibid. 1074. — Cruel 
Sentence of the Star Chamber in 1630 against 
Dr. XiCigbton, for a Libel upon the King and 
the Church of England, 3 vol. 385, — Opinioo 
of the Judges in 1637 that a party could not 
be punished for labels contained in a Bill in 
the Court of Star Chamber, ibid. 714. — Mr. 
Prynne's Summary History of the Law of 
I^ibels, ibid. 747. — It ws|s said by Chief Juv 
tice Scroggs, in the Case of Benjamin Harris, 
to have been decided by all the Judges that 
Books containing Libels on publie or pnvate 
persons maybe seized, 7 vol. 929. — Said to 
have been determined by all the Judges in 
the Reign of Charles the Secondf that it was 
unlawful to publish any intelligence of a 
public nature without licence from the King 
or his Ministers, ibid. 929, 1114, 1127. — 
On the Trial of Elizabeth Cellier for Libel, 
the Jury were not permitted to take the libel- 
lous Work out of Court with them when they 
retired to consider their Vetdict,^ without the 
Consent of the Defendant, the Judge inform- 
ing them, that without such Consent, it could 
not by law be done, ibid. 1207.— On Fit»- 
hanis's Trial, Chief Justice Pemberton said, 
that the Defendant was entitled to have the 
whole Work containing the Libels lead in 
Evidence to Uie Jury, and not merely the 
Clauses set out in the Indictment, 8 voL 356. 
—Frequency of Prosecutions for Libel at the 
end of the Reign of Charles (he SecQ&d, 10 
vol. 125 (note). ^Discussion in the Case of 

the Seven Bishops whether the puUieatitQ of 



Cfl!HTBJrr8.j 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



ao7 



a Seditious Libel is a Breach of the Peace, 
12 Tol. 225. — The Court of Common Pleas 
were unanimously of opinion, in the Case of 
John Wilkes, that a Libel is not a Breach of 
the Peace, 19 vol. 990. — Reasons why a Libel 
is not a Breach of the Peace, in a Protest 
against a Resolution of the House of Xjords in 
1763, that Privilege of Parliament does not 
extend to Cases of Libel, ibid. '995. — Send- 
ing a libellous Letter by the Post was held, in 
the Case of the Seven Bishops, to be a Publi- 
cation, though it was seen by nob'bdy but the 
Writer and the person to whom it was sent, 
12 yol. 330, 333. — ^Discussion of this Subject, 
ibid. ib. — In the Case of Williams of Essex, 
the mere writing a libellous Paper, though it 
was immediately sealed up, and was never out 
of the custody of the Writer, was held to be 
a Publicatiop, ibid. 328 (note). — Discussion 
in the Case of the Seven Bishops whether a 
libel written in Surrey, but acknowledged by 
the Defendants in Middlesex, is Evidence of 
jpublication in Middlesex, ibid. 322. — If a 
ipian copoposes a Libel in Surrey, and there 
wrees with a Printer to print it in London, 
'3us i^ a Publication by the Writer in London, 
Tutchin's Case, 14 vol. 1118.— Selling a Libel 
in a Shop by a Servant is prim& facie Evidence 
of a Publication by the Master, Almpn's Case, 
20 vpl. 838, 839.— In Tutchin's Case, Lord 
Holt distinctly leaves the Question of Libel or 
no Libel to the Jury, 14 vol. 1128. — Mr. 
Erskine's Remarks upon Lord Holt's Charge 
in Tutchin's Case, in his Speech for the Dean 
of St. Asaph, 21 vol. 1015. — Argunients of 
Mr. Ford and^ Mr. Pratt (afterwards Lord 
Camden) on Owen's Trial for a Libel in 1752, 
that tbe Jury are to judge of the intention of 
the Defendant in Cases of Libel, 18 vol. 
1223, ibid. 1227.— See Mr. Erskine's Argu- 
ment on the same Subject in the Case of 
the Dean of St. Asaph, 21 vol. 971.— 
Opinion of the Judges in the House of 
^rds darinf: the Debates on the Libel Act, 
that the criminal intention charged on the De- 
fendant in Cases of Libel is generally matter 
of form, and requires no proof on the part of 
the prosecution, 22 vol. 300. — Mr. Erskine's 
Argument in Perry's Case, that since the pass- 
ing of tbe Libel Act, the intention of tbe De- 
fendant in Cases of Libel is material, ibid. 
999. — His celebrated Argument in Cuthell's 
Case, on the necessity of showing a Criminal 
intention in order to make a party criminally 
responsible for th^ publication of a Libel, 27 
vol. 660. — In a cnminal Prosecution for a 
Libel, the truth of the matter stated in the 
libel is quite immaterial, and therefore, in 
Francklin's Case, Chief Justice Raymond 
would not admit Evidence of the truth of the 
Statements charged to be libellous, 17 vol. 
658. — ^Argumept of Mr. Hamilton, in Peter 
Zepger's Case, that the truth of a Libel mav 
be given in Evidence as a Justification, ibia. 
700. — Opinion of the Judges in the House of 
Lords, during the Debates on the Libel Act 
JA 179if Mi iR crijpipajl ProseoMtionS; tfie 

— - — mF' 



I 



truth of the libellous matter charged is quite 
immaterial, 22 vol. 298. — In Finerty's Case in 
Ireland, in 1797, the Court refused to admit 
Evidence of the truth of a Libel, 26 vol. 1008. 
— Alleged meaning of the word <* false," in 
an Indictment for Libel, ibid, ib., 22 vol. 298. 
— In Francklin's Case, Sir Philip Yorke (At- 
torney General) asserts it to be for the deter- 
mination of the Court whether the scandalous 
matter charged amounts to a Libel, 17 vol, 
669. — Chief Justice Raymond adopts this 
Doctrine in his Charge to the Jury in' that 
Case, ibid. 672.— Lofd Mansfield admits, in 
his Judgment in Woodfall's Case, that in all 
Prosecutions for Libeltried before him, he told 
the Jury that the effect of the Paper charged 
to be libellous was a matter of Law, and not 
for them to exercise a judgment upon, 20 vol, 
913, 918. — He states this Doctrine to be un* 
questionably the Law, ibid. 920. — Questions 
proposed by Lord Camden to Lord Mansfield 
respecting Uiis Doctrine, ibid. 921. — Reference 
to Pamphlets and Treatises impugning this 
Doctrine, ibid. 922. — Paper circulated oy the 
Constitutional Association in 1783 on the 
Powers and Duties of Juries, 21 vol* 851. — 
Mr. Erskine's Argument, in the Case of the 
Dean of St. Asaph, that the Question of Libel 
or not Libel was a Question of fact for the 
Jury, ibid. 922. — Arguments of Mr. Beara-oft 
in Reply -to this Doctrine, ibid. 935. — ^Mr. 
Erskine's Argument in support of the same 
Doctrine on a Motion for a new Trial, ibid. 
971. — Lord Mansfield's Judgment in that Case, 
denying the power of Juries in Cases of Libel 
to judge of more than the fact of Publication, 
ibid. 1033. — Mr. Justice Willes was of opinion, 
ill the Case of the Dean of St. Asaph, that upon 
the general Issue on an Indictment or Inform- 
ation for Libel, the Jury had the power and 
the right to examine the criminality or inno- 
cence of the Paper charged as a Libel, ibid. 
1040. — Proceedings in the House of Lords on 
the passing of the Libel Act, 22 vol. 294. — 
Opinion of the Judges, delivered in the House 
of Lords on that occasion, upon the rights and 
duties of Juries by the Common Law in Cases 
of Libel, ibid. 297.— The Libel Act, ibid. . 
306. — By the Law of Scotland, Juries have 
always had the power of judging of the Law 
ai well as of the Fact, in Cases of Libel, 23 
vol. 114, — Lord Ellenborough says, that be- 
fore the Libel Act was passed, he never doubt- 
ed that the Jury had a riglit in Cases of Libel 
to judge of the tendency of the whole Publi- 
cation, 29 vol. 49. — Reference to Cases an4 
Authorities respecting the Jurisdictionof Courts 
of Common Law to punish blasphemous and . 
obscene Libels, 17 vol. 157 (note).— Judgment 
of the Court of King's Bench in Curll's Case, 
that the Publication of an obscene Libel is a 
temporal Offence, and cognizable by Courts 
of Law, ibid. 160.— Lor^ Holt, in Read's 
Case, expressed his Opinion that such an 
Ofifenpe was cognizable only in the Ecclesiasti- 
cal Courts, ibid. 157 (note).— Mr. Bayley's 

OpioioDj inWiUiao^s's Ciise^tbjiitaUasphQmoys 



idB 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



[MlSCXLt* 



Libel mi(y be prosecuted at Common Law, 26 
vol. 654.-»The word Libel is a term of Art, 
and designates an Offence known by the Law 
of England, 19 vol. 989. — Doubts whether the 
word Libel always means, in legal language, 
an Offence, 17 vol. 159. — Lord Ellenborough 
Kolds, that a Publication tending to bring the 
Government into disgrace by means of ridicule 
is a Libel, 29 vol. 49. — ^Where a Libel is spe- 
cifically pointed against one of a body of per- 
sons, without naming such person, or distin- 
guishing him from l£e others, it is a Libel 
upon the whole body, Hatchard's Case, 32 vol. 
710. — Ht, Clifford's Remarks on the Law of 
Libel previously to the passing of the Libel 
Act, and on the meaning and object of that 
Act, in his Defence of the Editor of the Inde- 

Eendent Whig, for a Libel on Lord Ellen- 
orough and the Administration of Justice, 
30 vol. 1250. — ^Upon an Information for a 
Libel of and concerning the King's Govern- 
ment and the employment of his Troops (set- 
ting forth the Libel verbatim) the words ** of 
and concerning '' are a sufficient introduction 
of the matter contained in the Libel, and a 
sufficient Averment that it was written of and 
concerning the King's Government and the 
employment of his Troops, Home's Case, 20 
▼ol. 774. — Where the Writing is clearly libel- 
lous in itself, all explanatory Averments are 
surplusage, ibid. 792. — ^Where the Libel does 
not in itself contain the Crime, without ex- 
trinsic aid, such extrinsic matter must be 
put upon the Record by Averments; if 
new matter, by way of introduction ; if mat- 
ter of explanation only, by way of innuendo, 
ibid. 793. — This Doctrine, illustrated at large 
by Chief Justice De Grey, in his Judgment in 
Home's Case, ibid. 792 to 797. — Proclamation 
of Queen Anne against the publication of irre- 
ligious and seditious Libels, 15 vol. 359. — 
In Uie Case of Plunkett v. Cobbett, Lord Ellen- 
borough held, that in an Action for Libel, seve- 
ral Publications might be proved in order to 
show that the Libel had not been published by 
mistake, but deliberately and in the way of 
business, 29 vol.69 (note). — For Trials of Libels 
of various kinds in the State Trials, see Almon, 
John, 20 vol. 803 — Anderton, William, 12 vol. 
1245— Baillie, David, 14 vol. 1035--Baillie, 
Captain Thomas, 21 vol. 1 — Balmerino, John, 
Lord, 3 vol. 592 — Bamardiston, Sir Samuel, 6 
vol. 1063 — Bastwick, Dr. John, 3 vol. 711 — 
Baxter, Richard, 1 1 vol. 493— Bedford, Earl of, 
3 vol. 387 — Brewster, Thomas, 6 vol. 513— 
Callender, James Thompson, 23 vol. 79— -Carr, 
Henry, 7 vol. 1111— Cellier, Elizabeth, 7 vol. 
1043— Cobbett, William, 29 vol, 1— Cotton, 
Sir Robert, 3 vol. 387 — Curll, Edmund, 17 vol, 
153— Curtis, Jane, 7 vol. 959 — Cuthell, John, 
27 vol. 641— Dangerfield, Thomas, 7 vol. 790 
-i-Drakard, John, 31 vol. 495— Drake, Wil- 
liam, 5 vol. 1363 — ^Draper, Edward Alured, 
30 vol. 959— Duffin, Patrick William, 22 vol. 
317 — Earberry, — , 20 vol.853 — Eaton, Daniel 
Isaac, 22 vol. 753, 785, 31 vol. 927— Finerty, 
Peter, 26 voU 901— 'JFitzpatrick, Hugh, 31 yol. 



:^1 



1169— Floyde, Edward, 2 vol. 1153— Frandc- 
lin, Richard, 17 vol. 625 — Frend, William, 22 
vol. 523— Fuller, William, 14 vol. 517— Gor- 
don, Lord George, 21 vol. 485-i-Harris, Benja- 
min, 7 vol. 925 — Hatchard, John, 32 vol. 673 — 
Holt, Daniel, 22 vol. 1189 — Johnson, Robert, 
20 vol. 81 — ^Johnson, Samuel, 11 vol. 1339 — 
Keach, Benjamin, 6 vol. 701 — ^Leighton, Alex- 
ander, 3 vol. 383— Lilbura, John, ibid. 1315 
— Matthew.o, John, 15 vol. 1323 — ^Miller, 
John, 20 vol. 869 — Monntague, Richard, 2 
vol. 1258— Owen, William, 18 vol. 1203 — 
Paine, Thomas, 22 vol. 357— Peltier, Jean, 
28 vol. 529— Perry, James, 22 vol. 953 — 
Prynne, William, 3 vol. 562 — Read, — ,17 vol. 
157 — Reeves, John, 26 vol. 529 — ^Rowan, 
Archibald Hamilton, 22 vol. 1033 — St. John, 
Oliver, 2 vol. 899— Seven Bishops, 12 vol. 
183 — Shipley, William Davies, 21 vol. 847 — 
Smith, Francis, 7 vol. 931 — Stockdale, John, 
22 vol. 237 — ^Thompson, Nathaniel, 8 vol. 
1359 — ^Tooke, John Home, 20 vol. 651 — 
Troy, John Thomas, 29 vol. 503— Tutcbin, .;^ 
John, 14 vol. 1095 — ^Tytler, James, 23 vol. 1 
— Vane, Sir Henry, 3 vol. 1442 — ^Vint, John 
27 vol. 627— Wakefield, Gilbert, ibid. 679— 
White, Henry, 30 vol. 1131— Whyte, Alex- 
ander, 22 vol. 1238 — ^Wilkes, John, 19 vol. 
981 — Williams, Thomas, 26 vol. 653— Winter- 
botham, William, 22 vol.823 — ^Wraynham, Mr. 
2 vol. 1059 — Zenger, John Peter, 17 vol.675. 

LIBERTY OF CONSCIENCE. 

Instructions of James the Second to the 
Judges previously to their going the Circuit to 
support the Declaration for Liberty of Con- 
science, 12 vol. 189 (note). 

LIBERTY OF THE PRESS.— See JUbel. 

It was said by Chief Justice Scroggs on the 
Trial of Benjamin Carr for Libel to have been 
determined by all the Judges that it was illegal 
to print or publish any News-Books or Pamph- 
lets of News whatsoever without authority, 7 
vol. 1127.— Sir Philip Yorke's Remarks on the 
legal meaning of the Liberty of the Press, 17 
vol. 670. — ^The Liberty of the Press is a legal, 
not a licentious liberty, ibid. 675. — Arguments 
of Mr. Hamilton, in Peter Zenger's Case, in 
favour of the Liberty of the Press, ibid. 707. 
— Lord Mansfield's Account of the Dberty of 
the Press, in his Judgment in Woodfall's Case, 
20 vol. 903. — Mr. Erskine's Argument for the 
Liberty of the Press in the Case of Thomas 
Paine, 22 vol. 414. — ^Arguments of Mr. Hag- 
gart for the Liberty of the Press, on the Trial 
of Fyshe Palmer for Sedition, in the Court of 
Justiciary in Scotland, 23 vol. 276.— Mr. 
Erskine's Account of the principles by which 
the Liberty of the Press on Questions of Re- 
ligion should be regulated, in his Speech for 
the Prosecution in Williams's C^e, 26 vol. 
662. — Mr. Clifford's Argument for the Liberty 
of the Press in discussing the Proceedings of 
Courts of Justice, in his Speech in Defence of 
the Editors of the Independent Whig, 30 vol. 
1256.«-Lord EUenborough's Remws upon 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



CoN*rBNT6.3 

the liberty of the Press^ 31 vol. 408. — Lord 
Camden says, in delivering the Judgment of 
the Court in the Case of Entick v. Carrington, 
that unjust Acquittals in Cases of Libel are 
fatal to the Liberty of the Press, 19 vol. 1074. 
—Mr. Mackintosh's Remarks, in his Defence 
of Peltier, upon the influence of the Liberty 
of the Press upon the prosperity of England 
at several periods of our history, 28 vol. 595. 

LIJBERTY OF SPEECH.— See Elliott, Sir 

John. 

Reasons why Liberty of Speech in Parlia- 
Bient ought to be allowed, 3 vol. 319. 

LIBERTY OF THE SUBJECT. 
See Petition of Rights. 

The Law of England is peculiarly careful of 
the Liberty of the Subject, Em. Pref. t vol. 
xxvi. — Mr. Emlyn*s Enumeration of the Pro- 
visions made by the Law of England for secur- 
ing the Liberty of the Subject, ibid. ib. — Pro- 
ceedings in Parliament respecting the Liberty 
of the Subject in 1627, previously to the Peti- 
tion of Rights, 3 vol. 59. — Resolutions of the 
House of Commons against the power of the 
King -or Privy Council to imprison a Subject 
without a' cause expressed upon the Warrant 
of Commitment, ibid. 82.^Conference between 
the two Houses of Parliament on this subject, 
ibid. 83. — ^Arguments of the Managers of the 
House of Commons at the Conference in 
favour of the Liberty of the Subject, ibid. 
85. — ^Ancient Statutes in favour of the Liberty 
of the Subject, ibid. 87.— Sir Edward Cokeys 
Nine General Reasons for the Liberty of the 
Subject, 5 vol. 403. 

LICENCE. 

Discussion in the Great Case of Monopolies, 
whether an Action could be maintained by the 
East-India Company against a Merchant for 
trading to India without their Licence, or a 
^ Licence from the Crown, 10 vol. 371. — ^Argu- 
" ment of Mr. Holt in tliat Case, that British 
Subjects cannot trade with Pagans without a 
Licence from the King, ibid. 375. — Argument 
of the Solicitor General (Finch) to the same 
effect, ibid. 407. — Mr. Holt's Argument in the 
same Case, that the King has the power of 
granting by Charter an exclusive Licence to 
trade with Infidels, ibid. 377.—- Sir Robert 
Sawyer's Argument to the same, point, ibid. 
469.— Sir George Treby's Argument against 
the Doctrine that it is not lawful to trade with 
Infidels without a Licence from the King, 
ibid. 390. — ^Mr. PoUexfen's Argument against 
it, ibid. 440. — ^Distinction between a Franchise 
and a Licence, ibid. 402. 

LIMITATION. 

By the Statute of Limitations, if an Action 
for Adultery be laid in Case, the Limitation will 
be six years, if laid in Tirespass, four years, 12 
vol. 929 (note). — ^There i^ no Limitation witli 
respect to time in criminal Prosecutions, 4 vol. 
830 (note). 

VOL. XXXIV. * 



S09 



LITURGY.*^ee Comtnon-Prayer Bw^ 

LOANS.'— See Commistion of Loam, 

Mr. Hakewiirs Account, in his Argument in 
the Great Case of Impositions, of an Invention 
to raise supplies by way of a pretended Loan 
from the Merchants, practised by Edward the 
Third, 2 vol. 439.— Mr. Yelverton's Allusion 
to Loans in his Argument in the same Case, 
ibid. 485. — Mr. St. John's Reference to Loans 
raised in ancient times by Kings of England 
for the Defence of the Realm, 3 vol. 884.^ 
Loans were abolished by the Petition of RightSf 
ibid. 224. 

LOLLARDS. 

See Wickhffe, John, 1 vol 66 ; Sautre, Wil* 
Ham, ibid. 163; Badby, John, ibid. 219; 
Thorpe, William, ibid. 175; Cobham, Lord, 
ibid. 225. 

LONDON. 

Accounts of the Great Fire of London from 
Burnet, Clarendon, and other Historians, with 
Remarks on the question whether it was acci- 
dental or designed, 6 vol. 807 (note).— The 
House of Commons appoint a Committee to 
inquire into the Causes of the Fire, ibid. 809. 
— Keportof the Committee of the Examinations 
taken before them, ibid. 813. — Further Evi- 
dence given to the (Committee, but not reported 
by them to the House, ibid. 839.— The Fire 
was ascribed to the Papists by Lord Notting- 
ham, in passing Judgment on Lord Stafford, 7 
vol. 1 556, — Proceedings on an Information ia 
the nature of a Quo Warranto in the King's 
Bench against the City of London, 33-35 Car. 
2, 1681-1683, 8 vol. 1039.--Abstract of the 
Pleadings, ibid.ib— The Record, ibid. 128/. 
— ^Argument of Finch, Solicitor General, foir 
the Crown, ibid. 1087. — Argument of Sir 
George Treby, Recorder of London, for the 
City, ibid. 1099. — ^Argument of Sir Robert 
Sawyer, Attorney General, for the Crown^ 
ibid. 1147. — ^Argument of Mr. Pollexfen for 
the City, ibid. 1213.— Judgment given for the 
King, ibid. 1264. — ^Petition of the Lord-Mmyor, 
Aldermen, and Common Council^ to the King^ 
ibid. 1273.— The King's Answer to the Peti- 
tion delivered by Lord Keeper North, offering 
to stay the Judgment against the City on cer- 
tain conditions, ibid. 1274. — ^The City refuse 
to comply with the conditions, and Judgment 
is entered up for the Crown, ibid. 1283.— 
James the Second restores the Charter, ibid, 
ib. 1276 (note). — Account of, and Observations 
upon this Proceeding, by Burnet, North, and 
other Historians, ibid. 1039 (note).— Sir John 
Hawles's Remarks on these ProoeedingSi ibid. 
1347. — Reference to ancient Treatises on the 
Liberties and Privileges of the City of London 
in the Election of their Officers, 9 voU 298 
(note). — It was held in Lord Russel's Trial in 
London to be no Objection to a Juror that 
he had no freehold within the City, 9 vol. 591* 
— Sir John Hawles's Remarks upon this De* 
cision, ibid. 797.— The Stat. 27 EUx. c. 7, r^ 
P 



filO 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



EMi 



quiring an AMtfioti to be given to the nadleof 
every Jaror returned on the Jury Panel| does 
not apply to Loudon, 15 vol. 1323. 

LONDON CORRESPONDING SOCIETY. 

Account of the Nature and Objects of the 
Society as detailed in Evidence on the Trial of 
David Downte for Treason, 24 vol. 21. 

LONDON GAZETTE. 

' On the Trial of Captain Quekh and oihera 
for Piracy, the London Gazette was admitted 
to prove an Alliance between England and 
Portugal, and it was said to have been often 
allowed as good Evidence, 14 vol. 1084.— -The 
-Gazette is Evidence of all Acts of State, and 
the production of it is sufficient to prove an 
vAverment in an Information that certain Ad- 
dresses have been presented to the King, be» 
cause being received by the King in his public 
capacity, they become Acts of State, Holt's 
Case, 21 vol. 1213 (note). 

LORD CHANCELLOR. 

Form of the Oath administered to Michael 
Be la Pole, Earl of Suffolk, on the Great 
Seal being delivered to him, 1 vol. 91. — Form 
of the Lonl Chancellor's Oath, 16 vol. 785. — 
The Statute 12 Ric. 2, c. 2, prescribing an Oath 
to the Lord Chancellor and other Officers, ibid. 
827. — In practice the Lord Chancellor has the 
sole nomination of Justices of the Peace, though 
there are some old Statutes which state the 
nomination to be by the Chancellor and the 
Council, ibid. 1270. — It has been doubted 
whether a Lord Chancellor has a power of 
Commitment, except in a Court of Equity, 12 
▼01.1361. 

LUDDITES. 

proceedings tinder Special Commissions 
held at York, before Mr. Baron Thompson and 
Mr. Justice Le Blanc, for the Trial of the 
Luddites, 53 Geo. 3, 1813, 31 vol. 959. — ^In- 
troduction to. these Proceedings, containing 
an Account of the Disturbances in the Manu- 
facturing Districts which gave rise to them, 
Sbid. ib.-^Mr. Baron Thompson's Charge to 
the Grand Jury, ibid. 966. — ^Trial of John 
Swallow, John Batley, Joseph Fisher, and John 
Lamb, for a Burglary, ibid, 971. — Mr. Park's 
Speech for the Prosecution, ibid. 972.— Mr. 
Baron Thompson's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 
080. —The Jury find them Guilty, but recom- 
mend Lumb to Mercy, ibid. 997. — ^Trial of 
George Mellor, William Thorpe, and Thomas 
8mith, for the Murder of Mr. Uorsfall, ibid. ib. 
"— 'Mr. Park's Speech for the ProseculioB, ibid. 
998.^Mr. Justice. Le Blanc's Charge to the 
Jurv, ibid. 1008.— The Jury find them Guilty, 
ibid. 1033.— Sentence of Death is passed upon 
Ihem, ibid. tb. — ^They are executed, ibidal063. 
— Trial of John Scfaofield for nnliciously 
thooting at John Hinchliffe, ibid. 1035.— Mr. 
Park's Speech for the Pkoeeeutton, ibid, ib.-*- 



Mr. BattMi ThenMoii'i Chai^ to the 1\ 

ibid. 1047.— The Jury acquit faisa, ibid. 1< 

•—Trial of John Eadoa for administeritig 

unlawful Oath, ibid. 1064.r^Mr. Pavk'aSi 

for the ProsecatioB, ibid. ib. — ^Mr. Justice 

Blanc's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 1068.'— T 

Jury find him Guilty, ibid. 1073.— THal 

several other persons for administeriiig unlai 

ful'Oaths, ibid. 1074.— Trial of James H»( 

and seven other persons for attempting 

destroy a Mill, ibid. 1092.— Mr. Park's 

for tbe Prosecution, ibid. 1093. — Mr. Justi< 

Le Blanc*s Charge to the Jury, ibid. IJOtt.- 

The Jury find Pive of the Prisoners Guiltyi 

and acquit the rest, ibid. 1123.— Trial 

Joseph Brook for Burglary, ibid. 1124. 

Mr. Park's Speech for the PK>seeution, ibid, 

ib.— Mr. Baron Thompson'is Charge to tlieJiiiyij 

ibid. 1126.— The Jury acquit the Prison * 

ibid. 1137.— Trial of Job Hey, John HiU» 

WiinaM Hartley, for a Burglary, ibid. 1187.- 

Mr. Justice Le Blanc's Charge to th» J«fy^ 

ibid. 1139.— The Jury find them G«ilty» ibid. 

1147.— Trial of James Hey, ^Meph CfowHier^ 

and Nathan Hovle, for a Robbery in a DwelU 

ing-House, ibid, ib^— Mr. Jvstice Le Blaa^s 

Charge to the Jury, ibid. 1140.— The Juqp 

find the Prisoners Guilty, ibid. 1159. — ^Mn 

Baron Thompson passes Sentence upon the 

several Prisoners who are convicted, ibid. 

1161. — Royal Proelamations coBneeted with 

the Subjects of these Triids, ibid. 1166.^For 

the Proceedings on the Triris of the aeveni 

persons called Luddites, tried under a Special 

Commission at Derby, in the year 1817, see 

Btandreth^ Jeremiah ; Turmr, WilMom; LwilmB, 

haae; Weighim4m^ George, 

LUNACY.— See Intanit^. 

MADRAS COUNCIL. 
See Stratton, Geoige, 21 vol. 1045. 

MAGDALEN COLLEGE, OXFOR0, 

Proceedings against Magdalen College far 
not electing Anthony Farmer President of 
the CoUeee, according to the Command of thr 
King, 4 Jac. 2, 1687-1688, 12 vol. 1.— Ihe 
King's Mandate to the Fellows, commaadiiig 
them to elect Fanner, ibid. 5. — ^They elect Dr. 
Hough, ibid, ib.— 'The Vice-President and Fd« 
lows are cited to appear before tiie Eeclesi- 
astical Commissioners, ibid. 9.-^Their Answer, 
ibid. ib.-^Their Reasons for not electiiK 
Farmer, ibid. 12.— •Extracts firom the Founderli 
Statutes respecting the Election «f a Presideat, 
ibid. 15.— Sentence of Deprivation passed on 
Dr. Hough by the Ecclesiastical Coranis- 
sioners, ibid. 16.— The King commands the 
Fellows to elect the Bishop of Oxford, ibid.ib. 
—The King's Interview with the Fellows at 
Oxford, ibid. 17.-*They refose to elect the 

Bishop of Oxford, ibid. 18 ^VisitatioD of the 

Ecclesiastical Commisstooera ai Oxford, ibii. 
26.— -Drt Hough is admo&ished by them toetft 



CUMTiiJ'i's*]] 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



Sll 



9» kmfser ad Pifed^ent, ibid. 34. — He protetts 
tgainst the Proceedings oltheCommissioDen^ 
ibid. 36. — ^The Commissioners tender a form 
of Submission to the Fellows, which all of 
Hiem (excepting two) refuse to sign^ ibid. 46* 
•^-Sentence of deprivation against Dr. Hough 
and the Fellows, ibid. 48. — ^Dr. Thomas Smith's 
narrative of this Proceeding, ibid. 52. — 
Screaby's Aoeoant(^ity ibid. 1 (note), 18 (note). 
•—Letters relating to it taken from the Archives 
«£ Corpus Chrisd College, ibid. 92. — ^Account 
of the Visitation by the Bishop of Winchester. 
"" " 1. 109. 



MAGISTRATES.— 4See Jiatieei of the Peace. 

MAGNA CHARTA. 

Mr. Endyn's Acconnt of the Provisions of 
Magna Charta, respecting the Liberty of the 
Sabject, £m. Pref. 1 vol. xxvi. — ^The words 
^ Les Terrc,'' in Magna Charta, do not include 
a Commitment by command of the King, 3 vol. 
14. — Argument of Mr. Selden that the words 
•f Ma^a Charta expressly exclude such a 
Commitment, ibid. 18. — Mr. Littleton's Re- 
marks upon Magna Charta in his Argument at 
Che Conference between both Houses of Par- 
liament in 1628^ on the Liberty of the Subject^ 
ibid. 86. 

MAID OF R£KT.--See Barton, Ehzdbeth. 

MAIMING. 

Trial of Woodbume and Coke on an Indict-i 
Bent upon the Stat. 22 and 23 Car. 2, c. 1, 
against maliciously Maiming, commonly called 
the Coventry Act, 16 vol. 53. — ^The Indictment 
in that Case, ibid. 55, 

MAINPRIZE. 

Reference to Precedents of Writs of Main- 
prize in the close Rolls of the Tower, 6 vol. 
1302.— FiUherbert's Account of the Writ of 
Maiaprize, ibid. 1200. 

MALETOLT. 

Meaning of the Term as explained by Mr. 
Hakewill in his Argument in the Great Case of 
Impositions, 2 vol. 459« 

MALICE. — ^See Implied Malice ; Intention. 

Sir Thosias More's Distinction between 
Malitia and Maleirolentia, 1 vol. 391.-«-Signi« 
tatioa of the word ^ Maliciously,'' in Stat. 26 
Henry 8, c 1 3, against the d^ial of the King's 
$iipfeauicy, ibid, ib,— The Word is said by the 
Judges on the Trial of Fisher, Bishop of 
Bochester, to be void and superfluous in that 
Statute, ibid. 401.— Malice is implied so as to 
complete the Crime of Murder, where one man, 
witHout reasonable cause or provocation, kills 
mother, 14 ▼«!. 145. — ^Di^rence in the im- 
port of the term Malice in legal and in common 
Meeptattion, IT vol. 48.-— The distinction stated 
Wtween express and impMed Malice, ibid. 44. 
-^ Ma»dt» tb* dmti $x% Judges al the 



Malice, and not the Jury, Obeby's Case, ibid. 
49.p^L6rd Holt's Account of legal Mdice, 
and his Illustration of the difference between 
express and implied Malice, ibid. 63.-^Malice 
Prepense may be i^iplied so as to constitute 
Murder, ibid. 65. — ^Tbe Law implies Malice so 
as to constitute the Offends of Murder where a 
person is killed by duress of Imprisonment, 
Huggins's Case, ibid. 375. — Express Malice 
need' not be proved where the Act charged is 
unlawful, 6 voL 547^ 7 vol. 1124, 9 vol. 1349. 
•*-Where a person is charged with malidously 
doing an unlawful Act, the Malice is presumed 
from the illegality of the Act, and therefore 
Evidence of actual Malice is irrelevant as to 
the question of Gtiilty or Not Guilty, Picton'^i 
Case, 30 vol. 488. — In Prosecutions on the 
Black Act, and Lord Elienborough's Act, for 
maliciously Shooting, it is not necessary to 
prove express Malice, 81 vol. 1044, 1047. 

MALICIOUS PROSECUTION. 

An Action will lie against a person for ^ma- 
liciously prosecuting a probable cause of Ac- 
tion, 10 vol. 362. — Express Malice must be 
proved in an Action for a Malicious Prosecu- 
tion, because Malice is the essence^of the Ac- 
tion^ 30 vol. 488. 

MALICIOUSLY SHOOTING. 

In a Prosecutoin on the Black Act for mali- 
ciously Shooting, it is not necessary to prove 
that the Prisoner had his face blacked, or was 
otherwise disguised, Arnold's Case, 16 vol. 
744, 745 (note). — Nor in such a Prosecution, 
or in a Prosecution on Lord Ellenborough's 
Act, is it necessary to prove express Malice, 
Schofield's Case, 31 vol. 1044, 1047. 

MALIGNANT AND DELINQUENT, 

Oldmixon's Explanation of the meaning of 
these Terms, 4 vol. 857 (note). 

MALUM IN SE. 
Lord Coke's Distinction between an Offbnce 
which is malum in ie, and malum prohUfitum, 2 
vol. 727. 

MANDAMUS. 

If a Visitor of a College in one of the Uni< 
versities refuse to exercise bis visitatorial 
Office by receiving and hearing an Appeal, the 
Court of King's Bench will grant a Mandamuji 
to compel him, Frend's Case, 22 vol. 753.— 
But if he has heard and decided on it. thu 
Court has no authority to question hisJudg-* 
menty ibid. ib« 

MANSLAUGHT£R.--See BomieUe; Mmkr, 

It was resolved by all the Judges^ in Lord 
Morle/s Case, thai no Words will constitute 
such a Provocation in Law as will, if a person 
kill another upon his speaking them, reduce 
the Homicide from Murder to Manslaughter, 
6 vol. 771.— See also 17 vol. 66, 18 vol. 312.— 
Btttif after angty wwdi have passed, two par« 
p 2 



312 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



[Ml80SLI> 



ties suddenly fight and one is killed, this is 
Manslaughter, 6 vol. 771. — Opinion of the 
Judges in the House of Lords on Lord Com- 
wallis's Trial, that if several persons are toge- 
ther aiding and assisting to an action without 
malice prepense, from which Manslaughter 
ensues, all are equally guilty of Manslaughter 
as they would have heen of Murder if Malice 
had existed, 7 vol. 157. — Opinion of the Judges 
in Lord Mohun*s Case, that persons present 
when a Murder is committed, and in company 
wiUi the Murderer, do not necessarily partici> 
pate in the quality of his crime, but may be 
found guilty of Manslaughter, 12 vol. 1022. — 
Questions proposed severally to the Judges on 
the Trial of Lord Mohun in the House of Lords, 
respecting the amount of Homicide, under 
peculiar given circumstances, to Murder or 
Manslaughter, with their Answers thereto, and 
the Arguments of Counsel thereon, ibid. 1023 
&c. — ^Lord Holfs Account in Mawgridge's 
Case, of the Histoiy of the Law respecting 
Manslaughter, and the origin of the distinction 
between it and Murder, 17 vol. 61. — His Re- 
marks upon the different circumstances which 
by law reduce the Offence of Homicide to 
Manslaughter, ibid. 66. — Discussion of the 
same subject in Oneby's Case, ibid. 41. — See 
also Chetwynd's Case, 18 vol. 302. — Carnegie's 
Case, 17 vol. 73. — The Arguments of Counsel 
and tlie Opinions of the Judges on the points 
of Law proposed in the House of Lords in Lord 
Mohun's Case, 12 vol. 1015. — If a man shoot 
at a tame Fowl without an intention to steal 
it, and accidentally kill a Man, this is Man- 
slaughter, because done in the prosecution of 
an unlawful action, 16 vol. 80. 

MARIN£RS.-^ee Pressing Seamen, 

Mr. Emlyn's Doubts respecting the legality 
of the practice of Pressing Mariners, Em. Pref. 
1 vol. xxvii. — Mr. Justice Foster's Argument 
in favour of it, 18 vol. 1326.— The billeting of 
Mariners was one of the Grievances sought to 
be removed by the Petition of Rights, 3 vol. 
223. 

MARRIAGE.— See Divorce; Forcible 
Marriage, 

Argument of Bishop Cozens that Adultery 
trorks a Dissolution of Marriage, 13 vol.1332. 
— Provision respecting the solemnization of 
Marriages in the Directory of Piliblic Worship 
ordered by the Parliament in 1644-5, 20 vol. 
548 (note). — Act of Parliament passed during 
the Commonwealth, authorizing Marriages 
before Justices of the Peace, ibid. 552 (note). 
—This Act was repealed at the Restoration, 
ibid. ib. — Provisions of the Marriage Act 
respecting the Solemnization of Matrimony, 
ibid. 547 (note). — Voltaire's Remarks upon 
Marriage, ibid. 553 (note). — Before the Mar- 
riage Act, Fleet Marriages were clearly legal, 
14vol. 1 367 (note).— Discuasionin the Duchess 
of Kingston's Case, whether a Sentence of 
Jactitatioo of Marciage ia the Ecclesiastical 



Court is a conclusive Answer to a Charge of 
Bigamy, founded on a second Marriage, Id 
vol. 391. 

MASSACRE.— See Glenco; Maeguire, Connor; 

Lord. 

May's Account of the Massacre of the Proc 
testants in Ireland m 1741, 4 vol. 653 (note)« 

MASTER AND SERVANT.— See Slavery. 

If a Master is provoked by the Miscarriage 
of his Servant, and corrects him with a moder* 
ate Weapon, and the man dies in consequence 
of such correction, it is but a Misadventure ; 
but if he uses an unreasonable and improper 
Weapon, it is Murder, Mawgridge's Case, 17 
vol. 67. — Selling a Libel in a Shop by a Servant 
is prim^ facie Evidence of a Publication by the 
Master, 20 vol. 838, 839. 

MASTER OF THE ROLLS. 

It appears from Wraynham*s Case, that* in 
the Reign of James the First the Master of the 
Rolls was merely the first Master in Chancery, 
2 vol. 1059 (note).--The Master of the Rolls 
said to have been immemorially a judicial 
Officer both in England and Ireland, ' 15 vol. 
1321.— By the Stat. 41 Geo. 3, c, 25, the 
Master of the Rolls in Ireland was constituted 
an active judicial Officer, ibid. 1322. 

MASTERS IN CHANCERY. 

The Master of the Rolls was, in the Reign of 
James the First, considered as merely the first 
Master in Chancery, 2 vol. 1059 (note). — ^Thef 
Oath taken by Masters in Chancery on their 
admission into tlieir Offices, 16 vol. 830. — 
Commissions to Masters in Chancery in con* 
junction with Judges to hear and determine 
Causes, ibid. 831, 833, 835. — Account of the 
nature and duties of the Officeof a Master in 
Chancery, ibid. 836.— Lord Chancellor Mac* 
clesfield^s Account of the duties of a Master io 
Chancery, ibid. 1272. 

MATRONS, JURY OF, 

Entry of the Impanelling a Jury of Matrons 
and Midwives ad inquirerid, et ad irupidend. in 
the Proceedings by the Countess of Essex for 
a Divorce on the ground of Impotency, 3 vol. 
802. — Instance of impanelling a Jury of 
Matrons to ascertain whether a woman con- 
victed of a Capital Felony was quick with 
Child, 4 vol. 634. 



MEAL-TUB PLOT. 

Bomet's Account of the Meal-Tub Plot is 
1680, 7 vol. 1055.— Ralph's Account of it^ 
ibid. 1056. — Roger North's Account of it, ilnd. 
1064.— Sir Wm. Temple's Notice of this Plot, 
ibid. 1184 (note).— Trial of EUzabeth CelUer 
for being concfiraed ift it, ibii* 1Q43. 



C0NTBNT8.3 



THE STATE TRIALS. 
MEmCAL MEN. 1 MINISTERS. 



S13 



A Medical Man has no privilege to restrtin | Proceedings of the Commissioners appointed 
i. x»_j _i. /.__. by Cromwell, in 1654, for ejecting scandalous 

and insufficient Ministers, 5 vol. 539, 633. 



him from giving Evidence of facts communi- 
cated to him in professional confidence, 20 vol. 
573. 

MEDIETAS LINGUA. 

Instance of a claim of a Jury de Medietate 
Lmgus by several Foreigners on their Trial for 
Murder in 1682, 9 vol. 8. 

MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT.— See Par- 
Moment : House of Commons; FrivUege; Feeru 

MEMORANDUM. 

Where a Witn^s refreshes his Memory by 
Memorandums, it is usual and reasonable that 
the adverse Counsel should inspect them for 
the purpose of cross-examination, Hardy's Case, 
24 vol. 824. — It was held by tlie Court of Jus- 
ticiary in Scotland in the Case of Sir Archibald 
Gordon Kinloch, witness cannot make use ,of 
Memorandums which are not contemporary with 
the facts to which he speaks, 25 vol. 936. 

MENTAL RESERVATION. 

Remarks upon the Popish Doctrine of Mental 
Reservation, 7 vol. 545, 557. 

MERCHANDIZE. 

Discussion in the Great Case of Impositions, 
of the power of the King to impose a Tax upon 
Merchandize exported or imported, without 
the Authority of Parliament, 2 vol. 371. 

MERCHETA MULIERUM. 

Account of the ancient feudal duty so called, 
23 vol. 1409. 

MERCY. 

Mel'cy, as well as Justice, belongs only to 
the King by the Law of England, 4 vol. 929. 

MERGER. 

Discussion of the doctrine of Merger in 
Crimes by the Law of England, 33 vol. 311. 
—By the Criminal Law of England an in* 
ierior Crime merges in a superior one ; but 
in the Law of Scotland this Doctrine does 
not exist, ibid. 532. 

MIDWIVES.— See Matront. 

MILITARY LAW. 

Tlie Proceedings of Courts-Martial are re- 
turned into the office of the Judge Advocate- 
General, 28 vol. 100. 

MILLS. 

Mr. Baron Thompson's enumeration of the 
statutory Provisions against the Offence of 
destroying Mills, in his Charge to the Grand 
Jury assembled under the Special Commission 
at York in 1813, 31 vol. 968. 

MILLENARIANS.—See Fifth Moimchf 

Men, 



MINORCA.— See Fabngus^ Anthony. 

Arrangements made by the Treaty of Utrecht 
respecting the Government of the Island of 
Minorca, 20 vol. 177. 

MISADVENTURE.— See Hxmicide. 

If a man shooting at Wild Fowl accidentally 
kill a Man, this is Homicide by Misadventure, 
being done in the prosecution of a lawful Act, 
16 vol. 80.— If a Master or Parent is provoked 
by the misconduct of his Servant or Child, and 
corrects him with a reasonable and proper 
Weapon, and the Servant or Child dies in con- 
sequence of such correction, it is but a Misad^ 
venture, Mawgridge*s Case, 17 vol. 67, 

MISNOMER. 

Plea in Abatement of a Misnomer of the 
Christian name of a Defendant, 16 vol. 114, — 
Of the kinds of Misnomer which will vitiate 
Criminal Proceedings by the Law of Scotland, 
23 vol. 244 (note). 

MISPRISION. 

Resolved by the Judges in 1663, that in order 
to constitute a Misprision of Treason, there 
must be a knowledge of the design, and of the 
persons, or of some of them ; and therefore if a 
person is told generally that there will be a 
rising, vrithout being informed of the nature of 
the Plot, or the names of any of the parties to 
it, it is no Misprision to conceal it, 5 vol. 985. 
—But if a person knows of a Treason, and of 
some of the Conspirators, and only declares in 
general terms that there will be a rising, with- 
out a discovery of the Plot or the Traitors, this 
will be a Misprision of Treason, ibid. ib. — It 
is doubtful whether a full discovery of a Trea- 
sonable design to a person who is not a Magis- 
trate, or authorized to take Examinations 
respecting it, will excuse the party from 
responsibility for a Misprision of Treason, ibid, 
ib. — If a person accidentally hears the conver- 
sation of Traitors, and knows of their design, 
without in words or conduct approving of it, 
this is not Treason, but Misprision of Treason, 
Tonge's Case, 6 vol. 226 (note).— But Cbi^f 
Justice Pemberton says in Walcot's Case, that 
if a man is present at a Consultation where 
Treason is hatched, and then conceals it, he is 
guilty of Treason, 9 vol. 553.— See also, as to 
Sie distinction between Treason and Misprision 
of Treason, Sir B. Shower's Remarks on Lord 
Russell's Case, 9 vol. 716.— By the Stat. 7 Ann. 
c. 21, s. 11, persons indicted for Misprision 
of Treason are entitled to a list of Witnesses 
and Jurors, 10 vol. 268 (note).— Lord Chief 
Justice Abbott's Account of the Offence of 
Misprision ef Treason; in his Charge to the 



214 



Grand Jury prevtoosly to (be Trial of Thistle- 
vood and others for High Treason, in being 
Concerned in the Cato-Street Plot, 33 vol. 690. 
—Misprision of Felony is a High Misde- 
meanour, 31 vol. 969. 



GENEEAL INDEX TO CMii 

MONSTRANS OE PKOIT. 

Lord Keeper Somtrs's Atgument in the 
Bankers' Case, that a Monstiaos de Dfoii did 
not lie atCommoa La;w, 14 vol. 77. 



MIXED MONEY. 

The Case of Mixed Money in Ireland, 2 
vol. 113. — Mixed Money being declared by 
Royal Proclamation to be lawful and current 
Money in IreU^nd, held to be Sterling Money, 
ibid. 121. — It inay be termed lawful and cur- 
rent Money of England, ibid. 126. 

MONEY.— See Mixed Money. 

Necessity of a certain Standard of Money, 2 
vol. 116. — It is the peculiar and exclusive 
Prerogative of the King of England to make 
Money within his Dominions, ibid. 1 16.— The 
King may also put a vahie upon Money, ibid. 
117.— He may alter the value and standard of 
Money as he pleases, ibid. 118. — ^This Preroga- 
tive extends to Ireland, ibid. 1193.'^ What 
things are necessary to the legitimation of 
Money, ibid. 117. — Changes of Money in 
England have been made by the King without 
the concurrence of Parliament, ibid. 119. — 
Origin of the difference in Standard between 
English and Irish Monies, ibid. 120. — Origin 
of the word Sterling, ibid. ib. — Said to be un- 
lawful to collect Money for Charities without 
Letters Patent, or the King's Brief, 15 vol. 
1418, ibid. ib. (note) .^-Doubts respecting the 
legality of subscribing Money for tiie D^enoc 
of Government in times of emergency without 
the King's Licence, or the authority of Parlitu- 
ment, ibid. 1418 (note).*— Lord Hardwicke 
says that such doubts have no foundation in 
Xaw, ibid. ib. 

MONOPOLIES.— See Eatt India Company. 

Proceedings in Parliament against Sir Giles 
Mompesson, in 1621, for the abuse of Patents 
of Monopoly, 2 vol. 1 1 1 9. — ^Proceedings against 
Sir Francis Michell for a similar Oifence, ibid. 
1I3L — ^The Great Case of Monopolies, 10 vol. 
371.— Lord Ck>ke*s Definition of a Monopoly 
as cited by Mr. Holt in his Argument in that 
Case, ibid. 380.— Mr. Holt's A^mentin that 
Case, that the King has the power of granting 
by Charter an exclusive licence to trade with 
Infidels, ibid. 377.-<-Sir Robeit Sawyer's Ar» 
guaeot to the same point, ibid, 407.— Every 
Monopc^y of buying and selling, or of Trade, 
said by Mr, Pollexfiin in that Case, to be 
ingrossinff, ibid. 422. — ^liis Enumeration of the 
evils of Monopoliesy ibid. 425. 

MONSTER. 

Notiee of a Case in the Court ef Common* 
Pleas, in the Reign of James the Seconds 
respecting the right of property in a Monster^ 
20 vol. 55 (note). 



MONTH. 

Reasons why a Month in Law is a Luwnr 
Month, or twenty-eight days, 20 vol. 1283 
(note). 

MONUMENT, 

Account of the Inscriptions on the Mobo- 
ment in Commemoration of the Fire of London, 
6 vol. 864. — One of the Inscriptions, ascribin^^ 
the Fire to the Papists, was erased by James 
the Second, on his accession to the Crown, bui 
was restoied at the Revolntion, ibid. 833 
(note). 

MORAVIANS 

Reference to Works illustrating the religions 
doctrines of the Moravians, 5 vol. 542 (note)* 

MURD£R.--See Bomidde; MuMee; 
Momlaughter. 

Lord Coke says, that it was ?e9olve4 00 the 
Trial of Weston for the Murder of Sir Thomas 
Overbury, that the manner of killing laid in an 
Indictment is not the point of it, b^t the 
matter; and that if it be stated in the Indict^ 
ment that the stro)ce was given by a dagger^ 
when in fact it was by e sword, it is suf&Qien^ 
2 vol. 1031 .—In all Cases of Murder, the Judg- 
ment by the Common Law is the same ; ana, 
therefore, in Felton's Case for stabbing the 
Duke of Buckingham, the Judges refused to 
order the Prisoner's hand to be cut off, though 
required by the King to do so, 3 vol. 372. — By 
the Civil Law no Evidence could be adduced 
against a person accused of Murder, unlesa 
there were direct and positive proor of the 
Death, 11 vol. 464 (note).— Lord Hale's 
Practice as to Trials for Murder in this 
respect, 14 vol. 1310. — Account of the Trials 
Condemnation, and Exeqution, of Joan Perry 
and her two Sons, for the Murder of Mr. 
Harrison, who was afterwards discovered alive, 
14vol.l312.--^eealso Green, Cojoftm Vrnw^ 
—It was resolved by all the Juages in Lord 
Moriey's Case, that no Words whatsoever vrill 
constitute such a Provocation in Law as will, if 
a person kill another upon his speaking them, 
reauee the nature of the Homioide from Murder 
to Manslaughter, 6 vol. 771^— See also 17 vel. 
66, 18 vol. 312.—- But if upon angry Woids^ 
two men suddenly fight, and one is killed, it is 
only Manslaughter, 6 vol. 771.*-But in such 
a Case the Onus liee upon the Prisoner to 
prove the sudden Quarrel, 17 vol. 48.^-^Opinioa 
of the Judges in Lord lifohmi's Case, tbtt 
Persons present when a Murder is committed^ 
and in company with the Murderer, do not 
necessarily participate in the quality of his 
Crimef but may be found Ouihy of Man- 
slaughter, 12 vol. 10a2.^Que5tions proposed 



CoHVSKTSfl 



THE STATB TRIAI.S. 



315 



teveralljT to tlie JadgtM on the Trial of Lord 
Mohun in the House of Lords, respecting the 
imooiitof Homicide) under particular given cir- 
^UQstaiicesy to Murder or Manslaughter, with 
their Answers thereto, and the Arguments of 
Counsel thereon, ibid. 1023, &c. — By the Civil 
Law the person only who gives the mortal 
strolce is ^ilty of Murder, 14 vol. 1085. — 
— Malice is implied so as to constitute the 
Offence of Muraer, if one man kills another 
without reasonable provocation, Kidd^s Case, 
14 vol. 145. — If a Master or Parent kill a 
Servant or Child by unreasonable severity of 
Punishment, and with an improper Instrument, 
it is Murder, Mawgridge's Case, 17 vol. 67. — 
If a Man shoots at a tame Fowl, with an inten- 
tion to steal it, and in so doing accidentally 
ki\U a man, this will be Murder, 16 vol. 80. — 
Eemarks of Lord Holt in Mawgridge's Case, 

Xn the kinds and degrees of Provocation 
cb, in Cases of Homicide, will reduce the 
Offence from Murder to Manslaughter, 17 vol. 
66. — Discussion of the circumstances under 
whid^ Homicide will or will not amount to 
Murder by Chief Justice Raymond, in deliver- 
ing the Judgment of the Court in Qnehy's Case, 
ibid. 41. — Arguments in Chetwynd's Case, 
npoa the effect of different circumstances at- 
laidii^ the act of Homicide in constituting 
Murder or Manslanghter, 18 vol. 302.— On a 
Trial for Murder the Court are Judges of the 
Malice, and not the Juiy, Oneby's Cas^, 17 
voL 49. — Etymology imd derivation of the term 
Murder, ibid. 59 (note). — ^History of the Law 
of England respecting Murder, and origin of 
the distinction between it and Manslaughter, 
ibid. 59, ibid. ib.(note). — Murder may b^m- 
loitted without any stroke or wound being 
f;iveQ, Huggins'a Case, ibid. 374. — ^Xhe Law 
implies Mjdice so as to constitute the Offence 
of Murder, where a party is killed by duress of 
Imprisonment, ibid* 375. See also ibid. 453 
(note). — Instances in which an absept person 
may be guilty of Murder as a Principal, ibid. 
379. — Mr. Justice Foster's Opinion on Mac 
Daniel's Case, that the offence of a person wil- 
fully giving false testimony against an innocent 
man, with intent to accomplish his death, and 
thereby causing him to be executed, does not 
by the English Law amount to Murder, 19 vol. 
813. — Lord Coke's Opiuion coincided with 
that of Mr. Justice Foster, ibid. 810 (note).— 
Doubts respecting the validity of this Opinion, 
ibid, ib* (note),— Opinions of Mr* Justice 
Black«lone> Mr* B^nington, and others,, on the 
pc^nt, ibi,d. ib. — ^Ifa Man inflicts wounds on 
fkpotlier which nug^t probably cause death, it 
ia eqyal^ Murder in the Offender, wheUier 
peattK ins|9^ntly ensues in Gonsequ^Qce of the 
wounda, or whether ^t h^ been accelerated by 
th^ iff»prop«r manner in which the deceased 
lieated luma^lfji Governor Wall's Case, 27 vol. 
liS,-^Mr. Bml^ expresses |a Opinion that 
Murder must m all Cases be punished by 
Death, £m. Pief« 1 toL ^opui. — Mr. Justice 
Foster's Observations upon the Law lespecting 
Somoiidft upon am»l8» or attempts to anest. 



19 vol. 873 (note).r--B4»m«rks of several writers 
on the Law of Scotland respecting Homicide 
in resisting Q£&cers, ibid. 879. — ^The King 
cannot pardon in an Appeal of Murder, because 
it is the suit of the party, 8 vol. 287. — Lord Holt 
expresses his approbation of Appeals of Murder, 
13 vol. 1199 (note). — ^Lord Nottingham says^ 
that an Appeal of Murder is aSuit odious in Law, 
and therefore tied up to more formality than 
any other Suit, ibid. ib. — Proceedings on an 
Appeal of Murder, Bambridge and Corbett*^ 
Case, 1 7 vol. 395, 397.— An Appellee is allowe4 
to make his full Defence by Counsel in an 
Appeal of Murder, ibid. 430.-*See also 8 vol. 
726. — For instances of Trials for Murderin the 
State Trials, see Acton, William, 17 vol. 310 
—Annesley, James, 17 vol. 1093— Atkins, 
Samuel, 6 vol. 1473— Bambridge, Thomas, 17 
vol.297— Barbot, John, 18 vol. 1229— Berk ele, 
Thomas De, 1 vol. 55— Blandy, Mary, 18 voU 
1117— Bothwell, James, Eari of, 1 vol. 901— 
Broadfoot, Alexander, 18 vol. 1323— Byrne, 
William, 27 vol. 455— flyron, William, Lord, 
19 vol. 1177— Carnegie, James, 17 vol.73— 
Chetwvnd, William, 18 vol. 289— Coning*? 
mark. Charters John, Count, 9 vol. 1— Conk* 
wallis, Charles, Lord, 7 vol. 143— Cowper, 
Spencer, 13 vol. 1105— Felton, John, 1 voU 
1085— Ferrers, Lawrence, Earl, 19 vol. 885— 
Goodere, Captain Samuel, 17 vol. 1003— 
Green, Robert, 7 vol. 159— Green, Captain 
Thomas, 14 vol. 1199— Hall, John, 1 vol. 161 
—Harrison, Henry, 12 vol. 833— Huggins, 
John, 17 vol. 297— Jackson, William, 18 v<J. 
1069— Kidd, Captain William, 14 vol. 123— 
Kinloch, Sir Archibald Gordon, 25 vol. 891— 
Knowles, Charles, 12 vol. 1167— Mac Daniel, 
Stephen, 19 vol. 745— Mellor, George, 31 vol, 
997_Mohun, Charles, Lord, 12 vol. 949— 
Moriey, Thomas, Lord, 6 vol. 769— Mortoun, 
James, Earl of, 1 Vol 947— Noble, Richard, 15 
vol. 731— Oneby, Major John, 17 vol, 29— 
Pantaleon Sa, 5 vol. 461— Pembroke, Philip, 
Earl of, 6 vol. 1309 — Porteons, Captain John, 
17 vol. 923— Reason, Hugh, 16 vol. 1— San-. 

2uire, Lord, 2 vol. 743.— Somerset, Robert 
Jarr, Earl of, 2 vol. 965— Stevenson, John, 19 
vol. 845— Stewart, James, 19 vol, 1— Swan, 
John, 18 vol. 1193— Wall, Joseph, 28 voL 51 
—Walters, Rowland, 12 vol. 113— Weston, 
Richard^ 2 voU 911. 

MUTE-STANDING.— See Feine forte et 

dure. 

On the Trial of Richard Weston, for the 
Murder of Sir Thomas Overbury, Lord Coke 
explains to the Prisoner, on his refusing to 
plead, the nature of the punishment of the 
Peine fort et dure, 2 vol. 913.— Precedent of 
the infliction of the Peine fort et dure upon a 
Woman, in the Reign of Henry the Sixth, for 
refusing to plead to an Indictment for con- 
temptuous Words respecting the King, 3 vol. 
360. — Several instances are said by fir. Bar- 
rington to have occurred in modem times, 30 
vol. 767, Q28.— A F(i«>Der standing mute in 



di6 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



[Mxscblim 



High Treason is ipso facto attainted, ibid. ib. 
(note). — By Stat. 12 Geo. a, c. 20, standing 
Mute in Felony and Piracy amounts to a Con- 
Yiction, ibid. ib. — By Stat. 3 and 4 Will, and 
Mary, c. 9, all Offenders who would be with- 
out Clergy, on Conviction by Verdict or Con- 
fession, are so equally upon standing Mute, 
ibid. 402 (note). — It was resolved by the 
Judges, in Lord Castlehaven's Case, that if a 
Prisoner stood Mute in Rape or Sodomy, he 
might have his Clergy, ibid. 402. — It was 
also resolved by the Judges in that Case, that 
if a Prisoner stood Mute, it was in the discre- 
tion of the Court to open Evidence of the 
Facts, ibid. 403. — This was done on the Trial 
Of Weston for the Murder of Sir Thomas 
Overbury, 2 vol. 915.— It was also resolved, 
in Lord Castlehaven's Case, that if an Appellee 
stood Mute in an Appeal, he roust be hanged, 
an Appeal not being within the Statute of 
Westminster, 1 Car. 12, 3 vol. 403.— It was 
also resolved in that Case, that a Lord of Par- 
liament is within the Statute of Westminster, 
and that, if he refuse to plead, he is liable to 
the Judgment of- the Peine fort et dure, ibid, 
ib. — Lord Ellenborough says, in Governor 
Picton's Case, that the object of the Peine 
fort et dure was not to compel a Confession, 
but to compel the Prisoner to plead, 30 vol. 
895. — ^Distinction between the Peine fort et 
dure, and Torture, ibid. ib. 

MUTILATION.— See Cutting off the Hand, 

• 

In the Case of Felton, who murdered the 
Duke of Buckingham, the Judges refused to 
order the Prisoner's Hand to be cut off upon 
bis conviction, though required to do so by 
the King, 3 vol. 372. 

. NAME.— See Additiort; Misnomer, 

NATURALIZATION.— See AUen. 

Lord Bacon's Account of the different de- 
grees of Naturalization according to the Laws 
of England, 2 vol. 581.— Stat. 29 Car. 2, c. 6, 
iiatursdizing the Children of British subjects 
born out of the Kingdom during the Com- 
monwealth, 8 vol. 534. — Reason of the Law 
that the King cannot, without the authority of 
Parliament, naturalize an Alien, 10 vol. 499. 

NE EXEAT REGNUM. 

This Writ was originally confined to the 
restraint of persons from leaving Uie Realm 
for matters of Slate, 10 vol. 396*7— It was 
never intended or used for the purpose of 
restraining Merchants from leaving England 
for the purposes of Trade, ibid, ib.— It is, in 
modern times, extended to confine a person 
within the jurisdiction of Courts in England, 
ibidp ib. 

NEGRO.— See Slavery. 

Report of the celebrated Case of James 
Sommersett, the Negro, on a Habeas Corpus 



in the Court of King's Bench, 20 vol. 1. — Re-> 
port of Cases in the Court of Session, deciding 
that in Scotland a Man can have no right of 
property in a Negro, 20 vol. 1 (note). — ^Ac- 
count of the Negro Case in France, from 
"Les Causes C6l^res,'' ibid. 12 (note>— 
Doubts whether Slavery did not exist in France 
before the Revolution, ibid. 1369. — Said to 
have been held by the Court of King's Bench, 
in the Case of Butts v. Peony, that an Action 
of Trover would lie for Negroes, being Infidels, 
ibid. 51. — Mr. Hargrave's Remarks upon this 
and other Cases in our Law Books appearing 
to establish an absolute right of property in 
the Master of a Negro Slave, ibid. ib. 

NEW ENGLAND.— See Qvelck, John. 

Account of Witchcraft in New England in 
the 17th Century, extracted from Hutchinson's 
History of Massachusetts Bay, 6 vol. 647. 

NEW ROMNEY, TOWN AND PORT OF. 

The Trial of an Issue on an Information in 
the nature of a Quo Warranto against John 
Gibbon, to try whether the right of electing a 
Freeman of the Town and Port of New Romney 
be in the Mayor and Jurats, or in the Bf ayor, 
Jurats, and Commonalty, 8 Geo. 2, 1734, 17 
vol. 801. — Evidence for the Defendant, ibid. 
804. — Evidence for the Crown, ibid. 810.— 
Chief Justice Eyre's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 
819. — ^The Jury find a Verdict for the Crown, 
ibid. 822. — Trial of Issues joined on an In- 
formation, in the nature of a Quo Warranto 
against Richard Elles, to try the merits of bis 
Election as Mayor of New Romney, 8 Geo. 2, 
1734, ibid. 821. — Evidence on the Issue that 
Elles was duly elected ^ ibid. 827. — ^Verdict for 
the Defendant on that Issue, ibid. 841. — Eri- 
dence on the Issue that he was duly sworn, 
ibid. ib. — ^Verdict for the Crown on that Issue, 
ibid. 844. 

NEWS. 

Precedents of Prosecutions,* in early times, 
of persons for spreading false News, 3 vol. 
350.— Proclamation of Queen Anne against 
spreading false News, 15 vol. 359. 

NEWSPAPERS. 

It was said by Chief Justice Scroggs, in the 
Case of Benjamin Carr, to have been deter- 
mined, in the Reign of Charles the Second, 
by all the Judges, that it was illegal to print 
or publish any News Books, or Pamphlets of 
News whatsoever, without authority, 7 vol. 
1127. — Mr. Mackintosh's Historical Remarks, 
in his Defence of Peltier, upon the advantages 
derived by England from the introduction and 
multiplication of Newspapers^ 28 vol. 599.— 
Upon a criminal Trial for a label in a News* 
paper, an Affidavit containing the Names of 
the parties and of the place where the News- 
paper was printed, according to the Stat. 38 
Geo. 3, c. 78, together with the pix)ductioa of 



CMmNTB.3 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



diy 



t Newspaper eonresponding to the descnption 
in the Affidavit^ is Evidence of the publication 
in the County where the printing of it is 
described to be, 30 vol. 131d* 

NEW TRIAL. 

The Practice of Courts respecting the grant- 
iog or refusing New Trials on the ground of 
excessive Damages, stated by Chief Justice De 
Grey, on delivering the Judgment of the Court 
in the Case of Fabrigas v, Mostyn, 20 vol. 
175.— A Defendant convicted on a criminal 
Prosecution cannot move for a New Trial after 
the first four Days of the next Term, Holt's 
Case, 22 vol. 1206 (note). — ^But if it appear 
to the Court at any time before Judgment 
ihat injustice has been done by the Verdict, 
ihev will interpose and grant a New Trial, 
ibii ib. — ^Instance of a New Trial being 
granted in a criminal Case, upon Affidavits of 
Uie Jury, stating that they merely meant to 
find the Fact done by the Prisoner, and not 
the criminal Intention charged in the Indict- 
tneot, Case of Ashley and Simons the Jew, 19 
▼61. 680.— The Affidavit of a Juryman with 
regard to his sentiments on a point of Law is 
hot admissible on a Motion for a New TriaJ; 
Almon's Case, 20 vol. 851. 

NINE LORDS AT YORK.— See Nortfump^ 
ton, Spencer, Earl of. 

NOBILITY.— See Peers. 

A Title of Nobility cannot be taken away 
aceptby Act of Parliament, Earl of Shrews- 
hw/s Case, 2 vol. 743.— A Peer cannot di- 
rest himself of his Nobility, nor can it be 
taken from him but by Act of Parliament, At- 
tainder of his Person, or by Scire Facias to 
jecall his Letters Patent, Earl of Banbury's 
Case, 12 vol. 1 195.— The King cannot counter- 
mand Letters Patent creating a Title of 
Nobility 5 but where the Creation is by Writ, 
he may supersede it after it is sealed, and 
before the Parliament sits, ibid, ib.— Nobility 
M fixed to the identity of the person, and 
inherent in the blood of him to whom it is 
P^ted, and cannot be assigned over or barred 
by him who hath it, ibid, ib.— A title of 
Wpbuity cannot be taken away without the 
?^ng'8 consent, ibid. 1196. 

NON COMPOS MENTIS.— See Luamty. 

NORTH BRITON.— See WUkes, John. 

NOTES. 

•Reference to Passages in the State Trials, 
•ftewmg that the Judges formerly took no Notes 
01 the Evidence on Trials, 17 vol. 1420 (note). 
"-It has been said that Chief Justice Pratt 
?«!er took Notes of the Evidence on Trials 
•before him, ibid. ib. 

NOTTINGHAM.— See SachevereU, William. 
^e Cwe of the Corporation of Nottingham, 



respecting the surrender of Aeir Charter in the 
Reign of Charles the Second, 10 voL 95. — Not- 
tingham is a Borough by Prescription, and 
has always claimed to have a Corporation by 
Prescription, ibid. ib. • 

NOVELTY. 

Chief Justice North's Opinion against 
Novelties in Law, in his Judgment in the Case 
of Bamardiston and Soame, 6 vol. 1109. 

OATH. 

Form of the Oath administered to Michael 
De la Pole, Ead of Suffolk^ and Chancellor of 
England, on having the Great Seal delivered 
to him in the Reign of Richard the Second, 
1 vol. 91.-— Oath administered to Witnesses on 
criminal Trials during the Commonwealth, 5 
vol. 76.— The Grand July's Oath, 7 vol. 941.— 
Oath administered to Witnesses on the Trial of 
a Peer upon an Impeachment for a capital 
Offence, ibid. 1274.^0ath administered to an 
Interpreter on the examination of a foreign 
Witness, 9 yol, 1099. — Oath administered to 
Witnesses in the House of Lords on a Bill for 
a Divorce, 12 vol. 890. — Oath administered to 
Witnesses on the Trial of a Peer upon an Im- 
peachment for High Crimes and Misdemea- 
nours, 29 vol.672. — Oath administered to Triers 
on the, Trial of a Challenge for Cause, 26' vol. 
1227. — ^Judicial Oath of the Barons of the 
Exchequer, 14 vol. 63. — OalCL-bf the Lord 
Chancellor, 16 vol. 785. — Oath of the Masters 
in Chancery, ibid. 830. — Oath of a Witness 
examined on the Voire dire, 18 toI. 583. — 
Stat. 12 Ric. 2, c. 2, prescribing an Oath to 
certain judicial Officers previous to their ap« 
pointing ministerial Officers, ibid. 8^7. — Dis- 
cussion of the nature and object of this 
Oath, ibid. 1281, &c. — Summary of the Sta- 
tutes now in force respecting the Oaths of 
Allegiance and Supremacy, and making 
the Declaration against Popery^ 6 vol. 201 
(note). — For Trials of Persons for refusing to 
take the Oaths of Allegiance and Suprc^macy, 
see Crook, John, 6 vol. 201 — Fell, Margaret, 
ibid. 629— Fox, George, ibid, ib.— Hales, Sir 
Edvrard, 11 vol. 1165. — ^Account of the 
Statutes s^ainst administering unlawful Oaths, 
31 vol. 969. — Mr. Erskine's Remarks, in his 
Speech for the Prosecution on Williams's Trial 
for a blasphemous Libel, on the religious 
sanction of Oaths relating to the Administra-i 
tion of Justice, 26 vol. 665. — Opinions of 
Lord Coke and Mt. Justice Blackstone against 
voluntary Oaths, 33 vol. 151 (note). — For 
Trials of persons for administering unlawful 
Oaths, see Black, David, 20 vol. 1179— Edgar, 
William, 33 vol. 145 — ^Mackinley, Andrew, 
ibid. 275— Orr, William, 26 vol. 901. 

OBEDIENCE.— See Passive ObecUence; 
Resistance. 

Sensible Remark of Archbishop Sharpe on 
the limits of Obedience, 15 vol. 94 (note). 



«1» 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



CM 



oBSCENmr. 



It wa$ held by tb« Court of King^s Bertcb, 
in Curll's Case^ that Obscenity i« ft temporal 
Offence, ^nd cognuable by the Courts of Com- 
mon LaWy 17 Tol. 160. — ^Bat in Read's Case, 
Lord Holt and the other Judges of the Court 
of Ring's Bench held, that an Obscene Libel 
was 9Dly pumsbable in the Eoclesiastica] 
Courts, ibid. 157 (iiote)* See also ibid. 195 
(note). 

OBSERVATOR.— See Tuiddny John. 

OFFENCES. 

Diaevasioa in the Debate on the Relevapey, 
in li^Kinley's Cast in the Court of Justiciary, 
whcditr the Offence of administering unlawful 
Oaths if not merged in the superior Offence of 
Treason, where the Oaths are taken under 
aucb ciroumstanoea as by Law amount to 
l^easoD, 3S toL 282. 

OFFICE. 

Argument of Serjeant Probyn, on Lord 
Macclesfield's Trial, in justification of the 
practice of selling Offices by those who have 
the right of appointing to them, 16 vol. 1087. 
«— Dr. Sayer's Argument on the same subject, 
ibid. 1109.-«-Lord Chancellor Macclesfield's 
Argument on the same subject, ibid. 1273. — 
Where a P^^sfj^ being in possession of a Cor- 
porate Office, accepts another Office, incom^ 
patible with it, Uie former Office, by such 
acceptance, becomes vacant, 17 yol. 845 (note). 
—A person in a public Office of trust is liable 
to an Indictment for a fraudulent Breach of 
Duty; Bembridge's Case, 22 vol. 77,, ibid. 155. 

OFFICEBSw^Sae SeoMon, Eughf Steve»ian, 
John: Arrettp Con^akU. 

Mr. Justice Foster's Obsenrations upon the 
Law respecting Homicide upon Arrests by 
Peace Officers, 19 vol. 873. — XMseussion whe- 
ther a Warrant in which the Name of the 
Officer is inserted after the Warrant is sealed^ 
is legal, ibid. 864. 

ORDEAL, 

Mr. Barrington remaiks, that it does not 
appear when the Trial by Ordeal was disused, 
3 ToK 519« — Reference to authors who treat 
of the Trial by Ordeal, ibid. ib.~Qne of the 
Jesuits tried for being concerned in the Popish 
Plot offers to put himself on his Trial by 
Ordeal, 7 ^dl. 388. 

ORDER. 

An Order of Parliament is determined by 
the Dissolution of the Parliavi^nt, ^ rol, 4Q2. 

ORDINANCE. 

Account of Cr9in?r«U*f OrdiAMoe for ^ect- 



lag scandaloQs and iosufideot Miiuilisr% S 
vol. 639 (oote), ibid. 630. 

OVERT ACT.— See Trea$M. 

An attempt to n^fifry a person claiming 
present Title to the Crqwn, without the oon- 
sent of the reigning SovereigUf said to be an 
Oiert Act of Treason^ 1 vol. IQOa.— It wa^ 
held by all the Judges, at a Consultation pre* 
nous to the Trial of the Regicides, that Word^ 
may constitute an Overt Act of High Treason, 
5 ▼oL983; see also 10 vof. 277, 295. — But 
mere Words, not relating to any act or d^ 
sign, are not Overt Acts of Treason, 22 toI, 
480 (note). — Argument of Sir Thomas Wither- 
ington, in Love's Case, that the two Witnesses 
required ia Treason by the Statutes 1 and $ 
Edw. 6, in a Ca^e of complicated facts, 
miffht consist of one Witness to one Overt Act, 
ana another to another Overt Act of the same 
species of Treason, 5 vo). 178.— Mr. Justice 
Foster says» that this is the first instance he 
had met with of the assertion of this Doctrine, 
ibid. 240 Tnote). — ^This Doctrine was held' by 
all the Juages at the Consultation previous tQ 
the Trial of the Regicides, ibid. 978. — It was 
abo confirmed by the Opinion of the Judges 
in the House of Lords in Lord Stafford's Case, 
7. vol. 1527 ; see also what is said by Ixvrd Chief 
Justice North in Colledge's Case, 8 vol. 620, 
and by Lord Holt and the other Judges on 
the Trial of Sir William Parkyns, 13 vol. 111. 
-^By Stat 7 Will. 3, c. 3, it is provided^ that 
on a Trid for Treason no Evidence shall be 
given of anv Overt Act not laid in the Indict- 
ment, 5 Toi. 977 (note).— This Rule said by 
Mr. Justice Foster and Mr. East to have 
existed at Common Law, ibid. ib. — But since 
that Statute, Evidence may be given of an 
Overt Act not laid in the Indictment if it 
conduces to prove another Overt Act that is 
so laid, Vaughan's Case, 13 yqI. 499 ; Deacon'f 
Case, 18 toI. 360. — ^A Conspiracvto levy War, 
though no War be actually leviea, is an Overt 
Act of Compassing the King's Death within 
the Statute of Treasons, ibid. 984. — ^This was 
held bv Lord Holt, on the Trial of Sir William 
Freindf 13 toI. 61. — In Layer's Case it was 
said to haye been so decided a hundred times, 
16 Tol. 312.— See Mr. Anstruther's Argument 
on this subject on the Trial of Robert Watt, 
23 vol. 1194. — See alaothe lan^age of Foster, 
as cited by Lord Loughborough,inLord George 
Gordon's Case, 21 yol. 490. — It was resolved 
in Sir Heniy Vane's Case, that a consultation 
and advising together of the means to destroy 
the King and his GoTemment was an Overt 
Act of CQmpa9«ii>g the Kipg'a Death, 6toL 
122, 225."^A Conapiraoy to iuv^dp the $«als»» 
or depoi? the Kiqgy 19 99 Overt Act of Qish 
Treason in the Article q( Cgmpassi^g the 
King's Death> 13 voU Xt% 1il3,— CoQ^enting 
to a traitorous Design said by Loid Holt, iu 
Rookwood's Case, to be an Overt Act of Trea- 
son, ibid. 210. — Levying War is an Overt Act 

of Compaawg thtt KiPl^ H^i^ Sepscy'i 



CoMmrrs.J 



THE STATS TRIALS. 



619 



Case, 19 vdl. 1944.— in Twyn's Ctse^ tbe 
mibliabmif « Book indting the People to Re* 
beUiooy was bold to be en Overt Act of Treuoa 
u the Air^te o{ Compaoaing tbe King's Deeth, 
6 vol. 5X9 (oatd).«-Printing may be an Overt 
Aetcf Tfeasoii, Aaderton'tCaaey t3ToL 1848. 
—After proof of an Overt Act in tbe Coonty 
iflwbich the Treason is laid. Evidence may 
be given of any otber Overt Acts <tf the same 
species of Treason in otber Counties, Sir 
Henry V«ne*s Gase, 6 vol. 128,«^ee a refer- 
ence to otber Cases establisbing this point, 
iM. 139 (note).— «In tbe Case of Lord Preston, 
wbo was tried in Middlesex, the taking Boat 
ia Biiddlesex for tbe purpose of going to 
France to promote an Invasion of England, 
wis hold to be a sufficient Overt Act in Mid« 
dlesex in order to admit Evidence of other 
Overt Acts done in other Counties, 13 vol. 
7S7.-*«A Letter written in the County in which 
aa Indictnaent for Treason is laid, mav be a 
sufficient Overt Act within that County, 
Henaey's Case, 19 vol. 1845.— Sending intelli* 
fence, or collecting intelligence for the pur- 
pose of sending it to an Bnem^, in order to 
assist tbe Enemy to annoy this Country or 
defend himself, are Overt Acts of Treason, 
both in the Article of Compassing the King's 
Death and Adhering to tbe King's Enemies, 
14 voL 137a (note), 19 vol. 1344, 21 vol. 808. 
-^Any Act manifesting a criminal intention, 
or tending to the aocomplisbment of a crimi- 
nal object, is an Overt Act, 83 vol. 685.— There 
is no Bttle of Law that in Cases of Treason 
tbe Overt Act must be proved by two Wit. 
nesses before Evidence of a Confenion is 
admissible, Crossfi^'s Case, 26 vol. 57. 

OUTLAWRY. 

Pfecedents cited in the Case of Sir Francis 
Goodwin, showing that an Outlaw may be 
privileged by the House of Commons, and 
letarDMl to serve in Parliament, 2 vol. 97.— 
Tbe word Outlawry in a Pardon held to apply 
to Ontlawries between party and party, and 
not to Outlawries for Felony, 7 vol. 1052. — At 
Common Law, a person who was beyond Sea 
during the wbole Process and Pronunciation 
of an Outlawry against him, might assign this 
&ct for Error, 10 vol. 120.— -The Stat. 5 and 6, 
£dw*6, c. 1 1, enlarges the Common Law for the 
benefit of the Outlaw, and gives him liberty to 
assign for Error that he was beyond Sea at the 
time of the Oudawry pronounced, ibid.ib. — ^The 
Court of Kind's Bench refused the benefit of 
this Statute to Sir Thomas Armstrong, ibid. 111. 
-^^Basobitions of the House of Commons after 
the Revolution upon tbe Conduct of the Court 
of King's Bench in Ae CJase of Sir Thomas 
Armstrong, ibid. 117d — ^It is sufficient to entitle 
a person to the benefit of tbe Statute of Edw. 
6, if he surrender himself to the Chief Justice 
when brought to the Bar of the King's Bench 
by compulsory Process, Johnson's Case, ibid. 
Ill (note).— On an Outlawry for High Trea* 
•ei», tha Outlawry k the Mgment, and if the 



Prisoner be brought int» tiit Khig's Bandl 
upon the Outlawry, that Court does not pro* 
noonce Judgment, but iMrely gives a Rale fbr 
Executioo, Holloway's Case, ibid. 5«*-Dtibr» 
enoe between Outlawry in Civil and Criminat 
Proceedings stated by Lord Mansfield on de» 
livering the Judgment of the Court in Wilkes's 
Case, 19 vol. 1098. — Outlawry will lie upon 
a Criminal Information, ibid. 1104^— Outlawry 
will lie upon every Conviction for an Offence 
against tbe Peace, although tbeare may be no 
actual Force, ibid. 1106.— No Writ of Procla- 
mation is necessary in Criminal Cases in Out- 
lawry after Judgment, ibid. 1108. 

OXFORD UNIVERSITY,— See Magdiikm 

College. 

OYER AND TERMINER. 

Tbe Justices of the King's Bench art 
sovereign Justices of Oyer and Terminer, % 
vol. 758.*- Justices of the Peace are not Jus* 
tices of O^er and Terminer within the mean- 
ing of a Statute which gives Jurisdiction to 
Justices of Oyer and Terminer in certain spe« 
oified Cases, ibid, ib.-— Commissioners of Oyer 
and Terminer cannot, by the Common Law, 
sit during Term in the aame County with ^be 
Court of King's Bench, ibid. 750.-^Dlbum's 
Argument against extraordinary Courts dT 
Oyer and Terminer, 4 vol. 1275. — ^Justices of 
Oyer and Terminer, by the words of their 
CommissioD, mav inquire by other ways and 
means than by Indictment, 10 vol, 1357.««<! 
Difference in practice respecting the Jury 
Process under a Commission of Oyer and Ter-* 
miner and a Commission of Gaol Delivery, 13 
vol. 326.*— A Tales lies in Cases of Felonjr 
upon a Commission of Oyer and Terminer, 
ibid. 322.— On Special Commissions of Oyer 
and Terminer it is not tbe practice to return 
the Depositions taken before the commiUing 
Magistrates, 26 vol. 1192. 

PAGAN$.^See UnfJeU. 

PAINS AND PENALTIES,-.See Attainder; 
Atterburyf Bu^. 

Opinions of several eminent Writers re^ 
specting Bills of Pains and Penalties, 16 vol. 
651 (noteV-^Some of the Reaicides were pun- 
ished by Bills of Pains and Penalties, ibid. 
608."^Argument of Mr. Wynn against such 
BilU, in his Speech for Bishop Atterbuiy, 
ibid. 518.— A Bill of Pains and Penalties for 
Treason may be pleaded in Bar to an IndieU 
ment for the same Treason, 16 vol. 465. 

PALACE. 

Proceedings against Sir Edmond Knevet, 
for Striking in the King's Palace, 1 vo). 443. 

PAPERS. 

In former times the Jury could net, in 
Criminal Cases, take any^ Papers with ^em 



990 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



XMl8CBI<I>, 



when th^ retired to con^der their Verdict, 
unless by Consent, though the Papers bad 
been prored in the oonrse of the Case, 7 yoI. 
1207.— Lord Holt, on the Trial of Sir John 
Freiad, refused to allow the Jury to take a 
Letter out of Court with them which had 
been girea in Evidence for the Crown, 13 vol. 
62. 

PAPISTS,— See Jendti ; Pcpay, 

Sir Edward Coke's Historical Account of 
the Plots of the Papists in the Reign of Queen 
Elizabeth, 2 vol. 223.— A Papist held to be 
a good Witness by Chief Justice JefTeries, on 
the Trial of Gates for Perjury, 10 vol. 1192, 
1213. — ^Lord Holt,* in Sir John Freind's Case, 
refuses to have the competency of a Papist as 
a Witness argued, 13 vol. 45.— Mr, East's 
Summary of the Statutes now in force against 
pot making the Declaration against .Popeiy, 
6 Yol. 201 (note).— Animadversions on some 
of the principal Doctrines of Papists, 7 vol. 
643» — ^Ronarks on the Doctrines of Equivo- 
cation and Mental Reservation, ibid. 545, 557. 
— LordFountainhairs Account of the measures 
taken in favour of Papists in Scotland by 
James the Second, 1 1 vol. 1165 (note). — Evils 
arising from the appointment of professed 
Papists to places of Judicature by James the 
Second, 15 vol. 284. 

PARDON. 

It was held in Sir Walter Raleigh's Case, 
that a Commission from the King for a foreign 
Service, giving power of Life and Death, did 
not amount to a Pardon of a Treason pre- 
viously committed,' 2 vol. 34. — It was the 
Opinion of most Lawyers at that time, that 
such a Commission amounted to a Pardon, 
ibid. 37. — Chief Justice Mountague, in that 
Case, says, that a Pardon for Treason must be 
by express Words, and not by implication, 
ibid. 34. — ^Tbis Doctrine was alluded to by 
the Solicitor General on the Trial of one of 
the Regicides, 5 vol. 1101. — ^The power of 
pardoning Treason is inseparable from the 
person of the King, and cannot be communi- 
cated to others, 4 vol. 1184.— If a person has 
committed a capital Offence, and is pardoned, 
and afterwards breaks the Peace, he forfeits 
the benefit of his Pardon, ibid. 1186. — Lord 
Chief Justice North says, in Reading's Case, 
that a Pardon takes away not only a Witness's 
liability to punishment, but removes all objec- 
tion to his Competency, 7 vol. 296. — Mr. 
Margrave's Notice of this Opinion, ibid. 1052 

Snote). — In Elizabeth Cellier's Case, the 
udges were divided in opinion upon the 
Question whether, in case of a Conviction for 
Pelony, a Pardon would restore the compe- 
tency of the Witness, ibid. 1054 (note). — 
Chief Justice Scroggs says, in Lord Castle- 
maine's Case, that if a man be convicted of 
Perjury, a pardon will not make him a Wit- 
nessjj ibid. 1083. — Lord Holt expresses a cOn- 
Uajy Opinion in Crosby's Case, 12 vol. 1296. 



—Discussion of the Question, in Lord Castle- 
maine's Case, whether a person burned in the 
hand for Felony, and afterwards pardoned, is 
a good Witness, 7 toI. 1084.-*lt was deter- 
mined bv the Court of King's Bench in that 
Case, after a communication with the Judges 
of the Common Pleas, that a person convicted 
of Felony and pardoned, but not burnt ia 
the hand, is not a competent Witness, ibid^ 
1090.— Discussion in the Earl of Warwick's 
Case, of the Question whether a person who 
has been convicted of a clergyable Felony, 
and allowed his Clergy, but has not beea 
burned in the hand or pardoned, is a compe- 
tent Witness, 13 toI. 1005. — Opinion of the 
Judges, with their Reasons at length, that he 
is not a competent Witness, ibid. 1014 (note). 
-*Lord Holt's Opinion, in Crosby's Case, as 
to the effect of a general Pardon in the re- 
moval of civil and criminal Disabilities, 12> 
vol. 1292, 1296.-— Discussion of this subject 
in the Case of Ambrose Rookwood, 13 vol, 
183.— Where the King grants a Pardon under 
the Great Seal, it has the fuU^ effect of a Par* 
liamentary Pardon, ibid. 186. — ^Debates in 
the House of Commons, in the Earl of Danby's 
Case, respecting the validity of. ,a Plea of 
Pardon under the Great Seal to a Parliament- 
ary Impeachment, 11 vol. 769. — Mr. Justice 
Blackstone's Remarks upon this subject, ibid* 
742 (note). — ^By the Act of Settlement, 12 and 
13 Will. 3, c. 2, it was enacted, that no 
Pardon under the Great Seal of England shall 
be pleadable to an Impeachment by the Com-- 
mons in Parliament, ibid, ib.— But after the 
Impeachment has been heard and determined, 
the King may pardon, ibid, ib.— The King 
cannot pardon in an Appeal of Homicide, be« 
cause it is the Suit of the party, 8 vol. 287 ; 
See also 18 vol. 319. — A Pardon granted be- 
fore the commission of an Offence is inef« 
fectual, 14 voL 1029. — A Pardon under the 
Great Seal of Scotland cannot discharge an 
Offence committed against the Law of Eng- 
land, ibid. 1028. — ^A Pardon is not an Ac- 
quittal within the meaning of a Penal Statute, 
Chetwynd's Case, 18 vol. 327. — In pleading 
a Pardon after a Conviction for a Misdemea- 
nour, the .Defendant needs not go to the Bar 
of the Court, or plead it upon his knees, 17 
yol. 211 (note). — A Plea, of Pardon, being a 
Confession of the Fact, if not made out, is 
conclusive against the party pleading it, and 
he cannot plead over to the merits, 4 vol. 1187. 
— ^Form ofa Pardon granted to James the First 
to Theophilus Higgons, for conversing with 
Jesuits and remaining in Popish Seminaries, 
2 voL 738.— Form of a Pardon granted by 
James the First to Sir Eustace Hart, of all 
Adulteries and Incontinencies, ibid. 740. 

PARENT AND CHILD. 

If a Parent, being provoked by the Mis^ 
conduct of a Child, corrects . him moderately, 
and with a reasonable and proper Weapoii» 
and the Child happens to diei it is only a Mis* 



CONTBNTS.] 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



£31 



adfeuture, Mkwgridge's Case, 17 toI. 67« — 
Aigoment in favour of the right of the Father 
hf the Law of England, in all Cases, to the 
Costody and Education of his duldren, 15 
fd. 1205. 

PARLIAMENT. 

See Annual Parliaments ; House of Commonsj 
House of Lords ; Impeachment ; Privilege ; 
Veers; Parliamentary Law, 

Sir Robert Atkyns's Defence of Lord Coke's 
Etymology of the word Parliament, 13 vol. 
1393.— It was held in Sir John Elliott's Case, 
that seditious and unlawful Acts done in Par* 
liament are punishable in the Court of King*s 
BcDch, 3 ToL 317.— Sir Robert Atkyns's Argu- 
ment, in the Proceedings against Sir William 
Williams, that the Court of King's Bench 
cannot take cognizance of matters done in 
Parliament, 13 vol. 1422.— An Order of Par- 
liament is determined by the dissolution of 
the Parliament, Captain Streater's Case, 5 vol. 
403.— Courts take judicial Notice of the sitting 
or dissolation of Parliament, ibid. ib. See 
also 8 vol. 312. — A Parliament is ^ facto 
dissolved by the Death of the King, Sir Henry 
Tane's Case, 6 vol. 121. — ^Acts of Parliament 
derogating from the power of subsequent Par- 
liaments bind not, ibid. 122 (note).-*An in- 
ferior Court may judge of the Privilege of 
PaHiament where it is incidental to a Suit, of 
"Which the Court is possessed, but uot of mat- 
ters arising originally in Parliament, ibid. 
1*291. See also 8 vol. 313.— Difficulties of 
the subject of Parliamentary Privilege, and 
inconsistency of the Decisions made at di£fer- 
«nt limes respecting its extent, 6 vol. 1121 
(note).— AU Privileges of Parliament which 
derogate from the Common Law are now at 
^ end, excepting the freedom of a Member's 
Pwsim from Arrest, ibid. 1127 (note).— Mr. 
Justice Blackstone's Summary of the later 
Statutes restraining the Privileges of Parlia- 
nent, ibid. ib. — Parliament proceeds in its 
legislative capacity, and in matters of Privi- 
l^e, according to the Law and Custom of 
PaHiament; but in its judicial capacity it 
proceeds according to the Laws and Statutes 
^the Realm, 8 vol. 315.— Argument of Mr. 
Wynne, in Bishop Atterbury's Case, that Par- 
liaoient, when acting in its judicial capacity, 
u bound by the Rules of legal Evidence, 16 
Hi. 561 .-^The three Estates in Parliament 
^ one entire Body and Corporatiojo, 13 vol. 
^^8'— Lord Coke states, that in ancient time< 
^Parliament sat together, but separated at 
"e desire of the Commons, ibid. 1410.— Dis- 
cission of the Power and Jurisdiction of Par- 
'i^^nt, in the Proceedings against Sir William 
l^iUiains for publishing Dangerfield's Narra« 
^^9 as Speaker of the House of Commons, 
*?d by command of the House, ibid. 1380.— 
w Robert Atkyns's Argument, in Sir William 
wu\ianjg»g Case, that the House of Commons 
J** always been a constituent part of the Par- 
**«»«n» of England, ibid. 1394.— The Parlia- 



ment has a legislative, judicial, aad consulting, 
power, ibid. 1414. — Reference to the earlier 
Cases in the State Trials on the powers and 
privileges of Parliament, 14 vol. 695 (note).— - 
.Reference to Cases on the Question whether 
the legality of a Commitment by ei&er House 
of Parliament may be examined by a Court 
of Law, 13 vol. 1371 (note).— General Refer- 
ence to modem Pamphlets upon the Questionr 
of the duration of Parliamentary Impeachments 
after the Dissolution of the Parliament iii 
which they were commenced, 2 vd. 1446 
(note). — Resolution of both Houses of Parlia« 
ment in 1791, in the Case of Warren Hastings, 
that an Impeachment is not determined by a 
Dissolution of Parliament, 2 vol. 1446 (note)^ 
12 vol. 1236 (note), 

PARLIAMENTARY ELECTION.— See 

Pkctioa* 

PARLIAMENTARY LAW.— See Impeat^ 
ment; Parliament, 

Lord Nottingham informed Lord Stafford 
on his Trial, that the House of Lords would 
not permit Counsel to argue points of Parlia- 
mentary Law, 7 vol. 1545. — Reference to the 
earlier Cases in the State Trials on the subject 
of Parliamentary Law, 14 vol. 695 (note). — 
Reference to various Cases in which disputed 
points of Parliamentary Law are discussed and 
settled, 6 vol. 1121 (note). 

PARLIAMENTARY REFORM. 

The Duke of Richmond's Letter to Colonel 
Sharman on Parliamentary Reform, 24 voL 
1048. — Mr. Burke's Opinion on Reform in 
Parliament, 24 vol. 918. 

PARLIAMENTARY PRIVILEGE.--See 
Privilege of ParUament, 

PARRICID£.--See BUmdvy Mary; Standi- 
. field, Philip. 

Severe Punishment of a Parricide by the 
Roman Law, 4 vol. 1034. 

PARSON. 

An Action will not lie against a ParsoQ 
suing for Tithes in kind, knowing that there 
was a Modus, 6 vol. 1108. 

PARTIAL COUNSEL. 

Explanation of the meaning of the term by 
the Law of Scotland, 18 vol. 962 (note). 

PARTICEPS CRIMINIS.— See AccmpluM. 

PASSIVE OBEDIENCE.— See ReMtonce. 

Animadversions on the Doctrine of Passive 
Obedience and Noi^Resistance in the Speeches 
of the Managers for the House of Commons 
on the Trial of Dr. Sacheverell, 15 vol. 53, &c. 
— ^Argument of Sir Simon Harcouit for Dr. 
Sacheverell that the Doctrine of Passive Obe- 
dience, properly qualified and understood, is 
a Doctrine of the Chuf ch of Eoglaad, and is 



«•« 



QSNBRAL iNDEX TO 



[Mttcwuti* 



agiBMbla to ilM Lmt of Eagknd^ ibid* tOSv-- 
Mr. J>odd'c Aifmnottt on the itme pointy 
ibid. 216.— Mr. Pbipps'B Quouuioti of the 
GpiaioM of sovortl enuoent Ditinei of the 
Cburcb of Englaiid ie aapport of tbe Dootrine, 
ibid. 231.-— EKtrade ftom Homilies and Sem 
moos in sopport of the Dootriney ibid. 344.— 
Dr. Bumet t Aoconnt of tbe Doctrine of the 
Chnvch of England with reepect to Passive 
Obedience, in his Speech on Dr. Sadievereirs 
Trial, ibid. 481.p*-)dr. Justice Blaokstone's 
JElMiarks on tbe Doctrines of Passive Obe^ 
dience and Not^Resistance^ ibid, 2 (note).— 
Opittioof of Dr. Tnoker, Dean of Gloucester, 
on the same sabject, ibid. 5 (note). — Assertion 
jof the lawfelness of Resistance in certain Cir- 
cumstances by Mr. Jeffrey, in his Defence of 
Thomas Baird for Sedition, 33 vol. 105. 

PATENTS.— See AfoNOpotief ; Mon^auon, Sir 
Gila; Mkielt, Sir Framsii. 

Discussion in tbe Great Case of Monopolies 
respecting the Talidity of ao exclusive Patent, 
lor trading to India, granted by the Crown to 
the East India Company, 10 vol. 371. 

PEACE.— See Jtutica of the Peace. 

Wiit to the Sheriffs to proclaim Peace on 
the Accession of Edwaid the Third, 1 voU 49. 
•—Writing a seditious Libel tends to a Breadi 
of tbe Peace, but is not itself a Breach of the 
Peace, 19 vol. 990,996. — ^A Breach of the Peace 
may be committed without actual Force, 19 vol. 
3107w— DiscuasioD, in the Case of the Seven 
Biceps, whether a seditious libel is a Breach 
of the Peace, 12 vol. 22f.-— Discussion whether 
a Secretary of State is a Conservator of Uie 
Peace at Common Law, 19 vol. 10l2, 1037. 
— Lord Camden delivers the Judgment of the 
Court of Common Pleas, in the Case of Entick 
and Carrington, in the negative, ibid. 1048.— 
The power of Conservators of the Peace was 
▼ery short of the authority of Justices of the 
Peace at the present day, 12 vol. 1376 (note). 
•— The existence of Peace between this Country 
and France is matter of Notoriety, and need 
not be expressly proved, though evened in 
pleading, 23 voL 230, 28 vol. 016. 



PEACE OFFICERS 

Constable. 



Qfieer$,- 



PEERS.— See High Steward's Court ; h^peaeh- 
ment; Parliament. 

Assignment of Error in the Proceedings 
•gainst Thomas, Eaii of Lancaster, in 1322, 
that he was not tried by his Peers, 1 vol. 46. 
—In the Case of Simon de Beieibrd, the Lords 
peas Jndgment upon a Commonegr, b«t record 
a Protest aghast that Case being madea Pre* 
cedent for thera to judge any Ixit their Pe^i 
a Treasoa or Fekny, ibid. 54^— Record of 
ihe Protest of the Lords in that Case, anda 
doubt suggested whether it was not am Act of 
Parliament, 12 vol. 1229.— It was hold in the 
CaM of D^ Coutesi 9iSkmm\mvf, 4hat in 



the Star Chamber and Sa Chinceiy, Pi 
should answer upon Oath, 2 vol. 771.*— But m 
1638 and in 1640 the House of Lords dedared 
it to be the privilege of Peers to answer in all 
Courts upon Protestation of Honour only, itiid. 
772 (note).-^A Peer, sitting in Judgment, 
gives his Verdict npon his Honour, ibid. ib. — 
In Criminal Cases, and in giving his Evidence 
between party and party, he must be sworn ^ 
ibid. ib. — Cases in which the Protestation of 
Honour is sufficient, ibid. ib. — Lord Bacon i» 
said to have required Peers to swear in Chan- 
cery, ibid. 1093.--OU the Trial of Lord Staf- 
fbrd, the Bail of Macclesfield gave Evidence 
upon his Oath, and, upon his hesitating to ba 
sworn, was tokl bytfie Lord Hig^ Staward 
(Lord Nottingham) that there was net a coloar 
of doubt about it, 7 vol. 1458.--Two other 
instances mentioned, in whidi Peers have been 
sworn on their giving Evidence in crimimJ 
Cases in Pariiament, ibid. ib. (note)^— On tbe 
Trial of the Impeachment of Lmrd Chaacettor 
MaoelesAeld, the Bishop of Oxford gave Evi* 
deuce upon his Oath, 16 vol. 1252.— It waa 
resolved by the House of Lords in 1685, that it 
was a Breach of Privilege for a Master in ChaOp 
eery to refuse to take the Answer of a Peer upon 
his Honour, ibid. 1258 (note).-*Mr. I^nnesaye 
that a Bishop is not to be tried in Parliament, 
but by a Jury, 4 voL 744w — ^It was held in Lord 
Sanquire's Case, that a Peer of Scotland, not 
having a Barony in England, and not being 
a Lonl of Parliament, is not a Peer of the 
Realm, and therefore is not entitled to be tried 
in Parliament, 2 vol. 756.— A Bason of Ireland 
may be tried by a Jury in England for Trea* 
sons committed in Ireland, Macguire's Case^ 
4 vol. 665, 689,-^Kesolution, in Lord Castla- 
haven's Case, that a Peer of the Realm cannot 
waive his Trkd by his Peers and be tried by a 
Jury, 3 vol. 402* — ^Lord Hale mentions tbe 
Case of Thomas de Berkele as the only in- 
stance he ever knew of a Peer waiving hii 
Trial by his Peers, and being tried by a Jury, 
12 vd. 1219 (note). — ^It was also resolved, in the 
Case of Lord Castlehaven, that if a Peer refused 
to puthimself upon his Trial by his Peers, it vras 
standing Mote, and subjected him to the Peine 
fort et dure, 3 vol. 402^ — ^A Peer on his 
Trial oannot challenge any of his Peers, 1 vol. 
521, 1335. — So resolved by the Judges in 
Lord Castlehaven's Case, 4 vol. 4024 — Similar 
Resolution of the Judges in Lord Morie/s 
Case, 6 vol. 769 (note). — ^Resolved in hotd 
Castlehaven's Case, that a Peer on his Trial 
for Felony has no Privilege for Counsel ra(ve 
than a Commoner, 3 Td. 402. — Precedents 
respecting the allowance of Counsel to a Petf 
on bis Timl for Misdemeanours, 6 vol. 797.— • 
Resolution of the House of Lords in 1701 that 
no Lord of Pariiament, impeached of Hiyh 
Crimes and Misdemeanoun, shall, npon hoe 
Trial, be without the Bar, 14 ▼ol.288.--It 
seems donbtfol whedier a Peer, on his Arraign* 
ment, is to hold up his hand, 6 vol. 1 319 (noteX 
—It was held by the Judges, ia Lonl Castle* 
hKrea'a Case, Itet 4n a Tn^ ia the lii|^ 



ClMCBttS.]! 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



9*9 



Steward's Cowty the Lords Trien might eat 
tod drink before they were agreed, but tbat 
they could not separate or adjourn till tbey 
bad gi^en their Verdict, 3 vol. 403. — Discus- 
BOD respecting the propriety of such an Ad- 
jonnment on the Trial of Lord Delamere, 11 
Tol. 560.— 'The SunuBons of the Peer to the 
High Steward's Court, in the Case of the 
Countess of Somerset, was signed by the Lords 
of the Council^ 2 vol. 951. — ^Lord Chancellor 
Jeieries says, in Lord Delamere's Case, that 
tbe Peers are convened by the Lord High 
Steward, 11 vol. 562.— Account of the Cere* 
moaial part of the Proceedings on the Trial 
of a Peer in the Court of the Lord High 
Steward, by Gregory King, Lancaster Herald, 
15 ToL 771 (not^. — ^^Mr, Justice Foster's Re- 
aaiksupon the construction of the 10th and 
tlth Sections of the Stat. 7 and 8 Will. 3, 
niating to the Trial of Peers for Treason, 18 
fol 442 (note). — ^Mr. Barrington*s Observap 
tioDs on some of the ancient Statutes respect- 
bgthe Trial of Peers for Crimes, 19 vol. 968 
(note).— By the Stat. 20 Hen. 6, c. 9, Peeresses 
are pat upon the eame fiottng with Peers with 
KSpectto Trial and Punishment, 20 vol. 633. 
—Discussion, in the Duchess of Kingston's 
Cue, whether a Peeress convicted of a clergy- 
able Felony is entitled, tinder the Statutes, to 
the benefit of Peerage, ibid. 625. — ^Opinion 
of the Judges in that Case that a Peeress is 
eatiOed to the benefit of Peerage, ibid. 642 
(note).— The word "Peer'' In a Statute in- 
dndes Females as well as Males, ibid. 647 
(note).— Opinion of the Judges, in the Case 
of the Earl of Clarendon, that a Charge of 
High Treason cannot originally be exhibited 
by one Peer against another in the House of 
L»ds, 6 vol. 313. — ^An Appeal against a Peer, 
being the Suit of the party, is to be tried by 
te Ofdiaary Jury, and not io the House of 
I^rds, 8 vol. 238 (note). — Resolution of the 
Hoose of Lords, in the Earl of Devonshire's 
Case, that a Peer ought not to be committed 
for the non-payment of a Fine to the King, 
11 vol. 1372.— discussion in tlie Case of the 
^ren Bi^ops, whether a Peer may be con»- 
niitted for a idisdemeanour, 12 vol. 220. — 
Peers may be committed for Treason, Felony, 
or actual Breach of the Peace, ibid. 223.— A 
Prisoner on his Trial cannot be allowed the 
Privilege of Peerage on motion merely, unless 
?e produces his Patent, Lord Preston's Case, 
jbid. 666.— A Peer cannot divest himself of 
jw Dignity or Privileges, nor can they be taken 
from him except by Act of Parliament, At- 
«»ader of his Person, or by Scire facias to 
|«peal his Letters Patent, Earl of Banbury's 
vase, ibid. 1195. — ^Peerage cannot be taken 
wwjr without the King's consent, ibid. 1196. 
•*-Mr. Crube's Summary of the effects of an 
Attainder for Treason or Felony upon Peer- 
■8«»> 19 voL 979. — ^Peers have no Privilege 
^ relbse to be examined before the Privy 
^^Jttncil, Countess of Shrewsbury's Case, 2 
^ 771,-^fder of the Hoose of Lords in 
^984, that ne F«er ^ F«rtia»eat sboild 



amwcr any Complaittt tgatost Him in tb« 
House of Commons, either in person or by 
Counsel without the consent of the House of 
Lords, ibid. 1185. — ^A Peer convicted of a 
clergyable Felony is a good Witness without 
a Pardon or being burned in the Hand^ 13 
vol. 1014.'— Resolution of the Hoose of Lords 
in 1701 that no Peer of PailiamentinKpeached 
of High Crimes and Misdemeanours can be 
predikled from voting on any occasion except 
on his own Trial, 14 vol. 288.— Act of Psvlia* 
ment for the Degradation of a Peer in the 
Reign of Edward the Fourt}i,^.voL 169.— 
Reference to Statutes consolidating the Eng^ 
lish and Lish Peerages, 15 vol. 1332.—^ 
Bishop when pleading his Privil^e must 
plead generally that ke is ^* one of uie Peeis 
of the Realm,*' having no Letters Patent to 
set out, 12 vol. 1194. 

PEINE FORT ET DURE.*--See Muge^ 



Mr. Emlyn says, that &is Proceeding l» m 
unnecessary severity in the English Law, £m« 
Pref. 1 vol. xxxii.— Lord Coke's Explanation 
of the nature of this Proceeding to Richard 
Weston, on his refusing to plead to an Indict* 
ment for the Murder of Sir Thomas Overbury, 
2 vol. 91 3.*- Instance of the inflictien of the 
Peine fort et dure, in the Reign ef Henry th« 
Sixth, upon a person refusing to plead to an 
Indictment for speaking contemptuous Words 
of the Ring, 3 voL 3dO. — ^Instances are said 
to have occurred in modem times, 30 vol. 767» 
828.— The object of the Peine fort et dure 
was not to compel a Confession* but to oblige 
the |»artyto plead, 30 vol. 695.^ — It was re-i 
solved by the Judges in Lord Castlehaven'9 
Case, tl^t if a Prisoner stood mute im an 
Appeal, he must be hanged, an Appesd not 
being within ihe Statute of Westminster, 1 
c. 12, 3 vol. 403l--It was also resolved in 
that Case, that a Locd of Parliament is within 
the Statute, and liable to the Peine fort et 
dure if he ief«use to plead, ibid, ib, 

PENAL STATUTE.— See Di^^a^ i^w»^. 

Danger of leaving the construction or ex« 
tension of a Penal Statute to a Judge's Equity, 
1 vol. 891. — Discussion on the power of the 
King to dispense with a Penal Statute, 11 voL 
1187. 

PENALTY. 

If a Statute direets a Penalty inouvedbif 
the eonMOttission of an Office to be divided 
between the Sang and the Poor of tlie Pansh» 
theKhig oan <mly dispense ^th his tram )^ 
of the Penalty, 3 vol. 1179.— The Pendty of 
Abjuraikioti, applied to Protestant Dissentefl 
by tbe Stat. 35 Etiz. was derived from th« 
ancient Common-law practice of SanctnarvatMi 
Abjnratioo^if the Realm, 15 vol.146.— Wbem 
a Statute apponiU « Penalty ibr4enig a thing 
iiiuehim naXMmoe Mm, aad dectoie 



S24 



GENERAL IN^DEX TO 



[Mil 



how it shall be reoorered, it is to be punidied 
by that means^ and no others 16 vol. 1089. 

PERJURY. 

Chief Justice Scioggs says, in Lord Castle- 
maine's Case, that a person convicted of Per- 
jary cannot be a Witness, though he is par- 
doned, 7 Tol. 1083. — Lord Holt says, in the 
Case of Brass Crosby, that after a conviction 
for Perjury, a Pardon removes all objection to 
the Competency of the Offender as a Witness, 
12 vol. 1296. — Mr. Serjeant Hawkins's Re- 
marks on the<^rime of Perjury, 20 vol. 1058 
(note). — In former times Perjury was punished 
with Death, and afterwards with cutting out 
the Tongue, 10 vol. 1314. — ^Form of an Indict- 
ment for Perjury during the Commonwealth, 
5 vol. 335. — ^Form of an Indictment for 
Feijury, committed in Evidence given in 
the Court of the Lord High Steward, 11 vol. 
593 (note). — For Cases of Perjury in the State 
Trials, $ee Canning, Elisabeth, 19 vol. 283— 
Faulconer, Richai^, 5 vol. 323— Gibbons, 
John, 19 vol. 275--Heath, Mary, 18 vol. 1— 
Hurly, Patrick, 14 vol. 377— Gates, Titus, 10 
vol. 1079— Ward, Sir Patience, 9 vol. 299. 

PETER-PENCE. 

Peter-pence abolished by the Constitutions 
of Clarendcmy 2 vol. 546. • 

PETITIONS.— See Petition of Rightt. 

The Millenary Petition presented to James 
the First in 1604, concerning the Reformation 
of the Church, 2 vol. 89. — Petition of Grievances 
presented by the Commons to James the First 
in 1610, ibid. 519. — History of the Kentish 
Petition to the House of Commons in the reign 
of William the Third, 14 vol. 895 (note).— 
Petition of the Seven Bishops against the De- 
claration for Liberty of Conscience, 12 vol.239. 
—Algernon Sidney's Petition to the King after 
his Trial, 9 vol. 904. — Assertion of the Right of 
the People of England to petition the King 
against grievances by Mr. Pollexfen and Ser- 
jeant Levinz, on the Trial of the Seven Bishops, 
12 vol. 371, 392. — ^Argument of Sir William 
Williams, in the same Case, that the only proper 
mode of petitioning the King against Griev- 
ances is in Parliament, ibid. 402 (note), ibid. 
403. — The Court disapprove of this Doctrine, 
ibid. 407. — Lord Loughborough says, that it is 
the undoubted inherent Right of every British 
Subject to petition for the passing or repeal of 
a Sutute, 21 vol.487 — ^The Statute of Charles 
the Second, forbidding more than ten persons, 
under a Penalty,, to attend a Petition to the 
King or either House of Parliament, is not re- 

?ealed by the Bill of Rights, ibid. 646, 649.— 
he Act of Settlement passed at the Revolu- 
tion, eipressly declares the Right of the Sub- 
ject to petition the Crown, 14 vol. 496.— The 
Bight of petitioning has belonged to the people 
of this Country from ancient times, 33 vol. 74. 
—The Right of petitioning necessarily includes 
Ahe. Right of discussion, ibid. 84.*-Precedeiits 



of Prosecutions for Libels on the Judges, eon* 
tained in Petitions to the King against them, 3 
vol. 1074. 

PETITION OF RIGHTS. 

Debates in Parliament previous to the Pe^ 
tition of Rights, 3 vol.166. — Petition of Rights 
proposed to the House of Commons by Sir 
Edward Coke, ibid. 188. — ^The Lords propose 
an additional clause, ibid. 193. — Tlie Cfom- 
mons refuse the additional clause, ibid. 220.— 
Reasons of the Commons for refusing the 
addition, stated by Mr. St. John at a Free 
Conference between the Lords and Commons, 
in 1640, on the Subject of the Judgment in the 
Case of Ship-Money, ibid. 1270. — ^Debate in 
the House of Commons upon the proposed 
addition, ibid. 193. — ^The King's evasive 
Answer to the Petition, and dissatisfaction of 
the Commons thereon, ibid. 224.— The King^s 
final Answer, ibid. 230. — ^The Petition of Rigbts 
as finally agreed to by the King and both 
Houses of Parliament^ ibid. 221. 

PETIT TREASON. 

A Charge of Petit Treason against one 
Person, and of Murder against another, may 
be joined in one Indictment, 18 vol. 1193 
(note). — Petit Treason and Murder are in law 
the same offence, differing only in circumstance 
and degree, ibid. 1200. — Remarks of Mr. Jus- 
tice Foster upon the proper course to be taken 
where a man is indicted for Murder, and the 
proof amounts to Petit Treason, ibid. ib. — He 
states it as his Opinion that a man may be 
convicted of Murder upon an Indictment for 
Petit Treason, ibid. ib. 

PICKET. 

Description of the Punishment so called, 
from Grose's Military Antiquities, 30 vol. 481 
(note). 

PICTURE. 

On the Trial of Governor Picton for inflict- 
ing the Torture in the Island of Trinidad, a 
Picture, describing the mode of the Torture, 
was allowed to be shewn to the Jury, in order 
to explain the Evidence, 30 vol. 458. 

PILLORY. 

Mr. Emlyn's Remarks upon the Punishment 
of the Pillory, Em. Pref. 1 vol. xxxvi.— Mr. 
Barrington's Observations upon the Pillory, 3 
vol. 401 (note), 7 vol. 1209 (note). — Form of 
the Judgment of the Pillory, 7 vol. 1208 (note). 
—Remarks on the Etymology of the Word, 14 
vol. 446 (note).— Stat. 56 Geo. 3, c. 13^ 
abolishing the Pillory, except in certain cases, 
22 vol. 358.— Instance of a Man being killed 
in the Pillory, 19 vol. 809. 

PIRACY. 

Trial of several persons in 1693, for ac(iofl[ 
as Privateeis under a Commiasion from JaiBCi 



COimKTi.] 



THE STATE TftlALS. 



tfae Seoond after his Abdicatien, 12 -vol. 1269. 
*— Debate in the Privy Coancil whether the 
cooduct of. persons so acting amounted to 
Piracy, ibid. ib.«— Opinions in the Negative, 
Ibid, ib.y 1272. — Dr. Tindall's Remarks upon 
Uiese Opinions^ ibid. 1271 (note). — General 
ObserratioDS upon the Crime, of Piracy, 13 
Yi^ 454. — Manners seizing the Captain, and 
Ibrdbly taking away the Ship, adjudged to be 
Piracy, ibid. 478. — ^Foreigners acting under 
the Commission of a Foreign Prince at War 
inth England, are not Pirates, ibid. 503, 525. 
— ^Definition and Description of the Crime of 
Piracy, 15 vol. 1234. — For Instances of Trials 
for. Piracy in the State Trials, see Bonnet, 
Major Stede, 15 vol. 1231 — Dawson, Joseph, 
13 vol. 451 — Green, Captain Thomas, 14 vol. 

1199 ^Kidd, Captain WilUam, 14 vol. 14^— 

Qadcb, Captain John, 14 vol. 1067. 

PLANTATIONS.— See Colmy. 

Slat. 11 and 12 Will. 3, c. 12, making the 
Governors of Plantations liable to answer for 
Oppression in the Courts i n England, 1 4 vol. 497. 
—-Suggestion that it might be Treason to petition 
the House of Commons in the Plantations where 
the King governs by Prerogative, ibid. 496. 

PLAYS. 

Proceedings in the Star-Chamber against 
William Prynne and others, for printing and 
publishing Histrio-maslix, being a Book written 
against Stage-flays, 3 vol. 561. 

PLEADING.>--See ^M^en^; DUaioryFlea; 
Indictment; Information. 

In the Indictment of an Accessary in London 
to a Murder committed in Middlesex, it must 
be expressly alleged that the Principal com- 
mitted the Murder in Middlesex^ and not 
merely that he was indicted for it there. Lord 
Saoquire's Case, 2 vol. 757. — In favour of life, a 
Prisoner, in a capital Case, after a Special Plea 
found against him, may plead over Not Guilty, 
Sir Henry Vane's Case, 6 vol. 143. — See also 
Fitzbarris's Case, 8 vol. 275. — Suggestion that 
where a Party pleads a Pardon, and fails to 
make it out, he is concluded by it, and cannot 
plead over, 4 vol. 1187. — ^Arguments in Fitz- 
hairis's Case, that in criminal Cases the Court 
has the Ppwer of rejecting an insufficient Plea 
in Abatement without putting the Crown to a 
Demurrer, 8 vol. 265, &c. — In pleading a 
Record, an Averment of its existence gener- 
ally is not sufijcient, but the Record itself must 
be set oat, ibid. 265. — A Plea of Misnomer in 
Abatement by a Peer indicted as a Commoner 
may conclude with a general Verification, 
and not a Verification per Recordum, Earl of 
Banbury's Case, 12 vol. 1192, 1200. — It is 
no Objection to such a Plea, setting out a 
Patent under the Great Seal, that it does not 
expressly state the Defendant to be a Peer of 
England, nor that the place from which he takes 
his name of Dignity is in England, ibid. 1194, 
1199* — ^In Pleading, <' Dominus Rex *' always 
VHwa the King of BpgUnd, 13 VQI ??3,— 



225 



Opinion of |he Judges in the House of Lords, 
in Dr. SachieverelVs Case, that in all Indict- 
ments or Informations for Crimes by speaking 
or writing, the words imputed as criminal, 
must be expressly set out, 15 vol. 466. — A Bill 
of Pains and Penalties for Treason may be 

? leaded in bar to an Indictment for the same 
■reason, 16 Vol. 465. — On Indictments or In- 
formations for Crimes, the pendency of another 
Prosecution for the same Offence cannot be 
pleaded, 21 vol. 1048 (note).— Chief Justice 
De Grey's Explanation of the different degrees 
of Certainty requisite in different kinds of 
pleadings, 20 vol. 792. — In Indictments Cer- 
tainty to a common intent is not sufficient, 16 
vol. 315. — It is not necessary in an Indictment 
that the word " that," referring to the present- 
ment of the Grand Jury, should be repeated at 
every clause of the Charge, Cranburne's Case, 
13 vol. 230.— -Discussion in the same Case, 
whether in an Indictment for Treason, the 
word " Proditori^" must be repeated at every 
Overt Act, ibid. ib. — Discussion in Lowick's 
Case, respecting the necessity of repeating the 
words " then and there,*' at the allegation of 
each part of the Charge in the Indictment, ibid. 
267.— Of the use of the words " falso et mali- 
tiose," in a Declaration, 6 vol. 1113. — ^Lord 
Coke's Advice never to demur to a Declaration, 
if there be any hopes of the fact, for the matter 
of Law will serve as well after Verdict as upon 
Demurrer, ibid. 1114. — Qualification of the 
Rule that words of restriction in pleading are to 
be referred only to the last Antecedent, 13 vol. 
1110 (note).— See also 13 vol. 224. — Doubt 
expressed by Lord Mansfield and Mr. Justice 
BuUer respecting the universality of the Rule, 
that if one Count in a Declaration is bad, the 
Judgment must be arrested upon the whole, 
22 vol. 124. — In an Action for False Imprison- 
ment, where the Defendant pleads a Commit- 
ment as a Magistrate for a bailable Offence, 
the Plaintiff cannot, under the general Repli- 
cation of De injt4ridf give in Evidence a tender 
and refusal of Bail, 20 vol. 1315. 

PLEADINGS. 

DECLARAfiONs.-^Declaration in a Special 
Action on the Case, by a Candidate at an 
Election for Members of Parliament, against 
the Sheriff for making a double Return, fiarnar- 
diston V. Soame,.6 vol. 1063.— In an Action of 
Scandalum Magnatum by the Duke of York 
against Dr. Oates, io vol. 129. — In a similar 
Action by Lord Macclesfield, 11 vol. 1413. — In 
an Action on the Case for a Malicious Arrest 
of the Lord Mayor of London, Pritchard v. 
Papillon, 10 vol. 322. — In a Special Action on 
the Case, by a Burgess against the returning 
Officers of a Borough, for refusing the Plaintiff's 
Vote at an Election for Members of Parliament, 
Ashby r. White, 14 vol. 697. — ^A similar Decla« 
ration in the Case of Paty v. White, ibid. 801. 
— In Trespass for breaking the Plaintiff^s House, 
and seizing Papers, Entick v, Carrington, 19 
vol. 1030. 

Q 



S26 



^ENfiHAL tK£>EX TO 



i^M^^ffinnJit 



jrtd)tg..«.ItidiMiii€Dt of Edward, Duke of 
jSo«set8et/for High Treason, in attempting to 
«eise the person of the King, to iin{>nsofa th« 
Duke of Northttmbeiiand, and to excite an In* 
Borrection in London, 1 vol. 516. — ^Of Garnet 
lind others for High Treason, in being parties 
to the Gunpowder Plot, 2 Yol. 1 59.-^tnfbrfnation 
against Sir John Elliott and others for seditious 
Speeches in the House of Cotnmons, 3 vol. ^20. 
-—Indictment of Miles Sindercome for High 
Treas(^, in conspiring to Murder the Lord Pro- 
tector, 6 vol. 644.— Of Twyn and others for High 
IVeason, in publishing a Seditiotls and Treasons- 
able Book,d vol.514.— Of EdwardColeman for 
High Treason, in being concerned in the Popish 
Plot, T vol. 3.— Of Whitebread and others for 
being concerned in thesamePlot, ibid. 81 .-^See 
idso 10 vol. 1083, 1229.—- Of Richard Lahghorn 
for being concerned in the Popish Plot, 7 vol. 
41 r.— For other Indictments for High Treason, 
Arising out of the Popish Plot, see ^ vol. 592, 
960, 1161, 8 vol. 501, 567.— Of Charles Kerne 
for High Treason, on the Stat. 2^ Eliz. c. 5, for 
remaining within the Realm as a Seminary 
Priest, 7 vol. 707.— Other Indictments on the 
Statute of Eliz. 7 vol. 721, 725, 815, 8 vol. 
525.— Of Elizabeth Cellicr for High Treason, 
in being cdncerned in the Meal-Tub Plot, 7 
vol. 1043.— Of Roger Palmer, Earl of Castle- 
inaine, for being concerned in the same Plot, 
ibid. 1067.— Of Thomas Walcot for High 
Treason, in being concerned in the Rye-Housd 
Plot, 9 vol. 519, 562.— Of William, Lord Rus- 
sell, for being concerned in the same Plot, ibid. 
i578.^— Of Algernon Sidney for the same Treason^ 
ibid. 817.-^Of Dr. Oliver Plunket for High 
Treason, in conspiring to overthrow the Govern^ 
ment in Ireland, 8 vol. 451. — Of Joseph Hayes 
for High Treason, in corresponding with an 
outlawed Traitor, 10vol. 309 (note). — Of Lady 
Alice Lisle for High Treason, in harbouring 
Traitors, 11 vol. 297;-^Other Indictments for 
the same Offence, ibid. 388, 385, 388. — Of 
John Hampden for High Treason, in being 
concerned in the Duke of Monmouth's Rebel-" 
lion, 11 vol. 480, 485.— Of Lord Delamere for 
being concerned in the ssime Rebellion, 11 vol. 
516.— Of Lord Preston for High Treason, in 
carrying on a correspondetice witli the French 
Goverttraerit, for the purpose of bringing in the 
Pretehderj 12 vol. 646.— Of Charnock, King, 
and Keyes, -for High Treason, in being con- 
cerned in the Assassination Plot, 12 vol.1379. 
—Other Indictments of persons concerned in 
the Assassination Plot, 13 vol. 3, 66, 139, 345. 
•^-Of James Boucher for High Treason, on the 
Stat. 9 Will. 3, for going into Frarice and re- 
turning into England without a Licence from* 
the King, 14 vol. 983 (not e).--Of David Lind« 
»ay for the same Offence, ibid. 988 (note);^-^ 
Of Daniel Dammaree for High Treason, in 
Levjring War against the Queen, by engaging 
in a tumultuous- Assembly for the purpose of 
pulling down Meeting-Houses, 15 vol. 524.— 
A similar Indictment against Purchase, ibid. 
691, 695.— Of Francis Francia for High 
TtfeatfOH m coti^esponding with Fraii^ for the 



purpose 6f bringing in the Pletetider^ ibid. 90^. 
«-M3f Johii Matthews for High Treason tHi the 
Stat. 6 Ann, f(^r wfttinf a Book asi^erttd^ tte 
title of the Pt'etender to the CroVm of En^abd, 
ibid. 1834.-^f Christopher Layer for Iti|;h 
Treason, ih conspiring to bring ih the P)^ 
tender, 16 vol. 94.— Of Fiends ToWnUy fot 
High Treason, in being concerned in the A^- 
bellion of 1745, 18 vol. 833.**-Of LoidGwrge 
Gordon for High Treason, in instigatii^ ^ 
Nofc.Popery Riots in London in 1780^ tl vol, 
494.— Of t>e la Motte for cbtresponding ^ith 
the Ftinch GoteWment lA tini« of War, ibid. 
687.*-Of [David Tyrie for a similar Trfeftsbn. 
ibid. 850.--Of Hardy, Hortie tooke^ abd 
others, for High Treaison, in edtiSpiring to 
overthrow the Government, 24 ynAi ii%.>^ 
Other Indicttn^nts for similar Charges in tke 
Cases of Stone and Crossfield, 25 vol. 1156, M 
vol. 3. — Of Weldon for High Treason, in pro- 
moting the tbsurrection of the Defenders in 
Ireland, 26 Vol. 230.^Of other pfefsoilS for 
the same Treason, ibid. 295, 355.— Of Patria 
Finney in Ireland for High Treasbh, in c(^ 
responding with the French Govertitnetit in 
titne of War, for the purpose of prochiang an 
Invasion of the Realm, 26 vol. iOl9»-*Df Wil- 
liam Jackson for the same Treason, 25 vol. 785. 
— Of O'Coigly, O'Connor, and others, for High 
Treason, in correspbnding with the FreMh 
Governmeut, and encouraging an Invasion, ^6 
vol. 1204.— Of Hetity arid John She'afes toi 
High Treason, iti bdrig Concerned in the liM 
Rebellion, 27 vol. 257.— Other Indietmests 
for the same Treason, ibid. 399, 455, 52^.— Of 
Hadfield for High Treason, in shooting at the 
King, 27 vol* 1 283. *-*Of Colonel Desp&rd for 
High Treason, in cohspiring to kill the Kifig 
and overthrow the Govemh)ent> 28 tol. 359.«** 
Of Kearney for High Treason^ in being tW- 
cemed in the Irish Insurrection, ibid. 692.— 
Other similar Indictments, ibid. 758, 775,805, 
887, 925, 1042, 1069, 1098, 1184j 1239, 18f!. 
-^Of Watson and others fo* High Treason, in 
being concerned iti ati Insurrection to dVerthrow 
the Government, 32 vol. 1 0.-»-Of Brandrfeth aftd 
others for High Treason, in beifig concerned in 
the Luddite Insurrectiotij 32 vol. 755.— Of 
Thistlewood and others for lligh Treason, in 
being concerned in the Cato>Street Plot, 33 tot. 
697.— Of Swati and Jefferies for Petit Treasftn 
and Murder, l8 vol. 1194.— Of Lord Sanqaiite 
for being accessary before the fact to a Murder, 
2 Vol. 744.— Of Philip, EArl of Pertbiok^j ftr 
Murder, by beating and kicking, 6 vol. 1340. 
"*-Of Green and others for the Mtird^r of Sir 
Edmoddbnry Godfrey^ 7 voL 159.— Of SamWl 
Atkins for being accessary to the iitttee Muitier, 
ibid. 231 .--Of Count Coningsihatk and otli€n 
fbr Murder, 9 vol. 9,-^0^ Rowland Wttlt«8 
and others for Murder, In stabbing A Gehtit' 
tnan in a Brawl, 12 voL 113.— -OftHeary flfi*- 
risott for Murd«r^ by strangling Mih ft Hand* 
kerchief twisted roUiid a Coal, 12 vof. BBi*-^ 
Of Lord Mehtlii for MardeT^ by ^tabbkig, ibid. 
956.^0f the Earl o^ Bioibury' tut Murder, 
im, il§7i^^f thii ^1 of WifM^cK iiid UlA 



CMMMMtj 



TflE STATfi TRIAtl. 



Silt 



M<ibilii fof Murdef in at)uCr1, 13 tol. 945.-^ 
Of SpeR6«r CoWp^r and dtti6f!9 fof Mutter, hf 
itffwnhiQ^ ibid. ilO^.-*»Of Captaifi William 
Kidd fof Mlitd!^, by §tftking With a Backet, 
14 vol. ilO.^Of R6asd& dud Tranter for 
Minder, dnati Arrest, Id yoL 1.— Of Johti 
Oittfby fbt Mtirdif Irjr itabbingj It vol. 59."- 
Of Jo&fi ttoggitM, ft daol&r, fbr Murder, by 
enififilnl a Prisotieif iti an btiwhdlesdtn)^ RdotH. 
ittd thereby imaihg his Death, ibid. dn.M-Ot 
G^tifft G«od6f (; and MahdfiV fcH* Mtttder, by 
fithiflj^fn^ on bodtd a ship, 17 tol. 10O3.-^Cif 
JSffli69 AilAMley tiiid J6«eph Redding for 
Mtttd«r, ibid. 1094.^~^f Wtn. Ohfttw/fid A)r 
Mttfdef, b¥ itabbltig With a Roife, 13 vol. 
«W)*»^Of Wflii jaeksofi and othfets for Murder, 
bf ttftuipinj With a Rol>e, 18 Vol. lOTS.-^Of 
Maty Blafi^ fbr the Murder of her Father by 
fo&mti, ibidj illf.— <)f J^ft Stevetisoti ifor 

Marder, by ahooting with a Gurt, 19 tol. 845. 
M3f Lawrence, Earl Fwrers, for Murder, by 
AlKMfihg: "iHth ft Piitol^ ibid. d9i.^-^f William, 
Lcrtd £$tdfi^ for Murder, b)r stabbing with t 
msfA iQ & Duei^ ibid. iiao.<^Of Goternor 

Wall for Murder, by <l6gging a Soldt«rr under 
his C««tttt&fid ifi the ISlaUd of Goree, 29 vo). 
1438.-^Of Kiudh aud atiOthe^ fbr Miirdet, by 
IftOdfittg iU Ireland, ^8 TOh 6l9.^0f Lbrd 
AttdKfy for a Rtt»«j 3 vol. 4oe.^Of the matifte 
Ibr SddoiBy, Ibid. 4dr.-^0f Mal*y Meyder^ for 
Bfgimyi « Voii tTB.-'MJf Robert Feilding for 
^e ifttfib Offtooe, 14 vol. lS2B.^Of the 
mhinis of Kingston for the SaiAe Offenee, iO 
wrt, 8d9.^0f Colottel ftirner fer a BurgMry, 

i Tdl. a6d.^^-0f Bk)ben Hftwkind Ibr Larceny, 
ihii. 9SS.'^0f Dawijott and others for Piracy, 
13 tell 4lr&.-^0f Captaiti Vdu^aA fdr ihe 
tenre Ofefree. ilbid. 4^^ 489 (nOte).^Of €fkp^ 
VAn HM km otbini fbr the sAme Ofreflte^ 14 

vd. I4f ^-^-Of Gddiifirg Hftd Others far feloniously 

dMtying It Ihip M Sell With ititettt to defraud 

tile Und^Mrrit^rsi 2d foh leo.-^^Of Mary 
Il8»er for F9^ry of k Boud^ Id vtrl. 1^49.-^ 
or WiUlltffl Hales fbir n Miadem&a&otir kx 
QmtiM^ttAmf fbr forginf « Promissory If df e, 
IT Vol. i62.--Of titfiothy Murphy for the 
ibrgery df a WiU| 19 Vol. 694.^0f Nuitdaco- 
1^ for Hie Forgefjf of a Persian Bmid ih Itidia, 

90 vol. 925.-^Of JbhU LilbUm for feiotlidasly 
tiiB&i^iig ih lln|l&fid after his Banishmeht by 
A«i <yf Pa^tiamenf^ 5 vol« 487«-^Of Haagefi 
Swindseti fer Fdony Ufider tbe Stat« Heti< 7, 
fer the t^ttihk Marriage of ati Heiress, 14 vol. 
H^^Oi Goite aftd Wc^buriie on the Co- 

^6iry Aat (m maliciously cutting, 16 vdl. 55. 
MSIf Bdwiid Aruoid, Ufi ihe HftckAct^fbr 
tttti^eusiy irtioOting m IM& OU§loW, ibidi 695. 
*^f Witfiini ftftmiird Oil the Black Act tor 
«MMig B Lmitt With % lletifidUd liHiue^ <k». 
ttafidibg ft PfOVieiOfi td be tu&de lof hiin, 1^ 
Hfl. 815<-^Of iktmii Aitltefl ftir dettitig ^ii^ to 
t^rtofthe PortsftOUth DdCk^Yard^ 20 Vol. 
Idir.^'MK Mejoi f aaMfifr fbt P^nty ift his 
&4defi«« before the GoitiiUiftsitmers t>r 
fetttttfifiig Ibe Smtea of Delii^^tli and 
Poptol RMistatftdufiAg th8 G<H6moiiweaith, 
^ vek tt4^ I46i««0f OMIINl PelJI»y Ift M 



Bvideute on severd Trials ari^g out of the 
Popish Plot J 10 vol. 1085S.— Of Mary Heath 
for Perjury, on the Trial of an Action of Eject- 
ment in Ireland, 18 vol. 46.— Of Gibbons and 
others (the Abbotsbtrry Witnesses) for Perjury 
in their Evidence fot the Prisoners oti a Trial 
fbr Felouy, 19> vol. 2rr.--0f Elizabeth Can* 
ning for Perjafy in her Evideuce for the Pro- 
secution on a Trial for Fdony, 19 vol. 286.— 
Znfortnaelon agaiusit tieury Carr for a Libel on 
the Oovemmeut and the Adtninistratiou of 
Justice, t vol. 1 111.— Indictment of EliJ&abeth 
Cellier fbr ^ Libel iii & Book respecting het 
Trial for being itoplicated iU the Meal-Ttib 
Plot, ibid. ll83.^Ini6rMatioii against Richard 
Baxter for a Libel on the Bishops, il vol. 493. 

"^Ag&inst the Seveti Bishops for 'a Seditious 
Libel, 12 vol. 230.«»AgaittstSfr Wns. Williams 
F6r a Libel upon the Duke 6f York by the pub* 
lication of Dangerfield's Narrative, 13 Vol. 
1369.— Against William Puller for a Libel on 
the Government in certain fictitious LetteriSi, 
14 vol. 526 (ubte).^Agaiust John Tutchiu for 
a Libel on the Government id a Periodical 
Paper, ibid. 1095.--AgailiSt William Oweft 
tbr a Libel ofi the House of Commons, con- 
tained iti Remarks Upon the Cdttimitmetit of a 
person for Coutempt, 18 vol. 1204.— Agaiust 
Wilkes ibr a Libel on the fting, in Remarks oft 
his Speech in Parliameut, 19 vol. 1382. — 
Against Hotne Tooke for a Libel on the 
Govcrnmettt and the TroOps employed in New 
England, 20 vol. 651 i-=-Against Johu Almoti 
for publishing Junius's Letter to the King, 
ibid. 803.---Of the t)eaU of St. Adaph for pub- 
lishing l^ir William Joue^'s dialogue betWeeb 
a Gentlemau and a Farmer, 21 Vol. ^76.— 
Against Lord George Gordon f6r a Libel on 
the Judges and the Administration of Justice^ 
d2 Vol. lt5.«^A gainst the same person for a 
Libel on the QueeU of Frauce and the french 
Ambassador, ft2 vol. 214.-*^Agaitist Stockdale 
for a Libel 6n the House of Commons cou- 
taltied in a Review of the Charges against 
Warren Hastings, 23 vol. 2S^.— -Against Paine 
ibr a Seditious Libel in the Rights of Man, 22 
vol. 357.-^Against Eaton fbr publishing the 
Secoud Part of the Rights of Man, 22 vol. 754. 
^^ Against the 'same person for publishing 
Paiue*s '< Letter td the Addressers on thelat^ 
Proclamation,''' 22 vol. t85.— Against Perry 
and others for a Libet mi the Govemmem in 
the Momi^ Chronicle^ 22 vol. 958.— Against 
Hamilton Rowan for a Seditious Libel in an 
Address to the Votuuteer^ of Ireland, 22 voU 
lOS^ir'^Indictmeht of Eaton for a Libel on the 
King, 2S vol. 10l4.*^Information against Johm 
Reeves fbr a Libel dn the Euglish Constitution, 
26 vol. 529.^Indictmeut of Thomas Williams 
ibr publishing a blasphemous Libel, 26 Vol 
656.— Of Peter Finerty for a seditious Libel re- 
specting the Trial and ExeeutiOto of William Orr 
in Ireland, 26 Vol. 9d3.'^In!brmation against 
Vint and others for a libel On the Emperor of 
Russia, S7 vol. 62t.**-Indictment of Cuthell 
fbr a Libel, iu publishiug a Pamphlet written 
by OiibertWAefirfdi 27 t0l, 641,*-Informi^ 



31^ 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



[UieCNA' 



tion against Gilbert Wakefield for the same 
libel, ibid. 679.— Information against Peltier 
for a Libel on the First Consul of the Frencji 
Republic, 28 vol. 530. — Against Cobbett for 
libels on the Lord Lieutenant and other High 
Officers in Ireland^ 29 vol. 2.— -Indictment of 
Mr. Justice Johnson for a libel on the same 
persons, 29 vol. 359.— Information against 
Colonel Draper for a libel on Mr. Sullivan, 
arising out of Governor Picton's Prosecution^ 
30 vol. 980. — Indictment of the same person 
for a Libel on Colonel FuUarton, arising out of 
the same circumstances, 30 vol. 1347. — ^Inform- 
ation against Hart and White for Libels on Mr. 
Justice Le Blanc and the Administration of 
7ustice> in Remarks on a Trial in the Admiralty 
Court, 30 vol. 1131. — Information against 
Lambert and Perry for a libel on the King in 
the Morning Chronicle, 31 vol. 336. — Against 
Fitzpatrick for a libel on the Duke of Rich- 
mond, Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, 31 vol. 
1169. — Indictment of Hatchard for a Libel on 
the Aides de Camp of the Governor of Antigua 
in a Report of the African Institution, 32 vol. 
674. — Of Thomas Harrison for insulting Mr. 
Justice Hutton in the Court of Common Pleas, 
3 vol. 1369, 1371.— Of John Crook and others 
for refusing to take the Oaths of Allegiance 
and Supremacy, 6 vol. 212 (note).— Of Read- 
ing for attempting to suppress Evidence on the 
Trials for the Popish Plot, 7 vol. 262.— Of 
Knox and Lane for a Conspiracy to disparage 
the Evidence of the Popish Plot, 7 vol. 763. — 
Of Sir Samuel Barnard iston for disparaging the 
Rye-House Plot, 9 vol. 1336.— Or John Giles 
for an attempt to murder, 7 vol. 1130. — Of 
Glennan and others for a Conspiracy to 
murder John Hanloo, 26 vol. 438.'-~Of James 
Dunn and others for conspiring to murder 
Lord Carharapton, 26 vol. 839.— Of Lord Grey 
de Werk for a Conspiracy to debauch Lady 
Henrietta Berkeley, 9 vol. 129 (note).— Of 
Thomas Pilkington and others for a Riot at a 
Common Hall in the City of London, called 
for the purpose of electing Sheriffs, 9 vol. 219, 
and ibid. ib. (note). — Information against 
iSacheverell and others for a Riot at the Elec- 
tion of a Mayor at Nottingham, 10 vol. 31. — 
Information against Lord Thanet and others 
for a Riot, and attempting to rescue a Prisoner 
in a Court of Justice, 27 voL 822. — Indict- 
ment of Benjamin Leech for slandering the 
Election of Sir Dudley North and Sir Peter 
Rich as Sheriffs of London, 9 vol. 354. — In- 
formation against Forth for slandering the 
Verdict of the Jury in the Case of Algernon 
Sidney, 9 vol, 896 (note).— Indictment of 
John Hampden for a treasonable Conspiracy, 
9 vol.1 056 (note). — Information againstCharles, 
£arl of Macclesfield, for a Treasonable Con- 
spiracy, 10 vol. 1416.— Of Thomas Walker 
and others for a Conspiracy to overthrow the 
Government, 23 vol. 1055.— Of James Bird 
and others for a Conspiracy to excite an In- 
isurrection in Ireland, 25 vol. 749.--Of Henry 
Redhead Yorke for a treasonable iConspiracy, 
i^ tqI. ;lQQ4,-^f ^raddpu mi Speke 



for a • Conspiracy to spread false Reports 
about the Death of the Earl of Essev ^ vol- 
1129.T-Of Denew and others for an As- 
saulty and a Conspiracy to incite a person to 
fight a Duel, 14 voU 896.— Of Rosewell for 
Treasonable Words spoken at a Conventicle, 

10 vol. 149. — Information against John Frost 
for Seditious Words, 22 vol. 471. — Indictment 
of Briellat for the same offence, ibid. 909. — 
Of John Binns for a similar offence, 26 vol. 
595. — ^Information ^ed by the Solicitor Ge- 
neral against William, Earl of Devonshire, for 
an Assault and Challenge in the King's Palace, 

11 voL 1353 (note).— Information against 
Hathaway for a Cheat, in pretending to be 
bewitched, 14 vol. 641 . — Indictment of William 
Hendley for unlawfully collecting Money for 
Charities without legal authority, 15 vol. 1409. 
— Information against Smith and Brande HoIUs 
for Bribery at the Hindoo Election, 20 vol 
1227. — ^Against Stratton and others for de- 
posing Lord Pigot, the Governor at Madras, 21 
vol. 1049.—- Indictment of Sir. Thomas Ficton 
for a Misdemeanour in inflicting the Torture on 
a Woman in the Island of Trinidad, . 30 vol. 
227. — Of Joseph Hanson for assisting the 
Weavers of Manchester, in a Conspiracy to 
raise their Wages, 31 vol. 2. — Information 
against Bembridge for neglect of duty as 
Accountant in the Paymaster-GeneraPs Office, 
22 vol. 1 5. — ^Against Michael and John Hedges 
for Frauds upon Government in the Woolwich 
Dock Yard, 28, vol. 1315.— Against Alexander 
Davison for Frauds on Government in the pur- 
chase of Barrack Stores, 31 vol. 99. — ^Indict- 
ment of Valentine Jones for Frauds upon 
Government in the Office of Commissaiy 
General in the West Indies, 31 vol. 251 .—Of 
Dr. Sheridan and others for Misdemeanouis 
under the Irish Convention Act, 31 vol. 638. 

Pleas and Replications. — Plea in Abate- 
ment to an Indictment for Treason, that an 
Impeachment for the same Treason is depend- 
ing in Parliament, 8 vol. 251. — ^Plea in Abate- 
ment to an Indictment for a Misdemeanour, 
that the Grand Jury who found the Billy were 
returned by persons who had no title to be 
Sheriffs, 9 vol. 355. — Plea in Abatement in the 
Earl of Banbury's Case, that he is a Peer of 
the Realm^ and indicted as a Commoner, 12 
vol. 1168.— Replication that he had petitioned 
the House of Lords for a Trial • by his Peers, 
but his Petition had been rejected, ibid. 1170. 
— Plea of Justification in an Action for seiziog 
Papers, &c. under . a Warrant from the Seere* 
tary of State, 19 vol. 1030.--Plea in Abate- 
ment to an Indictment in England, that the 
^Defendant was resident in Ireland at the time 
of the supposed Offence, and ought to be tried 
there, 29 vol. 385.— Plea in Abatement to as 
Indictment, that one of the Grand Jury who 
found the Bill, is an Alien, 27 vol. 267.— R** 
plication thereto that he had taken the Oath of 
Allegiance and Supremacy, ibid. 268.— Pies 
in Abatement to an Indictment that several ci 
the Grand Jury who found the Bill, held offices 
tmdey the Crpwuj ax vqK ^►TO.'^Pl^si in Abate 



CoHtsJnte.] THE ST A 

jDent to an Indictment in Dublin that one of 
the Grand Jaiy had no freehold within the 
City, ibid* 577. 

Quo Wabbanto. — Pleadings on an Inform- 
ation in the nature of a Qao Warranto against 
the City of London, 8 vol. 1287.~Information 
in the nature of a Quo Warranto against the 
Mayor, Jurats, and Commonalty of Hastings, 
17 YoL 845. 

PLOTS. 

See Atsamnation Plot—Cato-Street Flot-^Gun- 
powder Plot— Meal-Tub Flot-^Fopkh Flat--- 
Rye-Eoiae Flot. 

Sir Edward Coke's Ateount of the Popish 
Plots in the Reign of Queen Elizabeth, 2 voL 223. 

POISON.--See Wettony Bkhard. 

By Stat 22 Hen. 8, c. 9, wilful Poisoners 
were to be boiled to death, 2 vol. 911.— By 
Sm. 1 Edw. 6, c. 12, it was enacted that the 
villbl Poisoning of any person should be 
adjudged Murder, 17 toI. 62. — ^Entry of the 
▼eidict of Felo de Se, on a Coroner's Inquest 
where the death was occasioned by inhaling 
poisoned Powder through the nose, 5 vol. 858. 
— ^Dr. Black's Account of the usual Symptoms 
of poisoning by Arsenic, extracted from his 
L^iftiires on Chemistry, 18 vol. 1140 (note). 



ri! T&IA'LS. 



229 



1225i — ^Mr. Hume's Description of the general 
Panic which prevailed at the time of the Plot, 
26 vol. 99.— For Trials of Persons connected 
with the Plot, see Anderson, Lionel, 7 vol. 811 
•—Atkins, Samuel, 7 vol. 231—- Brommicb, 
Andrew, 7 vol. 715— Coleman, Edward, 7 vol. 
1— Fitzharris, Edward, 8 vol. 223 — Gascoigne, 
Sir Thomas, 7 vol. 959— <^reen, Robert, 7 vol. 
159— Ireland, William, 7 vol. 79— Langhorn, 
Richard, 7 vol. 417— Stafford, William, Vis« 
count, 7 vol. 1217.— Stapletoi), Sir Miles, 8 
vol. 501— Stayley, William, 6 vol. 1501— 
Thwing, Thomas, 7 vol. 1161— Wakeman, Sir 
George, 7 vol. 491— Whitebread, Thomas, 7 
vol. 311. 

POPULARITY. 

Lord Bacon says, that ** a popular Judge is 
a deformed thing," 19 vol. 1112 (note). — ^Lord 
Mansfield's Notion of the Popularity to be de- 
sired by % public Character, ibid. 1112, 1403. 



POLYGAMY..-^ee Bigamy. 

POPERY. 

Review of the ancient Statutes against the 
interference of the Pope in England, 2 vol. 
537. — The Pope had no Jurisdiction in Eng- 
land before the Conquest, ibid. 541. — Histoiy 
of the Introduction of Popery into England, 
ibid. ib«. — ^Account of the origin of the quarrel 
between King John and the Pope, ibid. 548. 
—History of the encroachments of the Papal 
Power in England in early times, ibid, ib.— 
Summary of the Statutes in force respecting 
the not making the Declaration against Popery, 
6 vol. 201 (note). — Animadversions on some 
of the principal Doctrines of Popery, 7 vol. 
543.— Remarks on the Popish Doctrines of 
Equivocation and Mental Reservation, ibid. 
545, 557. 

POPISH PLOT.— See Bedloe, William; 
BobvUf Robert; Chtes, TUut, 

Introduction to the Trials for the Popish 
Pk>t, 6 vol. 1401. — Reference to various works 
illustrating the History of the Plot, ibid. ib. — 
Mr. Fox's Reflections upon it, ibid. 1402. — 



Mr. joxs itenectjonsupon it, i ma. 1402.— (note).— It is no Argument against the existence 
Diyden's Notice of the Plot in Absalom and ^f ^ Power, that it is liable to be abused, for 
Achitophel, ibid. 1404— Burnet's Account of ^U Power is accompanied by a trust, 10 vol. 



the Popish Plot, ibid. 1405. — His general 
Reflections upon the Evidence of the Plot, 
ibid. 1428« — Oates's Narrative, ibid. 1429. — 
Bedloe's Examination respecting the Popish 
Plot, taken at Bristol by Lord North, ibid. 
1493. — Curious Extracts from Lord Keeper 
North's MSS. respecting the Plot, ibid. 1497.— 
Examinations and Informations respecting it 
cdmmuincated to the House of Lpidsi 7 vol* 



PORTS.— See Lnpotkunu; Stup-Money. 

Of the qualification with which the proposi- 
tion that the Ports of the Realm belong to the 
King, is to be understood, 2 vol. 474. — Argu- 
ment of Mr. Yelverton in the Great Case of 
Impositions, that the King is only intrusted 
I with the Custody of the Ports for the benefit 
of the People, but not for the purpose of in- 
creasing his Revenue by laying Imposts upon 
Merchandize, ibid. 513. 

POSTNATL 

The Case of the Postnati, 6 Jac. 1, 1608, 2 
vol. 559.— Mr. Hargrave's Introductory Note 
to the Case, ibid. ib. — Moore's Report of tlie 
Proceedings in Parliament respecting the 
Postnati, ibid. 561. — Conference of Com-> 
mittees of the Houses of Lords and Commons 
on the Subject, ibid. 562.— The Judges deliver 
their Opinion that the Postnati were natural 
born Subjects, ibid. 568.— Mr. Justice Walmes- 
ley dissents, ibid. 576. — Arguments of Lord 
Bacon for the Postnati in the Exchequer 
Chamber, ibid. 575.— Lord Coke's Report of 
the Case, ibid. 607. — Lord Chancellor Elles- 
mere^s Speech in the Exchequer Chamber, it) 
the Case of the Postnati, ibid. 659. 

POWDER PLOT.— See Gunpowder Flot. 

POWER. 

Illustrations of the prevalence of an Opinion 
amongst Persons possessed of Power, that they 
may safely be intrusted with it, 8 vol. 38 



accomps 
407. — Necessity of imposing Restraints upon 
political Power, 17 vol. 721. — Danger of in- 
trusting Judges vrith discretionary Power^ 8 
vol. 56 (note). 

PRACTICE. 

After the Court has delivered an opinion, it 
is irregular for Counsel' to argue further, 10 
vol. ll86««»Discu«8ion in the Caseof theSerea 



080 



aBMTSHAl IVDEX TO 



ZUmcmtx^ 



, , whether % ptrty CM> be chwged with 

^D IndictmeBt or iBfonnatm io ^ Court of 
King's Bdneh, uoless he is brougrht ioto Court 
Ibf that }>Qrpoae Vf regulftf Process, 12 Tol. 
9(Ml.*~«Iii orimiDal Cues, whi)» A Pefeodaot is 
brought into the Court of liing's Bedeh in 
Castodjr, or upon » Qecognixance, he must 
plead presently, and is not entitled to an Im« 
parlance, Ibid. 242, 24r,»Tr-The Copy of the Jury 
Panel required hy the Statute of Will. 3, to be 
delivered to persons accused of High Treason* 
maybe delivered before the Jletqm of the Venire 
faciss, Rodfcwoed'sCase, 13 vol.il ^^-^Method 
of procuring the list of the Jury irpm the Sheriff 
adopted in the Case of Lord George Gordon* 
21 vol, 648/— Under the Statute of Will. 3, the 
proper time to take objections to an Indictment 
for Treason' is before Plea^ and before the Junr 
are sworn and eharged. Ibid. 161, 168, 223^It 
was formerly net the practice to quash IndioU 
meats for Murder, Perjury, or other great 
Crimes, upon motion, but to leave the partvto 
ipove in arrest of Juagment, ibid, 168, 223. — 
On a Conviction on a Trial at Bar in the Court 
of King*s Bench, whether by Confession or Ver^ 
diet, the Prisoner has four ftill days to move in 
arrest of Judgment, ibid. 403.— DiffiBrence fn 
practice respecting the Jury Process under a 
Commission of Oyer and Terminer, and a Com- 
mission of Gaol Delivery, ibid. 326,--Practice 
oftheCouft of King's Bench respeeting Rules to 
plead and join in Demurrer in Criminal Cases, 
16 vol. 116.— The Court will gramt no indul* 
gence in favopr of a Pilsitory Plea, Layer's 
Case, ibid. 123.— The Court will assist the 
prisoner in points of Law when they appear, 
but ^iU not assist him with fi^ts to make points 
of Law, ibid. 304.— Ir a criminal Trial at Bar, 
where the Venire in returnable on the first 
general Return of the Term, the appearance 
day for the Jury is the gmrto die past, but the 
Court may adjourn the Jury to any day before 
the next Return, without an entry on Record 
of such A<iiournment,i and it will not be a Dis- 
continuance, Lfiyer's Case, ibid. 307. — ^The 
practice of Courts respecting the granting IJew 
Trials in Capital Cases, on the ground of ex- 
cessive Damages, declared by the Court of 
Common Pleas in delivering their Judgment 
in the Case of Fabrijjas v- Mostyn, 20yol. 175. 
<^A Defendant convicted on a criminal Prose- 
cution cannot move fqv a New Trial after the 
first fow day« of the ne«t Term, HoU's Case, 
2a vol, 1206 (note).r-rBut if it appear to the 
Court ^t ^ny time that injustice has been done 
by th(| Veroi 
a new Trial, 

lags in the I^n^'s Bench by Bill, and >n 
Criminal tnforieations and Indictments origif 
naUy found in the King's Benph| the Process 
is returnable on a day certain; but if an 
Indictment is removed into the king's Bench 
by Certiorari, it is returnable on a common 
day, and not eh a day certain, Tutchin's 
Case, 14 Tol, lia).«-T.Diseus9ion iu Tutchin's 
Case, whether a clerieal Rrror in the Teite 
of a Distringas Corpora Juratorom may be 



amended by the Court after Vardidy ibi^. 
1135.^The Court^of Klug's Bench are equally 
divided in Opinion upon the Subject, ibid. 
1 187.«^ACrirainal Information may be M»end- 
ed at any time, but not an Indictment, 9 ¥ol. 
1366 (note).— See also 19 vol. llip.-^The 
Amendment of a Plea in Abatement to an In* 
dictraent for Murder allowed by the Coart be- 
fore it was entered of Record, against the 
Opinion of Lord Holt, £arl of Banbury's Case, 
12 vol. 1190.— The Statute of Anne, requiring 
an Affidavit of the matter stated in a Plea in 
Abatement, extends to alt criminal Casee| ex- 
cepting a Trial at Bar, 18 vol. 3M (note).- 

gee aluo 27 vol. 867, and 31 vol. 177 (note),— 
Arguvoent of Mr. Feekhem in H^a Ctm ^ 

Fabrigas t;. Mostyn, that after an Impariance, 
the Jurisdiction of the Court cannot be dis- 
puted by the Defendant, 80 vol 20a.— Be- 
narks o« the practioe of Courts in receiving 
A0idavits in Aggfe.veti9& (tod Mitigation of 
Punisbinent after Verdict, $2 vqU 1105 (note). 
^General Rules by which the prMtiea of 
Court! m putting off oriq^inal Tiigls at the sug- 
gestion pf Pefei»da»te oq the ground ef the ab^ 
eeo^e of Witnessest is regulated* 96 vol* loaa. 

PRiEMUNIRE. 
Proceedings Rgain^t Robert liglor on ths 

Stat. 16 Ric. 2, c. 5, for procuring Bulls from 
Rome, commonly called the Case of Prvmu- 
nire in Ireland, 4 Jac 1607, 2 vol. 553.— Ac- 
count of a Pnemunire, and of the meaning and 
origin of the tern, 6 vol. 310 (note)* 

PRMMBtE, 
Remarks and References on thee^R^t of tbf 
preamble, in explaining the meaning da 
Statute, 14 vol. 1011 (note).««'Argumeots is 
Mr. Justice Johnson's Case respecting tht 
extent to which the Preamble may control the 
enacting part of a altatute, 29 vo), 118. 

PRECEDENCE, 
Mr. Justice Blackstone's Table of Piicedencf 
amongst Pleaders in Courts of Justice, 3 ro). 
880 (note). 



PRECEDENTS.— See Fleadinp, 
Precedents said to be of the same authority 
as Gases, 3 vol. 58. — Precedents are net good 
directors unless they be judicial, ibid. 303.— 
Precedents against reason only shew that the 
like injustice has been done before, 6 voK t^Sl. 
^ ^ — Chief Justice Vfeiughan says in Bushell'sCsMt 

ict, they will interpose and grant I that in Cases which depend upon fundamental 

, ibid, lb.— 'In all civil Proceed- principles, Millions ofPrecedenti are to no pW' 

xr:>-.»„ T> — X. u„ n:ii „«j ;« pose, avol.78(note).— LofdCamdensayiiotb* 

Case of Wilkes v. Wood, that Preoedents sre 
po Justification of a practice in itself illegal) 
and contrary to the fundamental princii^ei of 
Justice, 19 vqI, 1167,— Precedent! reipectisf 
the allowance of Counsel to a Peer oa hii 
Trial on an Impeachment for MisdemeanQe^ 
6 vol, 797.'^Precedentsre8peoting the metbod 
ofproeeedingby the House of Cords agwjttl 
persons impeaohed by the Commons lor Mi** 



CounM.^ 



demeanoars^ ibi4« Q75. -^Precedents respecting 
ttesMwaar of proceeding in tlie House of Lords 
on Impeachments^ aa reported to the House in 
1701, 14 yol* 279^ — Precedents of the manner 
of deliyering Articles, of Impeachment by the 
Commons^ ibid. 275. — Preoedents of tiie Im^ 
pnaoQooteAi of Members of the House of Com- 
noas^ when impeached in Parliament, 8 vol, 
154* — Report made to the House of Lords in 
Sir Adam Blair^s Case of Precedents of Im* 
peachments from the Journals and Records in 
the Tower, 12 toI. 1218,^Precedents of Pro- 
secutions ^r Cowaxdice and neglect of duty in 
GoYeniors of Towns and Castles, 4 vol. 298. 
^-Preoedents r^ating to the Liberty of the 
Sn)9flct, a ToK 109.^Precedents of the Claim 
and RecognitiQn of tHe paif er of the House of 
Commona to ooinmit for Breach of Privilege^ 
8 yqI. 27. — Precedents of Punishments in* 
flicted by the House of Commons for Breach 
ofPriTil^^ ibid. 61 .-^Precedents to show that 
irhere a Party does not plead to the Jurisdic- 
tion of the Court, it is usual for the. Court to 
nroceed, though in Cases not within its Juris^ 
auction, Q yd, 730. — Precedents of Proceed- 
ings against peryons for insulting Judges, 3 
▼oK 1375, 

PRECEPT. 

Precept to the Lieutenant of the T^er to 
hriog the body of a Peer in his. Custody to the 
Court of the Lord High Steward, 6 vol. 774.— 
Precept to the Serjeant at Arms to summon 
the Peers to a Trial in the Court of the Lord 
High Steward, ibid. ib.-^Precept to the Lieu- 
tenant of the Tower in the Ca^e of Earl Ferrers, 
to deliver a Prisoner to the Sherifs for i(^Qa- 
tion, 19 vol* 974. 

PRECOGNITIONS. 

Mr. Hume's Account of the practice of the- 
Scotch Law respecting taking Precognitions or 
laminations previous to 'Drial, in Criminal 
Cases, 10 vol. 782 (note). 

PREFACES. 

Preface to the tot Edition of the State 
Trials, lv;Mr. Salmon, 1 vol. xix,— His Prefage 
to the Case of Ship Money, ibid. xxi. — Mr. 
£rolyn*s Preface to the Second Edition of the 
State Trials, ibid, xxii,— To the 7th and 8th 
Volumes of the State Trials, ibid, xlil.— To the 
9th and 10th Volumes, ibid, xlv.-— Mr. Har- 
grave's Preface to the Fourth Edition of the 
State Trials, ibid. xlvii.—To the Supplemental 
Volume of the Fourth Edition, ibid, li. 

PREGNANCY. 

Pregnancy is no Plea against Judgment for 
a Capital Offence, though it maybe pleaded to 
stay immediate Execution, Baynton's Case, 14 
vol. 631. — Instance of the impannelling a Jury 
of Matrons to ascertain whether a Woman 
convicted of a capital Felony is quick with 
Child» ibidr ^34* 



THE STATE TRfAia 3^1 

.PREROGATIVB.-r-See Kin^Di^pensin^ 
p(Nf;«fN~Jfiipon^i9nt-»£iAtp-ilibn 



Mr. Hargrave*s Reasons why the King's 
Prerogative of laying Embargoes should not 
be restricted to time of War, Haj*g. Pref.l vol. 
liL^Sir John Davis's Remarks on the Prero- 
gative of laying Embargoes, in his Argument 
in the Great Case of Impositions, % vol. 402. 
-^Discussion respecting Uie Royal prerogative 
of regulating the Coinage and value of Money 
within the Realm, in the Case of Mixed Money 
in Ireland, ibid. 114.-'-Mr« Hargrave's Re* 
marks on the power of the King to impose 
Taxes by Prerogative, in his Introductory Note 
to the Case of Impositions, 2 vol. 371.— 
The Case of John Bates in the Exchequer, 
commonly called the Great Case of Imposi- 
tions^ respectii^ the prerogative of the King to 
impose Taxes on Merchandise im^ported at the 
Ports of England without the concurrence of 
Parliament, 4 Jae* 1, 1606, ibid. 382.— Baroa 
Clark> Argument in that Case^ for the Prero« 
gative, ibid, ib.— Chief Baron Fleming'^ Ar-« 
gumeot on the same side, ibid. 387.-~Sir 
Francis Bacon's Argument in the House oC 
Commons for the Prerogative, ibid^ 395. — Sir 
John Davis's Argument on the same side, ibid. 
399. — Mr. HakewilFs Argument in the House 
of Commons against the Prerogative, ibid. 407. 
•^Mr, Yelverton's Argument against it, ibid. 
477. — ^Tbe Imposition of Duties by Preroga- 
tive was one of the Subjects of the Petition of 
Grievances presented by the Commons to 
James the First in 1610, ibid. 521. — Mr. Har^ 
grave's Reference to Writers on the Subject of 
Taxing by Prerogative, ibid. 381 . — Lord Hale'a 
Opinion on this Prerogative, ibid% 379. — Mr. 
St« John's Account, in his Argument in the 
Case of Ship-Money, of the means provided 
by the Common Law to enable the King to 
raise Money for the Defence of the Realm, 3 
vol. 864, 873.— It is a sole Prerogative of the 
King of England to make Proclamations, 2 vol. 
7^6. ---Discussion of the nature and extent of 
this Prerogative in the Case of ProclamationSji 
ibid. 725.*— Discussion in the Case of the East 
India Company v. Sandys, of the King's Prero- 
gative to impose restrictions on foreign Trade, 
:10 vol, 376, ibid. 386, &c. — Proceedings on a 
Question referred by the King to the Judges, in 
1718, respecting the King's Prerogative in the 
Education and Marriage of the R^yal Family, 
15 voL 1 195. — Discussion of the Subject by the 
Judges, on delivering their Opinions^ ibid.1206. 
—The Majority of the Judges declare in favour 
of the King's Prerogative, both as to the Marriage 
and Education of the Royal Family, ibid. 1223. 
—Mr. Baron Price and Mr, Justice Eyre dissent 
upon the point of Education, ibid. 1224.— Mr. 
Hargrave's Note on the existence of the King's 
Prerogative of Dispensing with penal Laws, 
11 vol. 1187 (note). — ^His Reference to Trea- 
tises and Cases illustrating the Controversy on 
this Subject, ibid. 1190 (note).— Sir Robert 
Alkyns's Inquiry into the lying's Prerogative 
in this respect, ibidl 1200.'^Mr. Northey's 



S32 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



QMisdBtiX. 



Argument against *uch a Prerogative in the 
Case of Sir Edward Hales, ibid. 1187.— Sir 
Ttiomas Powis's Argument in the same Case, 
in support of it, ibid. 1192. — Chief Justice 
Herbert delivers the Judgment of the Court of 
King's Bench in favour of it, ibid. 1195. — His 
Account of. the Authorities on which this Judg- 
ment was founded, ibid. 1251. — Sir Robert 
Atkyns's Animadversions thereon, ibid. 1267. 
— Discussion of this supposed Prerogative in 
the Case of the Seven Bishops, 12 vol. 362, &c. 
—The exercise of this Prerogative said by Sir 
John Hawles to have been one of the chief 
causes of the disaffection of the nation towards 
the House of Stuart, 8 vol. 427.— Mr. Justice 
Foster's Argument in favour of the King's Pre- 
rogative of impressing Mariners, whenever the 
public safety requires it, 18 vol.1331. — Dis- 
cussion respecting the King's Prerogative to 
make Laws for a conquered Country, 20 vol* 
293. — Mr. Justice Foster expresses an Opinion 
that the King is enabled by his Prerogative to 
x)rder the mode of Execution to vary from the 
Sentence in Capital Cases, 11 vol. 376 (note). 
— It was resolved in the Case of Proclamations 
that the King has no Prerogative but that 
which the Law allows him, 2 vol, 727. — ^The 
King's Prerogative is a part of the Law of 
England, 3 vol. 68. — The Prerogative of the 
Crown cannot authorize any thing injurious to 
the Subject, 10 vol. 386. — Account of the Pre- 
rogatives claimed by Charles the First, and 
disputed by the Parliament in the Speech in- 
tended to have been delivered by Mr. Cook, 
on the Trial of tlie King, 4 vol. 1027.— Counsel 
may give an Opinion upon any question of 
Prerogative, which the Subject may contest 
with the Crown in a Court of Justice, 2 vol. 
766. — Mr. Luders states that the maintenance 
of oppressive Branches of the Prerogative in 
the Reign of Queen Elizabeth was as absolute 
as in that of Henry the Eighth, and more dan- 
gerous because more systematic, 6 vol. 903 
(note). — ^Definition of Prerogative proposed by 
Mr. Alleyne, in his Argument in the Case of 
the Island of Grenada, 20 vol, 262. — Lord 
Strafford's Remarks in his Defence on the 
mutual Relations of the Prerogative of the 
Crown, and the Liberty of the Subject, 3 vol. 
1464. — Summary of the Prerogatives of the 
King of England, ibid. 1023, 1083. 

PRESBYTERIANS. 

Account of the Persecution of the Presby- 
terians in the Reign of Charles the Second, 11 
vol. 13 (note). — Account of the Conference in 
the Savoy at the Restoration, between certain 
Presbyterian Clergymen, and Clergymen of the 
Church of England, 6 vol. 25. 

PRESCRIPTION. 

By the Law of England there is no Prescrip- 
tion for Crimes, 4 vol. 830 (note).— By the 
Scotch Law, vicennial Prescription prevails 
even in Cases of Murder, ibid. 82i[(note). 



PRESENTMENT. 
The same certainty is required in a Present- 
ment as in an Indictment, 10 vol. 1397. 
PRESS.—See Uberhf of the Pre». 

PRESSING SEAMEN. ! 

Mr. Emlyn's Doubts respecting the Legality 
of the practice of Pressing Seamen, Em. PreC 
1 vol. xxvii. See also 18 vol. 1357 (note). — 
Argument of Mr. Justice Foster, when Recorder 
of Bristol, in favour of it, 18 vol. 1326. — 
Statutes giving to the King of England the 
power of requiring the personal senrice of 
every man able to bear arms, in cases of sudden 
emergency, ibid. 1327 (note). — The right of 
pressing Seamen is a Prerogative of the Crown • 
of England, ibid. 1331.— ^Collection of modem 
dicta and decisions in favour of the legality of 
the practice of pressing Seamen, ibid. 1359. 

PRESUMPTION.— See JSWcncc. 

Presumptive Evidence in Cases of Felony to ' 
be received cautiously, 7 vol. 1529 (note). — 
Discussion in Captain Green's Case, tespect- 
ing proof by Presumptions according to the 
Civil and Scotch Law, 14 voL 1230, &c.— By 
the Civil Law, the Corpus delicti must be posi- 
tively proved, before presumptive Evidence 
can be admitted to ascertain the Offender, ibid. 
1229, 1246.— Of the different kinds of Pre- 
sumptions by the Law of England, 1 7 vol. 1430. . 
— ^The Presumption of Innocence in criminal 
Cases is so strong, that in order to overturn it, • 
there should be legal Evidence of Guilt, pro- 
ducing a conviction only short of absolute cer- 
tainty, 33 vol. 506. — ^If upon the positive Evi- • 
dence on both sides, the mind remains in equi- 
librio, a strong Presumption in favour of eidier 
party will turn the scale, 17 vol. 1341. 

PRETENDER. 

Proceedings taken to prove the genuineness 
of the Child alleged to be the Son of James 
the Second and his Queen, 12 vol. 123. — Re- 
ferences to Historians and other Writers upon 
this Subject, ibid. 144. — Burnet's Account of 
the Proceedings, ibid. 166. — Wodrow's Ac- 
count of a curious incident in Scotland, respect- 
ing the Legitimacy of the Pretender, ibid. 176. 

PRIESTS.— See Jesuits ; Semnary Priests. 

PRINCIPAL AND ACCESSARY. 

See Accessary. 

PRINCIPAL AND AGENT. 

Discussion respecting the Extent to which 
the Acts and Declarations of an Agent may 
affect his Principal criminally. Lord Melville's 
Case, 29 vol. 747. 

PRINTING. 

Printing may be an Overt Act of Treason, 
12 vol. 1248. 

PRISAGE. 
Explanatipa of the duty callfd Prisagei pay- 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



CoRTBl^n.3 

able by the Common Law to the King, upon 
efery Cargo of Wine brought into the Kingdom 
by English Merchants^ 2 vol. 416. 

PRISON.— See GaoL 

The difference between Breach of Prison and 
Escape, 3 vol. 292. — If a man depart from 
Prison with the licence of the Gaoler, it is an 
Offence by Law, ibid. ib. — ^The Prison of the 
Court of King's Bench is not any local Prison 
confined to one place; and every place where a 
person is, by auUiority of that Court, restrained 
of his liberty is a Prison, ibid. ib. and 336. — 
If a person takes Sanctuary, and departs 
thence, he breaks Prison, ibid.ib. — Discussion 
on a Writ of Error in the House of Lords, in 
the Case of Hart and White, whether the Court 
of King's Bench has the power of imprisoning 
persons convicted of Crimes in other Prisons 
than those belonging to the Court, or to the 
Counties in which the crimes were committed, 
30 vol. 1325. — Opinion of the Judges in the 
affirmative, ibid. 1344. 

PRISONERS OF WAR. 

Discussion in the Case of Sir Robert Spotis- 
wood, whether by the Law of Scotland, Quarter 
granted to a Prisoner taken in Battle during a 
Civil War, is a Bar to Capital Punishment 
for High Treason in being concerned in such 
War, 4 voU 781. — ^Mr. Steel's Argument 
against a similar Defence in the Duke of 
Hamilton's Case in England, ibid« 1163. 

PRIVATEERS. 

Discussion in the Case of Golding and 
others, whether persons acting as Privateers 
under a Commission fVom James the Second, 
after his Abdication, were Pirates, or Enemies, 
12 vol. 1269. 

PRIVILEGE.— -See Privileged Witneuei; 
Privilege of Parliament : Peers. 

The Privilege, of an Ambassador does not 
extend to exempt him from Trial for Crimes 
committed in this Country against the Law of 
England, 5 vol. 491, 499. — A Peer has no 
Privilege to refuse to be examined before the 
Privy Council, Countess of Shrewsbury's Case, 
2 vol. 771.— Resolved in Lord Castlehaven's 
Case, that a Peer on his Trial for Felony, has 
no Privilege for Counsel more than a Com- 
moner, 3 vol. 402. — A Peer upon his Trial 
cannot be allowed his Privilege on Motion 
merely, unless he produces his Patent, Lord 
Preston's Case, 12 vol. 656. — A Peer has no 
Privilege from Arrest in Treason, Felony, or 
Breach of the Peace, ibid. 223. — In Wilkes's 
Case the Court of Common Pleas decide that 
a Member of Parliament is privileged from 
Arrest for writing a Seditious Libel, 19 vol. 
989. — ^Resolutions of both Houses of Parlia- 
ment against this Decision, ibid. 993. — Argu- 
ment in support of it in a Protest against the 
Resolation in the House of Lords, ibid. 994. — 
Remarks of Mr. Hume upon the Privilege of 



333 



Members of Parliament as to freedom from 
Arrest by the Law of Scotland, ibid. 994. 

PRIVILEGE OP PARLUMENT. 

Chief Justice De Grey's Distinction in 
Crosby's Case, between personal Privilege and 
the Privilege belonging to the collective Body 
of Parliament, 19 vol*. 1150.— Difficulty of the 
Subject of Parliamentary Privilege, 6 vol. 1121 
(note). — Illustrations of the uncertainty of the 
law of Parliament with respect to Privilege, 
ibid. ib. — Denial of the existence of this un« 
certainty by the first Earl of Chatham, 8 vol. 
445. — Mr. Howell's Observations on Privilege 
of Parliament, 8 vol. 1 (note). — Lord Claren* 
don's Account of the true meaning of the pro- 
position that Parliament is the only Judge of 
Its own Privileges, 6 vol. 1285 (note). — All 
Privileges of Parliament which derogate from 
the Common Law are now at an end, except- 
ing the freedom of a Member's person, ibid. 
1127 (note). — Proceedings in the House of 
Commons in the Reign of Henry the Eighth, 
respecting a Breach of Privilege upon the Arrest 
of a Member for Debt, 8 vol. 8.— Frequency of 
Commitments by the House of Commons for 
Breach of Privilege during the latter part of 
the Reign of Charles the Second, ibid. 7. — 
Reference to Works on the subject of the 
Power of the House of Commons to commit 
for Breach of Privilege, ibid. 13. — ^Report of a 
Committee of the House of Commons upon 
the state of the Law and practice of the House, 
in Cases of Proceedings against Members for 
any thing done or spdcen in the House, or 
against Servants of the House, ibid. 14. — Pre- 
cedents of the claim and recognition of the 
claim of the House of Commons to commit for 
Breach of Privilege, ibid. 27. — Precedents of 
Punishments inflicted by the House of Com- 
mons for breach of Privilege, ibid. 61 . — Report 
of a Committee of the House of Commons in 
1771, respecting Privileges, ibid. 65. — ^The 
Courts of Law cannot discharge or bail a 
person committed by the House of Commons 
for Breach of Privilege, Crosby's Case, 19 vol. 
1146.— Courts of Law take notice of Questions 
of Privilege when brought before them inci- 
dentally, but not when they come before them 
directly, ibid. 1150. — ^The Case of Privilege of 
Parliament, being an Appeal brought in the 
House of Lords against Sir John Fagg and 
other Members of the House of Commons, 6 
vol.1121* 

PRIVILEGED WITNESSES. 

Discussion respecting the nature, origin, and 
extent, of the Privilege of an Attorney not to 
disclose matters confided to him as Attorney 
by his Clients, 17 vol. 1224.-— The Privilege is 
the Privilege of the Client, ibid. 1242. — A 
Surgeon has no Privilege to decline answering 
Questions in a Court of Justice, respecting 
facts which have come to his knowledge in 
professional confidence, Duchess of Kingston's 
Case, 20 vol. 573.— Reference to sevwrt Casei 



t84 

iB whidi this SnY^tti if diseosted, ibid. 573^ 
The Privilege is confined to Counsel and At<* 
torniesy ibicL 575 (note), 586. — Lord Mans- 
field saysy in the Dachess of Kingston's Case, 
that the Privilege only extends to facts com- 
municated in professional Confidence by 
ClientSy in order to take Advice, or in order to 
instruct as to their Defence, and not to coU 
lateral facts which come to the knowledge of 
the Attorney by other general means, in the 
course of his Employment, ibid. 613.-*Objeci 
tions of Mr. Murphy to giving Evidence in the 
House of Lords, in the Enquiry into the Af- 
£urs of Greenvnch Hospital in 1778, of facts 
revealed to him as Counsel in professional 
Confidence, even with the express consent of 
his Client, 21 vol. 358. — It was held in Hardy's 
Case, that in State Prosecutions, Witnesses for 
the Crown cannot be called upon to disclose 
the names of persons who have given Informa- 
tion to Government respecting the Offences in 
question, 24 vol. 753, 808, 816. — ^The same 
Kule was held by the Court in Watson's Case, 
32 vol. 100. 

PRIVY COUNCIL. 

Seijeant Hawkins says that the Privy Conn* 
cil, or any one or two of them, may commit for 
Treason, 19 vol. 1039. — Lord Camden's Argu* 
ment on delivering his Judgment in the Case 
of Entick and Carrington, against the Power 
of a Member of the rrivy Council to commit 
fi>r a Libel, ibid. 1052. — Precedents of persons 
bailed by Courts of Justice on Commitments 
b^ the Privy Council, 3 vol. 11. — ^The Juris- 
diction of the Privy Council as to Commit- 
ment is limited, ibid. 28.-— Discussion in the 
Case of the Seven Bishops respecting the 
power of Members of the Privy Council to 
commit for a Libel, except when assembled in 
Council, 12 vol. 206. — Lord Camden doubts 
whether the Secretary of State was formerly a 
Member of the Privy Council, 19 vol. 1047. 

PROCESS.— See Rttittance to Froeeti. 

Discussion in the Case of the Seven Bishops, 
whether a Defendant can be charged with an 
Information in the Court of King's Bench, 
unless he is brought into Court by Process 
upon that Information, 12 vol. 205. — In the 
Cfase of an Indictment originally found in the 
King^s Bench, the Jury Process is returnable 
on a day certain ; but where an Indictment is 
removed from another Court, it is returnable 
on a common day an4 not on a day certain, 
Tutchin's Case, 14 vol. 1132.— On Ex-Officio 
Informations for Offences in foreign Countries, 
the Jury Process may be returned either on a 
day certain or on a common day, ibid, ib.— 
Discussion whether a Clerical Error in the 
Teste of a Distringas Corpora Juratorum may 
be amended by the Court after Verdict, ibid. 
1135. — ^The Court of King's Bench are equallv 
divided in Opinion upon the Subject, ibid. 
I187.--Mr. Justice Foster's Statement of the 
Law respecting Homicide committed in the 



GENERAL FKDEX TO 



Oincmt^ 



sesistaoee of Proceas^ 19 vol. 873 (noteW 
Reference U> other Cases oa this Sut^i ilwL 
874 (note). 

PROCLAMATIONS. 

The Case of Proclamations from Coke's 
Reports, 2 vol. 723.— The King cannot by his 
Pro<damation change any part of the Law, or 
create a new species of Ofieoce, ibid. 725, 726. 
— But it is an Aggravation of an Offence 
against the Law, if it is committed after its 
prohibition by Royal Proclamation, ibid. 726. 
—It is a Prerogative of the King of EnjUnd 
to make Proclamations, ibid. ib. — Prohibitions 
^ Proclamation were one of the Sul^ects of 
CTomplaint in the Petition of Grievances pre- 
sented to James the First in 1606, ibid. 534.-« 
Proclamation of Queen Anne in 1703, against 
spreading false News and publishing irreligious 
and seditious Libels, 15 voL 359.— Royal Pro* 
clamation in the same year against Vice and 
Immorality, ibid. 361. 

PROCLAMATIONS IN OUTLAWRY. 

No Proclamations are required in an Out- 
lawry in Criminal Cases after Judgmoot, 
Wilkes^s Case, 19 vol. 1108, 

PRODITORik 
Discussion in Cranbume's Case, whether tbs 
word « Proditorife? is to be repealed i© an In- 
dictment for Treason in the averment of evtiy 
Overt Act, 13 vol. 830, 

PROHIBITION. 
Articles respecting Abuses in the gra&ttDg 
of ProhibiUons by Courts of Law, nresentod 
by the Clergy to the Lords of the Council m 
1605, with the Answers of the Judges theretOi 
2 vol. 134.— The Obstruction offered to Wnts 
of Prohibition was one of the Subjects of Con^ 
plaint in the Petition of Grievances pfwea^ 
by the Commons to James the First, ibid. 526. 

PROPERTY. 
The great object of all Laws is the Securi^ 
of Property, 19 vol. 1066.— Lord Camdcns 
Observations in the Case of Entick v. Camng- 
ton, on the right of the Subject by the Laws 
of England to the security of his Property, 
ibid, ib.— Every invasion of private P/oP^lg^* 
however minute, is a Trespass, ibid. ij:"T*?f 
only exceptions to the absolute right which tne 
Subject has to the security of his ProperW are 
created by positive Laws, and Jhe onl^ J"^"' 
fication of an invasion of private Property most 
be founded upon such' Laws, ibid. ib. 

PROPHESYING, 
Account of the nature of the religion Exer- 
cise called Prophesying, 15 vol.426.-'Ciicu^ 
from Queen Elisabeth to the BUhops, i^^ 
mending the suppression of it, ibid, ^^r* 
Archbishop Grindall's Letter to the rrv^ 
Council, declining to comply with ^^.f^ 
mendation contained in the Circolar, ibid. 91'- 



TH35 STATE THIALa 



-^Bemwbl on Au» AjtAWbvp'n oonduct in 
lefosing to suppress the £xer<;i8e^ ibi4. 426« 

PBOTECTOEATE. 

Apcount of the Administration of Justice 
during the Protectorate, 5 vol. 935. 

PROTESTS- 

Hie first instance of a Protest with reasons 
in the House of X/>rds, said by Ralph to haTe 
been on occasion of the rejection of Fitzharris's 
Impeachment, 8 toL 231,^33 (note). — ^This 
Mistake corrected, 11 vol. 306 (note). — Roger 
North*s Account of the commencement of the 
practice upon which Ralph's Error was founded^ 
ibid* ib. — XiOrd Clarendon's Account of the 
commencement of Protests with Reasons, 
ibid, 907 (nQte).«^tanding Orders of the 
House of Lords respecting ProtestSi 12 vol. 
1189 (note), 

PROVISO. 

Repugnant Proyisoes in a Statute ure voidy 
10 vol. 438. 

PROVOCATION.— See Homkide^Murder^ 

PUBLICATION.--See Ubel. 

If a man composes a liibel in Surry, and 
there agrees with a Printer to print it in Lon- 
don, thin is a Publication by the Composer in 
London, Tutchin's Case, 14 vol, 1118. — Mr. 
jiostice Powell says, in the Case of the Seven 
Bishops, that in a Trial for Libel, the Pubticar 
tion must be expressly proved in the County 
where the Veoue is laicU otherwise it will be 
presumed to have taken place iu another 
County* 12 vol. 818.— *Selliug a Libel in a 
Shop by a Servant is prim^ facie Evidence of 
a Publication by the Master, Almon's Case, 20 
Tol. 833, 839.— Sending a libellous Letter by 
the Post was held in the Case of the Seven 
Bishops to be a Publication, though it was 
seen by nobody but the Writer and the person 
to whom it was sent, 12 vol. 330, 333. — Dis- 
cussion of this Subject, ibid. ib.---In the Case 
of Williams of &i|ex, the mere writing a 
libellous Paper, though it was immediately 
sealed up, and was never out of the Custody 
of the Writer, was held to be a Publication, 
ibid. 328 (note).^— If aLibel be publicly known, 
a Written Copy of it is said by Lord Holt in 
Bear's Case, to be Evidence of a Publication^ 
19 vol, 107^. — It is said to have been deter- 
mined by all the Judges to be unlawful to 
publish any intelligence of a public nature 
without Licence from the King or his Ministers, 
T vol. 929, 1114, 112r.— Upon a Criminal 
Trial for a libel in a Newspaper, an Affidavit 
containing the Names of the parties and of the 
plaoB where the Newspaper was printed, ao* 
cording to the Stat. 88 Qeo. 3, c. 78, together 
with the Prodnction of the Newspaper oorres* 



$BS 



ponding to the description in the Affidavit, ia 
jE^vidence of the Publication in the County 
where the Printing of it is described to be, 30 
ypl.i8l«. . 

PUNISHM£NT.-*^ee Feme fart et dure. 

Indiscriminate application gf Capital Punish* 
ment to crimes of various degrees by the Law 
of England censured, £m« Pref. 1 -vol. xxxii. 
&c.— Confinement and hard labour recom* 
mended for minor offences, ibid, xxxiii.— 
Punishment of cutting off the hand very rare 
in England, ibid. 443 (note).-*-Mr. Hume's 
Account of the different degrefes of Puuishi*^ 
ment for Crimes by the Law of Scotland^ 
18 vol. 839 (note). — It is a fundamental 
Rule of criminal Judicature, that the Punish* 
ment should be in proportion to the malignity 
of the Offender's ratention, 21 vol. 1291.^^ 
Remarks on the practice of Courts to receive 
Affidavits in aggravation - or mitigation of 
Punishment after Verdict^ 22 vol. 1185 (note). 
«— The Conduct of a Defendant since he has 
been found Guilty, may be taken into Consider, 
ation bv the Court, in ajigravation or mitiga^ 
tion of Punishment, ibid. ib.-^Mr. Emlyn's 
Remarks upon the Punishment of the Pillory, 
1 vol. zxxvi.-^By Stat 50 Geo. S, c. 138> ^ 
Pillory is abolished except in certain Cases, 29 
vol. 358. 

PURGATION, 

Account of the ancient common*law practice 
of Purgation^ 13 vol. 1010* 

. PURITANS.— See Xn^A/i^,S»^Btcftar(l; 

UdalifJohn, 

PUTTING OFF TRIAL. 

Reason given by Lord Holt for the Rule that 
a Prisoner cannot apply to postpone his Trial 
until he has pleaded, 12 vol. 664. — General 
Rules by which the practice of Courts in 
putting off Trials at the Suggestion of Defend- 
ants, on account of the absence of WitnesseSi 
is regulated, 26 vol. 1033. 

QUAKERS.— See JWa^&r, James ; Perm, 

William. 

Singular Narrative of the Disturhanee of a 
Congregation in a Church during Divine 
Service by a fanatical Quaker in 1659, 6 vol. 
998. — ^A Quaker cannot be a Witness in an 
Appeal of Murder, 17 vol. 330 (note). 

QUALIFICATION.— See Grand Jwif-^ 

Jury, 

QUARTER.. 

Discussion in Sir Robert Spotiswood's €ase, 
whether Quarter granted to a Prisoner taken 
in battle during a Rebellion operates as a Bar 
to the capita) part of the Punishment for High 



336 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



Treason in being concerned in soch a Rebel* 
lioDy 4 70U 781. — Antiquity and equity of tbe 
'Law of Nations respecting Quarter in Battle, 
ibid. 798. — ^The promise of Quarter in Battle 
can only extend to freedom from immediate 
Execution by the Sword, but not to remove 
tbe responsibility of the party to a legal Tri- 
bunal; ibid. 1184. 

QUASmNG INDICTMENTS. 

It is irregular to move to quash an Indict- 
ment after Plea, and after the Jury are charged 
and swoni| Rookvrood's Case, 13 vol. 161, 
168, 223.— The practice was formerly not to 
quash Indictments for great Crimes upon 
Motion, but to suffer the Trial to proceed, 
and leave the party to move in arrest of 
Jndgmoit, ibid. 168, 223 ; see also 27 vol. 
266.— Sir John Hawles says, that it is good 
canse to move to quash an Indictment that it 
contains Offences of different natures, 8 vol. 
729. — ^A Motion by a Prosecutor to quash an 
Indictment is by no means, a Motion of course, 
19 vol. 1173, 21 vol. 1048.— Mr. Justice 
Buller says, that the only Cases in which the 
Court has interfered have been when the 
Indictments were insufficient, 21 vol. 1048. — 
An Indictment may be quashed by consent, 
though no defect appears upon the face of it, 
18 vol. 1198. 

QUO WARRANTO. 

Roger North's Account of the Quo War- 
rantos against different Corporations in the 
Reign of Charles the Second, 8 vol. 1041 
(note). — Proceedings on the Quo Warranto 
against the City of London, ibid. 1039. — 
Proceedings on a Quo Warranto against the 
Corporation of Hastings, 17 vol. 845. — Simi- 
lar Proceedings against the Corporation of 
New Romney, ibid. 801, 821. 

RAPE. 

To constitute tlie Offence of Rape, there 
must be both Penetration and Emission, 3 vol. 
403, and ibid. 419 (note). — But the Emission 
may be presumed from Circumstances, ibid. 
419 (note).— It was resolved by Uie Judges 
in Lord Castlehaven's Case, that if a Prisoner 
stood mute on his Arraignment for Rape, he 
was entitled to his Clergy, ibid. 403. 

READING. 

Instance in Ireland in 1681 of persons con- 
victed of Felony being called upon to read, in 
order to entitle themselves to the benefit of 
Clergy, 12 vol. 631. — Instance of the same 
kind before Chief Justice Kelyng in 1661, 
ibid. 633 (note).— Chief Justice Kelyng fines 
a Clergyman for making a false Report to the 
Court respecting the reading of a Felon, ibid. 
634 (note).— By the Stat. 5 Ann, c. 6, the 
benefit of Clergy is allowed to all who are 
entitled to it, without reading, ibid. ib. 



REBELLION.-^See TVeason. 

Mr. Justice Foster's Account of tbe 
cussions and Arrangements respecting 
Trial of the persons concerned in the Be^ 
lion of 1745, 18 vol. 329.— For Trials 
persons concerned in the Rebellion of 171 
see Derwentwater, James, Earl of, 15 
761 — Wintoun, George, Earl of, ibid. 805. 
For Trials of persons concerned in the Rebel 
lion of 1745, see Berwick, John, 18 vol. 367 
Bradshaw, 'James, ibid. 41 5 ~ Cameron, I) 
Archibald, 19 vol. 734— Chad wick and 
tragh, 18 vol. 359— Deacon, Thomas Th 
dorus, ibid. 365 — Fletcher, George, ibid. 3 
—Kilmarnock, William, Earl o^ ibid. 441 
Kinloch, Alexander and Charles, ibid. 395- 
Lovat, Simon, Lord, ibid. 529^— M'Growthei 
Alexander, ibid. 391 — Morgan, David, ibid? 
371— Ratcliffe, Charles, ibid. 429— Townlej^ 
Trancis, 18 vol. 329 — ^Wedderbum, SirJohn^ 
ibid. 425. — ^For Trials of persons concerael 
in the Irish Rebellion, see Bond, Oliver, 27 
vol. 523 — Byrne, William Michael, ibid. 455 
— M'Cann, John, ibid. 399 — Sheares, Hen^ 
and John, ibid. 255— Tone, TheobaJd Wolfe, 
ibid. 613. 

RECOGNIZANCE. 

Recognizance of Bail in the Court of KiDg*s 
Bench to appear and answer to an Indictment 
for Felony in Parliament, 20 vol. 356 (note). 

RECORDS. 

Stat. 46 Edw. 3, authorizing the deUvery of 
Copies of public Records to all persons re- 
quiring them for the purpose of using them 
in Evidence, 12 vol. 661. —This Statute did 
not authorize the delivery of a Copy of tbe 
Indictment to a Prisoner on his Trial, ibid. 
ib.— <Sir John Hawles says, that in anciept 
times the Reasons of Judgments were, in 
difficult Cases, entered on Record, 8 vol. 434 
(note). — Proceedings against several persons 
in 1647 for forging a Record of a Fine, 4 foL 
951. 

RECUSANTS,~See Papkis. 

REFORM IN PARLIAMENT.--S«e 
Parliamentary Reform. 

REFORMATION. 

Queen Anne Boleyn's Patronage of the 
Reformation, 1 vol. 428. — Proceedings against 
Gardiner, Bishop of Winchester, for opposing 
the Reformation, ibid. 551. — Proceeding? 
again^ Bonner, Bishop pf London, for op- 
posing the Reformation, ibid. 631. 



REGICIDES. 
Resolutions of the Judges upon several 
points relating to the arrangements for the 
Trial of the Regicides, 5 vol. 971.— Discus- 
sion of the difficulty whether the killing of, 
Charles the First was to be laid in the InaicU 



.Contbntb.] 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



337 



ment to have been committed in his Reign or 
in that of Charles the Second, ibid. 981.— 
Persons to whom the Commission of Oyer and 
Terminer for the Trial of the Regicides, was 
directed, ibid. 986. — Proceedings on the Trials, 
12 Car. 2, 1660, ibid. 985.— Chief Baron Bridg- 
man's Chaise to the Grand Jury, ibid. 988. — 
Names of the persons against whom an Indict- 
ment was preferred, ibid. 994. — ^They are seve- 
rally arraigned, ibid. 995.— Sir Hardress Waller 
and George Fleetwood plead Guilty, ibid. 996, 
1005. — ^The others plead Not Guilty, ibid. 
996* — ^Trial of Thomas Harrison, ibid. 1008. — 
Sjpeech of the Solicitor General (Sir Heneage 
Finch) for the Prosecution, ibid. 1011. — Eri^ 
dence against him, ibid. lOlT. — Mr. Wadham 
Windham sums up the Evidence against him, 
ibid. 1023 — His Defence, ibid. 1024.— The 
Chief Baron's Charge to the Jury, ibid. 1033. 
•^He is found Guilty, and Sentence of Death 
is passed upon him, ibid. 1034. — His Beha* 
Tiour at the place of Execution, ibid. 1230.— 
Barbarous manner of his Execution, ibid. 
1237, and ibid. ib. (note). — Trial of Adrian 
Scroop, ibid. 1034.-'The Solicitor General's 
Speecn against him, ibid. 1037.- — Evidence 
against him, ibid. ib. — His Defence, ibid. 
1043.-«The Charge to the Jury, ibid. 1047.— 
The Jury find him Guilty, ibid. 1048.— His 
Sentence, ibid. 1075. — His Conduct at his 
Execution, ibid. 1298. — Ludlow's Account of 
him, ibid. 1035 ([note). — ^Trial of John Carew, 
ibid. 1048. — Evidence against him, ibid. 1050. 
— His Defence, ibid. 1052. — ^The Charge to 
the Jury, ibid. 1057. — He is found Guilty, 
ibid. 1058. — ^His Sentence, ibid. 1075. — His 
Conduct at his Execution, ibid. 1237. — Lud- 
low's Account of him and of this Trial, ibid. 
1049 (note).— Tri^l of Thomas Scott, ibid. 
1058. — Evidence against him, ibid. 1061.-^ 
The Charge to the Jury, ibid. 1070. — He is 
found Guilty, ibid. 1071. — ^His Sentence, ibid. 
1075.^His Conduct at his Execution, ibid. 
1272. — Ludlow's Account of him and of his 
Trial, ibid. 1058 (note). — Gregory Clements 
withdraws his Plea of Not Guilty, and con- 
fesses the Indictment, ibid. 1071. — His Sen- 
tence, ibid. 1075. — His Execution, ibid. 1283. 
—Ludlow's Notice respecting him, ibid. 1071 
(note). — ^Trial of John Jones, ibid. 1072. — He 
is found Guilty, ibid. 1074. — His Sentence, 
ibid. 1075. — His Conduct at his Execution, 
ibid. 1283.— -Ludlow's Account of him, ibid. 
1071 (note).— Trial of John Cook, Solicitor 
General to the Commonwealth, ibid. 1077. — 
The Solicitor General opens tbeJPharge against 
him, ibid. 1079. — ^The Evidence against him, 
ibid. 1080.-— He urges in his Defence that 
what he did was in the exercise of his pro- 
fessional duty as Counsel, by commana of 
the House of Commons, ibid. 1090. — Reply 
of the King*s Counsel, ibid. 1098.— The 
Charge to the Jury, ibid. 1105. — He is found 
Guilty, ibid. 1115. — His Sentence, ibid. 1243. 
-^His Conduct at his Execution, ibid. 1247. — 
Ludlow's Account of him and of this Trial, 

ibidf .1Q77 (q9^);7'^tt^r written by him to a 



friend a short time before hit Execution, ibid 
1257. — His Letter to his Wife, from the 
Tower, ibid. 1266.— Trial of Hugh Peten, 
ibid. 1116. — Evidence against him, ibid. 1118. 
—Extracts from a Sermon preached by him 
before Cromwell and Bradshaw, ibid. 1131. — 
Evidence for him, ibid. 1134.— His Defence, 
ibid. 1135.— He is found Guilty, ibid. 1143. 
—His Sentence, ibid. 1144. — His Conduct at 
his Execution, ibid. 1281. — Abstract of a Ser- 
mon preached by him in Newgate after his 
Condemnation, ibid. 1179.— Accounts of him 
by Ludlow, Whitlocke, and others, ibid. 1116 
(note).— Trial of Daniel Axtell, ibid. 1146.— 
Evidence against him, ibid. 1147. — His De* 
fence, ibid. 1156.-^He is found Guilty, ibid. 
1176. — ^Judgment against him, ibid. 1224. — 
His Conduct at his Execution, ibid. 1286. — 
Ludlow's Notice of him, ibid. 1146 (note). — 
Trial of Francis Hacker, ibid. 1176.— Efi- 
dence against him, ibid. 1178.-^He is found 
Guilty, ibid. 1185. — Judgment against him, 
ibid. 1224. — >His Conduct at the place of 
Execution, ibid. 1286.*--Ludlow'8 Account of 
him, ibid. 1176 (note).— Trial of William 
Hulet, ibid. 1185. — Evidence against him, 
ibid. 1186. — Evidence for him, ibid. 1192. — 
He is found Guilty, ibid. 1195. — Judgment 
agaiost him, ibid. 1224.-- Arraignment of 
Isaac Pennington, Henry Marten, Gilbert 
Milliogton, I^bert Tichburn, Owen Roe, 
Robert Lilburn, Henry Smith, and Edmund 
Harvey, ibid. 1195. — Harvey and Pennington 
confess the Charge, ibid. 1198. — Evidence 
against Marten, ibid. 1200. — ^The others con- 
fess, ibid. 1203.— The Jury find them all Guilty, 
ibid. 1208.— 'Judgment against them, ibid. 
1224.— Ludlow's Notice of Marten's Trial, 
ibid. 1195 (note). — Account of Marten's Con- 
finement and Death, ibid. 1208 (note).— 
Arraignment of John Downes, Vincent Potter, 
Augustin Garland, Simon Meyne, James 
Temple, Peter Temple, Thomas Waite, and 
William Heveningham, ibid. 1209. — They all 
confess the Indictment, ibid. 1214.— The Jury 
find them Guilty, ibid. 1220. — Judgment 
against them, ibid. 1224. — Names of the ten 
Regicides who were executed, ibid. 1230.— 
John Barkstead, John Okey, and Miles Corbet, 
are outlawed upon their Indictment,, ibid. 
994 (note). — ^They are taken in Holland, and 
brought to the Bar of the Court of King's 
Bench, ibid. 1301.— They plead that they are 
not the persons mentioned in the Record of 
Outlawry, ibid. 1310, and 1311 (note).— A 
Jury is impannelled, who find that they are 
the same persons, ibid. ib. — A Rule for their 
Execution is granted by the Court, ibid. ib. — 
Record of the Proceedings against them in the 
King's Bench, 19 vol. 737. — Corbett's Account 
of the Proceedings against him at Westminster, 
ibid. 1310. — ^Their Conduct and Speeches at 
the place of Execution, ibid. 1306, 1317. — 
Argument in favour of the Regicides who 
surrendered on the Royal Proclamation-, ibid. 
1346. — ^Account of three of the Regicides who 
fled to Ami^ricai ibid* 13J^9«^Mr« Fox'9 R^ 



iit 



aSNERAL IKDEX TO 



CMft0M& 



mifi4t9 updii the fil^ of the Regicides, 6 
vol. 201. 

REGISTER. 

Stat. 7 and 8 Will, dj c. 21^ estaUishing a 
▼oluntarj Register lor Seamen to serve in the 
Navy^ 18 vol. 1330 Ouote). — ^lliis expedient 
said by Mr. Justice Foster to have nad no 
e^eet, ibid. 1330, and 1331 (note). 

RELEVANCY. 

Accotitit of the practice of the Scotch 
Courts in criminal Trials respecting the 't>e- 
hate on the Relevancy of the Libel, 19 vol. 
125^ (note). 

RELiOIOK.^^e BUupheii^ i Iterety. 

Mr. Etskine's Vi^W df the ])Hnclple^ by 
Hhith Freedotn of Discussion on religious 
subjects should be iregulated^ in h\i Speech 
fdr the Prdsecutibn ih Williatos^s Case, 26 vol* 
e62.-^Mh Kyd'^ Argunienti, itt his Defence 
ill that Cas4, on the impolicy 6f Prdsecutiotis 
Ibr the t>Ublication of religious Opinrbnsi ibid. 
871, 6^;-^Opinions of various learned meti 
uporl this subject, ibid. 6t5.-^Mr. fiayl^y's 
Opinidh that k Publication reflecting oh the 
Christian Religion may be prds6ctited as t 
Lib^l at CoraMoti L^w, ibid. 654.^Lord 
ll^^yon expresses the s&!ne Opinion, ibid. 704. 
^^\t Vicary Gibl^'s iStateraeht of the Law 
i^pe<Hitig Libels on Religion, in his Speech 
fbt the Prosecution in Eaton^s Case, ^\ vol. 
Mi.*«-Df. Middleton's Opinion against Prdi- 
secutioils ibr libels upon Religion, ibid. -948. 
—Mir. BarHbgton*s Quotation of the JEmperor 
Titud^s Opinion aeainst Prosecutions for 
OS^nces against Religidnj 15 vol. 716; — Mr. 
Locke's Xetter to Sit Francis Masham on the 
Execution of Aikenhead in Scotland fot de^ 
nying the Doctiine of the Trinity, 13 vol. 

REMEDY. 

The maxini that '' the Law of England gives 
a Remedy for every Wrong," is to be under- 
stood with tlie Qualification, that the party 
seeking a Remedy must apply for it through 
the proper channel, 14 voL 784. 

REMONSTRANCE* 

Remotistrdiiae of the Lotig P^liatheiit ifi 
1.641 against Jesuits and Priests, 4 vol. 6&. — 
The Kittg'i Answer thereto, ibid. Q^% 

REfLfCAIiON. 

In Gin Actloiifot F&lse Imptis6niiienl$ ivhele 
the Defendant pleads. a lawfhl CoMliiitiiient 
as k Magistmte for a bailable Offenee, the 
Plaintiff cannot, under the general Replication 
of De if^uHi^ give in Evidence a tender 
and refusal of Bail; but iftnet reply nptQbkllf, 
SO Vol. l$ldi 



REPLY. 



Objeotion to tbe Attorney General^s ri^ to 
reply, on the Trial of Home Tooke upon aa 
Ex-omcio Information for a Libel, 20 vol. 
660.~--Lord Mansfield overrules the Ohjeotkm^ 
ibid. 664.'-^Lord Mansfield'a Observatioas on 
the right of a Prosecutor to reply in crimiaal 
Cases, ibid. 762»—; Disoussion in Dr. Sheri- 
dan's Case^ in Ireland^ respecting the right of 
the Attorney General or his Deputy to rdplj 
in a criminal Case where the Defendant oaJOs 
no Wittiesses, 31 vol. 707. — ^Instance of the 
refusal of the Court to permit Co«nsei for the 
Prosecution in a Case of Murder to reply 
where the Prisoner had called Evidence ia his 
befence on the merits, 17 vol. 353. 

REPORTS* 

Sir Joiin Howled iiays, that aitef it c^ed 
to be the pr&cti(^e to eftteT the tUasoii» df 
Judgments on Record, the Courts Always 
delivered the Reasons of theit JudgmefitI 
publicly, in order that th6y Might be ^ublishei 
irt Books of Reports, 8 vol. 434 (ttote).— tft 
1704 fiooks of Law Reports were S^id by l!lit 
Thotnas Powis to have beCoihe ^6 ftutbehms 
as to be a burthefi, 14 vol. 7l6.— Mf. Jtistiee 
Foster says, that ** imperfect Reports 6t htia 
aild circumstances ate the bane of all ^cien&i 
that depends iipon the Preced^tit!; and £x« 
amples of former times,** 16 Vol. 10(iio(e). 

REPORTER!^. 

InstanW o^ RepOfters being brdered wit of 
Court on a Trial befOfS Lord holt, U V6l. 
035. 

REPUTATION.— See Chiir^ci&', 

flESCtJE. 

Proceedings on ihe Trial of the Earl of 
Thanet and others for an attempt to rescue ft 
Prisoner ii^ a Court of Justice, 27 vol. 8S1* 

RESISTAKC£.-«See Pasthe ObeSeiut. 

Blackiitone's Rem^tb) on the dodlrifitf Of 
Resist^ncd skiid Passive Obedienee, 15 td J 
(!iote).-^OpbiottS df Dr. Tuckef^ ttean w 
GlOUtester, bn the saMe &iubject, ibid. 5 (note). 
— Sensible Retttatk of Archbishop Sharps W 
the limits of Obedience, ibid. M (tibtfe).-* 
Lofd, President Braasha#*s Assertion of tW 
Right of the peot)le of Englatid to ^«I1 *« r 
Kings to demount fo* MiscotidUct, In »» 
Address to ChtttUft the Firtlf ptfevieftsly t# 
passing SenteufclB lipoh him ill the Hijfh Gm 
of Justice, 4 voli 1008. ---Argument « MJ* 
Lechtnere, Oh the Trial of Dr. SWfi^Vef^i^ 
that Resistance to the !luprerfi* Atithdng 
undet eertkin ciroumsian^^ is juStiw »7 
the pritodples of the English Conslietftioftr \^ 
voli 61.--5ir Joseph Jekytt's Argtttoee^ 



Dts Saeheverell's Case, to m i^tae fW 
ibid, 97.^&k Rokm Sfre¥ AnfO^ ^ 



/■linwiihliifcii ""I 

vollTBfl9v»J 



fttE Sf AfE tftlAtS. 



ddd 



All RcTblt^itidh fo i^m *«^as efiTedted bjpoti th^ 
principle bf the legdliiy of Reshtaiiicey ibid. 
106.-^Sif Johii Hdlland'^ Aijgiiment to thfe 
saxbiB purpose, ibid. iiO.-^Sir Bihiofi Hat- 
Contt's Argument f&i Dt. SachfeVerell tbftl thfe 
tid^i^tie t)f Noh-ttfesistance is warirdnted by 
Afe Ciitiltsh of Englatid, atid agreeable to LaW, 
ibid. 20!2.i— Mr. Dodd^s Arguttient to tbe saJhe 
poH^se, ibid. 218.— Inslahces bf learned 
Wnters, cited by Mr. Phipps for Dr. Sacbeve- 
rell, who have denied the lawfulness of Re- 
sistance, ibid. 23ii— Eittactisj from Sermons, 
Homilies, and other writings of eminent 
Divines, as glVeh ih fividencfe oil Dr. Sache- 
lrerell*s Trial, to shoW that Non-Resistance is 
a Doctrine 6f Ibfe Chttrch of England, ibid. 
l!!44.^i-iBisfadp Sttftiel*s AcddUtit bf the boe- 
trine of thfe Chtireh of Etigtattd respecting 
Resistance, in his Speech on Dr. SacheverelFs 
Trial, ibid. 481 .^The BiShbp of Oxford's 
Speech en the same subject^ ibids 494; — Lord 
Meadowbank's assertion bf the legality of 
Resistance under certain eireumstances^ 33 
vol. 106. 

RESISTANCE TO PROCESS. 

If Officerls are killed in^hile attempting to 
execute ft legal Warirant for a breach of the 
Peacfe) having given notice of their authority, 
it is Murder in the pfersons making Ifafe Re- 
sistance, Curtis's Case, 15 vol. 742 (note). — 
If Officers acting under legal Process kill a 
Prisoner under a reasonable apprehension that 
he is about to rescue himself forcibly from 
their Custody, it is justifiable Homicide, 
Reason and Tranter's Case, 16 vol. 52. — 
Tridl of John Slfevensori fdt the Murder of 
t p^fsbii assisting an Officer in the execution 
of ihregular Process, 19 vol. 845.~Ai-guthenti^ 
bf Cottnsfel in that Case, whether tbe insertion 
of the Officer's name in a Writ after it was 
sealed, was stach ah irtegularity as would 
reduce the Offencfe of d person killing the 
Officer, while refeisfiiig the Writ, from 
Murder to Manslaughter, ibid. 864.~By the 
Law of Scotland, a defect in the Process, or 
an irfegukrity committed by the Officer in 
executing it, \Vill not justify resistance to the 
effbtt of depriving the Officer of his Life, 
ibid. 881. — Mt-. Burnett's Repdrt of a Case 
in Scotland, in lT95, in which the killihg an 
Officer iti resisting Process irregularly ex- 
fecuted Was held to be Miirdfer, ibid. 882. 

ItESTOfiATrON. 

Letters of Charles the Second to General 
Monk and several public Bodies from Breda 
immediately previous to his Restoration, 5 vol. 
947. — His Declaration to the People of Eng- 
land, promising a general Pardon to all per- 
8bns coiJi^ectfed with th^ death of the late 
King Who cfinilB in Within forty days, excepting 
Such as should be aftetwards excepted by Par- 
Uiltxi€fit, ibid. 951.— Other Declaratidhs of 
Cb&fles the Sfecdild during his Utile; promising 
fttrdt% ibMf 9$^: 



RfiTAlNEIl* 

Lord Erskine^s Letter to the Editor of .the 
State Trials, explaining his motives for can- 
celling a general detainer in the Case of 
ThbtniBts William^^ 28 vol; 714 (tiotfe)i 

RfitURN.— See HaBeas Cof^. 

An Offitier of a Court of Justice in making 
a Return td a Writ or Precept^ inust retuth 
what is his own i^ci^ or that bf cinother, but 
not what he is inibrmefl of by another, 3 VbL 
13.-^Argument in Stroud's Case that the sattib 
degree of Certainty is i^ot required in a RbtHrA 
to fi Habeas Corpus as in a Count or Plest, 
ibid; 248i-^Proceedings in an Action against 
a Sheriff for malieiousljr making ft double 
R\3tum to A Writ of Election, 6 VoL lOGdi 

REVE*JtJ]fe. 

Argument of Lord Holtj in the Bankei-^' 
Case, that the King may alien any part of his 
Revenue of which he has an Estate of Inherit- 
ance, 14 vol. 29. — Mr. Hargrave's Account 'of 
the Cohtroversy which arose Sooh aft^t the 
dedisibrt of the Bankers* Case, respefctlrig the 
right of th^ Ring to alienate the herfedllary 
Revenues of the Crown, ibid. 5. — ^Argument 
of Lord Somers, in the Bankers' Case,^ that 
the Barons of the Exchecjue^ have no Juris- 
diction over the issues bf the Revenue of the 
Crown, ibid. 46. 

REVOLUTION. 

Declaration of the Prince of Orange on his 
landing in England, 15 vol. 280. — Sir Joseph 
Jekyll's Vindication of the Principles of the 
Revolution in 1688$ in his Speech for the 
Commons on the Trial of Dr. Sacheterell, 
ibid. 95.-— Sir Robert Eyrfe's Argument iii that 
Case that the Revolution was effected iipon 
the principle of the legality of Resistance, ibid. 
106.— ^Sir John JHolland's Argument to the 
same purpose, ibid. 110; — Advantages derived 
by the English Constitution from the RctoIiI- 
tion, 26 voli 547. — EulogiUm of Mr^ Justice 
Foster upon the Revolution, ibid. 584i 

RIOTS.— See Pilkingtm, Thomas; Thanet, 
SackuUlCf Earl of; Watson, James, 

Mr. Luders's Observations tipon the Crises 
in whieh rebellious Riots have been hdd to 
amount to Treason^ & vol. 899 (note), 15 tpl. 
522 (note); — Reasons of the difibt&nce id 
Opinion amongst the Judges in the Weavers^ 
Case, whether assembling in multitudes for 
the purpose of destroying Lboms, and actually 
destroying many, be Treason, or only an aggra- 
vated Riot, 6 vol. 894 (note).— The Riot Act 
has fhade a great change in thfe Law with 
respect to rebellious Riots aiwi Tumults, 15 
vol. 544 (note).— Snidllett's Account of the 
Ribts iti favour bf the Pretehder in 171 5» 32 
vol. 44H.^Mr. WetheTell's Allusion (o {he 



240 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



[MlSCBLL. 



fiirming^ham Riots in 1791 > ia his Speech in 
Defence of Watson^ ihid. 449. 

ROBBERY. 

Actual putting in fear is not a necessary 
ingredient in the crime of Robbery, 19 toI. 
806.— Stat« 4 and 5 Phil, and Mary, c. 4, 
depriving persons of Clergy who are convicted 
of commanding, hiring, or counselling others 
to commit Highway Robbery, ibid. 776 (note). 
—Stat. 3 and 4 Will, and Mary, c. 9, on the 
same subject, ibid. ib.*--Remarks on these 
Statutes by Mr. Hume Campbell, in his Argu- 
ment in Macdaniel's Case, ibid. 786. — Dis- 
cussion whether a concerted Highway Rob- 
bery, effected for the purpose of entitling the 
Imrties to a Reward offered by Proclamation 
or the apprehension of Robbers, be a capital 
Offence as a Highway Robbery, Macdaniel's 
Case, 19 vol. 778. — Mr. Justice Foster's Ar- 

fument on delivering the opinion of the 
udges in that Case in the negative, ibid. 801. 

ROBES. 

Resolved by all the Judges that, on a Trial 
in the Court of tlie High Steward, the Judges 
were to attend in their Scarlet Robes, 6 vol. 
769. 

ROMAN CATHOLICS.-^See Papisis; 

JetuUs, . ^ 

Remarks on the tendency of some of the 
Doctrines of tlie Roman Catholics, 29 vol. 
532. 

ROYAL FAMILY. 

Proceedings in 1718 respecting the King's 
Prerogative in the Education and Marriage of 
the Royal Family, on a Question referred to 
the Judges by the King, 15 vol. 1195. — Dis- 
cussion of the subject by the Judges on de- 
livering their Opinions, ibid. 1206. — ^The 
Majority of the Judges declare their Opinion 
in favour of the Prerogative, both as to the 
Marriage and Education of the Royal Family, 
ibid. 1223. — Mr. Baron Price and Mr. Justice 
Eyre dissent upon the point of Education, 
ibid. 122^4. 

RUMOURS.— See News, 

• It was resolved in the Earl of Northamp- 
ton's Case, that the publication of false 
Rumours respecting the King, or any of the 
Great Men of the Realm, was punishable at 
Common Law, 3 vol. 863. 

RYE-HOUSE PLOT. 

Introduction to the Trials for the Rye- 
House Plot, 9 vol. 357.— Remarks upon the 
authenticity of some of the Histories of this 
Transaction, ibid. 360. — ^The Informations 
and original Papers relating to the proof of 
the ?lot, ibid, 365,— Burnet's History of the 



Rye-House Plot, ibid. 491.— Mr. Fox's Re- 
marks on the Transactions connected with it, 
ibid. 517. — Historical particulars of Persons 
accused of being concerned in this Plot, ibid. 
1005. — For Trials of persons charged with 
being concerned in it, see Blague, William, 
9 vol. 654 — Hone, William, ibid. 571— Rouse, 
John, ibid. 638— Russell, William, Lord, ibid. 
578 — Sidney, Algernon, ibid. 817— Walcot, 
Thomas, ibid. 519. 

SACRAMENT. 

Counsel appointed by Edward the Sixth to 
consider of the proper mode of administering 
Uie Sacrament, 1 vol. 634. — Resolutions of 
the Council upon the subject, and Proceed- 
ings of the Government thereon, ibid. 636. 

SANCTUARY. 

If a man take Sanctuary, and depart thence, 
it is said to be a Breach of Prison, 3 vol. 292. 
— ^Account of the ancient Common-law prac< 
tice of Sanctuary, 15 vol. 145. 

SAVOY CONFERENCE. 

Proceedings at the Conference in the Savoy, 
soon after the Restoration, respecting a Re- 
view of the Liturgy, 6 vol. 1. — Commission 
for the Conference, ibid. 25. — Burnet's Ac- 
count of this Conference, and the circum- 
stances which preceded and attended it, 
ibid. 61. 

SCANDALUM MAGNATUM. 

Enumeration of the persons included in the 
Statutes respecting Scandaium Magnatum; 
3 vol. 863.— Of the nature of the Scandal, 
ibid. ib. — ^The party grieved may proceed bj 
Action de Scandalo Magnatum, and formerly 
the party grieved and the Attorney General 
might have exhibited a Bill in the Star Cham- 
ber against the Offender, ibidi 865.— Account 
of the Statutes respecting Scandaium Mag- 
natum, 10 vol. 1 329 (note).— The Action of 
Scandaium Magnatum is a qui tarn Action, 
ibid. 1341.— Pleadings in Actions of Scan- 
daium Magnatum, ibid. 129, 1413.— Proceed* 
ings on a Writ of Inquiry on an Action of 
Scandaium Magnatum brought by the Duke 
of York (afterwards James the Second) against 
Dr. Oates, ibid. 125.— Proceedings in a simi- 
lar Action by the Earl of Macclesfield agamst 
John Starkey, ibid. 1329.— In an Action ot 
Scandaium Magnatum the Plaintiff is not 
entitled to Costs, though he obtains a Verdict, 
13 vol. 1437. 

SCOTLAND.— See PostncUi 
Proceedings of the Commissioners of boin 
Nations authorized to settle the Terms of the 
Union of Scotland with England on the Ac- 
cession of James the First, 2 vol. 561.-1^/^' 
cussion in Calvin's Case of the QuesttW 
whether persQns bom in SpaUapd ^^^ ^ 



CdNmm.] 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



241 



Accession of James the First to the Crdwn of 
£D|^a<id Mrere Aliens <or {fatifes^ and capable 
of maintaining an Action for Land in the 
latter Country, ibid. 559. — ^Argument on the 
Trial of the Duke of Hamilton, that a person 
bom in ^Scotland since the Union of the Crowns 
cannot be considered, in any sense, as an 
Alien ta England, 4 toI. 1174. — Before the 
Union, a Scotchman was refused a Jury de 
medietate Ungua, because Scotchmen were 
said to be reputed in England for Subjects, 
ibid. 1 177. — ^A Scotchman was a good Witness 
before the Union in a Case of Treason, ibid, 
ilk — ^Po[abt expressed on the Trial of Lionel 
Anderson and others, whether a Native of 
Scotkuid was within the words of the Stat. 27 
Eliz. c. 2, against Seminary Priests, 7 vol. 
871. — Plea in Kinloch's Case to an Indict- 
ment for Treason, that the Prisoner is a Native 
of Scotland, where a part of the Offence was 
charged to have been commit.ted, and there- 
fore, that he ought to be tried there, 18 vol. 
398. — ^The Plea is overruled by the Court, 
ibid. 401. — By Stat. 7 Ann. c. 21, Treasons 
committed in Scotland are to be tried by a 
Special Commission of Oyer and Terminer 
under the Great Seal, 23 vol. 1174.— Form of 
such a Commission, ibid. 1167.— Since the 
Union, the Law of Treason has been the same 
in Scotland as in England, ibid. 1189. — Dis-i 
CDssion in the Case of David Lindsay, whether 
a Native of Scotland is within the Stat. 9 Will. 
3, ag^nst persons returning into England 
fiom France without Licence, 14 vol. 999^ — 
Mackenzie's Account of the Jurisdiction of 
the Parliament of Scotland, 10 vol. 973 (note). 

SCOTCH PLOT. 

Reference to Historians who notice the 
Scotch Plot in the fteign of Queen Anne, 14 
vol. 937 (note). — Extract from Boyer respect- 
ing it, ibid. 938 (note). — Proceedings in Par- 
lisunent respecting it, ibid. 937. 

SEA. 

Of the'Supplies allowed bv Law to the King 
of England for the Defence of the Sea, 3 vol. 874. 

SEAL. 

. The principal Secretary of State has the 
custody of the King's Petit Seal,, or Signet, 
19 vol. 1013. 

SEAMEN.— See Preuing Seamen, 

Mr. Justice Foster's Argument in favour of 
the legality of Pressing Seamen, 18 vol. 1326. 
— Proclamations in the Reign of Charles the 
First against Seamen entering into Foreign 
Service, 3 vol. 829 (note). 

SEARCH WARRANTS. 

The legality of Search Warrants denied by 
Lord Coke, 19 vol. 1067. — Lord Camden 
says, that the practice of issuing Search War- 
raots for stolen Goods crept into the Law 
imperceptibly, ibid. ib. — His Remarks on the 
caution which the Law requires in the use of 
Search WarranjLSy ibid. ibt-*Qis Judgment in 

VOL. XXXIV. 



the Case of En tick v. Carrington against r the 
legality of Warrants to search for Seditious 
Libels or other Papers of a suspected person, 
ibid. 1063. 

SECRETARY OF STATE. 

Argument of Sir Bartholomew Shower^ in 
the Case of Kendall and Roe, against the 

?ower of a Secretary of State to commit for 
reason or Felony, 12 vol. 1359. — Lord Holt 
in that Case seems to have admitted the ex- 
istence of such a power, ibid. 1367, 1376. — 
Observations of Mr. De Grey (Solicitor Gene- 
ral), in his Argument in the Case of Leach v. 
Money and others, on the office of Secretary 
of State, 19 vol. 1013.— The, Secretary of 
State has the Custody of the King's Petit Seal, 
ibid. ib. — Report of the Case of the Queen 
against Derby, in which the Court of King's 
Bench decided that a Secretary of State has 
the power of committing for Libel, ibid. 
1014. — ^The Questions, whether he is a Justice 
of the Peace within the meaning of the Statutes 
7 Jaci 1, c. 5, 21 Jac. 1, c. 12, and 24 Geo. 2, 
c. 44, and whether he acts as a Conservator 
of the Peace at Common Law, discussed but 
not settled, ibid. 1012. — ^The Judgment of the 
Court of Common Pleas, in the Case of Entick 
V. Carrington, delivered by Lord Camden, 
deciding the negative of both these Questions, 
ibid. 1044. — Lord Camden's Account of the 
nature and history of the Office of a Secretary 
of State, ibid. 1046. — His Doubts whether he 
was formerly a Member of the Privy Council, 
ibid. 1047. — His Argument against his power 
to commit in. his own right as a Magistrate, 
ibid. ib. — Lord Kenyon says, in Despard's 
Case, that according to authorities, there is no 
doubt that a Secretary of State has power to 
commit, ibid. 1039 (note). 

SEDinON. 

Discussion respecting Sedition on the Re-* 
turn to the Habeas Corpus in Stroud's Case, 
3 vol. 242. — Sedition is not any determined 
Offence by the Law of England, ibid, ib.— « 
Etymology and legal meaning of the Word, 
ibid. ib.-^ir Edward Littleton's Remarks on 
the meaning of the Crime of Sedition by the 
Law of England, ibid. 254.— Mr. Selden's 
Remarks on the same subject, ibid. 267.— 
Use of the term by Bracton and other ancient 
Writers, ibid. 277.— Mr, Selden says, that by 
the Civil Law, Sedition was capital Treason, 
ibid. 279.— Dr. Johnson's Definition of Sedi- 
tion, 23 vol. 870.— Mr. East's Account of the 
distinction between Sedition and Treason by 
the Law of England, 22 vol. 477 (note). — 
Definitions of Sedition by various Writers on 
the Scotch Law, 23 vol. 641. — Explanation of 
the distinction by the Law of Scotland between 
real Sedition and verbal Sedition, or Leasing-' 
Making, ibid. 786, 855. See also, 33 vol. 
122.— *There seem to have been no Prosecu.* 
tions in Scotland for Seditioi^ previously to 
1792, 33volll4, 

R 



949 6SKE&AL 

SEDUCTION. 

Trfal of Lord Grey of Werk and others, ibr 
the Seduction of Lady Henrietta Berkeley, 9 
vol. 127. 

SEIZURE OF PAPERS. 

The Case of Seizure of Papers, bein^ Sin 
Action of Trespass in the Court of Common 
Pleas, by John Entick against Nathan Cnrring- 
ton and three other Messengers in ordinary to 
the King, for entering the Plaintiff's House 
and seizing his Papers under a Warrant from 
the Secretary of State, 6 Geo. 3, 1T65, 19 vol. 
1029.— The Pleadings, ibid. 1030.— A Special 
Verdict is found by the Jury, ibid. 1032. — 
Argument of the Special Verdict, containing 
t Discussion of the power of the Secretary of 
State to commit and to grant Warrants for 
the Seizure of Papers, ibid. 1036. — Lord 
Camden delivers the Judgment of the Court 
for the Plaintiff, that the Seizure of the Papers 
of a Suspected person is illegal, ibid. 1044. — 
It was said by Chief Justice Scroggs, in the 
Case of Benjamin Harris, to have been deter- 
mined by all the Judges that Books containing 
Libels on public or private persons, might be 
seized, 7 vol. 929. 

SEMINARY PRIESTS.-See Jesuit. 

The Stat. 27 Eliz. c. 2, making it Treason 
for Seminary Priests to remain within the 
Realm, 4 vol. 59 (note), 7 vol. 724.— This 
Statute seems to be provisionally repealed by 
the Stat. 31 Geo. 3, c. 32, s, 4, 7 vol. 724 
(note). — Remonstrance of the Long Parliament 
in 1641 against Seminary Priests, 4 vol. 60. — 
The King's Answer thereto^ ibid. 62. — In 
Prosecutions upon the Statute of Elizabeth, it 
was sufficient to show that the party accused 
had acted as a Priest, without proving that he 
had taken Orders from the Pope, 7 vol. 830, 
870. — It was doubtful whether a Scotchman 
was within th« Statote <tf Etiiabet^ ibid, 671. 



SENTENCE. 

Dispute between th« Bishops and Barons 
in the Council wlii^ should jfyronounce Sen- 
tence upon Thomas Beckett, Archbishop of 
Canterbury, 1 vol. 3. — Lord Bacon^s Observa- 
tions on th« King's power of altering the 
Erecution of the Sentence of a Court of Jos- 
lice in Cases of TVeason and Fekmy, 7 vol. 
ISSd (note).— Discnssioii of tlie Question 
wliether, in triminal Cases, the Execution 
may vaiy from the Sentence, 11 vol. 376.— 
Mr. Etnlyn eommends l^e practice of some 
foreign Coumries that the Magistrate should 
be present at the execution of a Sentence, and 
give directions about ft, 1 voU. xxxyi. — I>»ssec- 
tionj in Cases of Murder, forms part of the 
Sentence, 18 vol.1201, 19 vol. 959.— It was 
formerly the practice in Scodatad for t!he 
Boomster or Executioner of the Owtt to 
pronounce Sentence in capitatl Cases; it is 
now ^eiiveml by 'fee piresiding Jiidge, and 
afterwards read by the Clerk from "te ltoeord> 



INDEX TO imma. 

io vol. 1008.— In all Caies tt ISufdcr, ^ 
Sentence by the Common Law is the saiae; 
and therefore, in Felton'sCase for stabbing 
the Duke of Buckingham, the Court refused 
to order the Prisoner's Hand to be cut off) 
though required to do so by the King, S tok 
372. — Discussion, in the Duchess of Kingston's 
Case, whether a Sentence of Jactitation pro* 
nounced by the Ecclesiastical Court upon a 
'first Marriage, is a conclusive Answer to a 
Charge of Bigamy upon the party's contract- 
ing a second Marriage, 20 vol. 39l4-^Argii« 
ment of Sir Edward Thurlow (Attorney Gene- 
ral), in the Duchess of Kingston's Case, that 
Sentences of peculiar Jurisdictions are not 
conclusive Evidence of the facts Which vt 
the foundation of them^ ibid< 448. 

SERJEANT* 

A Serjeant at Law may be compelled to bs 
knighted, if it *be necessary for tne Defence 
of the Realm, 3 vol. 929.'^It was formerly 
part of a Serjeant's Oath| that as soon as be 
discovered the falsity of his Cause, he would 
.forsake it, 5 vol. 1093.— In former times s 
Serjeant at Law had pre-audience of the Attor* 
ney General, except on Motions for the King, 
2 vol. 881 (note). — Remarks upon the Office 
of King's Serjeant in early times, 19 toI. 
1 139.--Of the probable reason of the mention 
of the King's Serjeant in the Proclamation 
before the commencement of a Criminal Trial, 
ibid, ib.-— Mr. Spelman thinks that there was 
formerly a King's Serjeant in every Couotf 
for Pleas of the Crown, ibid, ib. 

SERMONS. 

Extraets from Htigh Latimer's Sermon on 
the Execution of LoiS Seymour of Sudley* 1 
vol. 506.— Dr. SaehevereU's celebrated Serawn 
on the Pmis of False Brethren, 15 vol. 69. 

SERVANT.— See Master and Servant. 

SERVICES. 

Mr. St. John's Account in his Argument in 
the Case of Ship-Money, of the Services 
reserved to th* King from Tentves of Uads 
to edable him to defend theltealtt; ^ "f^A. M* 

ShVim BISHOPS. 

Trial of Dr. Witiiam Samsroft^ Aiehbifllop 
of Canterbury, Dr. William Lloyd, ^^opf 
St. Asaph, Dr. iVascts Taiaer, BiiiMp of ^ 
Dr. Jolm Lake, Bishop of Chk^estcr, ^ 
Thomas Kenn, Bishop «rBrth and WelK*''' 
Thomas Whit€^ Bishop «f Peterborough, and 
Sir Jonathan Trelawney, Bart. Bishopol 
Bristol {tbe Seven Bidrops), at «l»« S^] 
Bench Bar, for publi*ing a Seditious Libdj* 
Jac. % leee, 12 vol. 183.--Chranger'sA<«««a: 
of each of tt« BiAops who were the solf^ 
of this Triad, i%id. ib.— They are brought W® 
tftie Tower mio the Court «tf fSng^ ^^IL 
Habeas Coppwj fipxm tiie M^tton^^** 



C!OMttMU0*3 



THB 5TATB TBIALS. 



d49 



ioni«y Getienly IM« I80.^1%e Rctum tp dke 
Habeas Coipat, ttatiog a CooimitflKBt by eer- 
tain Lovds of the Privy Cduneil for a Seditious 
libel, ibid. 1 93.---The Attorney General moTts 
tKat tbfty may plead to an Informalion filed in 
Court, ibid. 202.-*Tbe Cennsel for the Biibons 
object that they are not regularly in Court for 
the purpose of being cbarged with an Informa- 
tion, aBd move for their discharge on the Insuf- 
ficiency of the Eetum in npt stating that the 
Commitment was by the Lords of the Council 
in Council^ ibid. ib.-^The Court decide against 
this O^eciion^ ibid. 217.— The Counsel for 
the Bishops further object that^ being Peers 
of the Bealniy they ought not to have been 
committed for a Misdemeanour, ibid. 2 IB. — 
The Court decide against this Objection, 
ibid. 229.-^Mr. Justice Powell refuses to 

g>e an Opinion without consideration! ibid. 
.— TTie Information read, ibid, 231.— The 
Connselfor the Bishops move for an Imparlance 
till the next term, ibid. 240. — Discussion upon 
this Motion, ibid, ib.— The Court decide that 
they must plead instanter, ibid. 267. — ^They 
offer to plead their Privilege as Peers, and that 
they ought not to be called upon to plead in- 
Manler, ibid* ib»-^The Court reject this Plea 
•• ^ivoloQS (Mr. Justice Powell dissenting), 
ibid. ^74.^Thiy plead severally not Guilty, 
ibid. 37Jf*-^Tboy enter into Kocogniianoes to 
appoar for Triali ibid. ib,«^peecb of the At- 
tomoy General (Sir Thomas Powis) for the 
ProBOcutioOy ibid. 280.— Evidence of the 
Declaration for Liberty of CoD8cience» ibid. 
263.<<^Proof vf the Petition of the Bishops, 
ibid. 286.-^l^ections to the proof of the hand- 
writing of the Bishops to the Petition, ibid. 
296.— Objection that there is no Proof of a 
Publication in Middlesex, ibid. 303, 320. — 
The Court hold that there is not sufficient 
Proof of a Publication in Middlesex, ibid. 343. 
»^£videnoe given for the Crown of an Admis- 
sion by the Bishops, of a publication in Middle- 
sex, ibid. 344.-^£videnee of Lord Snnderland 
to prove the Publication, ibid. 355.-^The Chief 
Jnatice charges the Jury, ibid. 421.--^The 
Chief Justice and Justice Allibone declare the 
Pedtion to be a libel, Powell and HoUoway, 
Jfuatiees, being .of a contrary opinion, ibid. 
426.*»-The Jury find them Not Guilty, ibid. 
490. — Public expressions of joy at their ac^ 
qttittal, ibid. 431. — Particulars of the pre- 
sentation of their Petition to the King, 
ibid. 458.^Artieles from Tanner^s MSS., 
eontidftlng some original Accounts i>elating 
So this transaction, and the parties concerned 
im. it, ibid. 493.-- Account of the CosU of 
(bo Bishops in this prosecution, ibid. 514. 
"«-M^ Prioe^s Account of this Trial in a Letter 
to the Duke of Beaufort, ibid. 200 (no(^). 
•^Mr, Ersicin^s Remarks upon this Trial in 
bis Speech for the Dean of St. Asaph^ 91 vol. 
996. 



aarlef. 



SHADWEU.. 



Trial of sui Action of Ejectment brought 
against Lady Theodosia Jvy for the recovory of 
an Estate at Sbadwelli 10 vol. ^I»5. 

SHAM. 

Roger North's Explanatioo of tbe neaning 
of this Term when applied to the Plots in 
his time; 9 vol. 1224 (note). 

SHERIFF. 

Argument of Lord Chief Juitice North, that 
the Sheriff presides as a judicial o^cer in de« 
daring the Majority at an Election for Mem* 
bers of Parliament; 6 vpl. 1096.«-*Lonl Ellen* 
borough expresses some doubt of thisdoctrino; 
30 yol. 787.-^Account of the mode of electing 
Sherifs for London in the Reign of Charles 
the Second, 9 yol. 242; 869> 10 Tol. 359.-^ 
Ancient Statutes relating to tbe Appointmoot 
of Sherifii; 16 vol. 1282, 

SHIPS. 

Proclamations of Charles the First respecting 
the Flags to be exclusively used by Jong's 
Ships, 3 vol. 829 (note). 

SHIP MONEY. 

The Case of Ship^Money, 13 Car. 1, 169T, 
3 vol. 626. —The project of raising Money for 
the Government by means of Ship-Money do- 
vised by Attorney General Nov, ;bid. 828 
(note). — ^The first Writ for Ship-Money to the 
City of London, ibid. 830 (note). — Petition 
of the City against it, ibid. 833 (note).— 
Lord Keeper Coventry's Directions to tbe 
Judges previously to the Summer Circuits in 
1635, to prepare the public mind for the levy- 
ing of Ship-Money, ibid. e^Tt — Similar Direc- 
tions previously to the Lent Circuit in 1636, 
ibid. 641.— The King's Letter to the Judges, 
requiring their Opinion respecting the legality 
of Ship-Money, ibid. 842. — Answer of the 
Judges thereto, ibid. 844. — Sir John Finches 
Account of tlie manner in which this Opinion 
of the Judges was obtained, 4 vol. 4. — ^Tbe 
Answer of the Judges to the King's Letter 
ordered to be enrolled in the several Courts of 
Justice, 3 vol, 845. — Mr. Justice Hutton says, 
that his private Opinion was always against 
the legality of Ship-Mopey, and that he signed 
die Opinion of the Judges in favour of it only 
for conformity, ibid. 1198.— Sir John Finch 
confirms this Statement, 4 vol. 6, — Lord Claren- 
don's Account of the injurious effect of the 
Opinion of the Judges in favour of Ship-Money^ 
8 vol. 844 (note). — ^Record of the Proceedings 
in the Exchequer Chamber in the Case of the 
King V. John Hampden, commonly called the 
Case of Ship-Money, ibid. 1306, 846.— Mr. 
Salmon's Preface to the Case of Ship-Moner, 
1 vol. xni,— First Day's Argument or Mr. St. 
John for Mr^ Hampden, 3 vol. 856.-^Second 
Day's Avgamest of Mr. St. John, ibid. 900.-*^ 
R 2 



344 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



tMiflCfiu. 



Pirst Day's Argument of the Solicitor General, 
Sir Edward Littletop, for. the King, ibid. 923. 
— Second Day's Argument of Sir Edward Lit- 
tleton, ibid. 936. — ^Third Day's Argument of 
Sir Edward Littleton, ibid. 952.— First Day's 
Argument of Mr. Holborne for Mr. Hampden, 
ibid. 963. — Second Day's Argument of Mr. 
Holborne, ibid. 976. — ^Third Day's Argument of 
Mr. Holborne, ibid. 989. — Fourth Day's Argu- 
ment of Mr. Holborne, ibid. 1000. — First Day's 
Argument of the Attorney General, Sir John 
Banks, for the King, ibid. 1014. — Second Day's 
Argument of Sir John Banks, ibid. 1032. — 
' Argument of Sir Francis Weston, a Baron of 
' the Exchequer, on delivering his Opinion for 
Ibe King, ibid. 1065. — Argument of Sir 
Edward Crawley, a Justice of the Common 
Fleas, on delivering his Opinion for the King, 
ibid. 1078. — ^Argument of Sir Robert Berkley, 
a Judge of the King's Bench, on delivering his 
Opinion for the King, ibid. 1087. — Opinion of 
Sir George Vernon, a Justice of the Common 
Pleas, for the King, ibid. 1125. — Notes of the 
Argument of Sir Thomas Trevor, a Baron of 
the Exchequer, on delivering his Opinion for 
the King, ibid, 1125. — Argument of Sir George 
Croke, a Judge of the King's Bench, on de- 
livering his Opinion for Mr. Hampden, ibid. 
I127.---Sir George Croke's Argument, as pre- 
sented to the King, ibid. 1140,— Argument of 
Sir William Jones, a Judge of the King's 
Bench, on giving his qualified Opinion for the 
Crown, ibid. 1181. — Argument of Sir Richard 
Hutton, a Judge of the Common Pleas, on 
delivering his Opinion for Mr. Hampden, ibid. 
1191.— Opinion of Sir John Denham, a Baron 
of the Exchequer, for. Mr. Hampden, ibid. 
1201 .—Argument of Sir Humphrey Daven- 
port, Lord Chief Baron, on delivering his 
Opinion for Mr. Hampden, ibid. 1202, — Argu- 
ment of Sir John Finch, Lord Chief Justice of 
. the Common Pleas, on delivering his Opinion 
for the King, ibid. 1216.— Lord Clarendon's 
Notice of Finch's Argument, ibid. ib. (note). 
— ^Aifgument of Sir John Brampston, Lord Chief 
Justice of the King's Bench, on delivering his 
Opinion for'^he King on the general question, 
ibid. 1243.— Judgment of the Court of Exche- 
quer given for the King, ibid. 1251.— -Form of 
the Judgment as entered on Record, ibid. 1252. 
— Lord Clarendon's Account of the popular 
discontent^ excited by this Judgment, ibid. 
1254 (note).— Debate in the House of Com- 
mons respecting it, ibid. 1254.— Mr. Waller's 
Speech, ibid. 1255. — Resolutions of the House 
of Commons against Ship-Money generally, 
and against the Conduct of the Judges in de- 
livering their Opinions to the King in favour of 
it, ibid. 1261.— These Resolutions delivered to 
the House of Lords at a Conference, ibid. 1262. 
—Mr. St. John's Speech on that occasion, 
ibid. ib. — Speech of Mr. Hyde (afterwards 
Lord Clarendon), at the Conference, ibid. 
1282. — Articles of Impeachment delivered 
against Sir Robert Berkley, ibid. 1283.— Ar- 
ticles against the other Judges, ibid. 1301. 

JCesQlHtioos gf tl^e Bo\ise of Lords against 



Shipi-Money, and the conduct ofithe Judges, 
ibid. 1299. — ^The Judgment of the Court of 
Exchequer vacated in the House. of Lords, 
ibid. 1300. — Speech of Mr. Waller on deliver- 
ing the Articles of Impeachment against Mr. 
Justice Crawley, ibid. 1301. 

SHOOTING. 

In Prosecutions on the Black Act or Lord 
EUenborough's Act for maliciously shooting at 
any person, it is not necessary to prove express 
malice, 31 vol. 1044, 1047. — Nor is it neces- 
sary to prove that the person charged witb 
maliciously shooting had his face blacked, or 
was otherwise disguised at the time of the com- 
mission of the Offence, 16 vol. 745 (note).— 
For a Trial under the Black Act for maliciously 
shooting, see Arnold, Edward, 16 vol, 695.— 
For a Trial on an Indictment under the Black 
Act and Lord Ellenborough's Act jointly, see 
Schofield, John, 31 vol. 1035. 

SLANDER.-^See Libel;. Scandahm 
Magnatum. 

It was held in the Earl of Northampton's 
Case, that if A publish that he heard B say 
that C was a Thief, or a Traitor, and the fact 
be so, A may justify, because he gives C a 
means of Action against B, 2 vol; 864.— But if 
A publish that he heard the Slander generally 
without saying from whom, it is otherwise, 
ibid, ib.— Precedents of Criminal Proceedings 
against persons for slandering Judges, ibid. 
1080. — Precedents of Prosecutions for Slander 
of the King, 3 vol. 359. — Frequency of Prose- 
cutions for Slander at the end of the Reign of 
Charles the Second, 10 vol. 125 (note). 

SLAVERY. 

Mr. Hargrave's Argument for the discharge 
of Sommersett, the Negro, on a Habeas Cor- 
pus in the Court of King's Bench^ 20 vol. 23. 
— General Observations on Domestic Slavery, 
ibid. 25.— Difficulty of defining Slavery, ibid, 
ib. — Properties usually incident to Slavery, 
ibid. 26.— -The bad eflfects of Slavery, ibid, ib. 
— Opinions of modern Writers in fevour of 
Slavery, ibid. 27.— The origin and general law- 
fulness of Slavery considered, ibid, ib.— Uni- 
versality of Domestic Slavery amongst the 
ancients, ibid. 33.— Decline of Slavery in 
Europe, ibid. ib. — Revival of Domestic Slavery 
in America, ibid. 34. — Arguments to prove 
that the law of England will not admit of a new 
Slavery, ibid. 35.— The Laws of England will 
not permit a man to enslave himself by con- 
tract, ibid. 49.— Examination of the Cases on 
the subject of Slavery, since or just before the 
extinction of Villenage, ibid. 50.— Report ^J 
Cases in the Court of Session, deciding that 
Slavery is illegal by the law of Scotland, ibw- 
1 (note), 62.— Judgment of the Court of King « 
Bench, that Slavery is not allowed by tlie Law 
of England, ibid. 80.— Doubts whether Slavery 
did oQt exist in Frjince ^fore the B^wlutioBi 



CoNntm.] 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



245 



ibid. 1369vi— ^aid to have been held bv the 
I Court of King's Bench in the Case of Butts * v. 
I Penny, that an Action of Trover would lie for 
! Negro Slaves, heing Infidels, ihid. 51.— Mr. 
1 Haigrave's Remarks upon this and other Cases 
\ incur Law Books appearing to establish an 

absolute right of property in the Master of a 

Negro Slave, ibid. ib. 

SODOMY. 

History of the Law relating to this Crime, 3 
Tol. 401 (note). — The person prostituting him- 
s^f adjudged guilty of Sodomy, ibid. 422. — 
Sodomy was not Felony at Common Law, ibid. 
403, 409. — On a Charge of Sodomy, the 
Prisoner cannot- demand to be bailed de jure 
bat he may be bailed ex gratid, Lord Audley's 
Case, ibid. 403. — Indictments for Sodomy, 
ibid. 407. — For a Trial for tliis Offence^ see 
Audley, MerWn, Lord, 3 vol. 401. 

SOLDIERS. 

The Billeting of Soldiers was one of the 
Grievances complained of by the Petition of 
Right, 3 vol. 223. — Discussion of the legality of 
the King's keeping Soldiers in time of peace 
for the Security of his person, 9 vol. 765. 

SOLICITOR.— See Attorney. 

SOLICITOR GENERAL. 

It seems that in ancient times it was not the 
business of the King's Solicitor to take a part 
in Prosecutions for the Crown, 2 vol. 880. — 
the Solicitor->General in the absence of the 
Attorney-General, may file a Criminal Inform- 
ation, 19 vol. 1102.— In Wilkes's Case, this 
Opinion, was held unanimously by all the 
Judges, ibid. 1127 ; see also 20 vol. 799. 

SORCERY.— See Witchcraft. 

SPEAKER.— See WiUianUy Sir WiUiam. 

Authorities showing that the Speaker is 
merely the organ of the House of Commons, 
13 vol. 1421. 

.SPECIAL JURIES. 

Home Tooke's Animadversions on the mode 
of striking Special Juries in Criminal Cases, 
20 vol. 686.— If after a SpecialJury has been 
strack, the Cause goes ofi'for default of Jurors, 
DO new Jury can be struck, but the cause must 
be tried by the Jury first appointed, Francklin's 
Case, 22 vol. 980 (note), 983. 

SPECIAL PLEADING.— See Pleading. 

Mr. Emlyn's Censure of the nicety of Special 
Pleading, 1 vol. xxiv. 

. SPECIAL VERDICTS. 

In Special Verdicts in Criminal Cases, the 
Court never infer other facts from those found, 
but judge Upon the facts found, and not on 
the Evidence of tlie facts, Higgins's Case, 17 
▼ol. 378. — Nature of a Special Verdict by 
the Law of Scotland^ 19 vol. 241 (note).— 



Reference to authorities to show that there may 
be a Vetiife de novo after a Special Verdict i^ 
Criminal Cases, 17 vol. 380. 

SPIRITUAL COURTS.— See Ecclesiastical 

Courts, 

STABBING. 

Stat. 1 Jac. 1, c. 8, declaring it Felony 
without Benefit of Clergy to stab a person not 
having first struck, noi^having a weapon drawn, 
so that the party stabbed dies within six 
months, 18 vol. 304 (note).— It was held by 
all the Judges in Lord Morley's Case, that this 
Statute was only a Declaration of the Common 
Law, 6 vol. 771. — Occasion of passing the 
Statute, 18 vol. 305 (note).— Williams's Case 
upon this Statute, ibid. 306 (note), — Buckner's 
Case, ibid. 307 (note).— Throwing a Hammer 
at a person, and killing him thereby, is not 
within the Statute, ibid. 306 (note). — ^An In- 
dictment on the Statute, ibid. 290. 

STAGE-PLAYERS. 

Proceedings in the Star-Chamber against 
William Prynn for publishing a Book, called 
Histrio-Mastix, against Stage-Players, 3 vol . 
561. 

STANDARD OF MONEY. 

The English Standard of Money was first 
introduced into Ireland in the 12th year of 
King John, 2 vol. 119. — The first difference in 
the Standard of English and Irish Money was 
introduced in the 5th year of Edward the 
Fourth, ibid. 120. 

STAR-CHAMBER. 

The Court of Star-Chamber had Jurisdiction 
to try Attempts to commit Felonies, 2 voV 
1042, 1046.— Mr. Emlyn's Observations upon 
the Court of Star Chamber, 1 vol. xxxv. — Dis- 
cussion of the Reasons for which the Court of 
Star-Chamber was abblished, 17 vol. 752. — 
Sir Edward Coke's Opinion of the Court of 
Star-Chamber, ibid, ib.— Sir Thomas Mallet 
considers it probable that this was the most 
ancient Court of Justice in the Kingdom, ibid. 
758. 



STATE-OFFENCES. . 

Lord Camden says, in the Case of Seizure of 
Papers, that there is no distinction known in 
the Law of England between State Offences 
and Offences by the Common Law, 19 vol. 

1073. 

* 

STATE-PROSECUTIONS. 

In ancient times, and especially in the 
Reign off Henry the Eighth, instances of ac- 
quittals by Juries in State-Prosecutions are 
extremely rare, 1 vol. 407. — It was held by the 
Court in Hardy's Case, that in State-Prosecu- 
tions, a Witness for the Crown cannot be called 
upon to disclose the names of persons who have 
given Information to Government of the Of- 
fences in question, 24 vol. 753, 808, 816.— This 



d46 



6BNS1AL IKDEX TO 



ItimaniU 



Bttle was adhered to on Wfttson^t Tttal, 3S 
vol 109. 

STATE-TRIALS. 

Mr. Emlyn's Account of the advantages to 
he derived from Collections of State-Trials, 
Em. Pref. 1 vol. xxii. — Mr. Hargrave*s Account 
of the several Editions of the State-Trials, ihid. 
xlvii.— Plan of Mr. Hargrave's Edition, ihid. 
xlix.«-'Sute-Trial8 said to he no authority, 20 
Tol. 682. 

STATUTE OF TREASONS.— See Treason. 

The Statute of Treasons, 25 Edw. 3, in the 
original French, 5 vol. 972 (note).— The old 
Translation, ibid. 974 (note).— Mr. Luders's 
Translation, ibid. 975 (note).— The words *< by 
people of their condition," in the Statute of 
Treasons, held, in Sir Nicholas Throckmorton's 
Case, to apply to the Witnesses, and not to 
the Jury, 1 vol. 889. — It was said by the 
Court in that Case, that divers Cases out of 
the express Words of the Statute were Treason, 
ibid. 891. — In Sindercome's Case, the Court 
beld that the Statute was merely declaratory of 
the Common Law, 5 vol. 848, ibid. ib. (note). 
»-The Statute of Treasons is a declarative and 
penal Law, and admits of no Constructions or 
Inferences, 3 vol. 1473. — Mr. Luders's illus- 
trations of the probable meaning of the terms 
** compassing and imagining,'' in the Statute, 
7 vol. 961 (note). — Remarks upon the intent 
with which the Statute was passed, 9 vol. 699* 
—See also Mr. Erskine's Speech in Defence of 
Home Tooke, 25 vol. 268. — General Remarks 
upon the several points of Treason declared by 
the Statute, 26 vol. 723.— In Sir Walter 
Raleigh's (^ase, the Judges held that the 
Statute of Treasons was repealed, 2 vol. 15. — 
Several of the Judges in Tonge's Case, held 
that it was repealed by the Stat. 1 and 2 Philip 
and Mary, c. 10, 6 vol. 227 (note). 

STATUTES*— See IH^^smg Fewer. 

Mr. Emlyn says, that continual usage is the 
best Expositor of Statutes, Em. Pref.|l vol. 
xxii. — Sir Robert Atkyns's Inquiry into the 
King's Power of dispensing with Penal 
Statutes, 11 vol. 1200.— Mr. Hargrave's Note 
on this Subject, ibid. 1187 (note).— His Re- 
ference to Treatises and Cases in illustration 
of the Controversy, ibid. 1190 (note). — Ac- 
quittal in a penal Statute means an Acquittal 
by a Jury, and not a Pardon, Chetwynd's 
Case, 18 vol. 327.-^The Court of King's 
Bench is within the words of a Statute which 
gives Jurisdiction to Justices of Oyer and 
Terminer, Lord Sanquire's Case, 2 vol. 758. — 
But Justices of the Peace are not, ibid, ib.— 
Remarks and References on the effect of the 
Preamble in explaining the meaning of a 
Statute, 14 vol. lotl (note),— Arguments in 
Mr. Justice Johnson's Case, respecting the 
extent to which the Preamble may control the 
tnactingpart of the Statute, 89 vol. 118^*-* 



Statutes derogating ft6m the power of sub- 
sequent Parliaments have no obligation, 6 vol. 
122 (note).— It is said that the Custom of pre- 
fixing Titles to Statutes first began in 1488, 
16 vol. 743 (note).— The Title is no part of the 
Statute, ibid. ib.-^In ancient times Acta of 
Parliament were reduced into form by the 
Judges, ibid. 1389. — A Question raised whe- 
ther an ancient Statute is to be proved by the 
Parliament Roll, or by the Statute Rolls 
amongst the Records in the Tower, ilud.1388. 
— It is as mueh the department of a Judge to 
interpret the meaning of a Statute as to declare 
the Common Law, 25 vol. 726. 

STERLING. 

Discussion on the origin and derivation qf 
theTerm, 2 vol. 121. 

STEWARD.— See Eigh Steward. 

STRIKINQ IN COURTS. 

Detail of the Preparations for the Execution 
of the Judgment against Sir Edmund Knevet 
for Striking in the King's Palace, 1 vol. 443. 
— Collection of Precedents of Proceedings for 
the Offence of Striking in Courts, 27 vol. 969. 
— Mr. Fergusson's Argument that Striking in 
a Court of Oyer and Terminer, and not in or 
near a King's Palace, is not the Offence to 
which the specific punishment of cutting off 
the right hand is applied, 27 vol. 972. 

SUBJECT.— See Alien ; Fostnati. 

A British Subject taking a Commission from 
a foreign Power, and committing High Treason, 
may be punished as a Subject for that Treason, 
notwithstanding his foreign Commission, Mac- 
donald's Case, 18 vol. 859.^^Discu8sion whe- 
ther in an Indictment for Treason, it is neces- 
sary to lillege expressly that the accused was 
a subject of Great Britain, 26 vol. 819. 

• 

SUBORNATION OF PEflJURY. 

Indictment for Subornation, 7 vol.884 (note). 
— For a Trial for this Offence, see Tasborovgh, 
JohUi ibid. 881. 

SUBPCENA.—See Witnena, 

SUBSCRIPTION. 

Doubts respecting the legality of subscrilH 
ing Money for the Defence of Government in 
times of emergency without the authority of 
Parliament or the King's Licence, 15 vol.1418 
(note). — Lord Hardwicke ^ays that such doubts 
have no foundation in Law, ibid. ib. 



SUBSIDIES AND FIFTEENTHS. 

Mr. St. John*s Argument in the Case of 
Ship-Money, that these Taxes were levied as 
well for the Defence of the Realm in times of 
extraordinary Danger, as for the ordioary 
Defence of the Sea, 3 vol. 875. 



fliif—r(!.3 



THB STATE TftlALS. 



847 



6UFFftAG& 



Anvti^ent to show that Unir^nid fSvfTrage 
fff Memben of F«rliameiit never prerailed 
tHber ia England or Scotland, 33 vol. £6. 

SUMMING up EVIDENCE, 

Instances in Lord Mansfield's time of a 
Defendant's Counsel ia Cases of Libel being 
permitted to 9um up^ as welt as to open the 
Evidence for the Defence^ ^0 vol, Q35^ 885^ 
099* 

SUMMONS. 

I^]r4 Cl^uiceUor Juries says, io Lord 
])elaiiken^'« Case, ^t the Peers are convened 
ep 9L TH»l IP Mbu» Coivt pf the Lord High 
Stew«r4 by the ^umwonp ^ tl^e {iiigh Siteward, 
H y^L 5$i,^n (he C^e of ^e Cpuntess of 
S^pierii^ Urn 3um«u)ns was ^igni»d hy the 
loti» aiij» CfmDcil, % vol. 94^1. 

SUNDAY, 

Instance ip 1553^ of Sessions being MA in 
Imion on a Sunday, 1 ypl. 763. 

SUPPLIES. 

Mr* St. Jdui'n Account, In his Afgomeni In 
die Caae of i9iip«MoDey, of the n^ans with 
whii^ the Constitution has intrusted the King 
of England 6>r raising supplies for the Defence 
ef &e fiealm, 3 vol. 865. 

SUPEEMACY, 

Proceedings against various persons in the 
Eeiga of Henry the Eighth, for denying the 
King's Supremacy^ 1 vol. 469. — ^Summary of 
the Statutes at present in force respecting the 
omit^Qg to take the Oaths of Allegiance and 
Siipremeicy, 6 vol. 301 (note), 

SURETY^— See B(tU. 

Discussion in the Case of the Seven Bishops, 
whether publishing a Libel is a Breach of the 
Peace for which Sureties of the Peace can be 
re<juired, 12 vol. 224. — Lord Camden, in the 
Case of John Wilkes, seems to have been of 
Opinion that Sureties of the Peace cannot be 
re()uired from a Libeller, 19 vol. 993. — Rea- 
sons in favour of Lojrd Camden's Opinion in 
tbp celebrated Protest in the House of Lords 
against the Resolutions of the House upon the 
subject of Privilege, occasioned by the Case of 
Jdhn Wilkes, ibid. 996.— Opinion of the Judges 
in the If ouse of Lords in the Case of Hart and 
^hite, that the Court of King's Bench has the 
power of requiring Sureties for Good Behaviour 
for a reasonable time from persons copvicted 
of Crimes in that Court^ 30 vol. 1334. 

SUBGEON. 



A Burgeon has no Privilege to decline I 
Uiwering Questions in a Court of Justice, | 



respecting facts which bav< come ie U$ know- 
ledge tin professional confidence^ Duchess of 
Kingston's Caie, 20 vol. 573t 

SURRENDER. 

In Sir Thomas Armstrong's Case, Chief 
Justice Jefferies refused to accept the Prisoner's 
Surrender in Court, in order to entitle himself 
to the benefit of the Statute, 5 and 6 Edw. 6, 
c. 11, 10 vol. 110.— In Johnson's Case, in 
1728, a similar Surrender was made, and the 
Court said they were bound to accept it, and 
that Armstrong's C«»e was a Precedent oot fit 
to be followed, ibid. Ill (note). 

TALES. 

Upon a defhult 6f Jurors op a Trial for 
Pelony before Commissioners of Oyer and 
Terminer, there may be a Tales, but not before 
Commissioners of Gaol Delivery only, 13 vol. 
322, 326. — Reason of this distinction, ibid. 
326. — On the Trial *of Appeals and Indict- 
floente nenoved into the Court of King^p Bench, 
a Tales may be awarded, ibid* ib, 

TAXES. 

Mr. Hargrave's Remarks on the power of 
the King of England to impose Taxes by 
Prerogative, in his Introductory Note to the 
Case of Impositions, 2 vol. 371. — ^The Case 
of John Bates in the Exchequer, commonly- 
called the Great Case of Impositions, respect- 
iflg the Prerogative of the King to impose 
Taxes on Merchandize imported into £ng« 
land, wiUiout the Concurrence of Parliament, 
4 Jac. 1, 1606, ibid. 382.— Baron Clark's Ar- 
gument in that Case, for the Prerogative, 
ibid, ib.— Chief Baron Fleming's Argument 
on the same side, ibid. 387.— Sir Francis 
Bacon's Argument in the House of Commons 
for the Prerogative^ ibid. 395.— Sir John 
Pavis's Argument on the same side, ibid. 
399,— ]VIr. Hakewill's Argument against the 
Prerogative, ibid. 407.— Mr. Yelverton's Ar* 
gument against it, ibid. 477.— The Imposition 
of Taxes by Prerogative was one of the subjects 
of complaint in the Petition of Grievances 
presented by the Commons to James the First, 
in 1610, ibid. 521.— Mr. Hargrave's Reference 
to Writers on the subject of Taxing by Pre- 
rogative, ibid. 381.— Lord Hale's Opinion on 
this Prerogative, ibid. 379.— Discussion in 
the Case of Ship-Mooey, of the power of the 
King to impose Taxes upon his Subjects with- 
out the concurrence of rarliament, 3 vol. 656. 
— ^Difference between a Conquered Country 
and a Colony, with respect to the power of 
the King to impose Taxes on the Inhabitants, 
20 vol. 326.— Full Discussion in the Argument 
of the Case of the Island of Grenada, respecting 
the power of the King to impose Taxes ou a 
conquered Country, ibid. 258* 

TENURES. 
Mr. St. John's Aeeount^ in his Ai^ameat in 



348 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



[MisaEZitr* 



the Case of Ship-Money, of the Services re- 
served by Law to the King of England, from 
Tenures of liOnds, for the purpose of enabling 
him to defend the Realm, 3 vol. 865. 

TEST ACT. 

The Stat. 25 Car. 2, c. 2, commonly called 
the Test Act, 11 vol. 1185 (note). 

TESTE. 

Alteration of the Teste of Writs, Commis- 
sions, &c. upon the assumption of the Protec- 
torate by Cromwell, 5 vol. 480 (note). — Dis- 
cussion in Tutchin's Case, whether an Error in 
the date of the Teste of a Distringas Corpora 
Juratorum, can be amended by the Roll, 14 
vjoI. 1135. — ^The Court of King's Bench are 
equally divided in opinion on the question, 
ibid. 1187. 

THEFT.— See Larceny. 

Mr. Emlyn's Remarks on the Punishment of 
Theft, Em. Pref. 1 vol. xxxii. 

THEN AND THERE. 

Discussion in Lowick's Case respecting the 
necessity of repeating the words " then and 
there," at the allegation of each part of the 
Charge in an Indictment, 13 vol. 267.^ 

THREE NON-JURING CLERGYMEN. 
See Cook^ Shadrach, 

THRESHERS. 

Proceedings under a Special Commission for 
several Counties in Ireland for the Trial of 
persons engaged in an unlawful Association, 
called Threshers, 47 Geo. 3, 1806, 30 vol. 1.— 
Chief Justice Downes's Charge to the Grand 
Jury of the County ofSligo, ibid. ib. — ^Trial of 
John M*Donough and William Kearney, 
ibid. 5. — Speech of the Attorney General for 
the Prosecution, ibid. ib. — Evidence for the 
Prosecution, ibid. 14. — Evidence for the De- 
fence of Tii*Donough, ibid. 29. — Evidence 
for the Defence of Kearney, ibid. 46. — ^The 
Jury acquit both the Prisoners, ibid. 58. — 
Trial of Thomas Brennan, ibid. ib. — Evidence 
for the Prosecution, ibid. 60. — Evidence for 
the Prisoner, ibid. 65. — ^The Jury find him 
Guilty, ibid. 81. — Mr. Baron George's Charge 
to the Grand Jury of the County of Mayo, 
ibid. 83. — ^Trial of James M*Phadeen, ibid. 
85. — Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 86. 
— Evidence for the Prisoner, ibid. 92. — The 
'Jury acquit him, ibid. 97. — Trial of CollFlynn 
and eleven other Threshers, for the Murder of 
Thady Lavin, ibid. 97. — Speech of the Solicitor 
General for the Prosecution, ibid. 98. — Evi- 
dence for the Prosecution, ibid. 106. — Evidence 
>. for the Prisoners, ibid. 11?;.— Eight of them 
are found Guilty, and the rest kre acquitted, 
ibid. 123*— Sentence oC Death. i? passed upon 



those convicted, ibid, 153.— -Trial of Patrick 
Hargedan, ibid. 124^-r-Evidence for the Pro- 
secution, ibid. 127. — The Jury find him 
Guilty, 'but recommend him to mercy, ibid. 
131.— Trial of John Early, ibid. 131.— Evi- 
dence for the Prosecution , ibid. 1 32. — EvideDce 
for the Defence, ibid. 138. — ^He is found 
Guilty, ibid. 144. — ^Trial of James Mame, 
Richard Murphy, and James Clenane, ibid. 
145. — Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. ib. 
— Evidence for the Defence, ibid. 150. — ^The 
Jury find them Guilty, but recommend them 
to mercy, ibid. 152. — Sentences passed upon 
the several convicted Prisoners, ibid. 153. — 
Proceedings under the Commission for the 
County of Leitrim, ibid. 158. — ^Trial of James 
Fergusson, Michael Grant, and James Connell, 
ibid. 159. — Speech of the Solicitor Geneftl for 
the Prosecution, ibid, ib.— Evidence for the 
Prosecution, ibid. 166.-^Evidence for the 
Prisoners, ibid. 171. — ^The Jury find them 
Guilty, ibid. 175. — ^They are sentenced to 
Transportation for Life, ibid. 176.— Proceed- 
ings under the Commission for the County of 
Longford, ibid. 176.— Trial of Thomas Pitz- 
simons, Patrick Coyle, James Kilbride, and 
Patrick Coyle, ibid . 1 77. — ^Mr. Serjeant Moore's 
Speech for the Prosecution, ibid. ib. — Evidence 
for the Prosecution, ibid. 183.; — Defence of 
the Prisoners, ibid. 189.— Evidence for the 
Prisoners, ibid. 190. — ^The Jury find them 
Guilty, ibid. 195. Trial of Patrick Wren, 
ibid. ib. — Evidence for the Prosecution, ibid. 
196. — ^The Jury acquit him, ibid. 207. — Trial 
of Peter Morris, ibid. ib. — Evidence for the 
Prosecution, ibid. ib. — Evidence for the Pri- 
soner, ibid. 214. — The Jury find l^m Guilty, 
ibid. 218. — ^Trial of Farrel Blaney, arid Thomas 
Donoughoe, ibid. ib. — ^They are acquitted, 
ibid. 222. — Sentences of the convicted Pri- 
soners, ibid. ib. — Proceedings under the 
Commission in the County of Cavan, ibid.^ ib. 
— ^Two Prisoners tried, one of whom is ac- 
quitted, and the otherconvicted and transported 
for seven years, ibid, ib* 

TIME.— See Indktment^PUa^ng. 

Time is laid in an Indictment merely for 
form, and a variance between the time alleged 
and that proved, is immaterial. Lovers Case, 
5 vol. 233. — Sir Henry Vane's Case, 6 vol. 
131 : see also what is said by Lord Hoh in 
the Case of Charnock, King, and Keyes, 12 
vol. 1398. — No Indictment can be good unless 
it charges tlie Offence to have been committed 
on a certain day and year, 13 vol. 275 (nqle). 
— ^The Reason assigned for this Rule, is the 
necessity of stating some day to which, in 
Treason and Felony, the forfeiture may relate, 
l5 vol. 880. — In Impeachments it is not neces- 
sary to lay the offence on any particular day, 
ibid. 876. — A Month in law means a lanar 
Month, unless otherwise expressed, 20 vol. 
1283 (note). — In a Criminal Libel, by the Law 
of Scotland it is only necessary to set forth the 
main ^t lyitK c<eruia|y Q3 to time and plac«; 



CasTginn.'] 



THE STATE'TRIALS. 



249 



the circumstances need not be so stated^ 19 
▼ol. 10 (note). 

TITLE.— See Peers. 

In the £arl of Shrewsbury's Case, an Act 
of Parliamenty taking away the possessions and 
hereditaments annexed to a Title, was held to 
take away the Title itself, 2 vol. 741. — ^A Peer 
cannot divest himself of his Title, nor can it be 
taken from him, except by Act of Parliament, 
Attainder of his Person, or Scire Facias to 
repeal his Letters-Patent. Earl of Banbury's 
Case, 12 vol. 1195. — A Title of Honour cannot 
he taken away without the King's Consent, 
ibid. 1196. — Lord Holt says in the Earl of 
Banbury's Case, that Titles of Honour began 
to be created by Letters Patent in the time of 
Richard the Second, 1 2 vol. 1 200.-«Mr. Cruise's 
Summary of the effects of Attainder on Titles, 
19 vol. 979. 

TOLERATION. 

The Toleration Act, 1 Will, and Mary, 15 
vol. 309. — One of the Charges against Dr. 
Sacheverell was his denying the reasonableness 
of the Toleration Act, ibid. 38. 

TOLL. 

Mr. Hakewill's Account of the derivation of 
the word Toll, in his Argument in the Great 
Case of Impositions, 2 vol. 459. 

TONNAGE AND POUNDAGE. 

Mr. St. John's Argument in the Case of 
Ship-Money, that Tonnage and Poundage, 
before they were granted to the King by 
Statute, were not only raised for the ordinary 
Defence of the Sea, but were also intended 
for Defence on sudden occasions of extraor- 
dinary Danger, 3 vol. 87^. 

TORTURE. 

Mr. Emlyn says that Torture is not allowed 
by the Law of England, Em. Pref. 1 vol. xxv, 
2 vol. 774 (note). — Lord Coke, in the Trials of 
the Earls of Essex and Southampton, and in 
the Countess of Shrewsbury's Case, seems to 
express a contrary opinion, ibid. ib. — Instance 
of the application of the Torture in the Reign 
of James the First, ibid. 871. — It was agreed 
by all the Judges in Felton's Case in 1628, that 
no such Punishment is known or allowed by 
the Law of England, 3 vol. 371. — It was 
. said by Baron Weston on the Trial of Eliza- 
beth Cellier, that no person had suffered Tor- 
ture in England since Campion the Jesuit, 20 
Eliz., 7 vol. 1205. — But see Peacham's Case, 
2 vol. 871. Instances of the application of 
the Torture in Scotland, 6 vol. 1217 (note), 10 
vol. 691 (note). — Account of the Instruments 
of Torture formerly used in Scotland, ibid. ib. 
(note).— Account of SpreuU's Examination 
under Torture in Scotland^ ibid. 730. — 



Mackenzie's Observations on the use of Tor- 
ture in Scotland, 10 vol.751 (note) .•^Proceed- 
ings in a Case in Scotland in which the Tor- 
ture was applied, in the Reign of William 
the Third, ibid. 753 (note). — It seems that by 
the Law of Scotland Witnesses might be tor* 
tured if they hesitated or prevaricated in giving 
their Evidence, ibid. 727 (note).— Discussion 
respecting the effect of a denial of a crime 
under Torture, in protecting the accused from 
further Prosecution, ibid. 757. — Extracts from 
Treatises on Spanish Jurisprudence, to show 
that the Torture is authorized by the Law of 
Spain, 30 vol. 484, 541 .—Observations and 
Authorities showing the illegality of Torture by 
the Law of England, collected by Mr. Nolan 
in his Argument in the Case of Governor 
Picton, ibid. 892. — Distinction between the 
Peine fort et dure and Torture, ibid. 895. . 

TRADE. 

Discussion in the Case of the East India 
Company v. Sandys, respecting the power of 
the King of England by his Prerogative to 
restrain his Subjects from trading with fo- 
reigners, or to grant exclusive Licences for 
such trading, 10 vol. 371 .^Mr. Holt]s Argu- 
ment in support of the Prerogative, ibid. ib. — 
Sir George Treby's Argument in the same 
Case, against the Prerogative, ibid. 383. — 
Argument of the Solicitor General (Finch) in 
support of it, ibid. 405. — Mr. Pollexfen's Ar- 
gument against it, ibid. 414. — Authorities 
cited By him to show that by the Common Law 
Trade is free to all the King's Subjects, ibid. 
421.— Sir Robert Sawyer's Atgument in sup* 
port of the Prerogative, ibid. 457. — His Ac- 
count of the Restrictions imposed by the Law 
of England oh inland and foreign Trade, ibid. 
458. — His Argument that the Common Law 
gives no absolute Right to British Subjects to 
trade with Foreigners, ibid. 460. — Mr. Wil- 
liams's Argument in favour of the Right of 
British Subjects to a free Trade, ibid. 500. — 
— Chief Justice Jefferies's Argument in sup- 
port of the King's Prerogative to restrain his 
Subjects with respect to inland and foreign 
Trade, ibid. 523. 

TRANSPORTATION. 

Of the difference between Transportation 
and Banishment, 23 vol. 794\— Arguments that 
Transportation and Banishment are not dis- 
tinct species of Punishment by the Law of 
Scotland, ibid. 861, 866. 

TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 

Doctrines of the Lollards concerning Tran- 
substantiation, 1 vol. 166, 193, 233. 

TREASON. 

See Adhering to the Kin^s Enemies — Compassing 
the King's Death — Levying War — Statutfi of 
Treasons, 

peculiar Advantages given by the Lsw of 



MO 



GENEfiAL INDEX TO 



lUwtmM: 



England to ptnons aeeased of High Treason, 
Bm. Pref. 1 ?oL izTi,«-8onie of tbase Advan- 
tages enumerated, ibid, xxviii^ — ^Mr. Erekine'i 
iUlttuon to these Advantages, in his Speech in 
Defence of HadEeld, 37to1. 1808.— In Sir Wm. 
Stanley's Case, his saying that ** if he knew 
Perkyn Warbeck to be the Son of Edward the 
Fourth, he would not bear arms against him,'' 
was held to be Treason, 1 vol. 282. — ^Lord 
Bacon says that the Judgesin that Case " thought 
it dangerous to hold that if$ and andi should 
qualify Words of Treason, and would not 
admit of Treasons on condition,** ibid. ib.«-- 
Sir Nicholas Throckmorton's Allusion to the 
distinction between Words and Acts in Cases 
of Treason, established by the Stat. 1 £dw. 6, 
0. 12, s. 82, ibid. 805. -«It was held Hi^h 
TVeason in Owen's Case in 1615, to maintain 
that the Ring being excommunicated by the 
Pope, might lawfully be killed, 2 vol. 882.— 
It was resolved at a meeting of all the Judges 
in 1^28, in |Iugh Pine's Case, that no Words 
can amount to Treason, except by some par- 
ticular Statute, 3 vol. 368. — But Words spoken 
may constitute an Qvert Act of Treason, 5 vol. 
983. — Mr. Estst says that it is now settled that 
mere Words, not referring to any act or design, 
are not Overt Acts of Treason, 22 vol. 480 
(note). — Lord Strafford's Remarks upon the 
danger of allowing Constructive Treasons, 3 
Tol. 1466.— The Statute of Treasons is a de- 
clarative and penal Law, and admits of no 
Constructions or Inferences, ibid. 1473. — Mr. 
Luders's Strictures upon the Doctrine of Con- 
•tractive Treason, as laid down in the Cases of 
Messenger, and of Dammaree and Purchase, 
6 voU 902 (note), 15 vol. 522 (note). — Mr. 
Erskine*8 Argument against Coostractive 
Treasons in his Defence of Hardy, 24 vol. 877. 
— Mr. Wetherell's Notice of the Cases estab- 
lishing the Doctrine of Constructive Treason 
in his Defence of Watson, 32 vol. 431 ; See 
also the Arguments of Mr. Cross and Mr. 
Denman, in Defence of Brandreth on his Trial 
for High Treason, ibid. 865, 889.— Mr, Heme's 
humorous Remark on the Doctrine of Accumu- 
lative Treason in Archbishop Laud's Case, 4 
vol. 586 (note).— Mr. Justice Blackstone's 
Remark on the necessity of a distinct Defini- 
tion of Treason, 11 vol. 622 (note).— Statutes 
providing for the Trial of Treasons committed 
out of the Redilm, 1 vol. 439 ; see also 4 vol. 
664 (note). — An attempt to marry a person 
claiming present Title to the Crown adversely 
to the reigning Sovereign, said in the Duke of 
Norfolk's Case, to be an Overt act of High 
Treason, in the Article of Compassing the 
King's Death, 1 vol. 1003. — If several persons 
conspire to commit Treason in a particular 
manner, and some of them execute it in ano- 
ther manner, yet the Acts of the latter are the 
Acts of all by reason of the general intent, 
ibid. 1412.— It was resolved at a Meeting of 
the Judges in 1663, that if several persons 
conspire to levy War, and only some of them 
appear in arms, it is Treason in all, 5 vol. 983. 
—It «a« held by the Jndges in Sir Christopher 



Blmit's Case, that if ftreral penont intend 
Treason, and are accompanied and assisted im 
any treasonable Act by others not privy to the 
principal Treason intended, it is Treason in 
all, ibid. 1422. — It >?as said in Sir Nicholas 
Throckmorton's Case, that procuring another 
to commit Treason, is Treason in the Pro«i 
curer, ibid. 891. — If a person accidentaHj- 
hears the conversation of Traitors, and knows 
of their design, without in words or conduct 
approving of it, this is not Treason, but Mis« 
prision of Treason, Tonge's Case, 6 vol* 226 
(note) ; see also 5 vol. 985. — But Chief Justice 
Pemberton says in Walcot's Case, that if a man 
IS present at a Consultation where Treason is 
hatched, and then conceals it, he is Guilty of 
Treason, 9 vol. 553 ; See also as to the distinc- 
tion between Treason and Misprision of 
Treason, Sir B. Shower's Remarks on Lotd 
Russels Case, ibid. 716. — Lord HoU says 
in Ilookwood*s Case, that consenting to a 
traitorous design is an Qvort Act of Treason, 
and that being present at a Consultation about 
killing the King, and not revealing it, ia strong 
Evidence of such consent, 13 ?ol. 208.*^>i-C)H8f 
Justice Parker, in Dammaree's Ca9Q» says 
that voluntarily joining with Rebels ii^ any 
act of Rebellion, though the party be igno- 
rant of the intent, is High Treason within 
the Statute of Edward the Third, 15 vol. 
701, 702. — It was said in Argument m the 
Duke of Hamilton's Case, that if Alien 
Enemies join with English Rebels and aie 
taken, the Aliens shall be tried by Martial 
Law, or ransoiped ; but if Alien Fnends so 
join, it is Treason in all, 4 vol, 1182. — 
Opinion of the two Chief Justices and the 
Chief Baron on the Trials of the Earls of 
Essex and Southampton in the House of Lords, 
that when a Subject attempts to put himself 
into such force that the King may not be able 
to resist him, and thus to compel him to 
govern otherwise than he wishes, it is High 
Treason in the Articles of Levying War 
and of Compassing the King's Death, 1 vol. 
1355. — If a Subject continue an armed Power 
after the King has cpmmanded him upon his 
Allegiance to dissolve it, it is High Treason, 
ibid. 1337. — The Law intends the Compassing 
the Death and Deprivation of the King as a 
necessary consequence of a Rebellion against 
his authority, as foreseeing that a Rebel will 
not suffer him to live, who might punish his 
Treason, ibid. 1355.--*Mr. Luders's Illustration 
of the probable meaning of the words Coa^ 
passing and Lnagmng in the Statute of 
Treasons, 7 vol. 961 (note).— On the Arraigs- 
ment of Sir Christopher Blunt and others. 
Chief Justice Popham declares that if a Sub- 
ject attempts forcibly to overrule the Royal 
will, the Law intends the Compassing the 
Death of the King, judging not of the feet by 
the intent, but of the intent by dit;. fact, ibid. 
1410, 1417 (note).-*-By the Law of NaUoBS, if 
an Ambassador compass the Death of the King 
in whose Country he is, it is Treason, but it is 
otherwise, if he commits any other kiod of 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



S51 



tfkwMODy % YoL 881*—- An attempt to imprison 
tlie Sing, though his Death be not intended, 
is High Treason in the Article of Compassing 
Im Death, WiUiams*-s Case, ibid. 1087.—Mr. 
Ecakine's Argument in his Defence of Hardy 
on the nature of the offence of Compassing the 
Sing's Death, 24 toI. 894.— On the Trial of 
Skidercome for Treason against Oliver Crom- 
well, dnriog the Protectorate, the Court held 
diat Compassing the Death of the Chief Ma- 
gistrate, by whatever name he is called, is 
High Treason, 5 vol. 848.— It was resolved at 
a meeting of the Judges in 1663, that a Con- 
spiracy to ,levy War, though War be not ac- 
tually levied, is an Overt Act of Compassing 
the King's Death, but that such a Conspiracy 
is not Treason in the Article of Levying War, 
ibid. 984; see also 13 vol. 61, 23 vol. 1194.— 
In Layer's Case this was said by the Court to 
have been decided a hundred times, 16 vol. 
312. — See Mr. Anstruther's Argument on the 
Trial of Robert Watt, 23 vol. 1194.— It was 
also resolved at the meeting of the Judges in 
1663, that if War be actually levied, the parties 
may be indicted for Compassing the King's 
Death, and the Levying War may be laid as 
an Overt Act, 5 vol. 984. — Lord Mansfield 
says in Dr. Hensey's Case, that Levying War 
is an Overt Act of Compassing the King's 
Deatfa, 19 vol. 1334.— In Sir Henry Vane's 
Case, the Court held that the Consultation and 
advising together of the means of destroying 
the King and the Government, is an Overt Act 
«f Compassing the King's Death, 6 vol.122. — 
The same point was resolved at a meeting of 
the Judges in Tonge's Case, ibid. 225 (note). 
—The Court hold in Sir William Parkyns's 
Case, that a Conspiracy to invade the Realm, 
or to depose the King, are Overt Acts of High 
Treason in the Article of Compassing the 
King's Death, 13 vol. 110, 113; see also the 
language of Lord Holt in Sir John Friend's 
Case, ibid. 61 ; and of Chief Justice Eyre in 
Home Tooke's Case, 25 vol. 725. — Lord El- 
lenborough adopts {bis Doctrine as undoubted 
Law in Watson's Case, 32 vol. 579. — Mr. 
Justice Buller says in Delamotte's Case, that 
the sending intelligence, or collecting intelli- 
gence for the purpose of sending it to an 
Enemy, in order to enable him to annoy us, or 
to defend himself, is Treason, both in the 
Article of Compassing the King's Death, and 
Adhering to his Enemies, 21 vol. 808. — Lord 
Holt says in Sir William Parkyns's Case, that 
a Conspiracy to invade the Realm, or depose 
the King, is an Overt Act of High Treason in 
the Article of Compassing the King's Death, 
13 vol. 110, 113.— It was also resolved at the 
meeting of the Judges in 1663, that if several 
persons conspire to levy War, and only some of 
them appear in arms, it is Treason in all, 5 
▼ol. 983.— In Twyn'i Case the publishing a 
Book, inciting the People to Rebellion, was 
held to be an Overt Act of High Treason in the 
Article of Compassing the King's Death, 6 
vol. 513 (note).— Mr. Justice Foster's Remarks 
upon the different kinds of Insurrections which 



amount to High Treason, 01 voU 490.--*-Et«iy 
Conspiracy to levy War for the purpose of 
dethroning or imprisoning the King, or to 
oblige him to remove Councillors, or to alter 
his measure of Government, is an Overt Act of 
Compassing the King's Death, ibid. ib. — ^Lord 
Mansfield, in hi^ Charge to the Jury on the 
Trial of Lord George Gordon, says that the 
Court of King's Bench were unanimously of 
Opinion, that an attempt by a multitude to 
force the repeal of a Statute was a levying of 
War and Treason, 15 vol. 527 (note), ibid. 606 
(note), 21 vol. 644. — Lord Holt says, in Sir 
John Freind's Case, that, if persons assemble 
together, and act with force it^ opposition to 
some Statute, intending thereby to get it re- 
pealed, this is a Levying of War, though the 
bare design to do so would not be Treason, 
13 vol. 61. -^Insurrections for public and 
general purposes amount to Levying War 
within the Statute of Treasons, 21 vol. 490. 
— Every Conspiracy to Levy War for these 
purposes is an Overt Act of Treason in the 
Article of Compassing the King's Death, ibid, 
ib. ; see also 33 vol. 684.-— It was resolved by > 
all the Judges in Messenger's Case, that an 
Insurrection with intent to pull down Bawdy 
Houses in general, or to break open Prisons in 
general, and let out Prisoners, was a Levying 
War within the Statute, 6 vol. 901.^— In the 
Cases of Dammaree and Purchase, it was held 
that an Insurrection for the purpose of pulling 
down Meeting-Houses after Dr. SachevereU's 
Trial, was a Levying War, 15 vol. 605.—- 
Mr. Luder's Observations on the Doctrine of 
Constructive Levying War, as contained in 
the Cases of Messenger and Dammaree, 6 
vol. 902 (notp), 15 vol. 522 (note).— Lord Hale 
says that in order to constitute a Levying of 
War amounting to High Treason, there must 
be a Spedet Belli, 15 vol. 525 (note).— Hold- 
ing a Castle or a Fort against the King or 
his Troops, if actual Force be used to keep 
possession, is Levying War, 24 vol. 260 
(note). — Discussion whether a mere Detainer, 
by shutting the Gates against the King or 
his Troops, without any other Force from 
within, be a Levying of War, ibid. ib. — If the 
Rebel Subjects of a foreign Prince, who is 
at amity with Great Britain, invade England 
without a Commission from their Sovereign, 
they are Enemies of the King of Ghreat Britain, 
and/ British Subjects adhering to them are 
guilty of High Treason, Duke of Norfolk's 
Case, 1 vol. 1030.— Assisting a Government 
hostile to England, in making War upon an 
Ally of England, is Adhering to the King's Ene- 
mies within the Statute of Treasons, Vaughan's 
Case, 13 vol. 530. — Sending supplies orintelli^. 

Igence, or rendering any assistance to a hostile 
Force designing an Invasion of England, is 
High Treason in the article of Adhering to the 
King's Enemies, ibid. 531.— Mr. Justice 
Foster says, that in Gregg's Case the Judges 
were of opinion that the sending Intelligence 
to Enemies, though it be intercepted before it 
reaches them, is an Overt Act of Adhering 



fan 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



[Mnesxiir^ 



and that thii Opinion was adopted by the 
Court in Hensey's Case, 14 toI. 1376, 19 toI. 
1344. — See also the Case of Thomas Howard, 
Duke of Norfolk, 1 vol. 957.— In the Cases 
of Gregg & Hensey, the writing treasonable 
Letters, which were stopped at the Post Office, 
was laid as an Overt Act, both of Compassing 
the King's Death and Adhering to his Enemies, 
14 vol. 1376 (note).—- A British subject taking 
a Commission from a foreign Power, and com- 
mitting Treason, may be punished as a Subject 
for that Treason, notwithstanding his foreign 
Commission, Macdonald's Case, 18 vol. 859. 
— On an Indictment for High Treason in 
sending intelli|;ence to Enemies, a Letter sent 
by one of several Conspirators in pursuance 
of a joint design, is Evidence against all con- 
cerned in the Conspiracy, 25 vol. 1268, ibid. 
1277 (note).-'In Sir Walter Raleigh*s Case, 
the Court held that two Witnesses were not 
necessary in Treason, and that the Statute of 
Treasons and the Stat. 1 Edw. 6, c. 12, s. 22, 
were repealed, 2 vol. 15. — Several of the 
Judges, m Tonge's Case, were of opinion that 
these Statutes were repealed by the 1 and 2 
Phil, and Mary, c. 10, 6 vol. 227 (note).— The 
Statute of Treasons 25 Edw. 3, in the original 
French, 5 vol. 972 (note). — ^The old transla- 
tion, ibid. 974 (note).—- Mr. Luders*s Transla- 
tion, ibid. 975 (note).—The Words "by 
people of their condition," in the Statute of 
Treasons, held in Sir Nicholas Throckmorton's 
Case to apply to the Witnesses, and not to 
the Jury, 1 vol. 889. — It was said by the 
Court in that Case, that divers Cases out of 
the express words of the Statute were Trea- 
son, ibid. 891.— In Sindercome*s Case the 
Court held, that the Statute of Treasons was 
merely declaratory of the Common Law, 5 vol. 
848, ibid. ib. (note). — Remarks upon the in- 
tent with which the Statute of Treasons was 
passed, 9 vol. 699. — Sir Robert Atkyns's Re- 
marks on the several Treasons declared by 
the Statute, ibid. 727.— See also Mr. Erskine's 
Speech in defence of Home Tooke, 25 vol. 
268. — General Remarks upon the several 
points of Treason declared by the Statute, 26 
vol. 723. — Argument of Sir Thomas Wither- 
ington, in Love's Case, that the two Witnesses 
required in Treason by the Statutes 1 and 5 
Edw. 6, in a Case of complicated facts, might 
consist of one Witness to one Overt Act and 
another to another of the same species of 
Treason, 5 vol. 178.— Mr. Justice Foster says, 
that this is the first instance he had met with 
of the assertion of this Doctrine, ibid. 240 
(note). — ^This Doctrine was held by all the 
Judges at the Consultation previous to the 
Triad of the Regicides, ibid. 978. — It was 
also confirmed by the opinion of the Judges 
in the House of Lords in Lord Stafford's Case, 
7 vol. -1527. — See also what is said upon this 
point by Lord Chief Justice North in Col- 
ledge's Case, 8 vol. 620 ; and by Lord Holt 
and the other Judges on the Trial of Sir 
William Parkyns, 13 vol. 111.— Mr. Hale's 
Argument in Love's Case^ that an Accomplice 



is not ** a lawful and sufficient Witnei^wi^hiit^ 
the meaning of the Statutes of Edw. 6, 5 ▼oL 
240.— It was held by all the Judges in Tonge's 
Case, that an Accomplice is a sufficient Wit- 
ness within the meaning of those Statutes, 6 
vol. 227 (note), ibid. 228 (note).— It was adso 
held in Tonge's Case, that if a person volun- 
tarily confesses Treason before a Privy Coun- 
cillor or a Justice of the Peace, he comes 
within the exception to the Statute of Edw. 6, 
requiring two Witnesses, ibid. ib. (note). — 
The two Witnesses required in Cases of Trea- 
son must both be believed by the Jury in 
order to warrant a Conviction, 7 vol. 1112. — 
There need not be two Witnesses in Treason 
to prove matter of Inducement, 13 vol. 535. — 
By the Stat. 7 Will. 3, c. 3, it is provided, 
that on a Trial for Treason no Evidence shall 
be given of any Overt Act not laid in the 
Indictment, 5 vol. 977 (note).— This Rale 
said by Mr. Justice Foster and Mr. East to 
have existed at Common Law, ibid. ib< — But 
since that Statute, Evidence may be given of 
an Overt Act not laid in the Indictment, if it 
conduces to prove another Overt Act that is 
so laid, Vaughan's Case, 13 vol. 499, Deacon's 
Case, 18 vol. 366. — A Confession after the 
fact, proved by two Witnesses, is sufficient to 
convict under the Stat. 7 Will. 3, Deacon's 
Case, 18 vol. 369. — Printing may be an Overt 
Act of Treason, Anderton's Case, 12 vol. 
1248. — After proof of an Overt Act in the 
County in which the Treason is laid. Evidence 
may be given of any other Overt Acts of the 
same species of Treason in other Counties, 
Sir Henry Vane's Case, 6 vol. 123t. — Reference 
to other Cases establishing this point, ibid. 
129 (note).— In the Case of Lord Preston, 
who was tried in Middlesex, tl^e taking Boat 
in Middlesex for the purpose of going to 
France to promote an invasion of England, 
was held to be a sufficient Overt Act in Mid- 
dlesex in order to admit Evidence of other 
Overt Acts done in other Counties, 12 vol. 
727. — ^A Letter written in the County in which 
an Indictment for Treason is laid, ma^ be a 
sufficient Overt Act within that County, 
Hensey's Case, 19 vol. 1345. — By the Stat. 7 
Ann, c. 21, s. 11, a person accused of Treason 
or Misprision of Treason is to have a Copy of 
the Indictment and a List of the Jurors and 
Witnesses delivered to him ten days before 
his Arraignment, 10 vol. 268 (note), 21 vol. 
648. — Mode of procuring the List of the Jury 
from the Sherifi; in the Case of Lord George 
Gordon, 21 vol. 648.-^Mr. Justice Foster ex- 
presses a doubt whether the furnishing a Prisoner 
m Cases of Treason with a list of the Jury is 
not liable to much abuse, 26 vol. 14. — In an In- 
dictment for Treason, if the word " proditori^" 
be applied to the Treason generally, it seems * 
unnecessary to repeat it to every Overt Act, 
Cranbume*s Case, 13 vol. 231.— Discussion 
whether in an Indictment for Treason it is 
necessary expressly to aver that the accused 
was a Subject of Great Britain, 26 vol. 819.— 
A Baron of Ireland may be tried by a Jiiiy 



C&mmm.'2 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



^53 



in Eogland for Treasons committed in Ireland, 
4 vol. 6€5f ibid. 689.— Precedents of Scotch- 
men before the. Union being tried and ex- 
ecuted in England for Treasons committed 
there, ibid. 1176.— By the Stat. 7 Ann^ c. 21, 
High Treason committed in Scotland is to be 
tii^ there by a Special Commission of Oyer 
and Terminer, 23 vol. 1174. — ^Form of such 
a Commission, ibid. 1167. — Since the Union 
the Law of High Treason has been the same 
in Scotland as in England, ibid. 1190. — 
Tindal says, that there was no instance of an 
Executioa for Treason in the Reign of Queen 
Anne, 14 vol. 1036.— But see ibid. 1394, 
where this mistake is corrected. — Foster's Re- 
marks on the construction of the 10th and 11th 
Sections of the Stat. 7 and 8 Will. 3, relating 
to the Trials of Peers for Treason, 18 vol. 442 
(note). — Sir Samuel Romilly's Remarks on the 
difference between the Judgment and Execu- 
tion in Treason, ibid. 838 (note). — The Statute 
36 Geo. 3, c. 7, declaring different kinds of 
Treason, 33 vol. 954. 

TRIAL. 

It was held by the Judges in Lord Audley's 
Case, that on a Trial in the Court of the High 
Steward, the Lords Triers might eat and drink 
before they were agreed, but that they could 
not separate or adjourn before they gave their 
Verdict, 3 vol. 403. — Opinion of the Judges 
in the Honse of Lords, in Lord Delamere's 
Case, that a Jury charged and sworn on a 
Criminal Trial cannot adjourn till they have 
given a Verdict, 11 vol, 561; — But the Court 
may adjourn a Trial where there is an absolute 
necessity for such Adjournment, Hardy's 
Case, 24 vol. 414 ; Home Tooke*s Case, 25 vol. 
129, 1295 (note). — Discussion respecting the 
propriety of the Adjournment of a Trial in 
the Court of the Lord High Steward at the 
application of the Prisoner, in the Case of 
LordDelamere, 11 vol. 560.— Lord Chancellor 
Jefferies's Observations upon the difference be- 
tween a Trial in the Court of the High 
Steward, and the Court of the King in Parlia- 
ment, 11 vol. 562. — Account of the cere- 
monial part of the Proceedings on the 
Trial of a Peer, by Gregory King, Lancaster 
Herald, 15 vol. 771 (note). — A Baron of 
Ireland may be tried by a Jury in England for 
Treasons committed in Ireland, 4 vol. 665, 
ibid. 689.— Report of a Committee of Privi- 
leges in the House of Lords respecting the 
form of the Proceedings on the Trial of a 
Peer upon an Impeachment for a capital 
Offence, 7 vol. 1272.— Form of the Oath to be 
administered to the Witnesses on such a 
Trial, ibid. 1274. — Arnot's Remarks on 
^'Trials in Absence" by the Law of Scotland, 
14 vol. 373. — ^Though an Indictment against 
several persons be joint, the Venire,' and 
consequently the TriaJ, may be several, 9 vol. 
126. — ^Argument to show that it is the right 
of every one charged with a joint Indictment 
to demand a separate Trial, 15 vol. 755.— 
3^eaat Havrkins's Remarks upon the Trial 



of several persons on one Indictment, 16 vol. 
70 (note).— Foster's Remarks upon the con^ 
struction of the 10th and 11th Sections of the 
Stat. 7 arid 8 Will. 3, relating to the Trials of 
Peers in Cases of Treason, 18 vol. 442 (note). 
— Trial of Maha Rajah Nundocomar in the 
Supreme Court of Judicature in Bengal for 
Forgery, 20 vol. 923. 

t 

TRIAL AT BAR. 

In the Case of the King v. Hales, the Court 
of King's Bench refused a Trial at Bar of an 
Indictment for Forgery as the Prosecution was 
not carried on at the expense of the Crown, 
17 vol. 211 (note).— There cannot be a Trial 
at Bar of any local matter arising in the City 
of London, as the Citizens are not to be 
brought out of the City, ibid. 397. 

TRIAL BY JURY.— See Jwy, 

In all Trials by Jury there are two things 
to be considered ; 1st, the effect of the. evi- 
dence, supposing it to be true, which is matter 
of Law for the Court : and 2ndly, the truth of 
the Evidence, which is matter of Fact for the 
Jury, 8 vol. 710.— J^r. Erskine's Argument in 
the Case of the Dean of St. Asaph, on the 
Rights andPowers of Juries in Criminal Trials 
in general, and particularly in Cases of Libel, 
21 vol. 961,971. 

TRINITY. 

Proceedings against Thomas Aikenhead in 
Scotland, in 1696, for denying the Doctrine 
of the Trinity, 13 vol. 917. 

TRON. 

Etymology of the word Tron, 14'vol. 1054 
(note). 

TROVER. 

It was held by the Court of King's Bench, 
in the Case of Butts v. Penny, in the time of 
Charles the Second, that an Action of Trover 
would lie for Negroes, being Infidels, 20 vol. 
51. — The same was held by the Court of 
Common Pleas in the 5 Will. & Mary, ibid. 
52. — But this Doctrine was denied in the 
Court of King's Bench in 4 Ann, ibid. 53. 

TRUTH. 

In a criminal Prosecution for Libel, the 
Truth of the libellous matter is quite imma- 
terial, and therefore, in Francklin's Case, Chief 
Justice Raymond would not admit Evidence 
of the Truth of the statements charged to be 
libellous, 17 vol. 658. — ^Argument of Mr. 
Hamilton in Zenger's Case, that the Truth of 
a Libel may be given in Evidence as a Justifi- 
cation, ibid. 700.-^Animadversions on Mr. 
Hamilton's Argument, ibid. 729. — Opipion of 
the Judges in the House of Lords during the 
Debates on the Libel Act in 1792, that in cri- 
minal Prosecutions the Truth of the libellous 
matter charged is immaterial, 22 vol. 298. — 
Alleged meaning of the word " false '^ in aq 
Indictment for Libel, ibid. ib« 



M4 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



TWELVE BISHOPS. 



Froc9«diDgi against the Twelve Bishop* on 
an AccQsation of High Treason, t7 Car. t, 
1641y 4 ToU 63.^*LQrd Clarendon*i Obsenra- 
tions on theie Proceedingii ibid* 65 (note). — 
The Protof tation of the Bishopi to the King 
and the House of Lords against all Votes 
passed during tlieir absence from the House 
from fear of Assaults and Menaces in coming 
thiiher, ibid. d5.--Their Protestation being 
oommunicated to the Commons, they are 
aooosed of Treason, ibid. 69.— They are 
severally called to the Bar of the House of 
liords, and informed of the Accusation, ibid. 
70.-*-They put in their Answer that they are 
Not Guilty, and pray for a speedy Trial, and 
that they may be admitted to Bail, ibid. 7d.«-- 
The Tnal; ibid. 76.— Their Answers to the 
Charge of the Commons, ibid. 78. — Mr. Glynn 
lepUes for the Commons, ibid, ib.*— Speech of 
the Bishop of Litchfield and Coveninr, ibid. 
79r— 'The Lords retoWe that they shall forfeit 
the profits but not the inheritance of their 
temporal Estates, ibid. eu.^-'Tbey are dis* 
obarged upon Bail, ibid. ib. 

TYBANNY. 

Tyranny said by Lord Camden to be better 
than Anarchy, 19 vol. 1074. 

UNION Op ENGLAND AND SCOTLAND. 

See Fottnati, 

Proceedings of the Commissioners of both 
Countries respecting the Union of England 
and Scotland on the Accession of James the 
fmtf 3 rol. 5ai.*^Sinee the Union the Law 
of High Treason has been the same in Scotland 
as in England, 23 vol. 1190. 

UNIVERSAL SUFFRAGE. 

Joseph Gerrald's Argument in favour of the 
right or Universal Suffrage, 23 vol. 954. — Ar« 
gument that the Right of Universal Suffrage 
never prevailed either in Scotland or England, 
$3 vol, 66. 

UNIVERSITIES.— See Cambridge; Oxford, 

USAGE.— See Prescription. 

General Usage is the best exposition of the 
teeaning of a Statute, Em. Pref. 1 vol. xxii.**- 
A genenl immemorial Usage, not inconsistent 
vith any Statute, is part of the Common Law 
o£ England, 16 Tol. 1331. 

USURPATION. 

Curious Discussion In the Marquis of 
Argyle's Case, respecting the extent to which 
Subjects during an Usurpation of the Crown, 
and while the Sovereign de jure is forcibly 
kept out of possession, may make use of the 
Usurper's power for their own benefit and to 
enforce matters of internal regulatiooj 5 vol. 
1484. 



UTRECHT.— See Orfori md Morikfer, 

Emi of. 

I>ord Bolingbroke's Remarks upon ihe PrcK 
ceedings at the Treaty of Utrecht, 15 toL 
1059 (note). 

VARIANCE.— See IndiOnrnt. 

tt was resolved in Lord Sanqnire's Case^ 
that if a person be indicted as accessory t9 
two, and is found by Verdict accesaory to on^ 
only, it is no Variance, 2 toI. 759.-^Lord Coke 
says, that the manner of killing laid in aa 
Indictment for Murder is not the point of it^ but 
the matter ; and if it be stated in the Indict^ 
ment that the Death was caused by a DaggeiJ 
and proved to be by a Sword, it is sufficieoL 
ibid. 1031. — A Variance between the Pnwrf 
and the Charge in an Indictment as to tioif 
and place is immaterial^ 6 vol. 181^ 12 toI; 
139Q. 

VENIRE FACIAS.— See Proem. 

Entry of the Venire fiicias on the Trial of 
Thomas de Berkele for the Murder of Edward 
the Second, 1 vol. 56. — If a person b« in* 
dieted in Middlesex for an Offence comoutted 
in Middlesex, where the Court (its, there need 
not be fifteen days for the return of tho Venire^ 
Lord Sanquire's Case, 2 yoL T59.<-'Fomi of 
the Writ of Venire facias to the lieutenant of 
the Tower, commanding him to have the 
of a Peer in the Court of the Lord 
Steward, 6 vol. 773. — ^There may be several 
Venires upon a joint Indictment, 9 toL 126. 
^-There is no Venire facias unaer a Conmu«i> 
sion of Gaol Delivery, 13 vol. 326*-^A 
Prisoner after Verdict cannot demand, aa a 
matter of right, to have the Venire read in 
order to found an Objection in Arrest of Judg- 
ment, 16 vol. 303v — Reference to authorities 
to show that there may be a Venire de novo 
after a Special Verdict in Criminal Ca«e8« 17 
vol. 380. 

VENUE. 

It was resolved in Sir Henry Vane's Casi^ 
that Levying of War, stated in the Indictment 
to be in Middlesex, and laid as an Overt A(it 
of Compassing the King's Death in Middle- 
sex, mignt be proved by Evidence of a Levy* 
ing of War in Surrey, being merely transitory; ; 
but if a Levying War be the principal Trea- 
son for which the party is indicted, it must be 
laid according to the iact, tol. 123.— Thif, 
Mr. East says, must be understood to mean, 
"that after proof of an Overt Act in te| 
County in which the Treason is laid. Evidence 
may be given of any other Overt Acts of the 
same species of Treason in other Counties,'^ 
ibid. 129 (note).— Mr. Justice Poster saWf 
that no Objection was made during all the 
Trials for the Rebellion in 1745 to the gjting 
Evidence of Overt Acts committed in a 
County different fVom that where the fiict wis 
laid; an Overt Act having been tel piond k 




fiORMW]] 



THE STATE THIALS. 



M6 



fki proper County, ibid. ib.*^Iii Sir William 
hikyns*! Case, Lord Holt savi, upon an 
01i|ictioa made to Evidence of this kind, that 
if then bo a design to kill the King, and there 
an seteral Overt Aoti to prove uiat design, 
lad one is in one Coun^ and another in 
mother, the party may be indicted in either 
Cottiity, and Evidence given of the Overt Acts 
iibotb, 18 vol. 02^-^Lord North says, in CoU 
Mj^e'i Case, that if an Offence be committed 
is two Cottntiefly the party may be indicted in 
lithsr, and the acts done in both Coonttes 
miy be given in Evidence, 8 vol. 509.«»The 
Coart will change the Venne in an Action or 
bdictment where it is obvious that an in- 
dUbrent Trial cannot be had in the County 
«iiere it was originally laid, ibid. 824.-<i^Em» 
Hiking in Middlesex, with the intent of going 
M to France to tdke measures to depose the 
litg of England is an Overt Act of Treason 
h Middlesex, Lord Preston's Case, 13 vol. 
f2B.— Discussion in the Case of the Seven 
fiithops, whether a Libel written in Surrey, 
kt aduiowledged by the Defendants in Mid- 
wsn, is Evidence of a Publication in Mid* 
<l«a, 13 ¥ol. 323.~*If a Man compose a 
i^l in Surrey, and there deliver it to a 
Rioter to print in London, this is a Publica*- 
tt«a in London by the Composer, Tutchin's 
Owe, 14 vol. 1118.-^On the Trial of an Indict- 
ntttt for Forgery at Common Law, it was 
add, that where there is no direct Evidence 
^ the Forgery, but only circumstances whieh 
Mppen in several Counties, the Venue may 
w in either County, HaWs Case, IT vol. 202. 
^-Mr. Justice Powell says, in the Case of the 
^f!f^ Bishops, that the Offence must be ex- 
{f^ly proved to have taken place in the 
ywAy where the Venue is laid ; otherwise 
^ ^U be presumed to have taken place in 
»>otber County, 12 vol. 818. 

VERDICT.— See Jury; S^cid Verdict 

YILLENAOE.-^ 

^J'bsttve^ns on Villenage in Mr. Hargrave's 
2'S«tnent in the Case of Sommersett the 
J5«>, 20 vol. 3$.-- The condition of a Villein, 
*«. aCr-Origin and Decline of Villenage, 
^ 3T.«-*Manner of making title to a Villein 
?P'**'»cd, ibid. 41<-^CommiS8ioa from Queen 
2'***«th for the manumigsion of certain Vti- 
«"»>iHd. 1871, 

visrroE. 

»a Visitor of a CoUege in an Univemty 
jJ25*. *• owfcise his WsiiatoriU power, by 
^ying and heaiing an Appeal, tbe CoMit of 
^« Baarfi will grauta Mandamus to compel 
JJ. Btt V. The Biebop of Ely, 29 voL 753.— 
^u he has heard and decided on it, (he 
r^ af Kjng'e Bench has no auihoiity (o 
'"^ittbe the legality of his iudgaeot, iiid. ib. 



VOIR DIBE^-^ee Jby^fTi^esi* 

A Juror cannot be examined upon the Voir 
dire respecting any cause of Challenge which 
touches his honour or character, 15 vol. 898 
(note). — And upon this principle the Prisoner 
cannot ask him whether he has previously to 
the Trial said he thought him Guilty, Peter 
Cooke's Case, 13 vol. 334.*-*^ Witness cannot 
be examined on the Voir dire upon any matter 
which affects only his credibility, and not his 
competency. Layer's Case, 18 voL 162.*«- 
Where a Witness upon the Voir dire denies a 
fact upon whioh an objection to his competency 
is foiinded, the party objecting cannot call 
Witnesses to contradict him and prove bis in- 
cpmpetency, Lord I/>vat's Case, 18 vol. 508, 
T80. 

WALES. 

Account given in Calvin's Ca^e of the in- 
corporation of Wales vrithr England, 2 vol. 
646.1— Remarks upon. the History of the ac- 
quisition of Wales by England, m the Argu- 
ments in the Case of the Jsl^^d of Grenada, 
20 vol, 270. 

WAR. 

Discussion of the Law of War respecting 
the practice of granting Quarter in Battle, 
4 vol. 781.~*The existence of public War 
between England and a foreign 3tate is matter 
of notoriety, and need not be proved by 
express Evidence, Lord George Goraon*s Case, 
22 vol. 230.— See also, 29 vol. 616, 

WAEBANT,--*See G^imU Wmtimtt, 

In Cases where Magistrates hiave Jurisdic- 
tion, the validity of their Warrants cannot 
depend upon the truth of the Information on 
which it is granted, Curtis's Case, 15 vol. T4i 
(note). — Constables having a legal Warrant 
to arrest for a Breach of the Peace, may break 
open Doors, after having demanded admission 
and given notice of their Warrant, ibid, ib., 19 
vol. 873 (note).— Discussion respecting the 
validity of a Warrant to arrest for Debt in 
which the Name of the Special Constable was 
inserted after the Warrant was sealed and had 
left the Sheriff's Office, Stevenson's Case, 1!^ 
vol. 864. — ^Sucb a Warrant held to be invalid, 
and that if the Constable be killed in the ex- 
ecution of such a Warrant, it is oply Manslaugh- 
ter in the party who kills him, ibid« 878. — In a 
Warrant of Commitment it is unnecessary tp 
set forth the Information or Evidence npon 
which it was issued, but the nature of the 
Offence cbareed must appear upon it» Wilkes's 
Case, 19 toi. 988, — ^lu a Warrant of Com- 
mitment for writing a ^editions Libel^ the 
Libel need not be set out, ibid. ib. 

WAYS AND MEANS. 

Mr. St. John's Aooonnt, in his A t y wMat in 
Hm Case of Skip Uomft ^ ^ Waye aajl 



ih& 



IJENERAL INTDEX TO 



l}lliaemj^ 



Means provided by law to4he King of Eng- 
land of raising SappUes for the Defence of 
* the Realm, 3 voL 864. 

WEAVER'S CASE. 
Account of this Case, 6 vol. 893 (note). 

WITCHCRAFT. 

Extracts from Blackstone and other Writers, 
with Observations respecting the Laws against 
Witchcraft, and the History of Prosecutions 

-^Tor it, 2 vol, 1049 (note), 4 vol. 822 (note).— 
Case of Mary Smith for Witchcraft, 13 Jac. 1, 

.^1616, 2 vol. 1049. — Proceedings against seve- 
ral Witches in the County of Essex, 21 Car. J, 
1645, 4 vol. 817. — Howell's Letter on the 
existence of Witches and Evil Spirits, ibid. 
819 (note).— The Trial of the Suffolk Witches 
before Lord Hale, 17 Car. 2, 1665, 6 vol. 647. 
— ^Lord Hale avows His belief in Witchcraft, 
ibid. 700.— History of Witchcraft in New 
England, ibid. 647. — Proceedings against 
Temperance Lloyd and two other Women for 
Witchcraft, 8 vol. 1017.— Curious Case of the 
Trial and Conviction of a Man in 1702 for a 
Cheat, in pretending to be bewitched, 14 vol. 
639. 

WITNESS.— See Acam^ke^ Evidence-^ 
Pardon — Overt Act. 

In the Case of Sir Nicholas Throckmorton, 
a person convicted of Treason was admitted 
as a good Witness for the Prosecution, though 
objected to by the Prisoner, 1 vol. 880. — A 
person confessing Treason, but not attainted, 
held to be a sufficient Witness to prove Trea- 
son against others, Duke of Noifolk's Case, 
ibid. 1022. — Held by alLthe Judges in the 
Duke of Norfolk's Case, that Aliens and 
Villeins are good Witnesses, ibid. 1026. — Sir 
Thomas Witherington's Argument in Love's 
Case, in favour of the competency of Accom- 
plices to be Witnesses against persons tried 
for the Offence in which they are implicated, 

5 vol. 176. — Mr. Hale argues for the Prisoner 
in the same Case, that an Accomplice is not 
a " lawful and sufficient Witness" in Treason, 
within the meaning of the Statutes of Edw. 6, 
ibid. 240. — It was held by all the Judges in 
Tonge's Case, that an Accomplice is a good 
Witness within the meaning of those Statutes, 

6 vol. 227 (note), ibid. 228 (note).— An Ob- 
jection to a Witness on this ground over- 
ruled by the Court in Richard Langhorn*s 
Case, 7 vol. 445. — If a Pardon is promised to 
a person, on condition that he discovers a Plot 
generally, he is a good Witness for the Crown 
on the Trial of persons connected with that 
Plot, Tonge's Case, 6 vol. 228 (note).— But 
Lord Hale thought that it would be otherwise, 
if the Witness had been promised a Pardon 
on condition of his giving evidence against an 
individual concerned in the Plot, ibid. ib. — 
Discussion of Lord Hale's Opinion upon this 
|K)int in Xayer's Case, 16 vol. t58.*-Discus- 



sion in Timothy Murphy's Case, whether^ an 
Accomplice, already, indicted for the same 
Offence which he is called to prove against 
another person, is a. good Witness for the 
Crown against that person, 19. vol. 702. — ^The 
Court in that Case held him a competent 
Witness, ibid, 709— see.also, 9 vol. 126.— In 
Lord Stafford's Case, a. person so circum- 
stanced was held not to be a competent Wit- 
ness for the Prisoner, 7 vol, 1466. — An Accbm- 
plice is not to be. credited by a Jury, unless 
his Testimony be confiirmed in some material 
points ; but it is not necessary that it should 
be confirmed in every particular, 31 vol. 980, 
ibid. 1123. — ^Mr. Serjeant Copley's Remarks 
on this Doctrine in his Defence of Watson, 32 
vol. 513.— liord .Holt's Remarks upon - the 
credibility of Accomplices, in his Chargie to 
the Jury on the Trial of Charnock, King, .and 
Keyes, 12 vol, 1454.— Lord EUenborough^s 
Directions to the Jury, in Despard's Case, re^* 
specting the mode of estimating the degr^ of 
credit due to the Testimony of an Accomplice, 
28 vol. 487.-— His Observations to the Ju^ on 
the same subject, in his Charge to the Jury in 
Watson's Case, .32 vol. 583. — Chief Justice 
Abbott's Remarks on the Evidence of Accom- 
plices, in his Charge to the Grand Jury pre- 
viously to the Trials of the persons concerned 
in the Cato Street Plot, 33 vol. 689.— Mr. 
Hume's Observations respecting the admissi- 
bility of Accomplices as ' Witnesses' by the 
Law of Scotland, 11 vol. 1052 (note).-;^Mr. 
Burnett's Remark upon the same subject, 18 
vol. 855.— In Downie's Case, it was expressly 
held, that Accomplices were competent Wit- 
nesses by the Law of Scotland, 24 vol. 32.— 
Difference in the practice of English and 
Scotch Courts of Justice respecting the Exami- 
nation of Witnesses who are torn crhmniSf 
ibid. 30.— It is said in Quelch's Case, that, by 
the Civil Law, an Accomplice could not be a 
Witness, 14 vol. 1086. — ^It was held by all the 
Judges in the House of Lords, in the Case of 
Lord Comwallis, that there was no question 
that a person acquitted of an Offence was a 
good Witness against another charged with 
the same Offence, 7 vol. 152. — Lord North 
says, in Reading's Case, that a Pardon re- 
moves all Objection to the Competen<^ of a 
Witness on the ground of infamy of Cha- 
racter, 7 vol. 296.— Mr. Hargrave's Notice of 
this Opinion, ibid. 1052 (note). — In Elizabeth 
CelUer's Case, the Judges were divided in 
opinion upon the Question, whether a Pardon 
would restore the Competency of a Witness 
after a Conviction' for Felony, ibid. 1054 (note). 
— ^hief Justice Scroggs says, in Lord Castle- 
maine's Case, that if a man be convicted of 
Perjury, a Pardon will not make him a Wit- 
ness, ibid. 1083. — Lord Holt expresses a con- 
trary Opinion in Crosby's Case, ^12 vol. 1296. 
— Chiet Justice Jefferies refused to hear a 
Witness who was called to prove that he had 
perjured. himself on a former occasion, 10 vd. 
1185.— On the Trial of Elizabeth Canning for 
Perjury, M(. BaroR I^ggp^ refusecl similar 



CONTBMTS.3 



TME STATE TRIALS. 



357 



£Tiden<^j 19 vol. 632.— Discussion of the 
Question in Lord Castlemaine^s Case, whether 
a person burned in the hand for Felony, and 
afterwards pardoned, is a good Witness, 7 vol. 
1084. — It was determined by the Court of 
King's Bench in that Case, after a communi- 
cation with the Judges of the Common Pleas, 
that a person convicted of Felony and par- 
doned, but not burned in the hand, is not a 
competent Witness, ibid. 1090. —Discussion 
in the Earl of Warwick's Case, whether a 
person who has been convicted of a clergyable 
Felony, and allowed his Clergy, but has not 
been burned in the hand or pardoned, is a 
competent Witness, 13 vol. 1005. — Opinion 
of the Judges in the House of Lords in that 
Case, with their Reasons at length, that such 
a person is not a competent Witness, ibid. 
1014 (note). — Discussion of this subject in 
the Case of Ambrose Rookwood, 13 vol. 183. 
—A Papist held to be a good Witness by 
Chief Justice Jefferies, on the Trial of Oates 
for Perjury, 10 vol. 1192, 1213.— Lord Holt, 
in Sir John Freind's Case, refuses to have the 
competency of a Papist as a Witness argued, 
13 vol. 45. — By the Law of Scotland, infamy 
of character disqualifies a Witness, but he 
must be shown to be infamous by a legal 
conviction of some Crime inferring infamy, 
n vol. 651 (note).— A Wife cannot be a Wit- 
ness for or against her Husband, 14 vol. 624. 
--But in Lord Castlehaveu's Case it was re- 
solved by all the Judges, that a Wife may be 
a Witness against her Husband to prove his 
aiding and abetting in the commission of a 
Rape upon herself, 3 vol. 402. — ^This Resolu- 
tion said by Sir Bartholomew Shower not to 
he Law, 13 vol. 582. — In a Prosecution on the 
Statute of Henry the Seventh, for a Felony in 
forcibly carrying away and marrying a Woman 
of sul^tance, the Woman may give Evidence 
against the Offender, though she consented to 
the Marriage, 14 vol. 575. — Opinion of the 
Court of Exchequer in Ireland, in the Case 
of Annesley v. Lord Anglesea, that a Wife 
may give Evidence as to her Husband's credi- 
bility upon his Oath, but not on points affect- 
in? his property, 17 vol. 1276.— By the Law 
of Scotland, a Wife cannot, in any Case, be 
a Witness for or against her Husband, 18 vol. 
580 (note).->On the Trial of Lord Grey de 
Werk and others, for a Conspiracy to debauch 
^dy Henrietta Berkeley, the Lady was ad- 
fflitled to be a good Witness for the Defend- 
ants, 9 vol. 173 —On the Trial of a man in 
the Court of Justiciary in Scotland, for killing 
^person committing Adultery with his Wife, 
the Court admitted the Wife as a Witness for 
j€ Husband to prove that at the time of the 
Blow given, the Deceased was in the act of 
Adultery with her, 17 vol. 70 (note).— For- 
'nerly, by the I^aw of Scotland, Women were 
'^ot Emitted as Witnesses in any Case, 20 
yol. 44 (note). — ^A Quaker cannot be a Witness 
tV° ^PP«^ ^^ Murder, 17 vol. 330 (note).— 
Illustration of the Rule that a person interest- 
^ consequentially, but not immediately, in the 
VOL XXXIV. 



j result of a Suit is a competent Witness, ibid. 
1158. — In Roseweirs Case, Chief Justice 
Jefferies refused to allow a Question to be 
asked' of a Witness, by answering which she 
would make herself liable criminally, 10 vol. 
169. — A Witness is not bound to give an 
Answer to any Question which tends to accuse 
himself and subject him to Punishment or 
Penalties, Sir John Freind's Case, 13 vol. 17. 
— In Lord George Gordon's Case it was held, 
that a Witness was not bound to answer 
whether he was a Papist, because his Answer 
might subject him to Penalties, 21 vol. 650. — 
By the Stat. 46 Geo. 3, c. 37, it is declared^ 
that a Witness cannot refuse to answer a rele- 
vant Question merely because the Answer 
would subject him to a civil Action, 29 vol . 
642 (note). — Lord North's Account of the dis« 
tinction between the competency and credit 
bility of a Witness, 7 vol. 297. — Instances in 
former times of the admission of Evidence of 
particular acts of misconduct on the part of 
Witnesses for the purpose of discrediting 
them, 7 vol. 1459, 1478, 1485.— The maxim 
of the Civil Law respecting the extent to 
which Evidence of this kind was admissible, 
ibid. 1484. — ^Instance in modern times of Evi- 
dence in support of the Character of a Witness 
being admitted for the purpose of establishing 
his credibility, Murphy's Case, 19 voL 724.— 
A Witness cannot be examined on the Voir 
dire to any matter which only affects his credit^ 
and is no objection to his competency. Layer's 
Case, 16 vol. 162. — If a Witness on the Voir 
dire denies a fact upon which an objection to 
his competency is founded, the party who 
makes the objection cannot call Witnesses to 
contradict him in order to prove his incom- 
petency. Lord Lovat's Case, 10 vol. 596.— 
Lord Hardwicke states the rule to be, that 
the party objecting to the competency of a 
Witness may prove the matter of his objection 
by the Oath of the Witness, or by other tes- 
timony : but if he examines the Witness, and 
he denies the fact, he is concluded as to the 
objection to his competency, and cannot call 
other Witnesses to make it o^t, ibid. 730.--> 
Where a Witness on cross-examination denies 
the commission of a Crime imputed to him in 
order to affect his credibility, the party making 
the inquiry is bound by his Answer, and can- 
not contradict him and prove that he commit- 
ted the Crime by express Evidence, Watson's 
Case, 32 vol. 490. — Evidence of what a Wit- 
ness said on other occasions respecting the 
subject of his Evidence in a particular-Case 
is admissible to show his consistency, 27 vol. 
432. — Mr. Justice BuUer says, in Delamotte's 
Case, that the proper Question to be put to a 
Witness who is called to impeach the veracity 
of another Witness is, whether, from his 
knowledge of his general character, he thinks 
that he is deserving of belief upon his Oath, 
21 vol. 811. — Form in which the Question 
was put in Watson's Case, 32 vol. 495. — His- 
tory of the Law respecting the examination of 
Witnesses on behalf of Prisoners in capital 
S 



258 



GENERAL INDEX TO 



QMlQPBXOlif. 



Cases, as giren by BlackstODe, 6 voL 777 
(BOteX 10 vol. 213 (note).— Instances in early 
times of the refasid of Judges ta hear Wit- 
nesses against the Crown in criminal Cases, 
1 vol. 8859 1281, 1304.— Instances of a re- 
fusal by the Court to administer an Oath to 
Witnesses fi>r a Prisoner in capital Cases, 7 
vol.359, 8 vol. 373. — Sir John Hawles's Re- 
maiks npon the injustice and nnreasonableness 
of the ancient Rule of not allowing Witnesses 
for a Prisoner in capital Cases to be sworn, 
8 Tol. 735.— Chief Justice Jefferies admits the 
hardship of the Law in this respect, 10 vol. 
267.-'Instance previously to the Statutes 7 
Will. 3, c. 3, and 1 Ann, st. 2, c. 9, of the 
refusal of the Court to order the attendance of 
Witnesses for a Prisoner in a Case of Felony, 
6 vol. 570. — ^Witnesses for Defendants in 
Cases of Misdemeanour were sworn previously 
to the Statutes, 7 vol. 289, 908.— Chief 
Justice Treby says, in Peter Cook's Case, that 
it is matter of discretion and favour in the 
Court to order Witnesses on a Trial to be 
examined apart from each other, and not mat- 
ter of right which can be demanded by the 
Sarty, 13 vol. 348. — ^Lord Holt holds the same 
octrine in Vaughan's Ca.se, ibid. 494.-^ee 
also what is said by Mr. Seijeaut Foster in 
Captain Goodere's Case at Bristol, 17 vol. 
1015. — Antiquity and advantage of the prac- 
tice of examining Witnesses apart from each 
other, 13 vol. 348 (note). — Practice of the 
Scotch Courts respecting the examination of 
Witnesses apart in criminal Cases, 19 vol. 330 
(note). — Counsel and Attorneys are the only 
persons privileged from giving Evidence of facts 
communicated to them in professional confi- 
dence, 20 vol. 575 (note). — A medical man has 
no such privilege, ibid. 573. — Argument that 
Counsel ought not to be compelled to give 
Evidence of facts which, come to their know- 
ledge in professional confidence, even with 
the express consent of their Clients that they 
should reveal them, 21 vol. 358. — Argument 
of Sir Thomas Witherington in Love's Case, 
that the two Witnesses required in Treason by 
the Statutes 1 and 5 Edw. 6, in a Case of 
complicated facts might consist of one Witness 
to one Overt Act and another to another Overt 
Act of the same species of Treason, 5 vol. 
178. — Mr. Justice Foster says, that this is the 
first instance he had met with of the assertion 
of this doctrine, ibid. 240 (note). — ^This Doc- 
trine was held by all the Judges at the Con- 
sultation previous to the Trials of the Regi- 
cides, ibid. 978. — It was also confirmed by 
the opinion of the Judges in the House of 
Lords in Lord Stafford's Case, 7 vol. 1527.— 
See also what is said by Lord Chief Justice 
North in Colled ge's Case, 8 vol. 620, aod by 
Lord Holt and the other Judges on the Trial 
of Sir William Parkyns, 13 vol. 111. — Lord 
Nottingham, on Lord Stafford's Trial, assigns 
as a reason for this rule that it would- be 
otherwise extremely diflScult to convict for 
Treason, 7 vol. 1530. — Doubts respecting the 
validity of this reason, ibid. 1538 (note). — ^In 



Treason there need not be two Witnesses to 
matter of Indictment, 13 vol. 535. — On the 
Trial of Colonel Hacker, one of the Regicides^ 
it was resolved, that two of the Judges named 
in the Commission were good Witnesses U»r 
the Prosecution, 5 vol. 1181 (note). — A Judge 
may give Evidence as a Witness in a Cause 
tried before himself, 11 voL 459. — ^And Judges 
ought not upon a Trial to declare any fact 
which they know of their own knowledge un* 
less they are regulariy sworn as Witnesses^ 7 
vol. 874. — Instance of a Juror being sworn as 
a Witness in a Cause to give Evidence to the 
Court and his fellow Jurors, 6 vol. 1612 (note)^ 
18 vol. 123^ — Mr. Barrington observes, that 
in ancient times, the Witnesses to a Deed 
were a necessary part of the Jury who were ta 
try its validity, 6 vol. 1013 (note). — ^The two 
Witnesses required in Treason must be both 
believed by the Jury in order to warrant a 
Conviction, 7 vol. 1112. — It seems that by 
^e Law of Scotland, Witnesses might be toiw 
tured if they hesitated or prevaricated in giv- 
ing their Evidence, 10 vol. 727 (note). — By 
the Law of Scotland, all Witnesses in a crimi« 
nal Case must be examined in the presence of 
the accused, ibid. 779, 780 (note). — ^Provisions 
of the Law of Scotland respecting the dis- 
qualification of Witnesses on the ground of 
defective understanding, 12 vol. 559 (note).'— 
Chief Justice Jefieries's Examination of a 
Child previously to being sworn as a Witness, 
8 vol. 1148. — Instances of Witnesses being 
fined during the Commonwealth for refusing 
to be sworn on the ground of religious 
scruples, 5 vol. 113, 132. — Instance of a Wiu 
ness being committed by the Court of Jus- 
ticiary in Scotland for objecting to be sworn 
on religious grounds, 23 vol. 145. — On the 
Trial of Colonel Adrian Scroop, one of the 
Regicides, a Witness for the Prosecution was 
allowed to refresh his memory by a written 
Paper, 5 vol. 1039. — It was said by Chief 
Justice Eyre on Hardy's Trial, that where a 
Witness refreshes his memory by written me- 
moranda, it is the usual and reasonable prac- 
tice that the adverse party should inspect them 
for the purpose of cross-examining him, 24 voL 
824. — ft was held by the Court of Justiciair, 
on the Trial of Sir Archibald Gordon Kinloch, 
that a Witness can only make use of memo- 
randa made immediately at the time of the 
transaction to which he speaks, 25 vol. 936.-^ 
The same point was said to have been mled 
in Home Tooke's Case, ibid. ib. — It was held 
in Hardy*s Case, that in State Prosecutions, 
a Witness for the Crown cannot be called 
upon to disclose the names of persons who 
have g^ven information to Government respect- 
ing the Offence in question, 24 vol. 753, 808^ 
816. — ^This Rule was adhered to by the Court 
on Watson's Trial, 32 vol. 102. — In order to 
identify a Prisoner on his Trial, he maybe 
directly pointed out to the Witness, who may 
then be asked whether that is the person, 
Watson's Case, 32 vol. 74. — Lord Ellen- 
borough^ in a capital Case, expresses a doubi 



CoirrBNT&]] 



THE STATE TRIALS. 



259 



whether a Witness tnay not give Evidence of 
what took place hefore the Grand Jury who 
found the Bill, ihid. 107. — In Watson's Case 
lor High Treason, where a Witness was de- 
scribed in the List of Witnesses delivered in 
pursuance of the Stat. 7 Ann, c. 21 , as lately 
residing at a particular place, and it appeared 
upon his Examination on the Voir dire that he 
had a later and different place of residence, 
the description was held insufficient, and the 
Witness was not examined, 32 vol. 69. — But 
an Objection on the ground of such a mis- 
description must be taSken before the Witness 
has been examined, and his Evidence cannot 
bis struck out on that account, if the error be 
discovered afterwards, Watson*s Case, ibid. 
496. — ^The Statute of 7 Ann, c. 21, s. 11, au- 
thorizing the delivery of a List of the Witnesses 
for the Prosecution to persons accused of 
Treason or Misprision of Treason, 10 vol. 
268 (note). — The Court of Justiciary in Scot- 
land has no power to compel the attendance 
of Witnesses residing in England, 23 vol. 
628. — ^Instances of Witnesses being committed 
by the Court of Justiciary for Prevarication 
in giving their Evidence, 26 vol. 838, ibid. 1 1 52. 
— Oath administered to Witnesses on Trials 
during the Commonwealth, 5 vol. 76«-^Oath 
administered to Witnesses on the Trial of a 
Peer on an Impeachment for a capital Offence, 
7 vol. 1274. — Oath administered to Witnesses 
in the House of Lords on a Divorce Bill, 12 
▼oL 890. — Oath of a Witness examined on the 
Voir dire, 18 vol. 583. — Oath of an Interpreter 
on'the Examination of a foreign Witness, 9 
vol. 1099. — ^In criminal Trials, on reasonable 
proof being given that a Witness has been 
kept out of the way by the procurement of 
the Prisoner, the Deposition of the Witness 
before the Coroner may be given in Evidence, 
Harrison's Case, 12 vol. 851. — See also ibid. 
852 (note), and some discussion on this sub- 
ject in Sir John Fenwick's Case, 13 vol. 591. 

WOMEN. 

Anciently, by the Law of Scotland, Women 
were not admitted as Witnesses in any Case, 
20 vol. 44 (note). — Women were never en- 
titled to benefit of Clergy, ibid. 626. — Statutes 
of 21 James 1, c. 6, and 3 and 4 Will, and 



Mary, c. 9, extending to Women a similar 
benefit to the Benefit of Clergy, ibid. 631, 

WORDS. 

In Sir William Stanley's Case, Words were 
considered to amount to Treason, l vol. 277. 
— But the Stat. 1 Edw. 6> created the distinc- 
tion between words and acts in Cases of Trea- 
son, ibid. 895. — Opinion of all the Judges in 
Dr. Sachever,eirs Case, that in all Indictments 
or Informations for crimes in writing or speak« 
ing, the words supposed to be criminal must 
be expressly set out, 15 vol. 466. — ^This 
Opinion was denied to be law in Layer's Case, 
16 vol. 317, — ^The House of Lords resolve in 
Sachevereirs Case, that in an Impeachment it 
is not necessary to set out the exact words 
used, 15 vol. 29, 473. — Protest against this 
Resolution, ibid. 30. — No words can amount 
to Treason, unless by some particular Statute, 
3 vol. 368. — But Words spoken may constitute 
an Overt Act of Treason, 5 vol. 983. — It was 
resolved by all the Judges in Lord Morley's 
Case, that no Words can amount to a sufficient 
provocation to reduce the offence of Homicide 
from Murder to Manslaughter, 6 vol. 771, and 
see 17 vol. 66, 18 vol. 312. — ^Mr. East says, 
that it is now settled that mere Words, not 
referring (o any act or design, are not Overt 
Acts of Treason, 22 vol. 480 (note). — On a 
Trial for uttering Seditious Words, it is no 
variance if the Words charged agree substan- 
tially, though not literally with those proved, 
26 vol. 614. 

WRITS. 

Parliamentary Writs said to be always re- 
turnable in Parliaroeut previous to Stat. 7 
Hen. 4, 2 vol. 104. — Practice respecting Par- 
liamentary Writs during the sitting of Parlia- 
ment, ibid. ib. — Alteration of the style of 
Writs during the Commonwealth on Crom- 
well's assumption of the Protectorate, 5 vol. 
480 (note). 

YEOMAN. 

Discussion of the Etymology and legal 
meaning of the Term, 26 yoL 239. 



END OF PART 11. 



TABLE 



8 2 



A f ABLE 



OF 



PARALLEL REFERENCE 



rxoH 



HOWELL'S STATE TRIALS 



TO THB 



FOLIO EDITION BY HARGRAVE. 



A TABLE, <&c. 



THE PREFACES. 



OCTAVO. 




FOLIO. 




OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 


Vol, L xxii to xxiii 


••• 


vol, I' page ii 


VoL I. 


xxxiv to VI 


•«• voL hpage xi 


xxiv — xxy 


••• 


• •• 


HI 


xxxvii — xxxviii 


xiii 


xxvi 


••• 


• •• 


iv 




XXXIX 


xiy 


xxvii 


••• 


• •• 


V 




xl— xU 


• •• ••• Xt 


xxviii 


•»♦ 


• •• 


vi 




xlli — xliii 


.,. vol. vn. i 


xxix — XXX 


••• 


• •• 


• • 

VII 




xlv 


••• vp/« IX. i 


xxxi — ^xxxiii 


••• 


• •• 


ix 




xlvii 


••• vol. L i 



TRIALS. 



Vol. I. 89 to 90 

91— 92 

93— 9* 

95— 97 

98— 99 

100—101 

102—103 

104^106 

107—108 

109—110 

111—112 

113—114 

115—118 

119—120 

121 
122—124 
175—176 

177 
178—179 
180.-^181 
182.-183 
184—185 
186—187 
188—189 
190—192 
193—194 
195—196 
197—198 



•»« 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
• •• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
•.. 
••• 
••• 
••• 
«•• 
••• 
••• 
••• 



vol. I. p. 1 
••• ^ 

3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 I 



••• 
...• 

••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
• • • 
•«• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 



••• 
••• 



Vol.h 199^200 
201—202 
203—205 
206—207 
208—209 
210—211 
212—213 
214—215 
216—217 
218—220 
225 
226—227 
228—229 
230-231 
232—234 
235—236 
237—238 
23y— 240 
241—242 

^ 243—245 
246—247 
248—249 
250—251 
252 
253—256 
257—258 
259—260 
261—262 



• •• 


wLI. 


p. 27 


• »• 


• •• 


28 


• •• 


• •• 


29 


• •• 


• •• 


30 


• •• 


• •• 


31 


• •• 


••• 


32 


• •• 


• •• 


33 


•«• 


• •• 


34 


• •• 


• •• 


35 


• •• 


• •• 


36 


• •• 


35&36 


« • • 


••• 


37 


• •• 


••• 


38 


• •• 


••• 


39 


• •• 


••• 


40 


• *« 


••• 


41 


• t« 


••• 


42 


• •• 


••• 


43 


• •• 


••• 


- 44 


• •• 


••• 


45 


• •• 


••• 


46 


• •• 


••■ 


47 


• •• 


••• 


48 


• •• 


••• 


49 


• •• 


••• 


50 


• •• 


••• 


52 


• •• 


••• 


54 


• t« 


••« 


56 



264 



STATE TRIALS.-^Index of Reference to both Editions. 



OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




VoL I. 26S to 965 


••• 


voL I. p 


.58 


Vol. I. 527 to 528 


• •• 


W/.VIL 


p. 20 


277—278 


•.• 


vol XL 


1 


765—768 


• •• 


vol. XL 


'26 


279^284? 


••• 


••• 


2 


861—862 


vol. y III. app. S25 


283—287 


••• 


••• 


3 


863—864 


••• 


•»• 


326 


288—290 


••• 


••• 


4 


869—870 


••. 


vol. L 


63 


291—294? 


••• 


••• 


5 


871 


••• 




64 


295—298 


••• 


••• 


6 


872—873 


• • • 




65 


385—387 


••• 


vol. I. 


59 


874— S75 


••• 




66 


388—389 


••• 


• •• 


60 


876—877 


••• 




67 


390—391 


••• 


• • • 


61 


878—880 


••• 




6S 


392—394 


••• 


• .. 


62 


881—882 


••• 




69 


395 


»•• 


• •• 


63 


883—884 


••• 




70 


396 


••• 


• •• 


64 


885—886 


,., 




71 


395—398 


••• 


vol, XL 


7 


887—889 


,.. 




72 


399—402 


••• 


••• 


8 


890—891 


••• 




73 


403—408 


••• 


••• 


9 


892—893 


••■ 




74 


407—410 


••• 


••• 


10 


894—895 


•«• 




15 


411—414 


••• 


••• 


11 


896—897 


••■ 




76 


415—418 


••• 


.•• 


12 


898 


••• 




77 


419—422 


.•• 


••• 


13 


899—900 


.•• 




78 


423—427 


•.• 


••• 


14 


901—902 


••• 




77 


428-^31 


••• 


••• 


15 


903—904 


••• 




79 


432—433 


••• 


••• 


16 


905—907 


••• 




80 


439—442 


••• 


•.• 


17 


908—909 


••• 




81 


443—444 


••• 


••• 


18 


910—911 


•.• 




82 


443-^446 


••• 


••• 


16 


915—916 


vol. III. app. 327 


451—454 


••• 


••• 


18 


917-918 


••• 


• •• 


328 


455—458 


••• 


••• 


19 


919—920 


••• 


... 


329 


459—462 


••• 


• a« 


20 


921—923 


••• 


• *• 


330 


463—466 


••• 


• •• 


21 


924—925 


••» 


»•• 


331 


467—470 


••• 


• .• 


22 


926—927 


••• 


• •• 


332 


471—474 


••# 


• .• 


23 


937 


••• 


• •• 


332 


475—479 


• •* 


• .• 


24 


938—939 


•«• 


• •. 


333 


480—484 


••• 


• •• 


25 


940—941 


••• 


... 


334 


483— *86 


»•• 


vol. VIL 


1 


942 


••• 


»•• 


335 


487 


••• 


••• 


2 


943 


••• 


.•• 


336 


488—489 


••• 


••• 


3 


957 


••• 


vol, L 


81 


490-491 


••• 


••• 


4 


958—959 


••• 


•*• 


83 


492—494 


••• 


••• 


5 


960—961 


••fl 


••• 


84 


495—496 


••• 


••» 


6 


962—963 


•»• 


.r« 


85 


497—498 


••• 


••• 


7 


964—966' 


••• 


**• 


86 


499->500 


••• 


••• 


8 


967—968 


••• 


..• 


87 


501—502 


••• 


*•• 


9 


969—970 


••» 


• *• 


S8 


503—505 


••• 


••• 


10 


971—972 


••• 


• fl« 


89 


506 


#•• 


••• 


11 


973—975 


••• 


■ •• 


90 


507—508 


••• 


••• 


12 


976—977 


••• 


• •• 


91 


509 


••• 


••• 


11 


978—979 


••• 


• •• 


92 


510. 


••• 


••» 


12 


980—981 


••« 


.•• 


93 


511—512 


••• 


»•• 


13 


982—984 


••• 


.•• 


94 


513—515 


••• 


••• 


14 


985—986 


••• 


• •« 


95 


516—517 


••• 


••• 


15 


987—988 


••• 


• •• 


96 


518 


••• 


••• 


16 


989—990 


• • • 


•«• 


97 


519—520 


••• 


••• 


17 


991—992 


••• 


• «• 


98 


521—523 


••• 


••• 


18 


993—995 


••• 


... 


99 


524 


••• 


••• 


19 


996—997 


••• 


• •• 


100 


525 


«•• 


••• 


20 
19 


998—999 


••• 


• •• 


101 


526 


••• 


••» 


1000-1002 


••• 


• •• 


102 



i 



STATE TRIALS. — ^Index of Reference to both Editions. 



266 









1 








OCTAVO. 


POLIO. 




OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




Fo^. 1. 1003 to 1004 


»• vol* L p 


.103 


ro/.L 1187/0 1188 


••• 


voL L p 


.155 


1005—1006 




104 


1189—1191 


••• 


* 


156 


1007—1008 




105 


1192—1193 


••• 


• • • 


157 


1009—1010 




106 


1194—1195 


••• 


••• 


158 


1011—1013 




107 


1196—1197 


••• 


••• 


159 


1014—1015 




108 


1198—1200 


••• 


•■» 


160 


1016—1017 




109 


1201—1205 


••• 


••• 


161 


1018—1019 




110 


1206—1207 


••• 


••• 


162 


1020U-1022 




111 


1208 


• • • 


••• 


163 


1023—1024 




112 


1209—1211 


••• 


••• 


164 


1025—1026 




113 


1229 


••• 


vol. VIL 


19 


1027—1028 




114 


1230 


••• 


••• 


21 


1029—1030 




115 


1231—1232 


••• 


••• 


22 


1031—1033 




116 


1233 


»•• 


••• 


23 


1034 




117 


1234—1235 


••• 


••• 


24 


1035 




118 


1236 


••• 


••• 


25 


1041—1043 




117 


1237 


••• 


••• 


26 


1044 




118 


1238 


•«• 


••• 


27 


1045—1046 




119 


1239—1240 


••• 


••• 


28 


1047—1050 




120 


1241—1242 


••• 


••• 


21 


1095—1097 




121 


1243 


••• 


••• 


22 


1098—1099 




122 


1244 


••• 


••• 


23 


1100—1101 




123 


1245 


••• 


••• 


25 


1102—1103 




124 


1246—1247 


••• 


••• 


26 


1104--1105 




125 


1248 


••• 


••• 


27 


1106—1108 




126 


1249—1250 


••• 


••• 


28 


1109 




127 


1249—1250 


f 


00/. I. 


163 


IIIOl-1112 




128 


1251—1252 


•«• 


••• 


165 


1 J 27— 1128 




128 


1253—1254 


••• 


••• 


166 


1129-^1130 




129 


1255—1256 


••• 


••• 


167 


1131—1133 




130 


1257—1259 


••• 


• •• 


168 


1134—1135 




131 


1263—1264 


••• 


vol. VII. 


29 


1136—1137 




132 


1265—1266 


••• 


• •• 


30 


1138 




133 


1267-1268 


••• 


• •• 


31 


1139—1140 




134 


126^—1272 


••• 


!•• 


32 


1141 




133 


1271 


••• 


vol. I. 


167 


1142 




134 


1272—1273 


••• 


... 


169 


1143—1144 




135 


1274—1275 


••• 


•V. 


170 


1145—1146 




136 


1276—1278 


••• 


• •• 


171 


1147—1148 




137 


1279^1280 


••• 


• •• 


172 


1149—1151 




138 


1281—1282 


••• 


• •• 


173 


1152—1153 




139 


1283—1284 


••• 


••• 


174 


1156-r-1157 




140 


1285—1287 


••• 


• •• 


175 


1158—1159 




141 


1288—1289 


••• 




176 


1160—1161 




142 


1290—1291 


••• 


• •• 


177 


1161—1162 


• 


143 


1292—1293 


••• 


• •♦ 


178 


1163—1164 




144 


1294—1295 


••• 


• •• 


179 


1165—1166 




145 


1296—1298 


••• 


• •• 


180 


1167—1168 




146 


1297 


-••• 


• •• 


179 


1169—1170 




147 


1298 


••• 


• •• 


180 


1171—1173 




148 


1299—1300 


••• 


• •• 


181 


1174—1175 




149 


1301—1302 


••• 


• •• 


182 


1176—1177 




150 


1303~1304 


••• 


• •• 


183 


1178—1179 




151 


1305—1307 


••• 


• •• 


184 


1180—1182 




152 


130&^1309 


••• - 


• •• 


185 


1183—1184 




153 


1310^1311 


••• 


• •• 


186 


1185—1186 




154 


1312-T-1313 


•■• 


• •• 


187 



366 



STATE TRIALS. — Indsx of Reference to both Editions. 



OCTAVO. 

To/. 1. 1314/01316 
131.5—1317 
1318—1319 
1320—1321 
1322—1323 
1324—1326 
1327—1328 
1329—1330 
1331—1332 
1333—1335 

1336 
1337—1338 
1339—1340 
1341—1343 
1344—1345 
1346—1347 
1348—1349 
1350—1352 
1353—1354 
1355—1356 
1367—1359 

1360 
1359U-.1360 
1361—1363 
1364—1365 
1366—1367 
1368—1370 
1371—1372 
1373—1374 
1375—1376 
2377—1378 
1379—1380 

1381 
1382—1384 

1403 
1404—1406 
1407—1408 

1409 

1410 
1415—1418 

1419 
1420—1421 
1422—1424 
1425—1426 
1427—1428 
1429^1430 
1431—1432 
1433-*.1435 
1436—1437 
1438—1439 
'1440—1442 
1443—1444 
1445—1446 
1447—1448 
1449^1452 
Vol. IL 1 

2 



••• 



••t 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



•»• 



#•• 



••• 



••• 



••t 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



FOLIO. 

W)l. I. p. 188 

... 189 

190 

191 

192 

193 

194 

195 

196 

197 

198 

199 

200 

201 

202 

203 

204 

205 

206 

207 

208 

209 

vol. VII. 33 

34 

35 

36 

37 

38 

39 

40 

41 

42 

43 

44 

44 

45 

46 

47 

48 

47 

48 

49 

50 

51 

52 

53 

54 

55 

56 

57 

59 

59 

60 

61 

62 

mLL 211 

21$ 



••• 

••• 

... 
... 
••• 



... 
••• 
••» 
«•• 

... 
... 
••• 
*•. 

... 
«•• 

... 
••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



*.. 



•«• 



OCTAVO. 

Vol. II. 3 to 4 
5 — 6 
7 — 8 
9—10 
11 — 13 
14 — 15 
16 — 17 
18 — 19 
20 — 21 
22— 24 
25 — 26 
27 — 28 
29 — 30 
31 — 32 
33 — 36 
37 — 88 
39 — 40 
41 — 42 

43 
44 — 45 

61 
62 — 64 
65 — 66 
67 — 69 

70 

93 
94 — 95 
96 — 97 
98 — 99 
100—101 
102—103 
104—105 
106—107 
108—109 
110—111 
112 
113 
113—114 
115—119 
120—123 
124—128 
129—130 
159 
160 
161—162 
163—164 
165—166 
167—169 

170—171 
172r.-173 
I74r^l76 
177f-l78 
I79r-180 
181—182 

183rrp.l85 

1861^187 
188^189 



**• 

••• 
••• 
.«• 
»«• 
•«• 
••• 
. .. 



FOLIO. 

v(d. I. p. 218 

... '2U 

• ... 215 

... 216 

... 217 

... 218 

... 219 

... 220 

... 221 



..• 



• 4 
... 
... 

• * • 



... 



••• ... 

... ••• 

... ..• 

... 
• •• 
.«. 

... 



... 



.«. 



* • • 



... 



... 223 

... 224 

... 225 

... 226 

... 227 

... 228 

... z^ 

... 230 

... 231 

... wrf. VII. 6S 

61 

65 

66 

67 

67 

68 

69 

70 

... 71 

... 72 

... 73 

... 7* 

... 75 

... 76 

... 77 

78 

... vol. XI. 65 
... 66 
„. 67 
... 68 

69 

... wl. I. ^ 
2S2 

... 2S8 

- - St 

gS 

2S6 

2S7 

238 

239 
240 
2*1 



• . • 
... 
... 
... 

• .. 

• •• 
... 
... 



... 
... 

... 



.•• 



... 



... 



... 



... 
.*• 
»•• 
t** 
... 
... 



245 

m 

245 

••• ••• 



STATE TRIALS.-'Ihdejc of Espekevce to both Editions. 



267 



OCTAVO. 

Fd/.IL 190/0 191 
192^193 
194f 
217 
218 
219—220 
221~222 
223—225 
-22e— 227 
228—229 
230—232 
233-^234. 
235—236 
237—238 
239— 24?! 
242—243 
244—245 
246—247 
248—250 
251—252 
253—254 
255—256 
257—259 
260—261 
262—263 
264-f*266 
267r-268 
269^270 
271—272 
273—275 
276—277 
278—279 
280—282 
283—284 
285—286 
287—289 
290—291 
292—293 
294—295 
29&— 298 
299—300 
301—302 
303—304 
305—307 
308—309 
310—311 
312-^14 
315^^16 
317—318 
319—320 
• 321—323 
324—325 
326-^327 
328—330 
,♦ 331—332 
333—334 
S35— 336 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



• ta 



• •• 



• •• 



• •• 



• t* 



• •• 



• •• 



• •• 



• •« 



• •• 



• •• 



• •• 



at* 



• *• 



*•• 



• •* 



at* 
aaa 

• • • 



aaa 



• *• 



FOLIO. 

••» voL I. 0. 246 

247 
248 
247 
248 
249 
250 
251 
252 
253 
254 
255 
256 
257 
258 
259 
260 
261 
262 
263 
264 
265 
266 
267 
268 
269 
270 
271 
272 
273 
274 
275 
276 
277 
278 
279 
280 
281 
282 
283 
284 
285 
286 
287 
288 
289 
290 
291 
292 
293 
294 
295 
296 
297 
298 
299 
300 



••• 



aaa 



• aa 



• •m 



aaa 
• aa 

*•» 
aaa 



aaa 



aaa 



• •• 



• aa 



• •• 



• •• 



*•• 



aaa 



aaa 



• •• 



• m» 



• •a 



• aa 



aaa 



aaa 



• •• 



aaa 



• aa 



• 9$ 



»•• 



• ••. 



• •• 



■ •a 



• •• 



aaa 



• •• 



• aa 



aaa 



aaa 



aaa 



OCTAVO. 

VoLlh 337/0 339 
340—341 
342—343 
344—345 
346—348 
349—350 
351—352 
353—354 
355 
356—358 
371—380 
381—884 
385—388 
389—893 
394—397 
398—402 
403—406 
407—41 1 
412—415 
416—419 

425—428 
429—433 
434—437 
438-441 
442-^446 
447—450 
451—455 
456—459 
460—463 
464—468 
469—472 
473—476 
477—480 
481—485 
486—489 
4yU" ' 'Ty«j 
494—498 
499—502 
503—506 
507-^10 
511—514 
515—518 
519^-522 
523—526 
527—530 
531—534 
533—535 
536—539 
540—544 
545—548 
549—552 
553—557 
558—561 
562—565 

570u-5T4f 



FOLIO. 
••• voL L Pa 301 

aaa $02 



aaa 

aa« 
aaa 
• •a 
a*. 



aaa 

aaa 

• aa 
m9» 
aa* 
••• 



••• vol* XL 



••• 

•»• 
••• 

• aa 

• •• 

• •a 
a»a 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 
aaa 
»•• 

• •• 

• »• 
aaa 

• •m 

• •a 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •* 
aaa 

• • « 

• •• 

• •• 
»•* 

• •• 

• m» 
aa» 
aaa 
»•• 

• »• 
aaa 
aaa 

• •• 

• •a 
aaa 

• •9 
aaa 
aaa 
aaa 

• •• 



• •• 

• aa 
aaa 

• •» 

• ••' 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 
aaa 
aaa 
aaa 

• aa 
»•• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• »» 

• •• 
aaa 

• •• 

• mm 
aaa 
mmm 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• a« 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• aa 
aaa 

• •• 
aaa 
aa* 

• a* 
aa* 

• aa 

• a* 

• •• 

• •• 

• ak 

• •a 
aaa 
aaa 



303 
304 
805 
806 
307 
308 
309 
310 
29 
30 
31 
32 
33 
34 
35 
36 
37 
38 
39 
40 
41 
42 
43 
44 
45 
46 
47 
48 
49 
50 
51 
52 
53 
54 
55 
56 
57 
58 
59 
60 
61 
62 
63 
64 
65 
69 
70 
71 
72 
73 
74 
75 
76 
77 
78 



268 



STATE TRIALS. — Index or Refe&ekce to both Editions. 



sas 



OCTAVO. 

Vol. IL 515 to 518 
579-^82 
583—^87 
588-^91 
592- -596 
597—600 
601—605 
606—609 
610U-614 
615—618 
619—623 
624—628 
629—632 
633—637 
638-:-64.2 
64?3— 646 
647—651 
652''''655 
656—660 
661—664 
665— W9 
670—673 
674—677 
678—681 
682—685 
686—690 
691—694 
695—696 

697 
697—700 
701—702 
703—704 
705—708 

707 

708 
709^710 
711—712 
713—714 
715—716 
717—718 
. 719—720 
721—722 
723—724 
743—744 

745 

746—747 

748—749 

. 750—751 

752—753 

754—756 

. 151—158 

. 759—761 

762—763 

.764 

765—766 

767—768 

769u^772 



••• 
••• 

••• 
••• 

••• 
••• 

••« 
••• 
•■• 
••• 
••» 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••« 
•»• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
•••- 
••• 
••• 
••« 
•f • 



t •• 



••• 



••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••■ 
••• 
••• 



••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
■•• 
•• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 



FOLIO. 

... voL XL p. 79 

80 

81 

82 

83 

84 

85 

86 

87 

88 

89 

90 

91 

92 

93 

94 

95 

96 

97 

98 

99 

100 

101 

102 

103 

104 

105 

106 

... vd. I. 310 
311 
312 
313 

• •• ... i^It 

... vol. VIL 77 

78 
79 
80 
81 
82 
83 
84 
85 
86 
85 
86 
87 
88 
89 
90 
91 
92 
93 
94 
95 

... vol. XI. 106 
107 
108 



... 

•«• 
... 



■ a. 

• a. 
... 
... 
... 

• *• 
.•• 

• r« 

• •• 
*•• 

• *. 
... 

• •• 
... 

• *'• 
*•• 

• •• 



• *. 

• •• 
••• ••• 



... 
... 

... 
... 

• a. 

• *• 
... 

• •• 

• •• 
... 

• a. 

• a. 

• .. 
... 
.aa 
»a. 
... 

■ ••• 

• a. 



• a. 



... 



OCTAVO. 

VoLll. lis to 118 
777—780 
781—784 
785—786 
787—788 
789^790 
791—792 

795—797 
798—799 
800—801 

802 
803—804 
805—806 
807—808 
808—810 
811—812 
813—814 
815-816 
817—819 
820—821 
822—823 
824—825 
826—828 
829^—830 
831—833 
833—884 
835—837 
838—839 
840—841 
842—843 
844 — 846 
847—848 
849—851 
852—853 
854—855 
856—857 
858—859 
860^-862 
883—884 
885-"*-888 

887 

888 
889—891 
892—893 
894—895 

896 
897—900 
899—901 
902—905 
906—912 

911 
912—913 
914—916 
917—918 
919—920 
921-1-922 



... 
••• 
••• 
••• 

• a« 

• •• 



FOLIO. 

••• vo^. XI. p. 109 

••• ••• 116 

••• ••• III 

... vol. L 315 

••• ••• jio 

... ... 91 / 

S18 

319 

320 

321 

322 

S25 

... S24 

. voL X. app. 3 

4 

5 

6 

1 

8 

9 

10 

II 

12 

13 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

... va. Vila 95 

96 
95 
97 
98 
99 
100 

... 101 
102 

... voL XI. I 5 

:::«,u. g 

' 326 

,27 

.^ 
329 



•»• 
••• 
••• 

••• 

«•• 

... 

... 

•• 

•»• 

..• 

.•• 

••• 

•M 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 
.•* 
a«> 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• • • 

• a* 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• ••' 
... 

• •• 

• •• 
aa* 
. • « 

• •• 

• •. 

• •• 

• •• 
... 

• a» 



• a« 



... 
... 
... 

• •• 
.aa 

• a. 
... 
... 
«a» 
.*• 

• at 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 
... 
... 



... 
... 
... 
... 



... 
... 
... 

• •• 

• aa 



... 



.•• 



... 
• •• 



... 

• *• 

••• 4< 

aat 

• •• 



STATE TRIALS. — Index of Reference to both Editions. 



269 



OCTAVO. 


FOLIC 


). 


OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




ro/.II.923 to 924 


••• vo/. ] 


[. f . 330 


Fo/.U. 1043/0 1047 


••• 


HioL L fi 


.115 


925 — 926 


••• •« 


.. 331 


1048 


••• 


••• 


116 


927 — 928 


• •• •! 


.. 332 


1059 


••• 


vol. VII. 


. 101 


929 


• •• •< 


.. 333 


1060 


••• 


• •• 


102 


930 


• •• •< 


.. 334 


1061—1062 


••• 


• •• 


103 


929— 931 


••• •« 


.. 339 


1063—1064 


••• 


• •• 


104 


932 — 933 


• •• •< 


.. 340 


1065—1066 


••• 


• •• 


105 


934 


• •• mt 


. 341 


1067—1068 


••• 


• •• 


106 


935 — 936 


• •• •< 


.. 342 


1069—1071 


••• 


• •• 


107 


935 — 936 


• »• •« 


.. 341 


10721—1073 


••• 


• •• 


108 


937 — 938 


■ •• •< 


.. 342 


1074—1075 


• • « 


• •• 


109 


939 — 940 


• •• «4 


.. 343 


1076—1077 


•«»^ 


• •• 


110 


941 — 942 


• •• •< 


. 344 


1078—1080 


••• 


• •• 


111 


943 


• •• •! 


.. 345 


1081—1082 


••• 


• •• 


112 


944 — 948 


• •• •! 


.. 346 


1083 


••• 


• •• 


113 


947 


• •• •< 


.. 345 


1084—1086 


• !• 


• •• 


114 


948 


• •• •< 


.. 346 


1087—1089 


• • » 


H)oL L 


375 


949 


• •• •< 


.. 347 


1090—1091 


• •• 


••• 


376 


950 — 952 


• • . •! 


.. 348 


1092—1093 


• •• 


••• 


377 


951 


«•• •! 


. 347 


1094—1095 


• •• 


••• 


378 


952 — 953 


• •• •! 


. 349 


1096—1097 


• •• 


••• 


379 


954 _ 956 


• t* •« 


.. 350 


1098 


• •• 


••• 


380 


957 


• •• •• 


• 351 


1099—1101 


• •• 


.•• 


381 


957 


• • • •! 


.. .352 


1102—1103 


* • • • 


••• 


382 


965 -^ 968 


• • •< 


.. 351 


1104—1105 


• •• 


••• 


383 


969 


«■• •! 


.. 352 


1106—1107 


• •• 


••• 


384 


970 _ 971 


• •• •! 


.» 353 


1108—1109 


• •• 


.«• 


385 


972-. 974 


• •• •< 


.. 354 


1110—1111 


• •• 


••• 


386 


975 — 976 


• •• •< 


.. 355 


1112 


*•• 


••• 


387 


977 — 978 


• • *' • « 


.. 356 


1113 


• .• 


••• 


388 


979 — 980 


• •• •< 


.. 357 


VoL IIL 1 


• •• 


wd. VIL 


. 113 


981 — 982 


• •• •! 


.. 358 


I 


• •• 


• • • 


114 


983 -- 984 


• •• •« 


.. 359 


2—3 


• •• 


• •• 


115 


985 — 986 


• ■• •< 


►. 360 


4— 5 


• • • 


• •< 


116 


987 — 988 


■ •• •< 


.• 361 


. 6— 8 


• ••' 


• •• 


117 


989 — 991 


• •• •< 


►. 362 


9—10 


• ••' 


t*« 


118 


992 — 993 


• •• •< 


.. 363 


11—12 


• •• 


• ft* 


119 


994 — 995 


• •• •( 


.. 364 


13—14 


• •• 


• •• 


120 


996 —1000 


• •• •< 


,. 365 


15—17 


• •• 


• •• 


121 


1001 —1003 


• •• •< 


.. 366 


18—19 


• •• 


.•« 


122 


1004 --1005 


• •• •) 


►. 367 


20—21 


• •• 


!•• 


123 


1006 —1007 


• •• •< 


,. 368 


22—24 


• •■ 


• •• 


124 


1008 —1009 


• •• »« 


». 369 


25—26 


• •• 


• •• 


125 


1010—1011 


• • • • 1 


.. 370 


27—28 


• •* 


• •• 


126 


1012 — 1014 


• •• •• 


. 371 


29—30 


• •• 


• •• 


127 


1015 —1016 


• •• •• 


.. 372 


31 


• •• 


• ••• 


128 


1017 


••• •< 


.. 373 


32 


• •• 


• .• 


127 


1018 —1020 


• •• •! 


.. 374 


33 


• •• 


• •• 


128 


1021 —1022 


• •• •< 


. 333 


34—35 


• •• 


.«. 


129 


1023 —1024 


• •• •« 


)• 334? 


36—37 


• •• 


• •• 


130 


1025 —1026 


• •• •< 


.• 335 


38—39 


*•« 


• •• 


131 


1027 —1028 


• •• •! 


.. 336 


40—42 


• • • 


• •• 


132 


1029 —1031 


• •• 9i 


.. 337 


43—44 


• •• 


• •• 


133 


1032 —1034 


••• " •■ 


. 338 


4,5—46 


t»» 


«•• 


134 


1033 —1034 


.•• voLl 


a. 112 


47—48 


• •• 


• •• 


135 


1035 —1038 

^ -- _ 


• ••* 91 


.. 113 


49—51 


• •• 


.«• 


136 


1039 —1042 


• • • #4 


,. 114 


52—53 


• t« 


.•• 


137 



270 



STATE TRIALS.— IvDix ow Revebbitcb to both Editions. 



OCTAVO. 



VoL III. 54 
56 
5S 
61 
63 
65 
68 
70 
72 
75 
77 
79 
81 



84 

86 

89 

91 

93 

95 

98 

100 

102 

105 

107 

109 

111 

lis 

116 
118 
120 
122 
124 
127 
129 
131 
133 
136 
138 
140 
143 
145 
147 
149 
152 
154 
156 
159 
161 
163 
165 
167 
170 
172 
174 
176 



to 55 

— 57 

— 60 

— 62 

— 64 

— 67 

— 69 

— 71 

— 74 

— 76 

— 78 
— . 80 

— 82 
83 
84 

— 85 
~ 88 

— 90 

— 92 

— 94 

— 97 

-99 
01 
04 
06 
08 
10 
12 
15 
17 
J9 
21 
23 
26 
28 
30 
32 
35 
37 
39 
42 
44 
46 
48 
51 
53 
55 
58 
60 
62 
64 
66 
69 
71 
73 
75 
77 



FOUO. 
voL Yll, p. 



••« 

••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
•«• 
.*• 
... 



••• 
•»• 
••• 
••• 
••« 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 

• • • 
.«• 
... 
••• 
••• 
••• 
.•• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
«•• 
••* 
••• 
••• 
••• 
•«• 
»•• 
••• 

• • • 
... 
•-•• 
••• 
••• 
•t« 
••• 
.• • 
••« 



••• 

••• 
••• 
••• 
••« 

• mm 
••• 
••• 

••< 

• •• 
••• 
••• 

• *• 

• •• 
•■• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 
••• 

• »• 
••• 
••• 
••• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 
••• 
••■ 
••• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 
••■ 
••• 

• •• 

• ». 
.•• 
..• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• .• 
««• 

... 

• * • 

• •• 

••• 

• • * 

••• 

• • • 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 



138 

139 
140 
141 
142 
143 
144 
145 
146 
147 
148 
149 
150 
149 
150 
151 
152 
153 
154 
155 
156 
157 
158 
159 
160 
161 

162 
163 
164 
165 
166 
167 
168 
169 
170 
171 
172 
173 
174 
175 
176 
177 
178 
179 
180 
181 
182 
183 
184 
185 
186 
187 
188 
189 
190 
191 
192 



BHV 



OCTAVO. 

Fol. IIL 178 to 180 
181—182 
183—184 
185—186 
187—189 
190—191 
192—193 
194—195 
196—197 
198—200 
201—202 
203—204 
205—206 
207—209 
210—211 
212—213 
214—216 
217—218 
219—220 
221—223 
224—226 
227—228 
229—230 
231—234 
235—236 
237—238 
239—241 
242—243 
244—245 
246—248 
249—250 
251—252 
253—255 
256—257 
258—259 
260—261 
262—264 
265—266 
267—268 
269—271 
272—273 
274—275 
276—278 
279—280 
281—282 
283—285 
286—287 
288—290 
291—293 
294 
295—296 
297—298 
299—301 
302—803 
304*^-305 
306—307 
308—309 



■•» 
••• 

••• 
••■ 
••• 



••• 



• *m 
••• 

• •• 
*•• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• *• 

».• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •« 

• •• 

M* 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• «• 



FOLIC. 

vo^. VIL;;.ig| 
191 

m\ 

196 
197 
.198 
199 
200 
201 
202 
203 

205 
206 
207 
20S 
209 
210 
211 
212 
213 
214 
215 
216 
217 
218 
219 
220 
221 

ooo 

TXL 

22S 
224 
225 
226 
227 
228 
229 
230 
231 
232 
233 
234 
235 
236 
237 
238 
239 
240 
241 



••• 
••• 

••• 
•»• 
••• 
■•• 
••« 
••• 
•»• 
••• 
■•• 
••• 
«.• 
•■• 



••• 
••• 
••• 



«•• 

••• 

•.» 

••• 

••• 

••• 

••• 

••• 

••• 

••• 

••• 

••« 

• •• 

... 

••• 

••• 

••• 

••• 

••• 

••• 

•»• 

••• 

••• 

*•• 

••• 

••• 

••• 

••• 

••• 

••• 

••• 

.*• 

... 

•»• 

••• 

••• 

••• 

••• 

••• 

••• 

••• 

•*• 

••• 

••• 

••• 

••• 

»•• 

••• 

»•• 

••• 

••• 

••• 

••• 

•«• 

•«t 

•«• 



243 
244 
245 
246 
247 
248 
249 



STATE TRIALS.— Ini>»^x of R£FcitSNci& to both Editiosts. 



271 



OCTAVO. 


FOWO. 




OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




Fo/. III. 3)0 <o 312 


• •• 


vol. I., p 


.2^ 


Fo/.UL 466/0 467 


••• 


vol. I. ». 278 


313—314 


••• 


• •• 


251 


468 


••• 


•m 
• •• 


279 


315—317 


••• 


• •• 


252 


469 


••• 


• •• 


280 


318—319 


••• 


••• 


253 


470 


• • » 


• •• 


279 


320—321 


••• 


• •• 


254 


471 


••t 


• •• 


280 


322—323 


••• 


• •• 


255 


472—473 


■«» 


• •• 


281 


324v-326 


•t*. 


• ••' 


256 


474—476 


••• 


• *• 


282 


327—328 


••• 


• •• 


257 


477—478 


••• 


«.. 


283 


329—330 


•«• 


• •• 


258 


479—480 


••• 


• •• 


284 


331 


••• 


• •• 


259 


481 


• • . 


• •• 


285 


332—333 


•t« 


• ■• 


260 


481—484 


••• 


• . • 


286 


373—375 


»•• 


vol. XL 


118 


483 487 


••• 


w)l. XL 


124 


S76— 379 


••• 


••• 


119 


488—491 


•.• 


«.■ 


125 


380—383 


• •» 


••• 


120 


492—495 


••• 


••• 


126 


384—388 


••• - 


*•• \ 


121 


496—500 


••• 


••• 


127 


389—392 


••• 


•V 


122 


501—^04 


•«• 


••• 


128 


393—396 


.•• 


••• 


123 


505—508 


k*to 


••• 


129 


397 


• • • 


• •• 


124 


509—512 


• •• 


• •• 


130 


401—402 


•*• 


vol. L 


387 


513—514 


. • • 


•.• 


131 


403 


••• 


••• 


388 


519—520 


• •• 


voL L 


399 


' 404 


•#• - 


••• 


389 


521—522 


• •• 


•t. 


400 


405—408 


••• 


••• 


390 


523—524 


. •• 


«•• 


401 


409—410 


••• 


••• 


391 


525—527 


• •• 


••• 


402 


411-412 


••• 


••• 


892 


528—529 


• •• 


••• 


403 


413 — 414 


••• 


••• 


393 


530—531 


• •• 


••• 


404 


415—416 


' ••• - 


••• 


394 


532—533 


. • • 


•«• 


405 


417 


••• 


«•• 


395 


534—^35 


• •• 


••• 


406 


418 


»•• - 


••• 


396 


536—537 


• •• 


••• 


407 


419 


»•• 


•t. 


395 


538—540 


• •• 


••• 


408 


420 


••• 


••• 


396 


541—542 


• •• 


••• 


409 


421—422 


a • • 


••• 


397 


543—544 


• •• 


••• 


410 


423—424 


• «• 


••• 


398 


545—546 


• •• 


••• 


411 


425 


• »• 


••• 


399 


547 549 


• *• 


••• 


412 


426 


• •• 


••• 


400 


550—551 


• •• 


••• 


413 


425 


• ••- 


vol. VII, 


• 259 


552—553 


• •• 


••• 


414 


426 


• •• 


»•• 


260 


55^-^555 


• •• 


••• 


415 


427—429 


• •• 


• •• 


261 


. 556—558 


• •• 


••» 


4i6 


430—431 


• •• 


• •• 


262 


559 


• •• 


••• 


4i7 


482—433 


• •• 


• •• 


263 


560-562 


• •• 


•.• 


41 8 


434—435 


• •• 


• •• 


264 


561—562 


• •• 


••• 


4l7 


436—437 


• •• 


• •• 


265 


563 565 


• •• 


••• 


4i9 


438 


• •• 


• •• 


266 


566^567 


• •• 


••• 


420 


489 


• t» 


• •• 


265 


568—569 


• .• 


••• 


421 


440 


• •• 


• •• 


266 


570—571 


• ••' 


••t 


422 


441—442 


• •• 


• •• 


267 


572—574 


• •• 


••• 


423 


443 — 444 


• •• 


• •• 


268 


575—576 


• •« 


••• 


424 


445—446 


• •• 


«•• 


269 


577«-578 


..• 


••• 


425 


447—449 


• •• 


• •• 


270 


579—580 


• •• 


*•• 


426 


450—451 


• »• 


• •» 


271 


581—582 


• •• 


••• 


427 


452 453 


• •• 


• •• 


272 


583—586 


• •• 


••• 


428 


454 


• •• 


• •• 


273 


585—587 


• •• 


vo/. XL 


131 


455 


• •• 


#•• 


274, 


588—592 


• •• 


• • • 


132 


456 


• •• 


• •• 


273 


591— .596 


• •• 


vol^ I. 


429 


457—458 


• •• 


• •• 


274 


597—598 


• •• 


• •• 


430 


459—460 


• *• 


• •• 


275 


599—600 


• •• 


• •• 


431 


461—462 


• •• 


*•• 


276 


601—603 


• •t 


• *• 


432 


463—465 


• t* 


»•• 


277 


604—605 


• ■• 


t«t 


433 



272 STATE TRIALS. — Ivdbx of Refekevce to both Editiovs. 



OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 


OCTAVO. 


FOUO 


• 


Vol.UI.606to€(n 


.. voi. L 


p. 434 


Fo^m. 73510 736 


••• voL L 


p. 491 


608— ^609 


>• ••• 


435 


737—788 


••• ••« 


492 


610—611 


>• ••• 


436 


739—740 


••• ■•■ 


493 


612—614 


»• ••• 


. 437 


741—743 


••• ••• 


494 


615—616 


>• ••• 


438 


. 744—745 


••• ••• 


495 


617—618 


»• •• 4 


439 


746—747 


••• ••• 


496 


619—621 


>• ••• 


440 


74a— 749 


••• ■•« 


497 


62?i— 623 


»• •■< 


441 


750—751 


.•• ••« 


493 


624—626 


»• ••! 


. 442 


752—754 


••• ••• 


499 


627—628 


»• ••• 


443 


755—756 


••• ■•■ 


500 


629—630 


»• ••* 


444 


757—758 


••• ■•« 


501 


631—633 


»• •*< 


445 


759—760 


••■ ■•« 


502 


634—635 


l« ••! 


446 


761—763 


••• ••« 


503 


636—637 


>• ••< 


447 


764—766 


••• ••« 


504 


638-^9 


»• ••« 


448 


825—834 


••• ••• 


505 


640— 642 


!• ••< 


449 


835—836 


••• ••■ 


506 


643—644 


!• •«< 


, 450 


837—839 


••• ••« 


507 


645—646 


19 ••« 


451 


840^-^41 


••• ••• 


508 


647—648 


I* ax 


. 452 


842— «43 


••• ••• 


509 


649—651 


>• ••• 


. 453 


844—846 


••• ••< 


» 510 


652—653 


>• ••< 


> 454 


847—848 


••• ••■ 


511 


65ir-^655 


>• ••< 


. 455 


849—850 


••• ••■ 


512 


65&S57 


>• «•< 


. 456 


851-^852 


••• ••« 


513 


658—660 


»• a*! 


, 457 


853—855 


••• ••« 


514 


661—662 


i# ••< 


. 458 


856—857 


••• ••! 


515 


663—664 


»• ••< 


. 459 


858—860 


••• ••! 


516 


665S67 


• • ••! 


460 


861—862 


••• •»! 


517 


668—669 


>• ••• 


461 


863—864 


••• •.« 


518 


670—671 


»• ••< 


. 462 


865—867 


••• ••• 


. 519 


672—674 


>• ••< 


. 463 


868—869 


••• ••! 


. 520 


675—676 


!• ••< 


464 


870—871 


••• ••• 


521 


677—678 


!•' ••« 


, 465 


872—873 


•a. a.t 


. 522 


679—681 


»• »•< 


466 


874—876 


»m» ••* 


523 


682—683 


• • ••< 


. 467 


877—878 


• ■ • ••■ 


. 524 


684—685 


»• ••< 


468 


879—880 


»»» ••* 


525 


686—687 


»• ••« 


469 


881—882' 


••• ..< 


526 


688—689 


>• •*< 


. 470 


883—885 


•aa •»* 


527 


690—691 


!• ••< 


471 


886—887 


•a« aai 


528 


692—694 


>• ••< 


472 


888—889 


••• a.t 


529 


695—696 


f • • • < 


473 


890—891 


»•• aa« 


530 


697—698 


»« ••< 


474 


892—894 


.a. .at 


531 


699—700 


>• ••! 


, 475 


895—896 


•a. aai 


532 


701—702 


»• ••) 


476 


897—898 


••a aai 


533 


703—704 


»• ••< 


477 


899—900 


• a a at* 


534 


705—706 


>• ••• 


478 


901—903 


••• aat 


535 


707—709 


»• ••< 


479 


904—905 


»»• B.I 


536 


710-712 


>• t*4 


480 


906-907 


»•• ••* 


537 


711—714 


>• ••* 


. 481 


908—909 


f a.t 


538 


715—716 


!• ••! 


482 


910—912 


a.a • • 


539 


717—718 


^« ••« 


, 483 


913—914 


aa« aat 


5U) 


719—720 


»• ••! 


484 


915—916 


.aa .at 


541 


721—722 


I« ••) 


. 485 


917—918 


»•• aat 


542 


723—725 


>• ••« 


. 486 


919—921 


»•» ..« 


543 


726—727 


!•' ••< 


. 487 


922—923 


a. a aat 


544 


728—729 


• • ••« 


. 488 


924—925 


••a a.t 


545 


730—732 


I* *•« 


» 489 


926—927 


a t a • • a 


546 


733—734 


t • •• < 


490 


928—929 


••a •«. 


547 



STATE TRIALS.— IiTDEx oy Reference to both Editions, 273 



OCTAVO. 

rof.III.930^o932 
933—934 

935~ 936 
937_ 938 

942— 943 

944^ 945 

946 

947— 949 

950^ 951 

952— 953 

d54u-. 956 

957— 958 

959— 960 

961— 962 

963— 964 

965—966 

967— 968 

969— 971 

972— 973 

974— 975 

976— 977 

978— 979 

980— 982 

983 — 984 

985— 986 

987— 988 

989— 990 

991— 992 

993— 995 

996— 997 

998— 999 

lOOO— 1001 

1002—1003 

1004—1005 

1006—1007 

1008—1010 

1011—1012 

1013—1014 

1015—1016 

1017—1018 

1019—1020 

1021—1023 

1024—1025 

1026—1027 

1028—1029 

1030—1031 

1032—1034 

1035-^1036 

1037—1038 

1030—1040 

1041—1043 

1044—1045 

1046—1047 

1048—^1050 

1051—1052 

1053—1054 

yoii SIXXIV, 



• •• 



• •• 



••• 



• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• t« 
••• 

• •• 

• •• 

• #• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• t* 

• •• 

• •t 



• •• 

• t* 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 
•t* 

• •• 

• •• 



• •• 
»•• 

• •• 
••t 

♦ft 



• •• 

• •• 

• •• 
••• 

• •• 

• •• 
••• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •* 

• •• 



FOLIO. 

••• voL I. p. 548 
... 549 
... 550 
••• 551 

552 

553 

554 

555 

556 

551 

55S 

559 

560 

561 

562 

563 

564 

565 

566 

567 

568 

569 

... 570 

... 571 

... 572 

... 573 

... 574 

575 

576 

... 577 

... 578 

579 

580 

581 

582 

583 

584 

585 

586 

... 587 

588 

589 

590 

591 

592 

593 

594 

595 

596 

... 597 

... 598 

... 599 

600 

601 

602 

603 

604 



... 



... 

... 
... 
... 

•*. 



... 



... 



... 



... 



... 



... 



... 



... 
••• 



OCTAVO. 

r. III. 1055^0 1056 
1057—1058 
1059—1060 
1061—1063 
1064—1065 
1066—1067 
1068—1069 
1070—1071 
1072—1073 
1074—1076 
1077—1078 
1079—1080 
1081—1082 
1083—1084 
1085—1086 
1087—1088 
1080—1090 
1091—1092 
1093—1095 
1096—1097 
1098—1099 
1100—1101 
1102—1103 
1104—1106 
1107—1108 
1109—1110 
1111—1112 
1113—1114 
111.5—1116 
1117—1119 
1120—1121 
1122—1123 
1124—1125 
1126—1127 
1128—1130 
1131—1132 
1133—1134 
1135—1136 
1137—1138 
1139—1141 
1142—1143 
1144—1145 
1146—1147 
1148—1150 
1151—1152 
1153—1154 
1155—1156 
1157—1158 
1159—1161 
1162—1163 
1164—1165 
1166—1167 
1168—1169 
li70L-ii72 
1173—1174 
1175—1176 
1177—1178 ' 



... 
... 
... 

... 
... 

... 
... 



... 



••• 



... ... 



... 
... 
... 

... 
... 



■ * • 
... 
.*• 
... 
... 
... 
... 
... 
... 
•.. 
... 
... 
... 



... 
... 
... 
... 



... 
... 



FOLIO. 

... DoL I. p» 605 
••• 606 
... 607 
608 
609 
610 
611 
612 
61S 
614 
615 
616 
617 
... 618 
619 
620 
621 
622 
623 
624 
... 625 
626 

... 627 
628 
629 
630 
631 
632 
633 
634 
635 
636 
637 
638 
639 
640 
641 
642 
643 
644 
... 645 
... 646 
... 647 
... 648 
... 649v 
... ' 650 
651 
652 
65S 
654 
655 
656 
... 657 
... 658 
... ... 659 

u. „. 660 
fit . fo 661 



... 

... 

... 

••• ... 

••• ... 

... ... 

... 

.*• ... 

... 

... ... 

... ... 

... ... 

«•• ... 

... 

... 

... 

... 

... 

•t. 

... ... 

... ... 

••• ... 
... ... 

... ... 

••• ... 
... ... 

... 



... 
... 
... 
... 
... 
... 



... 
... 
... 
..« 
... 
... 



274 STATE TRIALS. 


.— lUTDEX OF Re^CACKCE TO BOTH EdITIOHS. 




OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




VAIL 1179/01180 


••• 


vo/.L p 


.662 


Vol. III. 1304 


..• voL h p. 


.71! 


1181—1182 


••» 


••• 


663 


1305 to 1306 


••• 


••• 


72( 


1183—1184 


••• 


«•« 


664 


1315—1316 


••• \ 


potVIL 


. 28i 


1185—1186 


••• 


••• 


665 


JS17 


••• 


•%• 


9Bi 


1187—1189 


ft« 


••• 


666 


1318—1319 


••• 


••• 


28' 


1190—1191 


••• 


••• 


667 


1520—1321 


••• 


n«« 


281 


1192— 1J93 


#•• 


••• 


668 


1522—1324 


••• 


•*• 


28J 


1194—1195 


••# 


#•• 


669 


1325—1326 


••• 


••• 


29( 


1196-1197 


••• 


••• 


670 


1327—1328 


•«• 


•♦• 


29: 


1198—1199 


••• 


«•• 


671 


1529—1331 


•t» 


••• 


29i 


1200—1201 


t»f 


#•• 


672 


1332—1333 


••• 


^^» 


29J 


1202—1204 


••• 


«•• 


673 


1334—1335 


♦•• 


M» 


29^ 


1205—1206 


••• 


«•• 


674 


1336—1338 


••• 


••• 


29i 


1207-1208 


••• 


••• 


675 


1339—1340 


••• 


••• 


29( 


I209u,l2l0 


• ■• 


•»t 


676 


1341—1342 


••• 


•%• 


291 


1211—1213 


• • • 


••• 


677 


1343—1345 


••• 


••• 


9» 


1214—1215 


••• 


••• 


678 


1346—1347 


•«• 


♦•• 


29J 


1216— I2l7 


••• 


••• 


679 


1348—1349 


••• 


••• 


3a 


1218—1219 


••• 


••• 


680 


1350—1351 


••• 


••• 


301 


1220—1222 


••• 


••• 


681 


1352—1354 


••• 


••• 


302 


1223—1224 


*•• 


•■• 


682 


1355—1356 


■•• 


••• 


302 


1225—1226 


••• 


^•» 


683 


1357—1358 


••• 


•t« 


304 


1227—1228 


••• 


«•• 


684 


1359—1360 


• •• 


••• 


30f 


1229—1230 


••• 


«•• 


685 


1361—1363 


• • • 


••• 


306 


1231—1232 


#•• 


M« 


686 


1364—1365 


••• 


••• 


30^ 


1233—1235 


••• 


• •• 


687 


1366—1367 


••• 


••• 


30£ 


1236—1237 


•tf 


• •• 


688 


1368 


••• 


••• 


30S 


1238— 1?39 


••• 


••< 


689 


1368 


•»• 


•♦• 


31C 


1240—1241 


••• 


• •• 


690 


1369 


••• 


m/. I. 


7lfl 


1242—1243 


••• 


• t« 


691 


1370 


••• 


••« 


72C 


1244—1245 


••• 


•«• 


692 


1371—1373 


••• 


••• 


721 


1246—1248 


• • • 


••• 


693 


1374—1376 


•%• 


w* 


722 


1249—1250 


• • • 


••• 


694 


1381—1386 


m%m 


••• 


723 


1251—1252 


••• 


Mf 


695 


1387—1388 


••• 


• •• 


724 


1253—1254 


M« 


«•• 


696 


1389—1390 


«•• 


••• 


725 


1256—1257 


ft* 


«•• 


697 


1391—1392 


••• 


••• 


726 


1258—1260 


• •• 


■ •• 


698 


1393—1394 


«M 


• «• 


727 


1261—1262 


• •• 


• •• 


699 


1395—1397 


^•» 


• •• 


728 


1263—1264 


«•• 


• •» 


700 


1398—1399 


•••. 


• •• 


729 


1265—1266 


«•• 


• •t 


701 


1400— 1401 


m%* 


•*• 


730 


1267—1268 


• •• 


«•• 


702 


1402 - 1403 


• It 


•«• 


781 


1269—1270 


<•• 


f»« 


703 


1404—1405 


• M 


M* 


732 


1271—1272 


«•• 


••a 


704 


1406—1407 


•o 


• «. 


733 


1273—1274 


••^ 


• •• 


705 


1408—1410 


•#• 


• M 


734 


1275—1276 


• •• 


••• 


706 


1411—1312 


• M 


•%• 


735 


1277—1279 


• •« 


••<• 


707 


1413—1417 


ft* 


• •• 


736 


1280—1281 


• •• 


#•• 


708 


1418—1419 


*<• 


f*« 


737 


1282—1283 


• •• 


• •• 


709 


1420—1422 


•«• 


*•• 


733 


1284—1285 


••/» 


•V 


710 


1423—1424 


M? 


• •• 


739 


1286—1287 


**.* 


•V 


711 


1425—1426 


••? 


••« 


740, 


1288—1290 • 


tt» 


• •• 


712 


1427—1428 


•«• 


• •• 


741 


1291—1292 


«M 


•«• 


713 


1429—1430 


• •• 


«t« 


TA 


1293—1294 


• •• 


**.* 


714 


1431—1432 


f*« 


^— 


7« 


1295—1296 


*V 


*%* 


715 


1433—1435 


tf% 


#M 


74* 


31297-1298 


• »• 


»•• 


716 


1436—1437 


f«« 


fM 


745 


1299~1300 


• •* 


*•• 


717. 


1438—1439 


tt« 


fM 


746 


isoii^isos 


m 


!.• 


7» 


tm^mi 


m 


fit 


74T 



STATC TUlAtS.-^tNDfix of ll£Ftt>.£yee to to¥R SdPHoyi. ilfi 



OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




OCTAVO. 


■■■ii'H 1 

FOLIO. 




r. III. 1442^0 1444* 


••t 


vo/. I. p. 748 


Vol. IV. 243 to 244 


... 


vol, I. p 


.792 


1445—1446 


••• 




749 


245—247 


... 




798 


1447—1449 


••• 




750 


248—249 


..• 


• •• 


794 


U50—l4fSl 


••• 




751 


250—251 


... 


»•• 


795 


1452—1453 


••• 




752 


252—253 


..« 


a.. 


796 


1454—1458 


•■• 




753 


25i^266 


*•• 


• •. 


797 


1459—1461 


•t« 




754 


257—258 


» • • 


••• 


798 


1462—1463 


••« 




755 


259—260 


•.• 


• •• 


799 


1464—1466 


••• 




756 


261—262 


•t« 


• .. 


800 


1467—1468 


••• 




757 


263—265 


..• 


... 


801 


1469—1471 


••• 




758 


266—267 


••• 


• •• 


802 


1472—1473 


••• 




759 


268—269 


•*• 


• •• 


803 


1474—1475 


••• 




760 


270—272 


••• 


••• 


804 


1476—1512 


■•• 


' 


761 


273—274 


•.• 


... 


805 


1513—1518 


••• 




762 


275—276 


•*• 


«»• 


806 


1521—1522 


••• 




763 


277—278 


••• 


• •• 


807 


1523— '1526 


••• 




764 


279—281 


•.• 


• *• 


808 


1527 


••• 




765 


282—283 


••• 


• •• 


809 


1528 


••• 




766 


284—286 


•.• 


• .• 


810 


Vol. IV. 


W. VII. 




287—288 


••• 


»•• 


811 


1— 2 


• •• 




309 


289—290 


•.• 


• . • 


812 


3— 4 


• •« 




310 


291—292 


•.• 


• •• 


813 


5— 6 


• •• 




311 


^3—295 


».• 


..• 


814 


7— 8 


••• 




312 




••• 


• •• 


815 


9— 10 


• •• 




313 


297--298 


••• 


• •* 


816 


11— 12 


••* 




314 


297—298 


• • • 


*•• 


815 


13— 15 


• •• 




315 


299 


*•* 


• .• 


816 


16— 17 


• • . 




316 


300—801 


•.• 


• .• 


817 


18 


• •• 




317 


802—804 


••• 


• •• 


818 


18 


• •• 




318 


305—906 


•«• 


• a. 


819 


185 


«at 


W.I. 


765 


807—808 


•»• 


• •• 


820 


186 


• •• 




766 


809— «10 


••• 


• •• 


821 


1S7_ 188 


• . • 




767 


311—818 


••• 


• •• 


822 


I89t— 190 


• •• 




768 


814 


••• 


... 


823 


191— 192 


t«« 




769 


315—816 


•.• 


«•• 


824 


193— 194 


• «• 




770 


315 


••• 


• •• 


823 


195—^ 197 


• •• 




771 


316—317 


.•• 


• «• 


824 


198— 199 


»•• 




772 


318—319 


•.• 


• •• 


825 


^OO— 201 


• •• 




773 


320—321 


•.• 


• •• 


826 


£02_fi03 


• •• 




774 


322—824 


••• 


• •• 


827 


«04— 206 


• •• 




775 


325—1326 


••• 


«•• 


828 


307— 208 


• •• 




776 


327—828 


••• 


• •• 


829 


209— 210 


• •• 




777 


329—830 


••• 


• •• 


830 


211— 212 


• •• 




778 


331—832 


••» 


• .• 


831 


^13— 215 


• •• 




779 


S33^^$i! 


^•.« 


• •• 


832 


216— 217 


• •• 




780 


335-^37 


••• 


• .. 


833 


218— ^19 


• •■ 




781 


338-889 


••• 


• •• 


834 


220— 222 


• •• 




782 


34a--341 


••• 


• •• 


835 


223—224 


• «• 




783 


342—843 


••• 


• •• 


836 


^5—226 


• •• 




784 


344—^45 


••• 


• •• 


837 


227— 229 


• •• 




785 


S46— 847 


••• 


• •• 


838 


280— 231 


• •• 




786 


348—850 


••• 


fft 


839 


2S2— 233 


• •• 




787 


351-852 


••• 


••• 


840 


284— 285 


••• 




788 


353-354 


•t* 


• •• 


841 


286-^ 2^8 


•*• 




789 


356—357 


••• 


• ft 


842 


239— 240 


• •• 




790 


358—359 


9*i 


••• 


843 


841— 8f 2 


«•« 




791 


360—861 


§«• 


if* 


844 



T 2 



276 STATE TRIALS.-^Index of Rcferekce to both Editioks. 



OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




r<rf. IV. 362 to S6S 


.• vo/. I. p 


.845 


To/. IV. 49510 497 


••• voL L 1 


u9a2 


364--S65 


*» •• • 


846 


498—499 


••• 


• •• 


903 


366—368 


>• ••• 


847 


500—501 


••• 


• •• 


9(H 


369—370 


>• ••• 


848 


502—503 


••• 


•••. 


905 


371—372 


>• ••• 


849 


504^-506 


••• 


« ff • 


906 


375^315 


t9 m • • 


850 


507—508 


••• 


••• 


907 


376—377 


ra ••• 


851 


509—510 


••• 


•••. 


908 


37g_379 


!• ••• 


852 


511— v5l3 


•«• 


• •• 


909 


380—381 


!• ••• 


853 


514—515 


•t« 


•••. 


910 


382—384 


»• •*• 


854 


516—517 


••• 


• •• 


911 


385—386 


»• ••• 


855 


518—519 


«•• 


• •• 


912 


387—388 


»• ••• 


856 


520—522 


••• 


• •• 


913 


389—391 


I* ••• 


857 


523— 52^4 


•t* 


• •• 


914 


392—393 


!• »•» 


858 


525—^26 


••• 


• t« 


915 


394j— 395 


>• ••• 


859 


527—528 


••• 


• •• 


916 


396—397 


!• ••■ 


860 


529—531 


••« 


• •• 


917 


39o ' ' IfUU •! 


!• •*• 


861 


532—533 


••• 


M* 


918 


401—402 


*» •• • 


862 


534t-^53B 


•*•. 


• •• 


919 


403— i04» 


»• ••• 


863 


536—531 


••• 


• •• 


920 


405—406 


!• ••• 


864 


538—540 


••• 


• •• 


921 


407—409 


»• ••• 


865 


541—542 


••• 


• •• 


922 


410U-411 


(• ••• 


866 


543—^44 


••• 


••• 


923 


412—413 


I* ••• 


867 


545—546 


••• 


• t« 


924 


414—416 


• • ••• 


868 


547—549 


••• 


• •• 


925 


417—418 


• • • * • 


869 


550—551 


••• 


• •• 


926 


419— 4!iO 


»• ••• 


870 


552—553 


••• 


#•• 


927 


421—422 


I* ••• 


871 


554t—555 


••• 


• •• 


928 


423—425 


>• ••• 


872 


556—558 


••• 


.4f 


929 


426—427 .. 


»• ••• 


873 


559—560 


• * • 


••• ' 


930 


428—429 


»« ••• 


874 


561—562 


t«« 


• •• 


931 


^ 430—431 


!• ••• 


875 


563—565 


•«• 


• •• 


932 


432—434 


• • ••• 


876 


566—567 


••• 


«•• 


933 


435—439 


»• ••• 


877 


568—569 


••• 


• #• 


934 


440—441 


»• ••• 


878 


570—571 


••• 


• •• 


935 


442—444 


t» ••• 


879. 


572-^74 


••• • 


• •f 


936 




»• ••• 


880 


575—576 


••• 


«•• 


9S7 


447—448 


*• ••• 


881 


577—578 


••• 


• •• 


93$ 


449--451 


It »•• 


882 


579^-580 


••• 


t** 


939 


452—453 


I* •!• 


SS3 


581—582 


••• 


• •• 


940 


454—455 


»• ••• 


884 


583—584 


••• 


• •• 


941 


456—457 


• • ••• 


885 


585—586 


••• 


• t« 


942 


458--460 


>• ••• 


886 


587—589 


••• 


• •• 


9*3 


461—462 


• • ••• 


887 


590—591 


••• 


• •• 


944 


\B03"' ™*Otd •( 


>• ••• 


888 


592—593 


••• 


• •< 


945 


465—466 


!• ••• 


889 


594—595 


•*• 


• t« 


946 


467— *69 


!• ••• 


890 


596—598 


••• 


• •• 


947 


470—471 


>• ••» 


891 


599—601 


••• 


• •• 


948 


472—473 


• • Wt* 


892 


602 


••« 


• •t 


949 


474-476 


>• ••• 


893 


603 


••• 


• •t 


950 


477_478 


>• •*• 


894 


653—662 


••• 


• t« 


949 


479—480 


• • ••• 


895 


663-^65 


••• 


• •f 


950 


481-^83 


•• •«• 


896 


666—667 


••• 


•t« 


951 


484 — 485 


!• ••» 


897 


668—670 


•«• 


••• 


952 


486—487 


»• ••• 


898 


671—672 


••• 


• t« 


9SS 


488—490 


»• ••• 


899 


673—674 


•«• 


• •• 


954 


491—492 


• • ••• 


900 


^75^676 


• 4* 


#H» 


955 


i9$^^ 


»t .••« 


901 


. 677-678 


tf« 


fit 


9S6 



STATE TRIALS.«-*-Iki>ss: op RfijfiREKCE to both Edition^. 277 



OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




F0/.IV. 679 to 681 


• •4 


vol, I. p 


.957 


Fo/. IV- 957 to 958 


... vo^VII. 


p. 320 


682—683 


• •• 


• •• 


958 


989— 994 


• •a 


'ooLL 


985 


684—685 


• •• 


• •t 


959 


995 


• •• 


••• 


986 


esG'-^si 


• ••' 


• •• 


960 


995— 996 


• t. 


••• 


987 


GS8 


• •«' 


a>* 


961 


997— 999 


• •• 


••• 


988 


689—690 


• •• 


• •• 


962 


1000—1001 


• •• 


••• 


989 


702—703 


• •» 


vo;.VlII.341 1 


1002—1003 


■ • « 


••• 


990 


704 


• •■ 


••• 


342 


1004—1005 


• »• 


••• 


991 


705—706 


• •• 


• •• 


343 


1006—1008 


• •• 


••• 


992 


707—708 


• •• 


• •• 


344 


1009—1010 


• •• 


••• 


993 


709—711 


• •• 


• •• 


345 


1011—1012 


• •• 


•*• 


994 


712—713 


•*• 


• •• 


346 


1013—1014 


• •• 


••• 


995 


714--71S 


• •• 


• •t 


347 


1015—1017 


• •• 


••• 


996 


716—717 


•«• 


• •• 


348 


1018—1019 


• •• 


••0 


997 


718—720 


• •^ 


• •• 


349 


1020—1021 


• •• 


••• 


998 


721—722 


• •• 


• •« 


350 


1022—1024 


• •• 


••• 


999 


723—724 


••• 


• ••' 


351 


1025—1026 


• •• 


••• 


1000 


725—726 


••• 


• ••' 


352 


1027—1030 


• •• 


••• 


1002 


727—728 


• •• 


• ••' 


353 


1031—1033 


• •• 


••• 


1003 


729—731 


• •• 


• •• 


354 


1034—1035 


• •• 


»•• 


1004 


732—733 


• •• 


• •• 


355 


1036—1037 


• •• 


••• 


1005 


734—735 


• •• 


• •• 


356 


1038—1040 


••• 


••• 


1006 


73&— 737 


• •• 


• •• 


357 


1041—1042 


• •• 


••• 


1007 


738—739 


••• 


• •• 


358 


1043—1044 


• •• 


••• 


1008 


740—743 


• ••' 


• •• 


359 


1045_1051 


• •• 


•t« 


1009 


744—745 


• •• 


• •• 


360 


1052—1053 


• •t 


•t« 


lOiO 


746—747 


• •• 


• •• 


361 


1054—1056 


* 

• •• 


••• 


10] 1 


748—749 


• •• 


• •• 


362 


1057—1058 


• •• 


••• 


1012 


750—751 


• •• 


• 99 


363 


1059—1060 


• •• 


••• 


1013 


752—754 


• •• 


• •• 


364 


1061—1062 


• •• 


••• 


1014 


767—768 


• •• 


voL I. 


961 


1063—1064 


• •• 


••• 


1015 


769—770 


• •• 


••• 


962 


1065—1067 


• t« 


••• 


1016 


771—772 


• •• 


••• 


963 


1068—1069 


• •• 


••• 


1017 


773—774 


• •• 


••• 


964 


1070-1071 


• •• 


••• 


1018 


775^776 


• •• 


«•• 


965 


1072—1074 


• •• 


••• 


1019 


777—778 


• •• 


V* 


966 


1075—1078 


• •■ 


••• 


1020 


779 


• •• 


»•• 


967 


1079—1080 


• »• 


••• 


1021 


780L-.782 


• •• 


••• 


968 


1081—1083 


• •t 


••• 


1022 


783—784 


• •• 


••• 


969 


1084—1091 


• •• 


••• 


1023 


785—786 


• •• 


••• 


970 


1092—1093 


• •• 


••• 


1024 


787—789 


• •• 


••• 


971 


1094—1095 


• •• 


••• 


1025 


790—791 


• •• 


••« 


972 


1096—1097 


• •• 


•.• 


1026 


792—793 


• •• 


••• 


973 


1098—1099 


• t« 


••• 


1027 


794—797 


• •• 


••• 


974 


llOO— 1101 


• •• 


••• 


1028 


798 


• •• 


••• 


975 


1102—1104 


• •• 


•«• 


1029 


799 


• •• 


••• 


976 


1105—1106 


• •• 


•• * 


1030 


800—802 


• •• 


••• ^ 


977 


1107—1108 


• a* 


••• 


1031 


803—804 


• •• 


••• 


978 


llOa— 1110 


at* 


•t* 


1032 


805—807 


■ •• 


••• 


980 


1111-11^-2 


• .• 


«•• 


1033 


808 


• •• 


•■• 


981 


1113—1114 


• •• 


••• 


1034 


809—811 


• •• 


•t* 


982 


1115—1116 


• •• 


••• 


1035 


812 


• •• 


••• 


983 


1117—1119 


• • • 


••• 


1036 


813—815 


• *• 


••• 


984 


1120—1121 


• •• 


••• 


1037 


816—818 


• •• 


••• 


985 


1122—1123 


• •• 


••» 


1038 


951—952 


• •• 


vol. VII. 


. 317 


1124—1125 


«• 


••• 


1039 


953—954 


• •• 


• •• 


318 


1126—1127 


• •• 


• 


1040 


955—956 


• •• 


• •• 


319 


1128—1133 


• 00 


.•• 


1041 



!l7d STATE TRIALSv-^lKMjt o» R&vtftivoS to Mtfi Bl^lf I61ff « 



OCTAVO. 

11S8 
1139—114.4* 
1155 
1156—1157 
1158—1159 
1160—1161 
1162—1164* 
1165—1166 
1167—1168 
1169—1170 
1171—1172 
1173—1175 
1176—1177 
1178—1179 
1180-H81 
1182—1183 
1184—1186 
11S7— 1188 
1189—1190 
1191—1192 
1193 
1194* 
1249 
1^50—1251 
1252—1263 
1264—1266 
1267 
1268—1269 
1269—1270 
1271—1272 
1273—1274 
1275—1276 
1277—1279 
1280—1281 
1282—1283 
1284—1285 
1286—1288 
1289—1290 
1291—1292 
1293—1294 
1295—1296 
1297—1299 
1300—1301 
1302—1303 
1304—1305 
1306—1308 
1309—1510 
1311— 1312 
1313—1314 
1315—1316 
1317—1318 
1319—1321 
1322—1323 
1324—1326 
1327—1328 
1329—1330 



FOLIO, 

••• vai. l.p. 1042 
«o 1043 

t*» 1U44 

•4. vd. II. 1 

... ^ 

••« 3 

•0m 4 

••• 5 

••• 6 

•#• 7 

••» o 

10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
••• 15 
*•• 16 

17 
18 
19 
20 
.♦ vof. VII. 319 
320 
321 
322 
323 
324 
19 
*«• ... 20 

#•• «.« Ju\ 

«.. *.. 22 

«rt« •«•' ^O 

•«t t.« 24 

• . • • • • ^i} 

••• .•• 26 

•»• ••• ^8 

«•. *.. 29 

••• ••• 30 

t«« .«• 31 

*•• *•• UiU 

•«« ««• 33 

*«• •<• 34 

• • . t « . 35 

«•« •*• 36 

•i* •«• 37 

»*• ... 38 

39 

••• ••• 40 

••. .«• 41 

• •• ... TCm 

... ••. 43 

... «•• 44 

•*• *•• 45 

••• ••• 4\> 



»0m 



• 4» 



• •• 

• *« 

• •• 

• •• 

••• 
W09 

•90 

• tB 
•>•■ 
«•• 
••• 
#.« 
*•* 

• •if 
#•« 

• •« 

• t« 

• •« 
•• 
«.» 

• f • 

• •• 

• •• 
«•• 



• •• 
••• 

• •• 

• .•' 



»., vo/<IL 



SBsqBBa 



OCTAVO. 

r. IV- 1331*0 1332 
1333—1334 
1335—1337 
1338—1339 
1340—1341 
1342—1343 
1844^1345 
1346—1348 
1349—1850 
1351—1352 
1S53— 1354 
1355—1856 
1357—1859 
1360—1361 
1362—1363 
1864—1365 
1866—1867 
1S68— 1869 
1370—1372 
1373—1374 
1375—1376 
1377—1378 
1379—1380 
1381—1383 
1^84—1385 
1386—1887 
1888—1889 
1390—1391 
1392—1394 
1395—1396 
1397—1398 
1399—1401 
1402—1403 
1404—1406 
Voi. V. 1 

2 
3— 4 
5— 7 
8— 9 
10— 11 
12— 13 
14— 15 
16— 17 
18— 19 
20— 21 
22— 24 
25— 26 
27— 28 
29— 30 
31-- 32 
33— 34 
35— 36 
37— 39 
40— 42 
43— 47 
48— 49 
50— 51 



FOLIO. 

<«• vol. IL p. 47 

48 

49 

50 

51 

52 

53 

54 

55 

56 

57 

58 

59 

60 

61 

62 

63 

64 

65 

66 

67 

68 

69 

70 

71 

72 

73 

74 

75 

76 

77 

78 

79 

80 

..- vol. VII. 323 

324 

325 
326 
327 
328 
329 
330 
331 
332 
3SS 
334 
335 
336 
337 
3SS 
339 
340 
341 
342 

...vol. II II 

84 

8$ 



a4« 

• i« 

•«• 
««. 
*•• 
*•« 

*•• 

• •* 

• •r 
.»• 
t«* 

• •« 

• •• 

• «• 
*«• 

• «• 

• •• 
t«« 

• •• 

• *• 

• •• 

• •• 
««« 
*•• 
«•• 

• •• 
«•• 
«•• 
.«• 
.•• 



• •• 
.«• 

«•• 

• «• 
.«« 
f.« 

• •• 
4.. 

• t. 

• •• 
m.V 
«»• 
.«« 

• *• 

• •« 

... 



*•« 

«•• 

• •• 

• *. 

• •• 

... 

• •• 

• •• 
... 
.*. 

• •• 
... 

• •. 

• •. 

• •• 
*•• 

• •• 

• •• 
... 
... 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 
... 

• •. 

• •• 

• •• 

• t. 
.•• 

• •• 
t«« 
*•• 



»•• 

• •• 
!•• 
»•• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 
••• 
*•• 

• •• 
.*• 
••• 

• •t 
»•• 
«.. 






• •• 



STATE TRIAL8/«**lHMK ot Ri majkcb to aotH Ei>itwk$; 279 



OCTAVO. 


FOUO. 


mmess^ 


OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 


' — - 


r(rf.y. 62 to 53 


«•• 


vol. II. 


p. 86 


voi.v. nsiQiie 


%„\ 


DOI. lit P 


.14S 


54— 55 


•tt 


• •« 


87 


177—178 


• •• 


■ •« 


144 


56-, 57 


••• 


t*. 


88 


179—180 


• •• 


•** 


145 


58— 59 


••a 


• •• 


89 


181—183 


• •• 


•t* 


146 


60— 62 


••• 


• •• 


90 


184—185 


• •» 


•t» 


147 


63-« 64 


• •m 


**• 


91 


186—187 


• t« 


•t* 


148 


65— 66 


• •• 


»•• 


92 


188—189 


«•» 


• 


149 


67—68 


««• 


•*• 


93 


190—192 


• tt 


•t* 


150 


69-* 70 


• •• 


• •• 


94 


193—194? 


•tt 


• •• 


151 


71—72 


• •• 


f.t 


95 


195— J96 


• •♦ 


•t* 


152 


73— 74 


• •• 


fit 


96 


197—198 


.•* 


••« 


153 


75^.77 


■•• 


?•• 


97 


199—200 


• •♦ 


•t* 


154 


78-, 79 


• «• 


• •• 


98 


201—202 


• t» 


••• 


155 


80— 81 


• •• 


«•• 


99 


203—205 


♦ •• 


*t* 


156 


82— 83 


••• 


»•• 


100 


206—207 


»»» 


••• 


157 


84-* 85 


•*• 


«•• 


101 


208—209 


«•• 


••• 


158 


86— 87 


•«• 


»t» 


102 


210—211 


t.» 


••• 


159 


88--. 89 


• t» 


»•• 


103 


212—213 


«•'• 


«•• 


160 


90-^ 91 


• *• 


• •• 


104 


214—215 


••« 


••* 


161 


92— 94 


• «• 


• •• 


105 


216—217 


«•• 


«•• 


162 


95— 96 


»t» 


• t. 


106 


218—220 


tt* 


•t« 


16S 


97— 98 


• •• 


••t 


107 


221—222 


••• 


«•• 


164 


99^100 


• •• 


•t. 


108 


228—224 


• •• 


*•* 


165 


101—102 


• •• 


• •t 


109 


225—226 


• a. 


•t« 


166 


lOS— 104 


••• 


t.« 


110 


227—288 


• •• 


*t« 


167 


105—106 


*•• 


• •• 


111 


2291—231 


• tt 


•tt 


168 


107—109 


••• 


• #• 


112 


232—233 


• t* 


•*• 


169 


110—111 


*«• 


• •• 


113 


234—235 


• •• 


•tt 


17d 


112—113 


■ •• 


• •t 


114 


236—237 


• t» 


••• 


171 


114—115 


■t« 


«*• 


115 


238—240 


• tt 


tt* 


172 


116—117 


••• 


••t 


116 


241—242 


«t* 


•t* 


17$ 


118—119 


• •• 


• •• 


117 


243—244 


• «• 


w.. 


174 


1201-121 


• •• 


• •• 


118 


245—246 


• •• 


•tt 


175 


122—124 


••• 


••• 


119 


247—248 


• t» 


«•• 


176 


125—126 


• •• 


• tt 


120 


249—251 


• •• 


*t* 


177 


127—128 


• •• 


• tt 


121 


252—253 


• •• 


*•• 


178 


129—130 


• •• 


• ta 


122 


254—255 


• t* 


•t. 


179 


131—132 


••• 


• t* 


123 


256—258 


• •• 


*.t 


180 


133—134 


• •• 


t»« 


124 


259—260 


• •t 


• •t 


181 


135-rl37 


• •• 


t.t 


125 


261—262 


• •• 


• t« 


182 


138—139 


• •• 


fe.t 


126 


.263 


t«» 


• •• 


183 


140—141 


••• 


• t» 


127 


264—266 


• •• 


• tt 


184 


142—143 


• •• 


• tt 


128 


267—268 


ttt 


• •• 


183 


144—145 


• •• 


• •• 


129 


269—270 


• •• 


• t* 


184 


146—148 


• •• 


• •• 


130 


271-:272 


• •• 


• •t 


185 


149—150 


• •• 


• •• 


131 


273-274 


• •• 


• •• 


186 


151--152 


• t* 


• •• 


132 


275—276 


• •• 


• .t 


187 


153-rl54 


• •• 


• *• 


133 


277—278 


tt^ 


• •t 


188 


155—156 


• •• 


ttt 


134 


279-t280 


• t» 


t.t 


189 


157—159 


•*• 


• •• 


135 


281-283 


• •• 


«•• 


190 


160^161 


• •• 


• *• 


136 


284—285 


• t* ■ 


• •• 


191 


162—163 


• ••• 


t.t 


137 


286—287 


• •» 


t«* 


192 


164—165 


••• 


• t« 


138 


288—289 


tt* 


• •• 


193 


-166—167 


• •• 


*•• 


139 


290-,291 


• •• 


• •• 


194 


168-rJ69 


• •• 


• at 


140 


292—294 


tt* 


• •t 


195 


170—172 


• •• 


• t« 


141 


334—335 


ttt 


vol. VII. 


343 


173—1.74 


• *• 


• tt 


142 


336-t8** 


• •• 


• •t 


344 



380 STATE TRIALS.*«^Iil0SX of Rekeevce to both Editions. 



OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




V0I.V. d45toS46 


••• 


oo/.VILfi.345 


VoLV. 54Qto5^3 


••• 


voLU. 


p. 218 


347—348 


••• 


••• 


346 


544—545 


••• 


••• 


219 


549—351 


••• 


••• 


347 


546—547 


••• 


• •• 


220 


552-^53 


••• 


••• 


348 


548—549 


••• 


■ •• 


221 


364—355 


••• 


••• 




550-^51 


••• 


• •• 


222 


356-^58 


••• 


••• 


350 


552-^53 


••• 


••• 


22s 


359—360 


••• 


••• 


351 


5.54—555 


••• 


• .• 


224 


361—362 


•«» 


••• 


352 


556-^557 


••• 


t.« 


225 


363 


••• 


••• 


353 


558—559 


••• 


••« 


£iOC 

Zjsb 


364—366 


■•• 


••• 


354 


56a-.561 


••• 


••• 


227 


365—370 


••• 


vol. IL 


195 


562-^4 


•*. 


• •• 


228 


371 


••• 


••• 


196 


565^^^366 


••• 


••• 


229 


372--373 


•t* 


••• 


197 


567'''568 


••• 


••• 


280 


374—376 


••• 


••• 


198 


569—570 


••• 


.«• 


231 


377-678 


••• 


•t* 


199 


571—572 


••• 


••t 


232 


379L-380 


••• 


••• 


200 


573—574 


••• 


••• 


233 


381.^82 


••• 


»•• 


201 


57^—576 


••• 


••• 


234 


383—384 


••• 


••• 


202 


577—578 


••• 


••• 


235 


885-386 


••• 


••• 


203 


579--^81 


•«• 


• •• 


236 


387—388 


••• 


••• 


204 


582—583 


••• 


• •• 


287 


389L-390 


••• 


■t« 


205 


63^.,^S5 


••• 


•t« 


238 


391—392 


••• 


••■ 


206 


586—587 


•.• 


• •• 


239 


393 394^ 


••• 


••• 


207 


688—589 


■•• 


• •. 


240 


395—396 


••• 


••• 


208 


590—591 


••• 


• •• 


241 


397—399 


••• 


••• 


209 


592—593 


••• 


«•• 


242 


400—401 


••• 


•t* 


210 


594—596 


••• 


tt« 


243 


402 


••• 


••• 


211 


597—598 


•t* 


••• 


244 


403-ii^405 


•t» 


••• 


212 


599—600 


••• 


• •• 


245 


407 


••• 


«rf.VTT 


.353 


601-^602 


••• 


ttt 


246 


408 


••• 


■ •• 


354 


603— j604 


••• 


.•• 


247 


409--^10 


•t» 


»•• 


S55 


605—606 


••• 


••• 


248 


411—412 


••• 


• •• 


356 


607—608 


••• 


• «. 


249 


413—414 


••• 


• •• 


357 


609-611 


••• 


• •• 


250 


415—417 


••• 


••• 


358 


612—613 


••• 


• •• 


251 


418—419 


••• 


• •• 


359 


614—615 


••• 


... 


252 


420—421 


«•• 


t«« 


360 


616—617 


••• 


• •• 


253 


422—423 


••• 


• •• 


361 


618—619 


••• 


«•• 


254 


424-.425 


••« 


••t 


362 


620—621 


• • • 


• •• 


255 


426—428 


•f • 


• »• 


363 


622—623 


••• 


• •t 


256 


429—430 


••• 


• •• 


364 


624—625 


••• 


• •• 


2.57 


4S1— 432 


••• 


• •• 


365 


626—628 


•«• 


• •• 


258 


433—435 


••• 


• •• 


366 


629 


••• 


• •• 


259 


436—437 


••• 


• •• 


367 


630 


••. 


••• 


260 


438—439 


••• 


• •• 


368 


767—772 




• •• 


259 


440—441 


••• 


t«t 


369 


773—774 


••• 


• •• 


260 


442—444 


• 


• a. 


370 


775—776 


t«. 


• •. 


261 


445—447 


•tt 


voL II. 


81 


777—778 


•*. 


• t« 


262 


448--^50 


••• 


••• 


82 


779—780 


••• 


• »• 


263 


517—519 


••• 


••• 


211 


781—784 


••• 


• •• 


264 


520 


••• 


«•• 


211 


801—804 


••. 


• •• 


265 


521—522 


■•• 


•»• 


213 


805—806 


••. 


••• 


9!^ 


'523—524 


••• 


•t« 


214 


807—808 


■•• 


• »• 


267 


525—527 


••• 


t.t 


215 


809—810 


•t. 


• •• 


268 


528—529 


••• 


••• 


216 


811—812 


•#• 


• •• 


269 


530 


»•• 


••• 


217 


813—814 


••• 


••• 


270 


531 


••• 


•§* 


218 


815—816 


••* 


t«« 


271 


539-.^l 


•M 


••t 


217 


817—820 


4t« 


• »• 


^% 





STATE TRIALS 


.«*>-IkDBX 01" RSfSRBKCli TO OSOTR EdXTIOKS; 




281 


- 


OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




Yd. 


V. page 821 


••• y 


0O/» 11. f 


.273 


Fo/.V. 1016/0 1017 


,.,voi.\\.f.a,\6 




822/0 823 


%•• 


•t« 


274 


1018—1019 


• tt 


t*« 


317 




824—825 


•tt 


•t« 


275 


1020—1021 


••• 


• •• 


318 




826—828 


••• 


• •• 


276 


1022—1023 


• •• 


ttt 


319 




841— S43 


...vol VII 


.371 


1024—1026 


• t* 


• •• 


320 




844—846 


• •• - 




372 


1027—1028 


tt* 


• •• 


321 




347—848 


• •• 




373 


1029—1030 


• t* 


• tt 


322 




849—851 


«.t 




374 


1031—1032 


• •• 


• •t 


323 




852—858 


••• 




375 


1033—1036 


• •• 


• •• 


324 




859U.860 


• •• 




376 


1037—1038 


••• 


• •• 


325 




861— «62 


• •• 




377 


1039—1040 


■ t* 


• tt 


326 




363.^.365 


• »• 




378 


1041—1043 


• »• 


• tt 


327 




871—875 


• •• 


vo/. lit 


277 


1044—1045 


• •• 


• •• 


328 




376—877 


• •• 




278 


1046—1047 


••• 


• t* 


329 




878—879 


• •• ' 




279 


1048—1050 


••• 


• •• 


330 


. 


880—882 


• •• - 




280 


1051—1052 


••• 


ttt 


331 




883 


• •• 


f ••• 


281 


1053—1055 


••• 


• •• 


332 




884 


• •• 




282 


1056—1057 


tt* 


• •• 


SSS 




883—885 


• •• 




281 


1058—1061 


tt* 


• •• 


334? 




886—887 


• •• 




282 


1062—1063 


tt» ' 


• •• 


SS5 




888—889 


• t* 




283 


1064—1066 


••• 


• •• 


336 




890u.*891 


• •• 




284 


1067—1068 


ttt 


ttt 


337 




892—893 


• ••' 




285 


1069—1071 


•tt 


• tt 


338 




894—895 


• •• 




286 


1072—1073 


• tt 


• •• 


339 


% 


896—897 


• •• 




287 


1074—1076 


• •• 


• tt 


340 




898 — ^900 


• •• 




288 


1077—1079 


• tt 


• •• 


341 




901—902 


• • • 




289 


1080—1081 


ttt 


• •• 


342 




903—904 


t.« 




290 


1082—1084 


ttt 


• •• 


343 




905 


• •• 




291 


1085—1086 


• tt 


• tt 


344 




906—908 


• •• 




292 


1087—1088 


• •• 


tt« 


345 




907—912 


.•• 




291 


1089—1091 


• •• 


• •• 


346 




913 


• •• 




292 


1092—1093 


• •• 


• •• 


347 




914—915 


• •• 




293 


1094—1095 


• •• 


• •• 


348 




916—917 


• •• 




294 


1096—1098 


• • • 


• •• 


349 




918—919 


• •t 




295 


1099—1100 


• •• 


• tt 


350 




920-*92l 


• •• 




296 


1101—1102 


•f» 


• •• 


351 




922—923 


• •• 




297 


1103—1104 


..• 


• •• 


352 




924—925 


• •• 




298 


1105—1106 


••• 


• •• 


353 




926—928 


• •• 




299 


1107—1109 


ttt 


• •• 


354 




929—930 


• •« 




300 


1110—1111 


• •• 


• •• 


355 




931 


• •• 




301 


1112— Ills 


• «• 


* 
• •• 


356 




932—833 


• f • 




302 


1114—1117 


••• 


• •• 


357 




947 


• «• 




301 


1118—1120 


••• 


ttt 


358 




971 


••• 




302 


1121—1122 


• •• 


ttt 


359 




972—984 


• tt 




303 


1123—1125 


tt« 


ttt 


360 




985—988 


*•• 




304 


1126—1127 


• •• 


• •• 


361 




989—990 


• tt 




305 


1128—1130 


• •• 


• •• 


362 




991—992 


ta* 




306 


1131—1132 


t.t 


• tt 


363 




993—996 


• •• 




307 


1134--1135 


t.t 


•tt 


364 




997—998 


• 
• t« 




308 


1136—1137 


• tt 


• tt 


365 




999-1001 


tta 




309 


1138—1140 


• •• 


• •• 


366 




1002-1003 


••• 




310 


1141—1142 


• •• 


• •• 


367 




1004-1005 


•tt 




311 


1143—1144 


• t* 


• •• 


368 




1006-1007 


• tt 




312 


1145—1147 


• •• 


• •• 


369 




1008-1010 


• •• 




313 


1148—1149 


• •• 


• •• 


370 




1011-1012 


«tt 




314 


1150—1151 


• tt 


• •• 


371 




1013-1015 


• •• 




315 


1152^1153 


M» 


t.»t 


37« 



in STATE TRIALSA^^Mtt or 1 


OCTAVO. FOUO. 




OCTAVO. 


FOUO. 






r(d.Y.n64fion56 


••• 


Ml. II. 


f.»7S 


VoLV. 139419 1396 


••• 


woLlh 


p.m 


1157—1158 


••• 


• •• 


374 


1397-1398 


••• 


••• 


m 


1 159-^-1160 


•«• 


• •• 


375 


1399—1400 


•*• 


••• 


430 


1161— 1163 


••• 


••• 


376 


1401—1402 


« •» 


*•• 


431 


1164—1165 


••• 


• •• 


377 


1403—1501 


••• 


• •• 


432 


1166—1167 


••• 


• •• 


378 


1502—1503 


••* 


• •• 


433 


1168—1170 


••• 


• •• 


379 


1504—1506 


••• 


• •• 


m 


1171—1172 


••• 


• •• 


380 


1507 


••• 


• •• 


435 


1173—1174 


• m* 


»•• 


381 


1508 


«•• 


••• 


436 


1175—1177 


••■ 


• •• 


382 


VoL Yh 74 


«•• 


.•• 


m 


1178—1179 


••• 


• •• 


383 


74 


••• 


• •• 


470 


1180—1182 


• •ft 


• •• 


384 


74— 75 


•• . 


• •• 


471 


1183—1184 


• •• 


• •• 


385 


76— 78 


••• 


••• 


472 


1185—1186 


#•• 


• •• 


386 


79— 80 


••» 


• •• 


473 


1187—1189 


• •• 


• •• 


387 


81— 82 


•*• 


• •• 


474 


1190—1191 


*•• 


• •■ 


388 


83— 84 


••• 


••• 


475 


1192—1193 


• •• 


• •• 


389 


85— 98 


•*■ 


... 


476 


1194—1196 


• •■ 


• •• 


390 


99 


•*• 


••• 


477 


1197—1198 


■ •• 


• •• 


391 


100— 104 


■•• 


••« 


478 


1199^1200 


*•• 


• •• 


392 


119— 136 


... 


••• 


435 


1201—1202 


■ •• 


• •• 


393 


137 


••• 


••• 


436 


1203—1204 


• •• 


• •• 


394 


138— 140 


■•« 


••• 


437 


1205—1207 


• •• 


• •• 


395 


141— 142 


••• 


••• 


438 


1208—1210 


• •• 


• •• 


396 


143— 144 


••• 


••• 


439 


1211—1212 


N 
• *• 


• •• 


397 


145_ 14,7 


... 


••• 


m 


1213—1214 


• •• 


• •• 


398 


148— 149 


• • . 


••• 


441 


1215—1216 


• •• 


• •• 


399 


150^ 151 


«•» 


•#• 


442 


1217—1219 


• •• 


• •• 


400 


152— 153 


••• 


••* 


443 


1220—1221 


• •» 


• •• 


401 


154— 155 


«•• 


••• 


tMj 


1222—1223 


• •• 


«•• 


402 


166— 157 


••• 


••• 


445 


1224—1225 


• • • 


• •• 


403 


158— 160 


••• 


«•• 


446 


1226—1227 


• •• 


■ •• 


404 


161— 162 


••• 


••• 


447 


1228—1232 


• •• 


• •• 


405 


163— 164 


••• 


••• 


448 


1233—1234 


• •• 


• •• 


406 


165-^ 166 


••• 


• •• 


449 


1235—1236 


• •• 


• •• 


407 


167— 168 


•*. 


••• 


450 


1237—1242 


• •• 


• •• 


408 


169— 170 


... 


• •• 


451 


1243—1249 


• •• 


• •• 


409 


171— 172 


••.- 


• •• 


452 


1250—1251 


• •• 


• •• 


410 


173— 175 


••• * 


••• 


453 


1252—1254 


• •• 


• •• 


411 


176— 177 


••• 


••• 


454 


1255—1256 


• •• 


• »• 


412 


178— 179 


••• 


• •• 


455 


1257—1283 


• ■ • 


• •• 


413 


180— 181 


••• 


• •• 


456 


1284—1290 


• •• 


• •• 


414 


182— 183 


.•r 


• •• 


457 


1291—1292 


• •• 


• •• 


415 


184— 185 


••• 


••« 


458 


1293—1299 


• •• 


• •• 


416 


186— 190 


• •• 


••• 


459 


1300 


• •• 


• •• 


417 


191— 192 


• •• 


• •• 


460 


1300 


• •• 


• •• 


418 


193— 194 


• •• 


• •• 


461 


1369—1372 


• •• 


• •• 


417 


195— 197 


• •• 


• •• 


462 


1373—1374 


• •• 


• •• 


418 


198— 205 


• *. 


••• 


463 


1375—1376 


• t • 


• #• 


419 


206— 210 


••• 


•t^ 


464 


1377—1378 


• •• 


• •• 


420 


211—215 


• •• 


• •• 


465 


1379—1380 


• •• 


••• 


421 


216—217 


••• 


• •• 


466 


1381—1383 


• •• 


• •• 


422 


218— 219 


• •• 


• • • 


467 


1384—1385 


• •• 


• •• 


423 


220— 222 


• *• 


••• 


468 


1366—1387 


• •• 


• •• 


424 


223 


••• 


• •• 


469 


1388—1389 


• •• 


• •• 


425 


224— 226 


••• 


••• 


470 


1390—1391 


• •• 


/ 
• •• 


426 


225— 228 


... 


• »• 


477 


1392—1393 


• «• 


•«• 


427 


.229 


••• 


• 9» 


47? 



r - 

STATE TRULS^ljroBX of Rsrftnwct to b^ts BDirxovfl. 


283 


OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




UVl. 229to231 


.«• vok 11. 


p. 479 


Vol \L page 396 voLYllh 


app.p 


.388 


232—233 


•»• 


«•• 


480 


397/0 398 


••• 




389 


2Si!—2S5 


• •9 


••t 


481 


399 


• «• 




390 


23^—237 


• •• 


•*• 


482 


400—402 


••• 




S91 


238—239 


• •• 


••• 


483 


403—404 


• •9 




392 


240—242 


• •• 


• *• 


484 


405—406 


• •• 




393 


24S— 244 


• •• 


••• 


485 


407—408 


••• 




394 


245-^246 


• •• 


••• 


486 


409-^10 


••• 




395 


247—248 


• •• 


••• 


487 


4,11—4,13 


■ •• 




396 


249^250 


• •• 


••• 


488 


414—415 


• •• 




397 


251--^3 


• •• 


••• 


489 


416-*417 


• I* 




398 


254—255 


• •• • 


>•• 


490 


418-t419 


• •• 




399 


256— 2S7 


»•• 


»t« 


491 


420—422 


««» 




400 


258—259 


• •• 


••• 


492 


423—424 


• •• 




401 


260—261 


«•• 


•»■ 


493 


425^-^26 


•«• 




402 


262.-1263 


• •• 


••• 


494 


427--428 


•«» 




403 


264—^5 


*•• 


••• 


495 


429—430 


»•• 




404 


266-^268 


«•» . 


••• 


496 


431 433 


9$0 




405 


269—273 


• •• 


«t» 


497 


434—436 


t<» 




406 


274 


*»t 


• •k 


498 


437--450 


*••> 




407 


275—276 


• •• 


• •• 


499 


451—452 


««» 




408 


277—278 


• •• 


• t* 


500 


453—454 


•«• 




409 


279 


• •• 


• f • 


501 


4^55.^^56 


•«• 




410 


280—284 


• *• 


• t» 


502 


457—458 


••• 




411 


291—506 


• •• 


• •• 


553 


459—461 


• •V 




412 


307— .809 


• •• 


• »• 


554 


462-^3 


•/• 




413 


310—311 


• *• 


• •• 


555 


464-465 


• •• 




414 


313—314 


«t« 


• »• 


556 


466—467 


•4» 




415 


315—316 


• ft 


• t* 


551 


468—469 


• i» 




416 


317-325 


«•• 


• •• 


558 


470—472 


•«» 




417 


326—327 


*«• 


«•• 


559 


473—474 


»•• 




418 


328-329 


• ■• 


• •« 


560 


475—476 


• •• 




419 


330—534 


• •• 


■ •• 


561 


477—478 


»t« 




420 


335-339 


• #• 


• »• 


562 


479—480 


• •• 




421 


340—541 


*•• 


• •• 


563 


481—483 


• •• 




422 


342—543 


*»• 


«•• 


564 


484—485 


«•• 




423 


344-^545 


«•• 


#•• 


565 


486-487 


• t« 




424 


346—347 


«•• 


«•• 


566 


488—489 


• •• 




425 


348-350 


• •• 


«•• 


567 


4901-491 


• •» 




426 


351—352 


• »• 


• •• 


568 


492—494 


• •• 




427 


353—354 


«•• 


• •• 


569 


495-496 


• •• 




428 


355—356 


• • fe 


• •• 


570 


497—498 


• •« 




429 


357—358 


«•• 


• •• 


571 


499-^00 


• •• 




430 


359—360 


• •« 


• •• 


572 


501.^02 


• •• 




431 


361—363 


• »• 


• •• 


573 


503—505 


• •• 




432 


367—368 


• •• 


• •• 


574 


5O6-0O7 


• •« 




433 


369-370 


• •• 


• »• 


575 


508—509 


• •« 




434 


371—373 


• •t 


• •* 


576 


510 


• •* 




435 


374--375 


• •• 


• ■• 


577 


511—512 


• •• 




436 


376—377 


• •• 


• •• 


578 


513 


•«• vol, IL 


527 


378—379 


• •• 


»•• 


579 


514 


4»« 




528 


380-382 


• •• 


■ •• 


580 


515-^17 


• •« 




529 


383—584 


• •• 


• •• 


581 


518—^19 


• •• 




530 


385^^86 


• •• 


• •• 


582 


520—521 


«•• 




531 


387—388 


• ■• 


• #• 


583 


522—523 


• •4 




532 


389—391 


kt* 


• •• 


584 


524—525 


• •m 




533 


893-i-395 


wl. VIIL app, 387 


1 526—527 


• •• 




534 



1 



284 STATE TRIALS 


.— Iin>£X OP REnftSKCE TO BOTH EdITIOVS. 




OCTAVO. ' 


FOLIO. 




OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




Vol. VI. 528 to 529 


... ^ 


voL II. p, 


.535 


Fa/. VL 773 to 774 


vol.yiLpA2S\ 


530— 5S2 


••• 




536 


775— 777 


«•• 


••• 


424 
425 


5SS-^S4 


t** 




537 


778— 780 


• ••• 


••t 


535—540 


••• 




538 


781— 782 


••• 


••• 


426 


541-^2 


••• 




539 


788 


••• 


••• 


427 


543—544' 


... 




540 


784— 786 


••• 


••• 


428 


545-^646 


... 




541 


879 


»•• 


vol* II. 


585 


547-^549 


••• 




542 


880— 881 


••• 


• •• 


586 


550-^1 


••• 




543 


882— 883 


••• 


••• 


587 


552-^3 


••• 






884-- 886 


•#• 


• •• 


588 


SSif-'-SSS 


••• 




5^5 


887— 888 


••• 


••• 


589 ' 


6fi6''.^S57 


••• 




546 


889— 890 


•.• 


••• 


590 


. 558—559 


••• 




547 


891— 895 


•*. 


••• 


591 


560U.561 


••• 




548 


896— 897 


••• 


• *• 


592 


^pe2 


• •• 




549 


898— 907 


••• 


• •• 


598 


563—564 


••• 




550 


906— 914 


••• 


••• 


594 


565 


••• 




501 


921 


••• 


••• 


595 


S65 


••• 




502 


922—923 


••• 


••t 


596 


sen-'-see 


.•• 




503 


924— 925 


.*• 


■ •• 


597 


567—^8 


••• 




504 


926— 927 


••• 


••• 


598 


569-571 


.•• 




505 


928— 929 


••• 


••• 


599 


572-^73 


••• 




506 


930— 931 


••• 


«•• 


600 


574-^75 


t** 




507 


932— 933 


••• 


• •• 


601 


576-^77 


••• 




508 


934— 935 


■•• 


• •• 


602 


578-^79 


••• 




509 


936— 938 


•«• 


... 


60S 


580-^1 


.«• 




510 


939— 940 


••• 


••• 


604 


582-^84 


••• 




511 


941— 942 


••• 


••« 


605 


585-^86 


••• 




512 


943— 944 


••• 


••« 


606 


587—588 


• • • 




513 


945— 946 


••• 


«•• 


607 


5891—590 


••• 




514 


947— 948 


«•• 


••t 


608 


591—592 


••. 


' 


515 


949— 950 


• • • 


• •t 


609 


593—594 


••• 




516 


951— 952 


••• 


r.* 


610 


595—597 


t«» 




517 


951— 954 


••• 


»•• 


609 


598-^599 


.#• 




518 


955— 956 


••• 


• •• 


611 


600—601 


•«• 




519 


957— 958 


• • • 


... 


612 


602—603 


••• 




520 


959— 961 


»«• 


••• 


613 


604—^5 


... 




521 


962— 963 


•■• 


t.* 


614 


606—607 


.•■ 




522 


964— 965 


•«* 


•«t 


615 


608—^09 


••• 




523 


966— 969 


••• 


»•• 


616 


6ia-6l2 


•«• 




524 


1063 


•«• 


W. VII, 


.427 


613—614 


••• 




525 


1063 


•«• 


•«• 


428 


615—^17 


••• 




526 


1064—1066 


•«• 


... 


429 


618—619 


••• 




527 


1067—1068 


••• 


• •• 


430 


619—620 


w/. VIII. app* 


381 


1069—1070 


•«• 


rat 


431 


621--622 


••• 


• •• 


382 


1071—1072 


t** 


•«• 


432 


623—624 


••• 


• •• 


383 


, 1073—1075 


••t 


•«• 


433 


625-^27 


•■• 


.•• 


384 


1076—1077 


••• 


••* 


434 


628 


• • ■ 


• • • 


385 


1078—1079 


••• 


••• 


435 


629—630 


•■• 


... 


386 


1080—1081 


••• 


• •• 


436 


701 


••. 


^ol. II. 


.549 


1082—1084 


••• 


• at 


437 


702 


••• 


■ • • 


550 


1085—1086 


.•• 


.»• 


438 


703—705 


••• 


• •• 


551 


1087—1088 


••• 


••• 


439 


706—707 


••• 


tt» 


552 


1089—1091 


••• 


• •• 


440 


708 


••• 


• • • 


553 


1092—1093 


•f • 


• •t 


441 


709—710 


.•• 


• •■ 


554 


1094—1095 


••« 


• •• 


442 


769—770 


••■ 


vol. VII. 


4^1 


1096—1098 


•f 


••• 


443 

m M M 


771—772 


•t* 


• •• 


422 


1099—1100 


••• 


t.a 


444 



STATE TRIALS.— Index of Reference to both Editions. 285 



OCTAVO. 

r.VI.110Uoll02 

1103—1104. 

1105—1107 

1108—1109 
1110^1111 

1112—1114. 
1115—1116 
1117—1118 

1119 

1120 
1121—1128 
1129—1131 
1132—1135 
1136—1138 
1139— 1U2 
114.3— 1144* 
114.5—1152 
1153—1161 
1162—1163 
1164—1169 
1170—1172 
1173—1174. 
1175—1176 
1177—1181 
1182—1183 
1186—1187 

1189 
1190—1191 
1192—1194? 
1195—1196 
1197—1198 
1199—1200 
1201—1202 
1203—1204. 
1205—1208 
1207—1215 
1216—1226 
1227—1229 
1230—1231 
1232—1233 
1234—1235 
1236—1237 
1238—1239 
1240—1242 
1243—1244 
1245—1246 
1247—1248 
1249—1250 
1251—1252 
1253—1254 
1255—1256 
1257—1258 
1259—1261 

1262 
1261—1262 

1263 



FOLIO. 

vol. VII. p. 445 
446 



«•• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••■ 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



■•• 



•«• 



••t 



••• 



•«• 



••• 



•«■ 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



447 
448 
449 
450 
451 
452 
453 
454 
453 
454 
455 
456 
457 
458 
459 
460 
461 
462 
463 
464 
465 
466 
467 
468 
467 
469 
470 
471 
472 
473 
474 
475 
476 
vol. II. 623 
624 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



»•• 



••• 



••• 



«•• 



••t 



t«» 



••• 



••« 



••t 



••• 



••■ 



625 
626 
627 
628 
629 
630 
631 
632 
633 
634 
635 
636 
637 
638 
639 
640 
642 

vo/. VIII. app. 4S5 
•t« 436 
437 



• •• 



• •• 



t«» 



• •• 



• •• 



• •• 



• •• 



• •• 



•t* 



••• 



••• 



••• 



•«• 



• •• 



• •• 



• •• 



• •« 



• •• 



• •• 



• •• 



• •« 



• •• 



• •• 



• •• 



■ •• 



*•• 



«•• 



••• 



••• 



• •• 



•«• 



!•• 



»•• 



ass 



■ fc' ■ '■ : 



OCTAVO. 

V. VI. 1266/0 1267 

1268 
1269—1270 
1269^1272 
1273—1275 
1276—1282 
1283—1284 
1285—1289 
1290—1292 
1293—1294 
1295—1296 
1297 
1309—1317 
1318—1319 
1320—1321 
1322—1324 
1325—1326 
1327—1328 
1329—1330 
1331—1332 
1333—1334 
1335—1336 
1337—1339 
1340—1341 
1342—1344 
1345—1346 
1347—1348 
1349-^1350 
1501 
1502 
1503—1504 
1505—1507 
1508 
1509—1511 
VoL VIL 
1— 2 
3 
4 
7 
9 
10— 11 
12— 13 
14— 15 
16— 18 
19— 20 
21— 22 
23— 24 
25— 26 
27— 28 
29— 31 
32.— 33 
34— 35 
36— 37 
38— 39 
40— 41 
42-^ 44 
f5^ ^ 



FOLIO. 
vol. VIII. app. 438 

«•• 4nbO 

vol.ll. 615 
616 
617 
618 
619 
620 
621 
622 
624 
641 
642 
643 
644 
645 
646 
647 
648 
649 
650 
651 
652 
653 
654 
655 
656 
655 
656 
657 
658 
659 
660 



3— 



••• 
••« 

• •a 
«•• 
••t 

• •• 
«•• 



• c • 

• •• 

• •• 

• • • 

• •• 

• •• 



• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 
••• 

• • • 

• •• 

• t* 
••t 



• «• 

• ■• 

••• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 
. • • 

• •• 

• •• 

• t* 

• •• 

• •• 
■ •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• «• 

• •• 

• •• 



••• 
••• 
••• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 

• •• 

• •• 
••• 
••• 
«t* 

• •• 

• •• 
••• 

• •• 
••• 



• •• 

• •• 
«•• 
••• 

• t* 

• •• 

• •• 
••• 

• •• 
••• 

• •• 
••• 
••t 
•t« 
••• 
•t* 

• •• 

• •• 
••• 
••• 
•t* 
*•« 
••• 

• •• 
•t« 
•«• 
••• 
«•• 
ft* 



659 
660 
661 
662 
663 
664 
665 
666 
667 
668 
669 
670 
671 
672 
673 
674 
675 
676 
677 
678 
679 
680 



288 STATE TRIALSv- 


— iKDftX 09 RlFXtlSHCZ TO BOTH ^ 


BoxTioirfl 


I. 




OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 


f 


ro/.VII. 47 to 48 


vol. 11. p. 


681 


Vol.Vlh ISSto 167 


wd. tl. f 


f. 764 


49— 50 


••• 


••« 


682 


168—169 


• •• 


• •f 


765 


51— 52 


••t 


tt« 


683 


170—171 


• •• 


t«t 


766 


53— 54 


f«« 


■•• 


684 


172—173 


• •• 


• •t 


767 


55^ 56 


•{• 


••• 


685 


174—175 


• •• 


•♦• 


768 


57— 58 


••• 


• •» 


686 


176—178 


• •• 


t«t 


769 


59— 60 


••• 


••t 


687 


179—180 


• •• 


• •• 


770 


61—63 


• • • 


••• 


688 


181—182 


«•• 


•t* 


771 


64— 65 


••• 


••• 


689 


183—184 


• •• 


••• 


772 


66— 67 


••• 


••• 


690 


185—186 


• •t 


• •• 


773 


68— 69 


• • • 


• •• 


691 


187—188 


• •• 


• •• 


774. 


70—71 


••■ 


•#• 


692 


189^191 


• •• 


• •• 


775 


• 72— 73 


• •V 


#•• 


693 


192—193 


• •• 


t*« 


776 


74—75 


• •• 


••• 


694 


194—195 


• •• 


• •» 


777 


76 


• •• 


••• 


695 


196—197 


• •• 


• •• 


778 


77— 78 


• •• 


••• 


696 


198 199 


«•• 


• •t 


779 


79 


• •• 


• •• 


695 


200—201 


• •• 


• •• 


780 


80 


• •• 


• •• 


696 


202—203 


• t* 


• •» 


781 


81— 82 


• •• 


• •• 


697 


i204— 206 


• •• 


• •• 


782 


83— 84 


• •• 


••* 


698 


207--208 


• •• 


• •• 


783 


85— 86 


■ •• 


••* 


699 


209—210 


• •• 


• »• 


784 


87— 89 


• •• 


••• 


700 


211—212 


• •• 


• •• 


785 


90^ 91 


• •• 


•f« 


701 


213—214 


• •• 


• •t 


786 


92— 93 


• •• 


•«• 


702 


215—216 


• •• 


• tt 


787 


94— 95 


• •• 


••• 


703 


217—219 


• •• 


• «• 


788 


96— 97 


• •• 


99* 


704 


220—221 


• #• 


• •t 


789 


98— 99 


• t« 


• •• 


705 


222—223 


• •• 


• •• 


790 


100—101 


• •• 


• •• 


706 


224 


• •• 


ttf 


791 


102—104 


• •• 


• •• 


707 


225—226 


• •• 


• •• 


792 


105—106 


• •• 


• •• 


708 


231 


«•• 


• •• 


791 


107—108 


• •• 


• •• 


709 


232 


f ft 


■ •• 


792 


109—110 


• •• 


• •• 


710 


232—234 


• •• 


• *• 


793 


111—112 


• *• 


• •• 


711 


235—236 


• •• 


• !• 


794 


113—115 


• •• 


• •• 


712 


237—238 


t»« 


••• 


795 


116—117 


• •• 


• #• 


713 


239—240 


• t* 


• f* 


796 


118—119 


• •• 


• •• 


714 


241—242 


•• 


• f» 


797 


120—121 


• •• 


• •• 


715 


243—244 


• #• 


• t« 


798 


122—124 


• •• 


• •• 


716 


245—246 


«•• 


• »• 


799 


125—126 


• •• 


• •• 


717 


247—250 


• •■ 


• f« 


800 


127—128 


t«« 


• •• 


718 


249—251 


••• 


f«# 


801 


129—130 


( ••• 


• •• 


7J9 


252 


t»* 


•»• 


802 


131—182 


1 

• •• 


«•• 


720 


253—255 


• *• 


••• 


803 


138—135 


t*» 


t«* 


721 


256—257 


• t* 


• *• 


804 


136—187 


• •• 


• •t 


722 


258 


• •• 


■ *• 


805 


138—189 


••• 


tt« 


723 


259—260 


• •• 


• «• 


806 


140—144 


• •• 


• •• 


724 


259—260 


• •• 


• •• 


805 


143—146 


• •• 


• •t 


725 


261 


##• 


»•• 


806 


14,7^148 


• •• 


• > • 


726 


262—263 


»t* 


• •• 


807 


149—151 


• •• 


«•• 


727 


264—265 


#•• 


#^» 


808 


152—153 


• •• 


• •• 


728 


266—267 


• *• 


»•• 


809 


154^155 


• •• 


« 


729 


268— «9 


• •t 


M« 


810 


156—158 


• •• 


• •• 


730 


270—272 


••t 


• •• 


811 


159 


• •• 


• •• 


759 


273—274 


• •• 


• •• 


812 


159 


«•• 


• •• 


760 


275-^76 


• •• 


• »• 


813 
814 
815 
816 


159—160 


• •• 


• •t 


761 


277—278 


• •• 


• •• 


161—163 


••• 


• «• 


762 


S79--280 


• •• 


#•• 


164--'165 


• t* 


«•• 


763 


281-^^3 


t#f 


• •• 



L .^ 



STATE TRIALS.«^IvDBx of Rsf ftasKcs t6 both Editxovi. 2tT 



OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 


KoJ. VII. 284^0 285 


voL II. p 


.817 


Fa/.VII.403to404 


Wa II. P, 


286—287 


••• 


• •* 


818 


405—407 


• •• 


• •• 


288—289 


•«• 


• a. 


819 


408—409 


• •a 


• •• 


290—291 


••• 


09* 


820 


410—411 


a*. 


• • . 


292—294 


•«• 


• a. 


821 


412—413 


• •• 


• • • 


295—296 


•t* 


• a. 


822 


414—415 


• •• 


• •• 


297—298 


••• 


• •• 


823 


416—418 


• a. 


»•• 


299—300 


••• 


%•» 


824 


417 


• •• 


• a. 


301—302 


••• 


• •• 


825 


418 


• a. 


• a* 


303—304 


• •a 


• a. 


826 


419—420 


... 


... 


305—306 


• •• 


• a* 


827 


421—422 


• •• 


• .. 


307—309 


• •• 


... 


828 


423—424 


• a. 


• a* 


310 


• f • 


.•• 


829 


425—426 


... 


• a« 


310 


••• 


• aa 


830 


427—428 


• a. 


• • • 


311 


• •• 


... 


829 


429—431 


• •• 


• •• 


312—313 


♦ •• 


• a* 


830 


432—433 


«•• 


• •• 


314—315 


«f* 


• a. 


831 


434—435 


• •• 


• •* 


316—317 


• •• 


m»» 


832 


436—437 


• »• 


• »• 


318—319 


• • » 


• •• 


833 


438—439 


• •• 


• •• 


320—321 


• •• 


... 


834 


440—442 


• •• 


• •• 


322—324 


• •• 


..a 


835 


443—444 


• a» 


• a* 


325—326 


• •• 


• * • 


836 


445—446 


m*» 


• a* 


327—328 


• •• 


• t* 


837 


447—448 


• a. 


• a* 


329—330 


• •• 


a*. 


838 


449—450 


... 


• •• 


331—332 


• •t 


• •• 


839 


451—452 


• •• 


• •a 


333—335 


• •• 


• •• 


840 


453—454 


• •• 


• a* 


336—337 


5 

• •• 


.*• 


841 


455—457 


• •• 


• •• 


338—339 


• .• 


• •• 


842 


458—459 


• •• 


• •• 


340—341 


«.• 


.a. 


843 


460—461 


• • . 


••• 


342—343 


• •• 


• •• 


844 


462—463 


• aa 


• •• 


344—345 


t.* 


.•• 


845 


464—465 


• •• 


• •« 


346—348 


• •• 


• •. 


846 


466—468 


• aa 


• *• 


349—350 


• a. 


• •• 


847 


469—470 


• •» 


• •m 


351—352 


• •• 


• •• 


848 


471 472 


• * • 


• •• 


353—354 


• •t 


• a. 


849 


473—474 


• • a 


• •• 


355—356 


• •• 


• aa 


850 


475—476 


• •• 


• a« 


357—359 


• a. 


... 


851 


477—478 


• •• 


• a* 


360—361 


• a* 


... 


852 


479—480 


• a« 


.•a 


362—363 


• at 


... 


853 


481—483 


• •• 


»•• 


364-365 


m»9 


• t» 


854 


484—485 


• • • 


• a. 


36&--^67 


• a. 


.*• 


855 


486—487 


• •• 


• •• 


368—369 


■ •• 


a«. 


856 


488—489 


• •• 


• •• 


370—372 


••• 


.•a 


857 


490-492 


• •• 


• •• 


373—374 


• •• 


... 


858 


493—495 


••• 


• •• 


375—376 


M« 


• •• 


859 


496-^00 


a.« 


• .• 


377—378 


• a* 


a.. 


860 


501-^02 


• •• 


... 


379—380 


^•» 


• •• 


861 


503—504 


• •• 


• •• 


381—382 


«•• 


• t« 


862 


505 


*•• 


• •• 


383—385 


«•• 


• •• 


863 


506 


• a« 


• a. 


386—387 


^•a 


... 


864 


591—593 


#•• 


• •• 


388—389 


«•• 


• •• 


865 


594 


• •• 


• •• 


390—391 


^•» 


• a. 


866 


595-^96 


• •• 


• a* 


392—393 


• •• 


• .. 


867 


597—599 


• a* 


• •■ 


394—396 


• •• 


. • . 


868 


600—601 


• a« 


• •• 


397-398 


• •• 


• •• 


869 


602—603 


• •• 


• aa 


399—400 


f«» 


• tt 


870 


604—605 


f»* 


«»• 


401^102 


• •• 


• a« 


87J 


606-^607 


««• 


• •• 



g72 
873 
874 
875 
876 
877 
878 
877 
878 
879 
880 
881 
882 
883 
884 
885 
886 
887 
888 
889 
890 
891 
892 
893 
894 
895 
896 
897 
898 
899 
900 
901 
902 
903 
904 
905 
906 
907 
908 
909 
910 
911 
912 
913 
914 
915 
916 
917 
918 
917 
918 
919 
920 
921 
922 
923 
924 



288 STATE TRIALS.r— Ikbex op Refe&ekce to both Ebitioks. 



OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




OCTAVO. 

• 


FOLIO 


t 


ViiL VII. 608to 609 


nsd. IL p 


.925 


Vd. VII. p. 726 


vol. II. p. 968 


610—611 


••• 




926 


727 


■ • ••• 


969 


612—614 


••• 




927 


728<i>730 


>• ••• 


970 


615—616 


••• 




928 


763 


1 • ••• 


969 


617—618 


••■ 




929 


764 


•• ••• 


970 


619—620 


••• 




930 


765—766 


••• 


971 


621—622 


••• 




931 


767—768 


I* ••• 


972 


623—624 


••• 




932 


769 770 


)• «•• 


973 


625—627 


• • • 




933 


771—772 


»• ••• 


974 


628—629 


••• 




934 


773—775 


>• «•• 


975 


630—631 


•t* 




935 


776—777 


»t ••• 


976 


632—633 


••• 




936 


778—779 


1. ••• 


977 


634—635 


•■• 




937 


780—781 


•• ••• 


978 


€36—637 


••• 




938 


782—783 


•• ••• 


979 


638—640 


••• 




939 


784—786 


I* ••• 


980 


641—642 


■.• 




940 


787—788 


•* «•• 


981 


643—644 


••• 




941 


789 790 


!• ••• 


982 


645—646 


••• 




942 


791—792 


•• » ••• 


983 


647—648 


••« 




943 


793—794 


»• ••• 


984 


649—651 


••• 




944 


795—796 


»• ••• 


985 


652—653 


• • • 




945 


797—798 


»• ••• 


986 


654—655 


••• 




946 


799—800 


f ••• 


987 


656—657 


••• 




947 


801-^03 


• • ••• 


988 


65ft— 659 


•t* 




948 


804—805 


»• ••■ 


989 


660—661 


•t* 




949 


806—807 


!• ••• 


990 


662—663 


••• 




950 


808—809 


»• ••• 


991 


664—666 


••t 




951 


810—812 


f ••• 


992 


667—668 


••• 




952 


811—829 


1* ••• 


993 


669—670 


••• 




953 


830—831 


!• ••• 


994 


671—672 


••• 




954 


832—833 


>• w.» 


995 


673—674 


■•• 




955 


834—836 


!• ••• 


996 


filh-^l^ 


••• 




^h^ 


837—838 


I* ••• 


997 


677 679 


••• 




957 


839—840 


>• ••• 


998 


680—681 


••• 




958 


841—842 


»• ••• 


999 


682—683 


••• 




959 


843—844 


t. ••• 


1000 


684—685 


••• 




960 


845—846 


>• ••• 


1001 


686 


%•• 




961 


847—849 


>. ••• 


1002 


687—688 


••• 




962 


850—851 


>t ••• 


1003 


687—688 


vo/. VIII. app 


.453 


852—853 


)• • •• 


1004 


689 690 


••• 




454 


854—855 


)• ••• 


1005 


691—692 


••■ 




455 


856—858 


»• ••• 


1006 


693—694 


••• 




456 


859—860 


It ••• 


1007 


701—703 


• • • 




457 


: 861—862 


)• ••• 


1008 


704 


• • • 




458 


863—864 


>• ••• 


1009 


705 


••• 




459 


865—866 


• ••• 


1010 


706 


.•• 




460 


• 867—868 


»• ••• 


1011 


707 


••• 


«o/."lI. 


961 


869—870 


1 • ..• 


1012 


708—709 


•.. 




962 


871—872 


)• ••• 


1013 


710—711 


• • • 




963 


• 873—875 


• ••• 


1014 


712—713 


• •• 




964 


876—877 


■ • «•• 


1015 


714—715 


••• 




965 


878—879 


)• ••• 


1016 


716 


••• 




966 


880 


» ••• 


1017 


715—721 


■•« 




965 


881—882 


• tat 


1018 


722 


• • • 




966 


881—882 


> ••• 


1017 


723 


••• 




^^1 


■ 883—884 


• «tt 


1018 


724—726 


•«• 


• •• 


968 


885—888 


t ••! 


1019 


725 


Iff 


tt« 


%1 




f «•• 


102Q 



STATE TR 


lALS 


. — Iku: 


EX OF I 


L£PEREKC£ TO BOTH 


Editions. 


289 


OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




F.VII. S9l to 892 


...vol. 11. p.lOQl 


F.VII. 1042^0 1044 


*•• 


vol. III. 


p. 32 


893— 894 


••• 


••• 


1022 


1043 


... 


... 


31 


895— 897 


••• 


•■• 


1023 


1044 


... 


• •• 


'32 


898— 899 


••• 


••• 


1024 


1045—1046 


• •. 


..• 


33 


900— 901 


••• 


••• 


1025 


1047—1048 


• ■« 


... 


34 


902— 903 


••• 


••• 


1026 


1049—1050 


#.• 


.•• 


S5 


904— 905 


•#• 


••» 


1027 


1051—1055 


• •• 


• •f 


36 


906— 907 


•«. 


•t» 


1028 


1067 


• •. 


• .• 


35 


908— 909 


••• 


••• 


1029 


1067 


• •• 


.«• 


36 


910L-. 912 


••• 


••• 


1030 


1067—1069 


... 


... 


37 


913— 914 


••• 


••• 


1031 


1070-1071 


• •• 


• .. 


38 


915— 916 


••• 


••• 


1032 


1072—1073 


• •• 


..« 


39 


917— 918 


••• 


#«• 


1033 


1074—1075 


... 


..• 


40 


919— 920 


••• 


••t 


1034 


1076—1077 


• •• 


• «• 


41 


921— 922 


••• 


••• 


1035 


1078—1080 


... 


... 


42 


923— 924 


•#• 


••• 


1036 


1081—1082 


... 


... 


43 


925— 927 


••• 


••• 


1037 


1083—1084 


• •• 


... 


44 


928— 929 


••• 


••• 


1038 


1085—1086 


.*• 


... 


45 


930 


••• 


••• 


1039 


1087—1088 


.•• 


... 


46 


931— 932 


••• 


••t 


1040 


1089—1091 


... 


•t* 


47 


931— 932 


••• 


••• 


1039 


1092—1093 


«.• 


••* 


48 


933 


••• 


••• 


1040 


1094>— 1095 


••• 


• ■• 


49 


934— 935 


••• 


••• 


1041 


1096—1097 


... 


• a. 


50 


936— 937 


••• 


••• 


1042 


1098—1099 


.•• 


.*• 


51 


959 


••• 


••• 


1041 


1100—1102 


«.. 


... 


52 


960 


••• 


••f 


1042 


1103—1104 


... 


• •• 


53 


959— 962 


»•• 


VO/.III. 1 1 


1105—1106 


... 


«•<• 


54 


963— 964 


t»t 


• •• 


2 


1107—1108 


*•• 


... 


55 


965— 966 


••• 


• •• 


3 


1109—1111 


.•• 


... 


56 


967— 974 


••• 


• •• 


4 


1112 


t.« 


... 


58 


975— 986 


••• 


• •• 


5 


1111—1113 


... 


... 


57 


987— 988 


••t 


• •• 


6 


1114—1115 


..* 


... 


58 


989^ 990 


•#• 


• •• 


7 


1116—1117 


... 


• •• 


59 


991— 992 


#•• 


• •• 


8 


1118—1120 


• •• 


... 


60 


993— 994 


••« 


• ■• 


9 


1121—1122 


*•• 


... 


61 


995— 997 


••• 


• •• 


10 


1123—1124 


... 


... 


62 


998— 999 


••• 


• •• 


11 


1125—1126. 


• *• 


... 


63 


1000—1001 


••• 


• •• 


12 


1127—1130 


.•• 


..• 


64 


1002—1003 


••f 


• •• 


13 


1129—1131 


... 


• •t 


65 


1004—1005 


••• 


••• 


14 


1132—1133 


.•• 


... 


66 


1006—1007 


#•• 


• •• 


15 


1134—1135 


... 


... 


67 


1008—1010 


••• 


• •• 


16 


1136—1137 


• .• 


• •. 


68 


1011—1012 


••• 


• •• 


17 


1138—1139 


• t. 


• •. 


69 


1013—1014 


• • ■ 


• •• 


18 


1140 1141 


• • • 


*•• 


70 


1015—1016 


■ • • 


• •• 


19 


11^2—1143 


... 


... 


71 


1017—1018 


••• 


• •t 


20 


1144—1146 


• .• 


.•t 


72 


1019—1020 


•$• 


• •• 


21 


1147—1148 


... 


• •• 


73 


1021—1022 


••• 


• •• 


22 


1149—1150 


... 


.*• 


74 


1023—1025 


••• 


• •• 


23 


1151—1152 


■ •• 


• «• 


75 


1026—1027 


••• 


• •■ 


24 


1153—1154 


... 


• «• 


76 


1028—1029 


••• 


• •• 


25 


1155—1156 


... 


• *. 


77 


1030—1031 


••• 


• •• 


26 


1157—1159 


... 


• •• 


78 


1032—1033 


••• 


• •• 


27 


1160—1162 


... 


••• 


80 


1034—1035 


••• 


• •• 


28 


1161—1162 


*•• 


• •• 


79 


1036—1038 


••« 


• •• 


29 


1163 


• •• 


• •• 


80 


1039-^1040 


••♦ 


t«t 


SO 


1164-^-1165 


••• 


• •• 


81 


1041 


*«« 


Iff 


91 


1166—1167 

•• 


• •« 


fM 


89 



!k90 



STATE TRIALS. — Index or Revbrekce to both EoiTioiftf. 



OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




F.VILn68<all69 


••• 


vol. III. 


p. 83 


r.VIL 1371 to 1373 


.••iio;.iU.p.l36 


1170—1171 


••• 


• •• 


84 


1374—1375 


••• 


«•• 


137 


1172—1174 


••• 


• •• 


85 


1376—1377 


•«• 


••• 


138 


1175—1176 


••• 


••• 


86 


1378—1379 


••• 


•«• 


139 


1177—1178 


••• 


••• 


87 


1380—1382 


•«• 


•«• 


140 


117^—1180 


••• 


• •• 


88 


1383—1384 


••• 


• •• 


141 


1181—1182 


••• 


»•• 


90 


1385—1386 


•«* 


*•• 


142 


1183—1184 


••• 


• •* 


89 


1387-1388 


••• 


••t 


143 


1185—1186 


••• 


• • • 


90 


1389—1391 


t«* 


• #• 


144 


1187—1188 


••• 


••• 


91 


139^—1393 


••• 


^•. 


145 


1189—1190 


••• 


■ •• 


92 


1394—1395 


• at 


• •• 


146 


1191—1192 


••• 


• •• 


93 


1396—1397 


• •* 


••• 


147 


1193—1155 


••• 


••t 


94 


1398—1400 


• •• 


•t* 


148 


1196—1197 


••• 


• •• 


95 


1401—1402 


• •• 


•tt 


149 


1198—1199 


••• 


• •• 


96 


1403—1404 


• •• 


• •t 


150 


1200—1201 


••• 


• •t 


97 


1405—1406 


■ •• 


»t* 


151 


I202r-I203 


• • • 


••• 


98 


1407—1409 


• t« 


••• 


152 


1204^1205 


••• 


• •• 


99 


1410—1411 


• •t 


••• 


153 


1206—1207 


••• 


• •• 


100 


1412—1413 


• •• 


• •• 


154 


1208 


••• 


■ •• 


101 


1414—1415 


• •• 


»•# 


155 


1209—1235 


••• 


• •• 


102 


1416—1417 


• •• 


4«* 


156 


1236—1237 


• • • 


• •• 


103 


1418—1420 


*•• 


• •• 


157 


1238—1239 


••• 


• •• 


104 


1421—1422 


^•» 


• •• 


158 


1293-1295 


••• 


• •• 


101 


1423—1424 


• «t 


• •• 


159 


1296—1298 


••t 


• •• 


102 


1425—1427 


• •• 


• • • 


160 


1298 


••• 


• »• 


104 


1428—1429 


• •• 


• «• 


161 


1299—1300 


••t 


••t 


105 


1430—1431 


• •• 


• •• 


162 


1301-1302 


••• 


••* 


106 


1432—1433 


• t a 


• •• 


163 


1303—1304 


••• 


•«• 


107 


1434—1436 


• •• 


••• 


164 


1305—1307 


••• 


• •• 


108 


1437—1438 


• ta 


• •• 


165 


1308—1309 


••t 


•«• 


109 


14^39—1440 


• •• 


••• 


166 


1310—1311 


••t 


•ta 


110 


1441—1442 


• «• 


• •• 


167 


1312—1314 


••• 


••• 


111 


1443—1445 


• #• 


• t» 


168 


1315—1316 


••t 


f 


112 


1446—1447 


• •• 


• •• 


169 


1317-1318 


••* 


• •• 


113 


1448—1449 


• f« 


• #• 


170 


131^—1320 


••• 


• •• 


114 


. 1450—1451 


• «• 


• •• 


171 


1321—1323 


••• 


• •t 


115 


1452—1453 


«•• 


• •• 


172 


1324—1325 


••• 


• •• 


116 


1454—1456 


• t* 


♦ »♦ 


173 


1326—1327 


••• 


• •# 


117 


1457—1458 


«•« 


• *• 


174 


1328—1330 


••• 


• ■t 


118 


1459^1460 


• •• 


««• 


175 


1331—1332 


••t 


••• 


119 


1461—1463 


• »t 


• •* 


176 


1333—1334 


•«« 


••• 


120 


1464—1465 


••» 


**.' 


1T7 


1335—1337 


••• 


• •• 


121 


1466—1467 


••» 


«t* 


178 


1338—1339 


•«• 


••• 


122 


J 468— 1470 


»•* 


• *• 


179 


1340—1341 


••• 


• •• 


123 


1471—1472 


•M 


• •f 


180 


1342—1344 


••• 


• •• 


124 


. 1473—1474 


••« 


• •• 


181 


1345—1346 


■•t 


••* 


125 


1475—1476 


• •f 


• •« 


182 

4 Ad 


1347—1348 


••• 


••t 


126 


1477—1479 


•»t 


• •« 


183 
184 
185 
1S6 
187 

1 AO 


134.9—1352 


••• 


• •• 


127 


1480—1481 


«•• 


*•• 


1353-1354 


••• 


•*9 


128 


1482—1483 


•t* 


«»* 


1355—1357 


••• 


• •• 


129 


1484—1485 


• •• 


•M 


1358—1359 


••• - 


••♦ 


130 


1486—1487 


4M 


^H 


1360—1361 


••• 


••• 


131 


1488—1490 


•^# 


•M 


188 
189 
190 
191 1 
19« 


1362—1363 


••• 


«•• 


132 


J491— 1492 


mV 


••« 


1364—1366 


■ ••• 


• •• 


133 


1493—1494 


*** 


«•• 


1367—1368 


«•• 


••• 


134 


1495—1496 


«#• 


H* 


1369—1370 


••• 


••• 


135 


1497—1499 


. *« 


••f 



J 



W^Tf T^lAlS-y^hpf^ Of B#»]^jLi5V^:^ TO 9PTH if iff^^«. 291 



Boaacp^ 



OCTAVO. 

1502—1503 

l&O*— 1506 

1&07— lfip8 

1509—1510 

1511—1512 

1513—1515 

1516—1517 

1518—1519 

15.20—1521 

1522—1524 

15.25— J5;26 

1527—1534 

15.35—1540 

154^1—1542 

1543—1545 

1546—1547 

1548—1549 

1550—15.51 

1552—1553 

1554—1556 

1557—1560 

1561—1563 

i564— i565 

1566 

1567—1568 

ft^VIlJ. J63 

J64— m 

167— 170 

)71— J72 

J73 

174 

J74f— J80 

^81— J83 

184— X85 

j86— J87 

188— 189 

190— J 91 

)92— 194 

195— 198 

199— 200 

JJOI 

210 

?1 1—216 

223 

?25 

8^6— 234 

?35— 242 

243— 244 

245— 246 

247— '248 

249— 251 

252— 253 

254—255 

256— 258 

259— 260 

261— 262 



FOWO. 


gh m 


OCTiLyO. 


fQUO. 


• - 


w^.in.. 


p. 198 


F4i{.VIILS.63<p265 


...ipfi,ll\.p.2.Sii 


••* 


?•• 


194 


266^267 


••» 


• •• 


235 


',•• 


.••• 


195 


268—870 


• •• 


• •• 


236 


••#. 


f«» 


196 


271—^72 


.♦•.• 


• •• 


237 


•,•• 


• •• 


197 


«7|— 875 


♦.M 


*•• 


238 


••• 


f» 


198 


276— ?77 


• •• 


• •• 


239 


V •JM 


^•» 


199 


278—279 


»•• 


• •• 


240 


.V* 


• •• 


200 


280—882 


PPJ^ 


• •• 


241 


?.••• 


• •• 


201 


283-r?84 


••9 


• t* 


242 


/.•» 


?•• 


202 


285—886 


•*» 


• •• 


248 


^.»« 


f»* 


203 


287—289 


••» 


• •• 


244 


^^* 


.••• 


204 


290—291 


*9M 


• •• 


245 


^.•« 


»•• 


205 


292—293 


•P9 


• •• 


246 


••# 


• • • 


206 ; 


294^—295 


•PM 


• •• 


247 


V* 


• •• 


207 


296—298 


*•• 


• •t 


248 


• «• 


f 


208 i 


299—300 


•9a 


• •• 


249 


••# 


• • • 


209 


3Q1— 302 


»tM 


• •• 


250 


,r»* 


*•• 


210 


303—304 


• •» 


• •• 


251 


'»,•* 


JP«« 


211 


305—307 


#•* 


• •• 


252 


^•* 


^•» 


212 i 


308—309 


••t 


• •• 


253 


,••* 


^•» 


213 • 


310U-311 


9*3 


... « 


254 


• •« 


,••• 


214 


312—314 


9 9» 


• • • 


255 


••* 


-/••• 


215 


315—316 


•9$ 


• t« 


256 


.**> 


^•» 


216 . 


317—318 


••» 


• •• 


257 


^•# 


/•• 


217 


.319—320 


*9» 


• •• 


258 


»^* 


.••• 


218 ; 


321—323 


*•* 


• •• 


259 


•V 


«* VII. 475 


324--325 


»•• 


• •• 


260 


»f* 


<••• 


476 


326—327 


99 » 


• •• 


261 


Af 


^•» 


477 , 


328—329 


99 M 


• •• 


262 


^f* 


;••• 


478 ■ 


330-331 


t»ff 


*•• 


263 


Pf 


.*** 


479 ; 


332—334 


999 


• •• 


264 


ff 


• •• 


480 


335—336 


• •• 


»•• 


265 


•9* 


,«•# 


479 


337—338 


•M 


• •• 


266 


!**» 


.*** 


480 


339—340 


••» 


#•• 


267 


9** 


,••• 


481 


341—343 


••? 


• •• 


268 


•f» 


,••• 


482 


344—345 


*»f 


• •• 


269 


1 


A«» 


483 


346—347 


»•• 


»•• 


270 


••# 


/*•• 


484 


348—350 


•»f 


• •• 


271 


.♦•• 


.*** 


485 


351--352 


«•• 


#•• 


272 


•M 


«••• 


486 


353—354 


••• 


#•• 


273 


.**» 


• #• 


487 


355—356 


»•• 


• •• 


274 


.•f-» 


/••• 


488 


357—358 


••• 


• . • 


275 


^M 


/••• 


489 


359—361 


* *.* 


• •• 


276 


.#»* 


»••• 


490 


362—363 


»•• 


• •• 


277 


-^•* 


tio^. III. 223 1 


364^365 


• •• 


• •• 


278 


^^ 


»•• 


224 


366—567 


••f 


• •• 


279 


*•• 


/•• 


225 


368—370 


••* 


• «• 


280 


«t« 


#•• 


226 


371—372 


••f 


• •• 


281 


«»# 


#•• 


225 


373—374 


••f 


• •• 


282 


^.•» 


••• 


226 


^ 375—377 


.••» 


f •• 


283 


^v«* 


^•» 


227 


378—379 


• •t 


• •t 


284 


^•* 


;»•• 


228 


380—381 

« 


• •• 


- ••• 


285 


^^.-^ 


^•« 


229 


382—383 


• •• 


• •• 


286 


.•-•• 


^•» 


230 


384—386 


• •• 


• •• 


287 


PJ> 


*«t 


231 


887—^88 


*•.• 


t*a 


288 


^•» 


^•» 


232 


389—390 


«•• 


• •• 


289 


^^ 


^•» 


233 


391— 39S 


—f 


»#• 


290 



12 



292 



STATE TRIALS.— Index o? Refe&ekce to both EDitiotrs. 



OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




r.VIIL 394.^395 


••• ^ 


volAlLt 


u291 


F^VIIL 533^534 


..; V0/.III. 


p. 332 


396—397 


••• 


••• 


292 


535—636 


••• 


• •• 


333 


398 


••• 


••• 


293 


537—538 


••• 


• •• 


334 


399—400 


••t 


••• 


294 


539—540 


• • • 


• •• 


335 


425—426 


••• 


vol. IV. 


165 


541—543 


••• 


• •• 


336 


427 


••• 


• ■• 


166 


544—545 


••■ 


• •• 


337 


427 


••• 


• •• 


165 


546—547 


••■ 


• •• 


338 


428-429 


••• 


• •• 


166 


548 


••• 


• •• 


339 


430-431 


••• 


• •• 


167 


549—550 


••• 


• •• 


340 


432—433 


••• 


• •• 


168 


549-^3 


••• 


• •m 


339 


43*^-436 


••• 


• •• 


169 


554—662 


••• 


• •• 


340 


437—438 


••• 


• •• 


170 


563—568 


••• 


• •■ 


341 


439—440 


••• 


• •■ 


171 


569 


••• 


• •• 


342 


441—443 


••• 


• •9 


172 


570—572 


••• 


■ •• 


343 


444 


••• 


. • . 


173 


573—574 


••• 


• •• 




444—445 


••• 


• • • 


174 


575—576 


••• 


• •• 


345 


447—448 


••• 


VO&III. 


293 


677-^78 


••■ 


• •• 


346 


449—450 


••• 


t** 


294 


579—580 


••• 


• •• 


347 


451-452 


••• 


• •• 


295 


581—682 


••• 


• •• 


348 


453-455 


••• 


• •• 


296 


583—584 


••• 


• •• 


349 


456—457 


••• 


■ •• 


297 


585—687 


••• 


• •• 


350 


458—459 


••• 


• •* 


298 


588—589 


•t« 


• •• 


351 


460—461 


• • . 


• •• 


299 


590L-691 


••• 


• •• 


352 


462-463 


••• 


• •• 


300 


592 593 


••• 


. . • 


353 


464—466 


•#• 


• •• 


301 


594—695 


••• 


• •• 


354 


467—468 


••• 


• •• 


302 


596—597 


••• 


• •• 


355 


4/50 4,70 






303 


598—599 


■ A A 




356 


471—472 


••• 
••• 


• •• 

• •• 


304 


600—601 


w • w 


* # • 

• •• 


357 


473-475 


••• 


• •• 


305 


602—603 


• •• 


• •• 


358 


476—477 


••• 


• •• 


306 


604—605 


• •• 


• •• 


359 


478—479 


••• 


• •* 


307 


606—607 


••• 


• •• 


360 


480—481 


••• 


• •• 


308 


608—610 


• #• 


• •• 


361 


482—484 


••• 


• •• 


309 


611—612 


• •t 


• •• 


362 


485—486 


••• 


• •• 


310 


613—614 


• •• 


• •• 


363 


487—488 


••• 


• •• 


311 


615—616 


• •• 


• «• 


364 


489—490 


••• 


• •• 


312 


617—619 


• t« 


• •• 


365 


491—493 


••• 


• •• 


313 


620—621 


• •• 


• •• 


366 


'494-495 


••t 


• •• 


314 


622—623 


• •• 


• •• 


367 


496—497 


••• 


• ■• 


315 


624—625 


• •• 


• •« 


368 


498—500 


•«• 


• •• 


316 


626—627 


• •• 


• • • 


369 


501—502 


••• 


• •• 


317 


628—630 


••• 


• •• 


370 


503—504 


••• 


• •• 


318 


631—632 


• •• 


• •• 


371 


505—506 


••t 


• •• 


319 


633—634 


• •• 


t«» 


372 


507—508 


••t 


«•• 


320 


635—636 


• • . 


• •• 


378 


509L-511 


t«» 


• •• 


321 


637—639 


• •• 


• • 


374 


512—513 


••• 


*•« 


322 


640—641 


• •• 


• •• 


375 


514^—515 


••• 


• •• 


323 


642—643 


• •• 


• •• 


376 


516—517 


••• 


• •t 


324 


644—645 


• •• 


• •• 


377 


518—519 


••• 


••• 


325 


646—648 


• •• 


• •* 


378 


520-^522 


••• 


• •• 


326 


649—650 


• •• 


•t« 


379 


523 


••• 


• •• 


327 


651—652 


• •• 


• #• 


380 


524-526 


••• 


• •• 


328 


653—654 


«t« 


■ •• 


381 


525 


•t« 


• •• 


327 


655—657 


■ •• 


• «t 


382 


526 


••• 


• •• 


328 


658—659 


• •• 


• •• 


388 


527—528 


••• 


••• 


329 


660—661 


• •• 


. «t 


384 


529—530 


••• 


• f» 


330 


662—664 


• •t 


*«t 


SS5 


$Sl--^92 


•«f 


• f« 


SSI 


^5^-666 


tM 


• 11 


m 



STATE TRIALS 


».-*-Index op Reference to both 


Editions. 


293 


OCTAVO. 


• 


FOLIO. 




OCTAVO. 


- 


FOLIO. 




r. VIII. 667 to 668 


••• 


vol. III. p, 38*7 


F.VIIL 796to 797 


••• 


vol. III. 


► 430 


669—670 


••• 


••• 


388 


798— 800 


••• 


• •• 


431 


671—672 


••• 


••• 


389 


801— 802 


••• 


• •t 


43t2 


673—674? 


••• 


• • * 


390 


803— 804 


••• 


• •• 


433 


675—677 


••• 


••• 


391 


805— 806 


' ••• 


* ••• 


434 


678—679 


••» 


••• 


392 


807— 809 


••• 


• •• 


435 


680U-681 


• • > 


••• 


393 


810— 811 


••• 


• •• 


436 


682—683 


••• 


••• 


394 


812— 813 


••• 


• •• 


437 


684*— 685 


••• 


••• 


395 


814— 815 


••• 


• •• 


438 


686-^88 


••• 


••• 


396 


816— 817 


t.m 


• •• 


439 


689—690 


••• 


••• 


397 


818— 819 


• •• 


• •• 


440 


691—692 


••• 


••• 


398 


820 


• •• 


• •• 


441 


698—694? 


••• 


••• 


399 


821 


• •• 


• •• 


442 


695—696 


••• 


••• 


400 


835— 837 


• •• 


vol. IV. 


183 


697—699 


••• 


••• 


401 


838— 839 


• •• 


• •• 


184 


700U-701 


••• 


••• 


402 


840 


• •• 


• •• 


185 


702—703 


••• 


••• 


403 


841— 842 


• •• 


• •• 


186 


7(H— 705 


••• 


••• 


404 


870— 883 


• •• 


vol. III. 


44.1 


706—708 


••• 


••• 


405 


884 — 894 


• •• 


• •• 


442 


709—710 


••• 


••• 


406 


895— 897 


• •• 


• •• 


443 


711—712 


••• 


••• 


407 


898— 900 


• •• 


• •• 


X'MrM 


713—714? 


••• 


••• 


408 


901— 902 


• •• 


• •• 


445 


715—716 


••• 


••• 


409 


903— 904 


• •• 


• •• 


446 


717—718 


••• 


••• 


410 


905— 906 


• •• 


• •• 


447 


719—720 


••• 


••• 


411 


907— 909 


• •• 


• • • 


448 


721—724? 


••• 


• • « 


412 


910— 911 


• •• 


• •• 


449 


723—724? 


••• 


vol. IV. 


173 


912— 913 


• •• 


• •• 


450 


725—726 


••• 


• •• 


174 


914— 916 


• •• 


• •• 


451 


727—728 


••• 


• •• 


175 


917— 918 


• •• 


• •• 


452 


729—730 


••• 


• •• 


176 


919— 920 


• •• 


• •• 


453 


731—733 


••• 


• •• 


177 


921— 922 


• •• 


• •• 


454 


734--735 


••» 


• •• 


178 


923— 925 


• •• 


• •» 


455 


736—737 


••• 


• •• 


179 


926— 927 


• •• 


• •• 


456 


738—740 


••• 


• •• 


180 


928— 929 


• •• 


• •• 


457 


741—742 


••• 


• •• 


181 


930— 931 


• •• 


• •• 


458 


743—744 


••• 


• •• 


182 


932— 934 


• •• 


• •• 


459 


745 


••• 


• •• 


183 


935— 936 


• •• 


. • • 


460 


746 


••• 


• •• 


184 


937— 938 


• •• 


• •• 


461 


74,7_749 


••• 


vol. III. 


413 


939— 940 


• •• 


• •• 


462 


750—751 


••• 


• •• 


414 


941— 942 


• •• 


• •• 


463 


752—753 


••• 


• •• 


415 


943— 945 


••• 


• •• 


464 


754—755 


••• 


• •• 


416 


946— 980 


• •• 


• •• 


465 


756 


••• 


• •• 


417 


981— 983 


• •t 


• •• 


466 


757—758 


••• 


• •• 


418 


1039—1048 


• •• 


• •• 


545 


759—760 


••• 


• •• 


417 


1049—1078 


• •• 


• •• 


546 


761—767 


••• 


. ••• 


418 


1079—1083 


• •• 


• •• 


547 


768—769 


••• 


• •• 


419 


1084—1086 


• •• 


• •• 


548 


770—771 


••• 


• •• 


420 


1087 


• •• 


• •• 


547 


772—774 


••• 


• •• 


421 


1087 


• •• 


• •• 


548 


775 776 


••• 


• •• 


422 


1088—1089 


• •• 


• ff» 


549 


777—779 


••• 


• •• 


423 


1090— 10J)2 


» • • 


• •• 


550 


780—783 


••• 


• •• 


424 


1093 


••• 


••• 


551 


784—786 


• • • 


• •• 


425 


1094—1095 


••• 


• •• 


552 


787—789 


••t 


•«• 


426 


1096—1097 


••• 


• •• 


553 


790—791 


••• 


• •• 


427 


1098 1100 


• •• 


• •• 


554 


792—793 


••• 


*•• 


428 


1101—1104? 


•«• 


• •t 


555 


794—795 


••• 


•»• 


429 


1105~1106 


• •• 


•f» 


556 



i94 STATE TRIALS.— In^mx « Rmtmmci y^^^* B»Jf fcWii 



OCtAVO. 


FOLIO. 




octAtro. 




roLio. 




Fvra-iiw/onos 


...^ 


M>/.ni. 


fK557 


rVm.l884«orl885 


•<.W.lILjp.6l4 


1109-^mO 


••• 


•«• 


558 


1»36— 1987 


• *• 


«•• 


615 


1>11— 1113 


••• 


••• 


559 


1288—1889 


••• 


*•• 


616 


1H4_1H5 


*•• 


••• 


560 


1240—1241 


•«• 


4%* 


617 


1116^1117 


••• 


••• 


561 


1842-T-1244 


•«• 


«•• 


618 


1H8— 1(19 


•'•• 


••• 


562 


(945—1946 


• « • 


«•• 


619 


1120-1128 


••• 


••• 


563 


1847—1948 


••i 


<•• 


620 


1123—1124 


•'•• 


•#• 


564 


(849—1850 


*«• 


«•• 


621 


>125— 1126 


••• 


•4» 


565 


1251—1853 


««• 


¥•• 


622 


1127—11:28 


••• 


• •• 


566 


1854—1855 


«•• 


«•• 


628 


11^9— 1130 


••• 


• •• 


567 


1856—1857 


••• 


«•• 


624 


>181— 1183 


••'• 


• •• 


668 


1858—1859 


«0» 


«•• 


625 


1184—1185 


•'•• 


• • • 


569 


1860—1861 


•«• 


•*• 


626 


118^8^1137 


•#• 


• ff« 


570 


1862—1872 


«»• 


*•• 


627 


1188—1189 


••• 


«•• 


571 


1883—1884 


*#• 


«•• 


628 


1140^1142 


••• 


• • • 


572 


1885—1886 


««• 


• •• 


629 


H48— 1144 


••'• 


• •• 


573 


1887—1868 


•<• 


«•• 


630 


1145—1146 


••• 


• •• 


574 


1859—1860 


««• 


• •• 


505 


1147—1148 


••• 


t«« 


575 


1861 


• 4m 


«•• 


506 


1149—1151 


*•• 


*•• 


576 


1862—1868 


t«. 


!•• 


507 


1152—1158 


•«• 


*•'• 


577 


1864—1866 


*•• 


«•• 


506 


1154—1155 


••• 


• «• 


578 


1867—1868 


• «• 


«•• 


509 


1156—1157 


•«• 


• <• 


579 


1869—1870 


«•• 


«•• 


510 


1158—1159 


i4» 


• •• 


580 


1871—1872 


• •• 


••• 


511 


1160—1162 


• • • 


• •• 


581 


1S78— 1874 


• •• 


«•• 


512 


1163—1164 


• #• 


• •• 


582 


1875—1876 


<«• 


«•• 


513 


1165—1166 


t^ff 


• •• 


583 


1877-*1879 


44» 


*•• 


514 


1167—1168 


• f 


• •• 


584 


1880—1381 


«•• 


*•• 


515 


1169—1170 


• •• 


• •• 


585 


1882—1883 


«•• 


<•• 


516 


1171—1173 


«•• 


• •• 


586 


1984^1S85 


• «t 


«•• 


517 


1174—1175 


#•• 


*•• 


587 


1886—1889 


«•• 


i«t 


518 


1176—1177 


»*• 


• ff* 


588 


yolume IX. 






• ^K ^ 


1178—1179 


«•« 


• •• 


589 




1 


• ik 


«•• 


465 


1180— 1181 


«*« 


ff*« 


590 




2 


• •• 


• •• 


466 


1182—1184 


«•• 


• •• 


591 


3— 


7 


«•• 


l»t 


467 


1185—1186 


• •4 


*•• 


592 


8 — 


9 


«•• 


• •• 


468 


1 187—1 188 


4mi 


«fl* 


593 


10— 


12 


• •• 


• •• 


469 


' 1189—1190 


4it 


4^6 


594 


13— 


14 


««b 


• •• 


470 


1191—1193 


4«* 


«•• 


595 


15— 


16 


«•• 


• • • 


471 


1194—1195 


«•« 


«•* 


596 


17— 


18 


»•• 


«•• 


472 


1196—1197 


• • • 


ff*« 


597 


19— 


20 


• t» 


«•• 


473 


1198—1199 


• •• 


• •• 


598 


21— 


28 


k«h 


• •• 


474 


1900-1901 


• •• 


• •• 


599 


24— 


25 


«•• 


• •• 


475 


1902—1904 


• •• 


• •• 


600 


26— 


27 


••» 


*•• 


476 


1905—1906 


<•*. 


• t • 


601 


88— 


29 


• •k 


*•• 


477 


1207—1908 


• •• 


*•» 


602 


80— 


82 


»«k 


• •• 


478 


1909—1910 


• •• 


• •• 


603 


83— 


84 


• •« 


• •• 


479 


1911—1913 


k«* 


• •• 


604 


85— 


36 


«•» 


• •• 


480 


1914—1915 


»•• 


• •• 


605 


87— 


88 


4tk 


«•• 


481 


1916—1917 


• •• 


• •4 


606 


89— 


40 


«•• 


«•• 


482 


1218—1919 


• •• 


• hi 


607 


41— 


42 


«•* 


• •• 


483 


1920—1992 


• •• 


• •• 


608 


43— 


45 


»•• 


• • • 


484 


1298—1994 


• •• 


• •• 


609 


46— 


47 


• •• 


• «• 


485 


1995—1996 


• •• 


««« 


610 


48— 


49 


• •• 


• •» 


486 


1987—1998 


• •» 


• •• 


611 


50— 


51 


• •• 


• •• 


487 


1899—1960 


• •• 


• •* 


612 


52— 


53 


••• 


• •• 


488 


1881—1883 


• •• 


« « • 


618 


M— 


S5 


• •• 


«•• 


489 



STATE TRIALS.^^IiTBXx of RsfSftsucB to both 

1 


Editions. 


295 


OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




f9lAX.p.mto 57 


..'uo/.III.j>.490 


Vol. IX» 24610 248 


...VO/. III.iD 


r.640 


58— 60 


*t ••• 


491 


249—250 


.•• 


• a. 


641 


61— 62 


»• ••• 


492 


251—252 


*•• 


«.. 


642 


63— 64 


»« •.. 


493 


253—254 


... 


... 


643 


65— 66 


>• •*. 


494 


255—266 


..« 


... 


644 


67— 68 


>• «.• 


495 


257—259 


... 


... 


645 


69— 71 


1. ... 


496 


260-^261 


..« 


• *• 


646 


72— 73 


>• •.• 


497 


262—263 


• •• 


«.• 


647 


74— • 75 


»• ... 


498 


264—265 


... 


... 


648 


76—77 .. 


>• ... 


499 


266—267 


..« 


• .. 


649 


78— 80 


»• ' •*• 


500 


269—270 


... 


• .• 


650 


8t— 82 


»• •.• 


501. 


271—272 


•*• 


• .• 


651 


83—117 


»• ••• 


502 


273—275 


• •• 


• .. 


652 


118— i20 


»• ..« 


503 


276-^7 


•*• 


... 


653 


121 — 122 .4 


y «•• 


504 


. 278—279 


... 


..• 


654 


123 


r* •.• 


505 


280—^1 


••• 


... 


655 


124 


)• ... 


506 


282—283 


• •• 


••• 


656 


125 


. «rf.IV. 


199 


284^-4286 


•»• 


• •* 


657 


126—128 


>• •< • 


200 


287—288 


«•« 


... 


658 


127—129 


. VO/.III. 


519 


289—290 


..• 


• •• 


659 


180^182 


!• »•• 


520 


291—293 


«•• 


• •« 


660 


133—184 


»• ••• 


521 


294 


•.• 


• •• 


661 


135—186 


1. ••• 


522 


294—295 


... 


bl« 


662 


137—138 


»• ••• 


523 


299—300 


• .• 


< •• 


661 


139—140 


t* ••• 


524 


801 


••• 


... 


662 


141^148 


tk ••• 


525 


802—303 


••• 


• •• 


663 


144—145 


»» •.• 


526 


304—806 


... 


• *. 


664 


146—147 


»• ••• 


527 


307—808 


..« 


.«• 


665 


148—149 


»• «•• 


528 


809—310 


*•• 


• «• 


666 


150—151 


»• •.• 


529 


311—312 


..• 


• • • 


667 


152—153 


»• ••• 


530 


313—314 


•«• 


.«• 


668 


154—156 


I. Cff* 


531 


315—817 


••• ' 


• •• 


669 


157—158 


»• ••• 


532 


318—319 


• «• 


• «. 


670 


159l— 160 


». at* 


533 


320—321 


..• 


• «• 


671 


161—163 


>• •.• 


534 


322—823 


• fl» 


... 


672 


164—165 


)• ... 


535 


324—326 


••ft 


• •. 


673 


166—167 


)• ••• 


536 


327—328 


••• 


• •• 


674 


168—170 


!• ••• 


5S7 


329—380 


••• 


... 


675 


171—172 


»• ... 


538 


331—332 


••• 


• •• 


676 


173—174 


»• ... 


539 


333—335 


.«« 


*•• 


677 


175—176 


»• ».» 


540 


336—337 


... 


... 


678 


177—178 


»« ..• 


541 


338—339 


«•• 


.•• 


679 


179—181 


». ••• 


542 


840—341 


••• 


• •• 


680 


182—183 


1. .•• 


543 


342—344 


•.• 


••• 


681 


184_186 


1. ..• 


544 


345—346 


«.• 


• »• 


682 


187 


t. ... 


629 


347—348 


..» 


• •• 


683 


219—222 


1. ... 


629 


349—350 


••» 


... 


684 


223—224 


• • *.• 


630 


351—852 


vol. X. app. 31 


225—227 


• * .•• 


631 


35S—S55 


.•• 


... 


32 


228—229 


■ • •.. 


632 


S56 


.*• 


..» 


33 


230—231 


». •*• 


633 


357—358 


... 


.*• 


34 


282—284 


• « ... 


634 


519 


i • • 


vo^III. 


683 


235—236 


1. «.. 


635 


520 


••• 


... 


684 


287—289 


». ••• 


636 


620—522 


' •*• 


• •• 


685 


240—241 


1. ... 


637 


523—^24 


«.• 


• •• 


686 


242—243 


1. ••• 


638 


525—527 


'«.. 


... 


687 


244—245 


»• « • • 


639 . 


^28-^29 


*••• 


«.•• 


688 



296 STATE TRIALS.— Index of Reference to both EotTioKS. 



OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




VoL IX. 530/0531 


••• 00/.III.j9 


.689 


532—533 


••• 


••• 


690 


5S^S36 


••• 


••• 


691 


537—538 


••• 


•f • 


692 


539—540 


• •• 


• •• 


693 


541—542 


••• 


•«• 


694 


543-^44 


••• 


••• 


695 


545—546 


••• 


••• 


696 


547—549 


••• 


«•• 


697 


550—551 


•«• 


••• 


698 


55^"^$ 


••• 


••• 


699 


554i—555 


«•• 


••• 


700 


556^557 


• •• 


• •• 


701 


558—560 


• •• 


••• 


702 


571 


••• 


••• 


701 


571 


••• 


••• 


702 


571—572 


••• 


••• 


703 


573—574 


• •• 


••• 


704 


575—576 


••• 


••• 


705 


577-^78 


.•• 


••• 


706 


577—578 


••• 


••• 


705 


579^-580 


••• 


••• 


706 


.581— 5H3 


••• 


••• 


707 


584—^85 


• •• 


• • • 


708 


586-^87 


••• 


. • • 


709 


588—590 


• •« 


ta. 


710 


591—592 


• •• 


• •• 


711 


593—594 


••• 


• •• 


712 


595—596 


••• 


• •• 


713 


597—598 


••• 


• •• 


714 


599—601 


• •• 


• •• 


715 


602—603 


• •• 


• •• 


716 


604—606 


• •• 


• •• 


717 


607—608 


••• 


• «'. 


718 


609^-610 


• •• 


• • « 


719 


611—612 


•«• 


• •a 


720 


613—615 


• •• 


• •• 


721 


616—617 


• •• 


• •• 


722 


618—619 


• •• 


• •• 


723 


620—621 


••• 


• •• 


724 


622—624 


••• 


• •• 


725 


625—626 


••t 


• •• 


726 


627—628 


••• 


• •• 


727 


629—630 


«•• 


«•• 


728 


631—632 


• •• 


• •• 


729 


633—635 


••• 


• •• 


730 


636 


••• 


• •• 


731 


636 


• •• 


• •• 


732 


637 


••• 


• •• 


731 


638—639 


••• 


• •• 


732 


640—641 


• •• 


• •• 


733 


642—643 


••• 


• •• 


734 


644—645 


••• 


• •• 


735 


646—648 


••• 


• •• 


736 


649—6.50 


••• 


• •• 


737 


651—652 


••• 


• •• 


738 


eSS'-SSS 


•t* 


• •• 


739 



OCTAVO. 

Fo/. XI. 656/0 657 
658—659 
660—661 
662—663 

666—668 

669—670 

671—672 

673—674 

675—677 

678—679 

680—681 

682^-689 

690—691 

692—694 

695 

695 

695—696 

697 

697—698 

699—700 

701—703 

704—705 

706 

707—708 

709 

709 

710—711 

712—713 

714—716 

717—720 

719—720 

721 

722—723 

724 

725 

726 

727—728 

729^731 

732—733 

734—735 

736—737 

738—740 

741 

742 

741—742 

743—744 

745—746 

747—748 

749—751 

752—753 

754 

754—756 

755—756 

757 

758—760 

761—762 



... 



••• 



••• 
••• 
..• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••t 
••• 
••• 
••• 
•*• 
... 
••• 

• a. 

• •« 



• •• 



.•• 



• •• 



• •• 



... 



• •• 



• .• 



• •• 



• •t 



... 



• •• 



... 



• •• 



FOLIO. 

...vo/. III. p. 740 
741 
742 
74S 
744 
745 
746 
747 
748 
749 
750 
751 
752 
755 
754 
755 
756 
787 
788 
789 
790 
791 
792 
793 
794 
xwL VIII. app. 463 

464 
465 
466 
467 
468 

••• voL III* 755 

756 
757 
758 
757 
758 
759 
760 
761 
762 
763 
764 
765 
766 
765 
766 
767 
768 
769 
... 770 
... 771 
... 772 
771 
772 
773 
774 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 
.«• 
t.« 
•*• 

••• 
••• 
••• 
... 
... 
... 
»•• 
••• 
... 
..• 
... 
... 
... 
•fft 
... 
••• 
•t. 
... 



.«• 



••• 
•«• 
... 

• a. 



... 



• *• 



«•• 



... 



... 



... 



■ •« 



... 
... 
• •ff 
... 

... 



• •• 



• ». 



••• 



..• 



.#• 



STATE TRIALS.— Ikd£X or RsfEaEKCE to both Editions. 



^7 



OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




VolAX. 763^764 


••• 


vo/. III. 0.775 


VidAX. 901 to 909 


... x)oLlll*p 


.822 


765—766 


••• 


■ 

••• 


776 


910— 914 


••• 


••• 


823 


767—768 


'••• 


••• 


777 


915— 916 


••• 


••• 


824 


769—772 


••• 


••• 


778 


' 999 


••• 


vol. IV. 


195 


771 


••• 


••• 


777 


1000 


••• 


' ••• 


196 


771 


••• 


••• 


778 


1001—1002 


••• 


••• 


197 


772—773 


•••, 


••• 


779 


1003—1006 


••• 


••• 


198 


774—775 


••• 


••• 


780 


1053—1054 


••• 


vol. III. 


823 


776—777 


••• 


••• 


781 


1055— 10.'56 


••• 


• •• 


824 


778—780 


••• 


• • • 


782 


1057—1058 


••• 


••• 


825 


781 


••• 


••• 


783 


1059—1060 


••• 


• •• 


826 


782—784 


••• 


••• 


784 


1061—1062 


... 


• •• 


827 


783 


••• 


••• 


783 


1063—1065 


••• 


• •• 


828 


784 


••• 


••• 


784 


1066—1067 


••• 


• •• 


829 


785—786 


'••• 


••• 


785 


1068—1069 


••• 


• •• 


830 


787—788 


'••• 


••• 


786 


1070—1072 


••• 


• •• 


831 


789—790 


'••• 


••• 


787 


1073—1074 


••• 


• •• 


832 


791—794 


'••• 


••• 


788 


1075—1076 


••• 


• •• 


833 


793 


••• 


to/. IV 


.187 


1077—1078 


- ••• 


• •• 


834 


794^795 


••• 


• •• 


188 


1079—1081 


••• 


••• 


S35 


796—797 


••• 


• •• 


189 


1082—1083 


•»• 


• •• 


836 


798—799 


••• 


• •• 


190 


1084—1085 


••• 


••f 


837 


800—802 


••• 


• •• 


191 


1086—1088 


' ••• 


• •• 


838 


803—804 


••• 


• •• 


192 


1080—1090 


•••^ 


• •• 


839 


805—806 


••• 


• •• 


193 


1091—1092 


••• 


• •• 


840 


807—809 


••• 


• •• 


194 


1093—1094 


••• 


• •• 


841 


810 


••• 


• •• 


195 


1095—1097 


••• 


• •• 


842 


811—812 


••• 


• •• 


196 


1098—1099 


••ff 


• •• 


843 


817 


••• 


vtd. III. 


793 


1100—1102 


• ••• 


• . • 


844 


818 


••• 


••• 


794 


1103—1104 


• • • 


• •• 


845 


819—821 


••• 


••• 


795 


1105—1106 


■ ••• 


• •• 


846 


822—835 


••• 


••« 


796 


1107—1108 


••• 


• •• 


847 


836—837 


••• 


••• 


797 


1109—1111 


••• 


• •• 


848 


838—842 


••• 


••• 


798 


1112—1113 


••• 


• •• 


849 


848—847 


••• 


«•• 


799 


1114—1115 


«•• 


• •• 


850 


848—849 


••• 


••• 


800 


1116—1117 


••• 


• •• 


851 


850—851 


••• 


••• 


801 


1118—1120 


• • • 


• ■• 


852 


852—854 


••• 


••• 


802 


1121—1122 


••• 


• •• 


853 


855—856 


••• 


••• 


803 


1123—1125 


••• 


• •• 


854 


857— «58 


••• 


••• 


804 


1126 


••• 


• •• 


855 


859—861 


••• 


••• 


805 


1126 


••• 


• •• 


856 


862—864 


' ••• 


••• 


806 


1127—1128 


• ••• 


• •• 


855 


865—867 


' »•• 


••• 


807 


1129—1130 


••• 


• •• 


856 


868—869 


••• 


••• 


808 


1131—1133 


••• 


• •• 


857 


870—871 


••• 


••• 


809 


1134—1135 


••• 


• •• 


858 


872— «74 


••• 


••• 


810 


1136—1137 


••• 


••• 


859 


875—876 


••• 


••• 


811 


1138—1139 


••• 


• •• 


860 


877—878 


••• 


••• 


812 


1140—1141 


••• 


•t« 


861 


879—880 


••• 


••• 


813 


1142—1144 


••• 


• •• 


862 


881— «83 


••• 


••• 


814 


1145—1146 


••• 


• •• 


863 


884—885 


••• 


••« 


815 


1147—1148 


••• 


• •• 


864 


886—887 


••• 


• !• 


816 


1149—1150 


••• 


• •• 


865 


888— «90 


••• 


• •• 


817 


1151—1152 


••• 


• •• 


866 


891—892 


••• 


■ •• 


818 


1153—1154 


••t 


• •• 


867 


893—894 


■ ••• 


• •• 


819 


1155—1156 


••• 


• •• 


868 


895—898 


••• 


• •• 


820 


1157—1158 


••• 


• •• 


869 


899—900 


' •»• 


• •• 


821 


1159—1161 


••• 


•M 


.870 



Mt STATE TRlALS.^^IiTDn Of IlEf iBfivei to i^ortn '. 


BDiTioyi^ 




OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




OCTAVO. 


4 


POLIO 


• 


VAX. nmtd lies 


..,wa.nhp.S7l 1 


Vol. X. 4io 6 


•«• HXH* ill. 


p^m 


1164—1165 




872 


7— 8 


• •• 


• •• 


%5 


1166—1167 




873 


9— 10 


••• 


• •• 


9i6 


1168—1169 




874 


11— 13 


••• 


• •• 


947 


1170—1171 




875 


14^ 16 


••• 


• •• 


948 


1172—1173 




876 


17 


••• 


• •• 


94f9 


1174^1176 




877 


17— 18 


•«• 


• •• 


950 


1177--.1178 




878 


29— 84 


t«* 


• a. 


949 


1179—1180 




879 


35 


• • • 


• .• 


950 


1181—1182 




880 


36—37 


•«• 


t*. 


951 


1183— 1184 




881 


38— 89 


••• 


• •• 


952 


1185—1186 




882 


40— 42 


• «• 


• •• 


953 


1187—1188 




883 


43—44 


••• 


• •• 


954 


1189—1190 




884 


45— 46 


<•• 


• •• 


955 


1191—1193 




885 


47— 48 


•«• 


• •• 


956 


1194—1195 




886 


49— 50 


•#• 


«t« 


957 


1196—1197 




887 


51—53 


••• 


• •• 


958 


1198—1199 




888 


54— B5 


•«• 


*•• 


959 


1900—1901 




889 


56— 67 


••• 


• •• 


960 


1902— 1904 




890 


58— 59 


••• 


«•• 


961 


1205—1906 




891 


60l— 61 


*•• 


it* 


962 


1907—1908 




892 


62—63 


••• 


4«* 


963 


1909—1910 




893 


64—66 


••• 


• •• 


964 


1911—1212 




894 


67— 68 


•ff« 


«•• 


965 


1913—1914 




895 


69— 70 


• flk 


• •t 


966 


1215—1917 




896 


71—72 


«•« 


• •• 


967 


1218—1219 




897 


73—74 


«•• 


• •• 


968 


1220—1221 




898 


75— 76 


• •• 


«•• 


969 


1222 




899 


77—79 


«•• 


• •• 


970 


1223— 124i3 




900 


80— 81 


• •« 


• •t 


971 


1244—1246 




901 


82— 83 


• •• 


«•• 


972 


1250 




902 


84— S5 


• •< 


• •• 


978 


1250—1251 




903 


86— 87 


«•• 


• • • 


974 


1252—1253 




904 


88— 89 


• •• 


«•• 


975 


1954—1255 




905 


90— 91 


• •« 


««• 


976 


1256 




906 


92— 93 


• •• 


«•• 


977 


1256 




907 


94— 96 


• •• 


• •• 


978 


1257—1258 




908 


95 


• •« 


*•• 


977 


1259 




909 


96 


• •• 


• •• 


978 


1261—1262 




911 


97— 98 


«•• 


• •• 


979 


1263—1264 




912 


99 


• «• 


<«• 


980 


1265—1267 




913 


100—101 


• «« 


• •• 


981 


1268—1269 




914 


102—104 


• •« 


• •• 


982 


1270—1272 




915 


105—109 


*»• 


««• 


983 


1273 




916 


110—112 


• •• 


• •• 


984 


1274—1275 




917 


113—114 


• •• 


0»* 


985 


1383—1334 




933 


115—118 


• •• 


tit 


986 


1335—1388 




934 


119 


• •• 


• •• 


987 


1339—1841 




935 


119 


• •* 


• •• 


988 


1342—1843 




936 


123 


• «. 


wrf.IV. 


197 

a aA 


1844—1345 




937 


123 


• »• 


•<• 


198 


1346—1348 




938 


123 


• •ff 


• «• 


199 


1349t— 1850 




939 


124 


• t* 


»•• 


200 


1351—1352 




940 


125—129 


«•• 


vol: III. 


987 
988 


1353—1354 




941 


130 


• *t 


• •• 


1355—1858 




942 


181—132 


• ■• 


• !• 


989 


fW. X. 1— 3 




943 


133—184 


• »• 


»•• 


990 



STATB TRIALSr 


-Inb 


BX Of 1 


llVB^BWCS TO BOTH I 


iDITIOKS- 

FOUO. 


M» 


OCTAVO. 


FOLIO- 


OCTAVO. 




Viil.X. 13510186 


*.««(rf.III. 


p. 991 


Vd^X. 257^258 


vd. III. p 


.1048 


137—189 


*•• 


«•• 


992 


259 


*•« 


• •• 


1049 


140—141 


•*• 


«•• 


993 


260 


••• 


«•• 


1050 


142—143 


••• 


• •• 


994 


260—261 


«4» 


<•• 


1049 


144--a45 


••# 


*•• 


995 


262 


• »« 


<•• 


1050 


146—148 


••« 


• •• 


996 


263—264 


««• 


*•• 


1051 


147—150 


*•• 


«•• 


997 


265—266 


•«♦ 


• •• 


1052 


151 


«•• 


«•• 


998 


266 


*4^ 


«•• 


1051 


152—153 


••« 


A*^ 


999 


267 


• «• 


«•• 


1052 


154—155 


•«• 


4t* 


1000 


268 


• tf* 


• •• 


1053 


156—157 


•»« 


4«« 


1001 


268 


9»k 


«•• 


1054 


158- 159 


••• 


«•• 


1002 


269—271 


fit 


• •• 


1053 


160—161 


«*« 


«•• 


1003 


272—273 


• <• 


• •• 


1054 


162-«163 


'««• 


*•• 


1004 


274—275 


• ff* 


!•• 


1055 


164—165 


•«« 


• •• 


1005 


276—277 


• •* 


• •• 


1056 


166—167 


«!• 


*•• 


1006 


278—280 


••* 


M« 


1057 


lea— 169 


«•« 


«•• 


1007 


281—282 


*•* 


• •• 


1058 


170-^171 


t 


• •• 


1008 


283—284 


• •ft 


*•• 


1059 


172—174 


• •• 


• •• 


1009 


285—287 


*•* 


••• 


1060 


175 


• «i 


• • • 


1010 


288—289 


«•• 


«•• 


1061 


176—177 


• •• 


• •• 


1011 


290—291 


• «• 


#•• 


1062 


178—180 


• »• 


• •• 


1012 


292—293 


«•« 


••• 


1063 


181—182 


• •• 


• •• 


1013 


294—296 


• •• 


• •• 


1064 


183—184 


• i* 


«t« 


1014 


297—298 


• •• 


*•• 


1065 


185—186 


• i» 


• •• 


1015 


299—300 


«•« 


«•• 


1066 


187—188 


• »» 


• •• 


1016 


301 


• •• 


«•• 


1067 


189—101 


• 4* 


• •• 


1017 


302—303 


• •• 


»•• 


1068 


192--103 


• •• 


*•• 


1018 


307—310 


• •i 


«•• 


1067 


194—195 - 
196—197 


««« 


?•• 


1019 


311—312 


«•• 


• •• 


1068 


k«« 


• •• 


1020 


313—314 


»•* 


«•• 


1069 


198—199 


t«« 


• •• 


1021 


315—316 


• •« 


«•• 


1070 


^00—201 


• *i 


• •t 


1022 


317 


• •* 


«•• 


1071 


202—203 


• 4k 


• •• 


1023 


318—320 


• «• 


• •• 


1072 


204—205 


• «• 


»•• 


1024 


319—320 


«•# 


«•• 


1071 


206—207 


• *« 


• •• 


1025 


321—322 


• •• 


• •• 


1072 


208—210 


• «• 


b* • 


1026 


323—324 


■ •• 


!•• 


1073 


211—212 


i«« 


• •• 


1027 


325—327 


• •* 


«•• 


1074 


213—215 


• •• 


• •• 


1028 


328—^29 


• •• 


• •• 


1075 


216—217 


#«• 


• •• 


1029 


330-^331 


h** 


«•• 


1076 


218—219 


• •• 


u« 


1030 


332—333 


• •• 


«■• 


1077 


220—221 


• i* 


• •• 


1031 


SSii'-^Se 


• •• 


• •• 


1078 


222—223 


• •i 


• •• 


1032 


337—388 


• •« 


■ •• 


1079 


224—285 


•i# 


••• 


1033 


339—840 


kti 


• •• 


1080 


226—227 


»•« 


• •• 


1034 


341—342 


» •• 


• •• 


1081 


228—229 


• •• 


• •• 


1035 


343—344 


• •• 


• •• 


1082 


230—231 


««• 


•« • • 


1036 


345—347 


»•• 


• •• 


1083 


232—833 


«•« 


• •• 


1037 


348—349 


«•• 


*•• 


1084 


234—236 


!«• 


»»• 


1038 


350-^^51 


• •• 


• •• 


1085 


237—238 


«•• 


• •• 


1039 


352—353 


• «• 


«•• 


1086 


239—240 


• •« 


• •• 


1040 


SSii'SSe 


• •« 


• •• 


1087 


241—242 


• *• 


• »• 


1041 


357—358 


• •« 


«•• 


1088 


243—245 


• «• 


• •• 


1042 


359—360 


• •• 


«•• 


1089 


246—247 


• •< 


• •• 


1043 


361—362 


• •« 


*•• 


1090 


248-4r49 


• •« 


• •• 


1044 


363—364 


• •• 


. ••• 


1091 


250—251 


• •• 


»•• 


1045 


365—367 


••• 


• •• 


1092 


253—254 


• •• 


• •• 


1046 


368—^9 


••• 


• •• 


1093 


255—256 


*«4 


•»• 


1047 


370U-372 


• •• 


»•• 


1094 



300 



STATE TRIALS.-i-lNi>Ex of Reverekce to both Editiovs. 



OCTAVO. 


FOLIO, 


t 


OCTAVO. 


. FOLIO. 




Voi.X. 371*0374 


vol. VIL 


493 


VoLX. smtosm 


w/. VIL 


p. 550 


S75 




494 


508—509 


••• 


• •• 


551 


376—378 




495 


510—511 


••• 


• •• 


552 


379—380 




496 


512—514 


••• 


• •• 


553 


381— S82 




497 


515—516 


••• 


• •• 


554 


SSS'-^SS 




498 


517— >518 


••• 


• •• 


5SS 


386—387 




499 


519—521 


••• 


• •t 


556 


388—389 




500 


522—523 


«•• 


• •• 


557 


390—391 




501 


524—525 


••• 


• •• 


558 


392—394 




502 


526—528 


••• 


• •• 


559 


395—396 




503 


529—530 


••• 


• •• 


560 


397—398 




504 


531-^2 


••• 


• t« 


561 


399—401 




505 


533—535 


••• 


• •• 


562 


402'-^l03 




506 


536—537 


••• 


• •• 


563 


404—405 




507 


538—539 


. • • 


ff«* 


564 


406—407 




508 


540-542 


••• 


• •• 


565 


408—410 




509 


0»0"""^0x Jf 


• •* 


• •• 


566 


411—412 




510 


545—546 


••• 


• •• 


567 


413—418 




511 


547—549 


••• 


• •• 


m 


419—420 




512 


550-551 


••• 


• •• 


569 


421—422 




513 


552—554 


• a. 


• •• 


570 


423—424 




514 


555^551 


• •• 


• •• 


571 


425—427 




515 


558— A59 


• •• 


• •• 


572 


428—429 




516 


560—561 


• •• 


• !• 


573 


430^-431 




517 


562r^^Q3 


1 

• •• 


• •• 


574 


432—434 




518 


564-566 


• •• 


• •• 


575 


435—436 




519 


567—568 


• •• 


• •• 


576 


437—438 




520 


569—570 


• •• 


• •• 


577 


4391-^4,1 




521 


571-572 


• •• 


• •• 


578 


442—443 




522 


573—575 


• •• 


• l« 


579 


444—445 




523 


576—577 


• •• 


• •• 


580 


446—448 




524 


578—580 


• •• 


• •• 


581 


449—450 




525 


581—582 


• •• 


• •• 


582 


451—452 




526 


583—584 


• •• 


• 1* 


583 


453—454 




527 


585—586 


• •• 


• •• 


584 


455—457 




528 


587—588 


• •• 


• »• 


m 


458—459 




529 


589—591 


• •• 


• •• 


586 


, 460—461 




530 


592-593 


• • . 


• «• 


587 


462—463 




531 


594—595 


• •• 


«•• 


588 


464—466 




5S2 


596—597 


• !• 


• •• 


589 


467—468 




533 


598^-600 


• •• 


• •• 


590 


469—470 




534 


601—602 


• •• 


• •• 


591 


471—473 




535 


603—604 


• •• 


• •• 


592 


474—475 ' .. 




536 


605—606 


• •• 


«•• 


593 


476—477 




537 


607—608 


• •• 


• •• 


594 


478—479 




538 


609-611 


• •• 


• •• 


595 

— ^. j^ 


480-482 




539 


612—613 


• •• 


• •• 




483—484 




540 


614—615 


• •• 


• •• 


597 


485—486 




541 


616—618 


• •• 


• •• 


598 


487—488 




542 


619—620 


• •• 


• •• 


599 


489—491 




543 


621—622 


• • 


• •• 


600 


492—493 




544 


623—625 


• •• 


• •• 


601 


494—495 




545 


626—627 


• • • 


• •• 


60i 


496—498 




546 


628—629 


• «• 


• •• 


603 


499U-.500 




547 


630—632 


• •• 


• •• 


60i> 
605 
606 


501-^502 




548 


633—634 


• •• 


• •• 


503—505 




549 


635-^36 


. ff«« 


• f * 



STATE TRIALS. — Index op llEFEiiEiycE to both Editions. 301 



OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




Vol. X. 687 io 689 ' 


vol VII. J 


p. 607 


Fo/.X. 1158/0 1159 


••t 


vol. IV. 


36 


6450— 641 


»• ••• 


608 


1160—1161 


••• 


•.• 


37 


642—. 648 


•• ••• 


609 


1162—1164 


•*• 


••• 


38 


644— 646 


I* ••• 


610 


1165—1166 


••• 


••• 


39 


647— 662 


,. vol. III. 


. 1095 


1167—1168 


••• 


••• 


40 


663— 665 


>• ••• 


1096 


1169—1171 


• • • 


... 


41 


666— 668 


i. ••• 


1097 


1172—1173 


••• 


... 


42 


669— 670 


>• ••• 


1098 


1174—1175 


••• 


*•• 


43 


671— 672 


• «• 


1099 


1176—1178 


••• 


• • • 


44 


67s— 674 


!• ••• 


1100 


3179—1180 


' ••• 


••• 


45 


675— 676 


»• ' ••• 


1101 


1181—1182 


••• 


••« 


46 


677— 679 


>• ••• 


1102 


1183—1185 


••• 


••'• 


47 


680— 681 


>• ' ••• 


1103 


1186—1187 


••• 


•.• 


48 


682— 692 


*. ••• 


1104 


1188—1189 


••• 


... 


49 


693— 697 


>• ••• 


1105 


1190—1192 


••• 


••• 


50 


698— 699 


• ••• 


1106 


1193—1194 


••• 


••• 


51 


700— 701 


)• ••• 


1107 


1195—1196 


••• 


••• 


52 


702— 704 


t. ••• 


1108 


1197—1199 


••• 


••• 


53 


705— 706 


»• ' ••• 


1109 


1200—1201 


••• 


••• 


54 


707_ 708 


)• ••• 


1110 


1202 1203 


••• 


••• 


55 


709 


• ••• 


1111 


1204--1206 


••• 


••• 


56 


710— 711 


»• ••• 


1112 


1207—1208 


••• 


••• 


57 


1079—1080 


». vol. lY. 1 1 


1209—1210 


••• 


••• 


58 


1081 


>• ••• 


2 


1211—1213 


••« 


••• 


59 


1083—1084 


»• ••• 


3 


1214—1215 


••• 


••• 


60 


1085—1087 


• ••• 


4 


1216—1217 


••• 


, .•• 


61 


1088—1089 


)• ••• 


5 


1218—1220 


••• 


••• 


62 


1090—1092 


>• ••• 


6 


1221 1222 


••• 


•.• 


63 


1093—1094 


)• ••• 


7 


1223—1224 


••• 


••• 


64 


1095—1096 


»•' ••• 


8 


1225 


••• 


••• 


65 


1097—1098 


>• ••• 


9 


1226—1227 


••• 


••• 


66 


1099—1101 


i« ••« 


10 


1227 


••• 


••• 


65 


1102—1103 


»• ••• 


11 


1228 


••• 


••• 


66 


1104—1105 


>•' ••• 


12 


1229—1231 


••• 


••• 


67 


1106—1107 


)• ••• 


13 


1232—1233 


••• 


••• 


68 


1108—1109 


»• • ••• 


14 


1234—1236 


••• 


••• 


69 


1110—1111 


>• ••• 


15 


1237—1238 


••• 


••• 


70 


1112—1114 


• ••• 


16 


1239—1240 


••• 


•.• 


71 


1115—1116 


• ••• 


17 


1241—1243 


••• 


•.• 


72 


1117—1118 


»• •■• 


18 


1244—1245 


••• 


••• 


73 


1119^-1120 


>• ... 


19 


1246—1247 


••f 


••• 


74 


1121—1122 


)• .«• 


20 


1248—1249 


••• 


ta» 


75 


1123—1125 


!• ••• 


21 


1250—1251 


••• 


..'• 


76 


1126—1127 


>• ••• 


22 


1252—1254 


••• 


• .• 


77 


1128—1129 


)• ••• 


23 


1255—1256 


••• 


• *• 


78 


1130—1131 


• • ••• 


24 


1257—1258 


••• 


••• 


79 


1132—1134 


»• ••• 


25 


1259—1260 


••• 


• •'• 


80 


1135—1136 


»• ••• 


26 


1261—1263 


••• 


«•• 


81 


1137—1138 


I* ••• 


27 


1264—1265 


••• 


• •• 


82 


1139—1141 


!• • •• 


28 


1266—1267 


••• 


• •• 


83 


1142—1143 


!• • •• 


29 


1268—1269 


t • . 


• •• 


84 


1144^-1145 


>• ••• 


SO 


1270—1272 


••• 


••• 


85 


1146—1148 


• • ••• 


31 


1273—1274 


••• 


• •• 


86 


1149—1150 


»• ••• 


32 


1275—1276 


••• 


• •• 


87 


1151—1152 


»• ••• 


33 


1277—1278 


••• 


• «• 


88 


1153—1154 


»• lit 


34 


1279-.1281 


§•• 


• •• 


89 


)l5fi«-1157 V 


It •«* 


9S 


1288^1883 


!»• 


•%♦ 


8Q 



aot 



STATE TRlALS.-r-IwMir or RBtcKiiicB t« Iock Estn»»>. 



OCTAVO. 


1 


FOLIO. 




OCTAVO. 


FOLIO, 




Vcl.XAQU$o 1285 


••« 


vo(.IV. 


jEI.91 


Vii. XL 413 to 414 


••• 


wAlVf 


ul¥i 


1286—1287 


••• 


••• 


92 


415-t416 


••• 


••• 


145 


1288—1290 


••• 


• •• 


93 


417-^19 


••• 


•«• 


146 


1291—1292 


••• 


• >• 


94 


420—421 


••» 


••• 


147 


1293— 1294 


*•• 


• *• 


95 


488—423 


••• 


••• 


148 


1295—1297 


••• 


• •• 


96 


424-t426 


*p* 


*•• 


149 


1^8—1299 


••• 


• •• 


97 


427-t428 


.*** 


•?• 


150 


ISOO— 1301 


••• 


«•• 


98 


429^-^30 


/»•• 


Pf 


151 


1302—1304 


••• 


••• 


99 


431—433 


•*• 


Pf 


152 


1305—1306 


•«• 


• •• 


100 


434—435 


••• 


Sf 


153 


1307—1308 


••• 


• •• 


101 


436-437 


•§* 


*p* 


154 


1309—1311 


••• 


••• 


102 


438—439 


••• 


•#• 


155 


1312—1313 


«#• 


• •• 


103 


440L-.441 


»•• 


••• 


156 


1314—1315 


••• 


• •• 


104 


442—444 


s»* 


*•• 


157 


1316 


•«• 


• •• 


105 


445-446 


»•• 


••• 


158 


1317 


••• 


••• 


106 


447-?448 


*** 


#•• 


159 


V. XI. 297— 310 


••• 


• •• 


105 


449—451 


S9m 


»f« 


160 


311— 320 


••• 


• •« 


106 


452 


ff 


•f« 


161 


321— 322 


••• 


• • • 


107 


453-^4 


• »• 


*?• 


162 


328— 325 


••• 


- •*• 


108 


455 


#r» 


•f 


199 


S26— 327 


«•• 


• •• 


109 


456 


• f« 


• •• 


200 


328— 329 


••• 


• •• 


110 


457—4.58 


• •• 


v»f» 


201 


S80— 331 


••• 


••• 


111 ; 


4i;9— 4^0 


*•* 


s»* 


202 


332— 334 


•«• 


••• 


112 


461—462 


pmm 


• •• 


203 


^5^ 336 


••• 


••• 


113 


463-^466 


»*• 


pfm 


204 


337— 338 


•«• 


«•• 


114 


465—466 


%•• 


a*VJ[I. 


611 


339— 340 


••• 


••• 


115 


467—468 


#•♦ 


»•• 


612 


341—343 


••• 


••« 


116 ' 


467— *68 


P*f 


«^iy. 


161 


344w-. 345 


•«« 


•*• 


117 


-*69 


»•• 


p** 


162 


346—347 


•*• 


• •• 


118 


470^71 


M» 


#•• 


163 


348— 350 


••• 


• «• 


119 


472—474 


^•» 


S»9 


164 


351— 352 


« •• 


• •• 


120 


473-474 


*•• 


••• 


203 


353— 356 


««• 


• •• 


121 


475 


• p» 


••• 


204 


357— 359 


••• 


••• 


122 


475—476 


0S9 


A*f 


205 


360—362 


M« 


• •• 


123 


477-r480 


mm* 


»#f 


206 


363— 364 


»«« 


••• 


124 


479 


• t* 


•f 


207 


265^ 366 


«•• 


•*• 


125 


480^-481 


s»» 


v» 


208 


367— 369 


>*• 


*•• 


126 


432 


^••» 


<•*• 


209 


J370— 372 


•*• 


SMS 


127 


483—435 


•»• 


•«• 


210 


.373— 375 


•«• 


• •• 


128 


493—495 


^0»iQcl»l^ftPP» 37 


376— 379 


• •• 


««• 


129 


496—497 


•.•• 


.•*• 


38 


3B0— 382 


•A* 


• •• 


130 


498—499 


.•#• 


^/« 


39 


381— 382 


«•« 


••« 


129 


500—^02 


w» 


»#• 


40 


383 


•A» 


• •• 


130 


.503 


*»• 


^JF» 


33 


383— 335 


•«• 


• •• 


131 


.504 


##• 


v*.*» 


34 


336— 387 


•M* 


•*• 


132 


505—507 


*p» 


^#« 


S5 


388— 389 


• •• 


.f 


133 


508—510 


•09 


*f 


36 


.390—392 


■ A»* 


• •• 


134 


509— 5; 1 


*#• 


xd-lV. 


209 


393— 394 


*.«• 


*.•• 


135 


512-:$J[4 


^#» 


5M» 


210 


3S5— 396 


A«« 


»«• 


136 


515—516 


.*## 


#y« 


211 


.337- .398 


••• 


»•• 


137 


517-^18 


.«#• 


*!•• 


212 


399— *P1 


**• 


•*»• 


138 


519-T$21 


.•#• 


.•#• 


213 


402—403 


|»i.» 


.••• 


139 


522—^23 


.**• 


.•#• 


214 


404— 405 


«M* 


^A* 


140 


524-^^5 


»• 


•j*« 


215 


406— 407 


A»» 


,•« • 


141 


526—^28 


**• 


«»• 


216 


,408— 410 


<*•.• 


.■•■• • 


142 


529—530 


P9* 


»f« 


217 


iai~*12 


>«»' 


<••* 


143 


531—532 


«• 


9^3 


218 



SfATE TRIAL6»>— Ikpbk ef B.tn%%vet to both Editiokb. $08 



OCTAVO. 


1 


FOLIO. 




OCTAVO. 


' 
1 


POLIO. 




Fa;.2L 5S3to534 


...' 


vol,lV.p.2l9 


fW. XI. 869 to 871 


••• 


vol. IT. p 


.760 


535-^37 


«»• 


»•• 


220 


1143 1144 


••• 


ml. IV. 


247 


538-539 


••• 


»•• 


221 


1145 1148 


••• 


• •• 


248 


540-^41 


•»• 


• •• 


222 


1149—1155 


•f* 


••• 


•249 


542-^43 


••• 


• •• 


223 


1156—1158 


«•• 


••• 


250 


544-^45 


••• 


• •• 


224 


1157 


••• 


*«• 


249 


546-^47 


••• 


• •• 


225 


1158 


»•• 


*•• 


250 


548-^49 


••• 


• •• 


226 


1150--1160 


»•• 


•«• 


251 


550-^52 


•«• 


*•• 


227 


1161—1162 


••• 


•»• 


252 


553—554 


••• 


f •• 


228 


1163 


••• 


• •• 


253 


555-^56 


••• 


»•• 


229 


1 164—1 166 


••• 


• • • 


254 


557-^8 


••• 


«•• 


230 


1165 


w^ VII. p 


.611 


559—560 


«•• 


• •• 


231 


1166—1173 


• •• 


• • • 


612 


561—562 


•»• 


• •• 


232 


1174—1190 


• •« 


«•• 


613 


563—564 


••• 


• •• 


233 


1191 1193 


«•• 


• •• 


614 


565—^67 


••• 


• •9 


234 


1194— 11P5 


• •• 


•«« 


615 


568—569 


««• 


• •• 


235 


1196—1251 


««• 


»•• 


616 


570—571 


••• 


• •• 


236 


1251 1252 


««• 


««• 


617 


572—573 


•*• 


• •• 


237 


1253—1255 


• •• 


••• 


618 


574—575 


•♦• 


#•• 


238 


1256—1257 


• • • 


• •* 


619 


576—577 


••• 


*»P 


239 


1258—1260 


'••* 


••• 


620 


. 578—579 


•«• 


*•• 


240 


1261—1262 


• •• 


•*• 


621 


580—581 


«•• 


• •• 


241 


1263—1264 


• •• 


• •« 


622 


582—584 


••• 


• •• 


242 


1265—1267 


• «• 


• •• 


623 


585—586 


••• 


.••• 


243 


1268 


• • • 


♦••> 


625 


587 588 


t • • 


• •• 


244 


1269 1271 


««• 


• •« 


626 


589—591 


••!• 


«•• 


245 


1272—1273 


• •• 


•«• 


627 


592—600 


••• 


• •• 


246 


1274—1275 


• •* 


• •• 


628 


599 625 


• *• 


oo^.II. 


731 


1276 1277 


««« 


•*• 


629 


626—^27 


•#• 


• • • 


732 


1278—1280 


• • « 


••• 


iS39 


628—629 


«•• 


«•• 


733 


1281—1282 


• • • 


• •• 


631 


630—724 


••• 


*•• 


734 


1283—1285 


• •• 


• •• 


632 


725—748 


••« 


• •• 


735 


1286—1287 


• •• 


• •» 


633 


752 


'••» 


• •• 


736 


1288—1289 


• •• 


• •t 


634 


764—765 


••« 


• •• 


737 


1290—1292 


• •• 


• •• 


635 


766—767 


••-• 


• •• 


738 


1293—1294 


• •« 


• •• 


636 


768—769 


•«• 


• •• 


739 


1295 1297 


... 


• •• 


637 


824—826 


••• 


• •• 


740 


1298—1299 


• •• 


• •• 


638 


827— fi28 


••• 


• «• 


741 


1300—1302 


• •• 


• •• 


639 


829—^30 


•»m 


• •• 


742 


1303—1304 


• •• 


• •• 


640 


831-^833 


• •• 


• •• 


743 


1305 1306 


«•• 


«.. 


641 


834—836 


• •• 


• •• 


744 


1307—1309 


• .. 


• «• 


642 


837-^8 


• •• 


• •• 


745 


1310—1311 


«.• 


• •• 


643 


839—840 


•#« 


• •• 


746 


1312—1314 


'••• 


• •• 


644 


841—^42 


•*». 


• •• 


747 


1315 


»»• 


.*** 


645 


843—845 


• «« 


<•!• 


748 


1316 


«•• 


• •• 


646 


846—847 


•«• 


•••• 


749 


1315-1320 


• •• 


. • • 


253 


848—849 


•m* 


«•• 


750 


1321 


«•• 


• •• 


254 


850—851 


••• 


«•• 


751 


1322—1323 


• •• 


• •• 


255 


852— S53 


••• 


«•• 


752 


1324—1326 


• •• 


««• 


256 


854-^6 


••• 


• •• 


753 


1327—1328 


• •• 


• •• 


257 


857—1858 


• r» 


• •• 


754 


1S2§— 1330 


*•• 


4.* 


258 


859—860 


*«• 


• •• 


755 


1331—1332 


••• 


• •• 


259 


861—662 


*«• 


• •• 


756 


1333—1335 


.«• 


•«• 


260 


863-r«65 


•*• 


• •• 


757 


1336—1337 


»•• 


*•• 


261 


866-^67 


••#• 


• •• 


758 


1338—1340 


•«• 


••» 


262 


£68 


M« 


tt* 


759 


1339—1348 


««» 


«k* 


645 



V 



304 



STATE TRIALS.^— IiTDEx op ItErBAEKCE to both Editioks. 



OCTAVO 


K 


FOLIO. 




OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




Vd. XI. 


1349 


do/. VU. p 


.646 


Fo/-XIL 189*0191 


• ro/.IV, 


. 303 


1350to 1351 


• • ••• 


647 


192—196 


• • • • 


304 


1352—1354 


»• ••• 


648 . 


197—203 


• • • • 


305 


1353—1358 


!• voL II. 


133 


204—205 


• .». 


306 


1359— 


1363 


> • ••• 


134 


206—208 


. • • • 


307 


1364—1367 


••• 


135 


209—210 


. • • • 


308 


1368—1372 


»• ••• 


136 


211—212 


• • • • 


309 


1371— 


1373 


. vol. IV. 


283 


213—214 


. « • • 


310 


1374—1375 


>• ... 


284 


215—216 


a • • • 


311 


1376—1377 


• ••• 


285 


217—219 


. • • • 


312 


1378—1380 


•• ••• 


286 


220—221 


• • • • 


313 


1381— 


1382 


I* ••• 


287 


222—223 


. • • • 


314 


1383 


1384 


y. ••• 


288 


224—227 


. » • • 


315 


1385— 


1386 


t. ••• 


289 


228—230 


• • • • 


316 


1387 


1389 


»• ••• 


290 


231—232 


• B • • 


317 


1390—1391 


1* ••• 


291 


233—234 


• • • ■ 


318 


1392— 


1393 


• • ••• 


292 


235—237 


• • • • 


319 


1394—1395 


>• ••• 


293 


238—239 


• • • • 


320 


1396—1398 


»• ••• 


294 


240—241 


• ••• 


321 


1399—: 


1400 


»• ••• 


295 


242—244 


. ■ ■ • 


322 


1401 


1402 


>• ••• 


296 


245 246 


• • • • 


323 


1403—1404 


»• ••• 


297 


247—248 


. • « • 


324 


1405— 


1407 


t. ••• 


298 


249 251 


. • • • 


325 


1408—1409 ., 


i« ••• 


299 


252—253 


• • • • 


326 


1410—1411 


• • ••• 


300 


254—255 


ff • • ■ 


327 


1412— 


1413 


I* ••■ 


301 


256—266 


• • • • 


328 


1414— 1416 


»• ••• 


302 


267—268 


• • • • 


329 




1417 


!• ■•• 


303 


269—271 


. • • • 


330 


1418—1420 


»• ••• 


304 


272—273 


. • • ■ 


331 


Vol. XII. 


1 


• • ••• 


261 


274—275 


• • • a 


332 




2 


»• ••• 


262 


276—277 V .. 


• • • • 


333 


3— 


4 


• • ••• 


263 


278—280 


. • • • 


334 


5 


6 


• • ••• 


264 


281—282 


. ' ■ • • 


335 


7— 


9 


•• ••• 


265 


283—284 


• • • • 


336 


10— 


11 


»• ••• 


266 


285—286 


• • • • 


337 


12— 


13 


f. . •• 


267 


287—288 


• ••• 


338 


14— 


15 


»• «•• 


268 


289—290 


• • • « 


339 


16— 


18 


• • ••• 


269 


291—293 


• • • • 


340 


19— 


20 


>• ••• 


270 


294—295 


t • ■ ■ 


341 


21— 


23 


• .• • • • 


271 


296—297 


• • • • 


342 


24— 


25 


• • ••• 


272 


298—300 


• • •• 


343 


26— 


29 


>• ••• 


273 


301—^302 


• • « • 


344 


30— 


31 


»• *•• 


274 


303-^06 


• • t • 


345 


32— 


33 


>• ••• 


275 


307—309 


• • « • 


346 


34— 


35 


> • ••• 


276 


310-^11 


• • • • 


347 


36— 


37 


»• ••• 


277 


312—314 


« • ■ • 


348 


38— 


40 


»• ••• 


278 


315-^16 


• *•• 


349 


41— 


42 


»• • . • 


279 


317--^18 


• ••• 


350 


43 


»44 


»• ••• 


280 


319—321 


• ••• 


351 


45— 


47 


»• • •• 


281 


322—^23 


• ••« 


352 


48— 


50 


»• • t < 


282 


324—325 


• ••• 


353 




113 


,. vol. VIL 


647 


326—^29 


• ... 


354 




113 


>. • t • 


648 


330—331 


• ••• 


355 


114— 116 


>• *«• 


649 


332—333 


• *•• 


356 


117— 


118 


»• ••• 


650 


334—336 


* ••• 


357 


119— 


120 .. 


>• •!• 


651 


337--338 M 


f - t*t 


358 


121— 


m , 


»« Mt 


652 


339-^40 


f tff 


m 



STATE TRIALS. — Index of REFfiRBKCE to iBOTH Editions. 



305 



OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 


■ 


OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




Fo{.XIL S4I to 343 


wh IV. p 


.360 


To/. XII. 651 to 653 


...-vo?. IV. 


p.4l3 


S44^..^5 


«•• 




361 


es^f-^ss 


••• 


• •• 


414 


346—847 


••• 




362 


656-657 


••• 


• •• 


415 


348—349 


••• 




363 


658—659 


••• 


• •• 


416 


350-351 


••• 




364 


660—661 


••• 


• .. 


417 


352—354 


••• 




365 


662—664 


••• 


• »• 


418 


355—356 


••• 




366 


ees-^'eGG 


••• 


• •• 


419 


357—358 


••« 




367 


667—668 


••« 


. •• 


420 


359—360 


••• 




368 


669—670 


«•• 


•*• 


421 


361—362 


•«• 




369 


671—672 


••• 


••• 


422 


363—865 


••• 




370 


673—674 


••• 


«.• 


423 


366—367 


••• 




371 


675—676 


•*• 


• •• 


424 


368—369 


• • • 




372 


677—679 


••• 


• .• 


425 


370—371 


• • » 




373 


680-681 


• •• 


• .• 


426 


372—373 


••• 




374 


682—683 


••• 


• .« 


427 


374—376 


•«« 




375 


684—685 


••• 


• •• 


428 


377—378 


••• 




376 


686—687 


•*• 


«•• 


429 


379L-.380 


«•« 




377 


688—690 


•*• 


• •• 


430 


381—382 


••• 




378 


691—692 


••• 


• *• 


431 


383—385 


••• 




379 


693—694 


••• 


• •• 


432 


386—387 


••• 




380 


695—696 


•»• 


• «■ 


433 


388—389 


••• 




381 


697—698 


•••" 


«•• 


434 


390—391 


••• 




382 


699—701 


••• 


• t» 


435 


392—393 


••• 




383 


702— 703 


••« 


••• 


436 


394—396 


••• 




384 


704—705 


•ff« 


%•• 


437 


397—398 


••■ 




385 


706—707 


«•• 


•t* 


438 


399— 4fOO 


•t* 




386 


708—710 


••• 


• •• 


439 


401—407 


••• 




387 


711—712 


•t* 


• •• 


440 


408—409 


••• 




388 


713—714 


••• 


• *• 


441 


410—412 


••• 




389 


715—716 


••• ' 


• •• 


442 


413—415 


••• 




390 


717—718 


••• 


• *• 


443 


416—417 


••• 




391 


719—720 


••• 


«»• 


M! X' M! 


418-^19 


• !• 




392 


721—723 


«•• 


••• 


445 


420—423 


• •• 




393 


724—725 


••• 


«.« 


446 


424—426 


• •• 




394 


726—727 


ta« 


«•• 


447 


427—428 


• •• 




395 


728—729 


• .• 


• •• 


448 


429—431 


• •• 


' 


396 


730-731 


• •• 


«.• 


449 


597—^06 


• •• 




397 


732—784 


• t* 


«•• 


450 


607--608 


• •• 




398 


735—786 


• •• 


««• 


451 


609—610 


• •• 




399 


737—738 


• •• 


«*• 


452 


611—614 


• •• 




400 


7391—740 


• •• 


«t« 


453 


613—615 


• •• 




401 


741—742 


• •• 


«•• 


454 


616 


• t* 




402 


743—747 


• •• " 


• •• 


455 


617—619 


• •• 




403 


748—749 


• *• 


••• 


456 


620--621 


..• 




404 


750—751 


• •• 


••• 


457 


622—623 


• •• 




405 


752—753 


• •• 


••• 


458 


624--625 


• t* 




406 


754—755 


• •• 


••• 


459 


626 


• ff* 




407 


756—757 


• •• 


••• 


460 


627—628 


• •» 




408 


758—760 


••• 


• .. 


461 


629 


««t 




407 


761—762 


t«* 


• •• 


462 


630—631 


• •• 




408 


763—764 


• •• 


«f* 


463 


632-635 


• •• 




409 


765—766 


• •• 


«•• 


464 


636—637 


• •» 




410 


767—768 


«*• 


• •• 


465 


645 


• •• 




409 


769^-771 


• •• 


«•• 


466 


646—647 


• •• 




410 


772—773 


•tc 


•• 


467 


647—648 


• •• 




411 


774—775 


• •• 


••t 


468 


,,^^ 649—650 


• f% 


• ft 


412 


776-777 


f tt 


?** 


469 


VOIh JOXIV, 








« 









t06 STAT£ TRIALS.-^IviHix mt Heftuvm to Mtn fibt^Mnh. 



OOTATO. 


FOLIO. 




OCTAVO. 


FOLIO* 




rWLXII-778107,79 


... M/. I V. ^ 470 1 


ra^.XlL 898^899 


if9L VIII. 


;i;is 


. 780— 7J82 


• •• 


• •• 


471 


899 


•b* 


• •• 


14 


788—784 


• ** 


«•• 


472 


900 


«•* 


'»•• 


IS 


. .785—786 


• ^ 


• •• 


473 


dOO— 902 


u* 


-••• 


14 


787—788 


««« 


»•• 


474 


.502—903 


sw 


• •• 


15 


. .789—790 


• • 


••• 


475 


.903 


•u 


v»* 


16 


791—793 


• »• 


••• 


476 


904 


a*. 


k*. 


15 


. .794—795 


• i* 


«•• 


477 


904—905 


*u 


• •• 


16 


796—797 


«*• 


«•• 


478 


S06— W7 


wU 


• •• 


17 


. 798—799 


••• 


*•• 


479 


ao7 


. tti* 


»•• 


18 


800-.r802 


••• 


••• 


480 


908 


»4* 


• •• 


17 


803—804 


•U 


*•• 


481 


. M8— 910 


«»«• 


• •• 


18 


. 806—806 


««« 


*•• 


482 


911-^12 


»4* 


••• 


19 


807—808 


«M 


*•• 


483 


912—914 


•4* 


• •• 


20 


. .809—811 


• <• 


k*. 


484 


915—916 


••• 


• •• 


21 


812— 8J3 


• «* 


• •• 


485 


917 


. •<• 


• •• 


22 


814— ai5 


•«• 


• •• 


486 


917 


•i* 


• •• 


21 


8J6 


• «• 


»•• 


487 


918 


•i« 


• •• 


22 


. .817—819 


• <• 


k«« 


488 


918 


h«» 


* 

• •• 


2S 


. 321—822 


• *• 


«o^ VIII. 1 1 


.919 


•U 


;•• 


22 


. 823—824 


• «• 


b.. 


2 


. 920-r921 


•i» 


b«» 


23 


jB25— 826 


••• 


*•• 


3 


921—922 


Urn 


••• 


24 


.527—828 


• •• 


»•• 


4 


922 


M* 


• • 


25 


329—830 


»•♦ 


• •• 


5 


923 


^•* 


i»« 


24. 


j331— 834 


• •» 


• •• 


6 


523 


u« 


;«•> 


25 


.833 


*t* 


«^IV. 


487 


924 


kU 


w* 


24> 


.834 


•(•• 




488 


924 


>i« 


.!•• 


26 


. 335-^36 


•t* 


• •• 


489 


.925 


U* 


••• 


24> 


. ?37— 838 


• t» 


• •• 


490 


.925 


hf. 


••• 


26 


. 839—840 


• •• 


• •• 


491 


926 


•*« 


*•• 


25 


841—842 


• •» 


• •• 


492 


927 


*«• 


*•• 


26 


040 ' "OCMJ 


u* 


• •• 


493 


.928 


• i* 


*•• 


26 


. 345-^7 


«••. 


• •• 


494 


927—929 


•»• 


»•• 


27 


848-rS49 


• •» 


• •• 


495 


930-t931 


«i» 


«•• 


28 


. 850—852 


*«» 


• •• 


496 


932— :933 


U* 


••• 


29 


853—854 


••• 


••• 


497 


934—935 


kU 


«•• 


80 


. 855^^56 


•«• 


• •• 


498 


986-937 


u» 


t«* 


81 


.jS57— 858 • 


•«• 


• •• 


499 


. 938—939 


««• 


«•• 


32 


859-r861 


• «» 


• •• 


500 


940—941 


4«» 


*•• 


38 


862—863 


• *» 


• •• 


501 


942—943 


• «• 


A.. 


34 


864-^5 


««» 


• •• 


502 


944—945 


*•» 


«•• 


S5 


. 866-^867 


*•• 


• •• 


503 


946—948 


»«i 


<•• 


86 


868—369 


•«» 


• •• 


504 


949—952 


k«k 


00& IV. 509 


870 


r*a> 


«•• 


505 


953 


• «» 


«%• 


510 


,871—872 


*«» 


• •• 


506 


954—955 


«' 


'<}•• 


511 


> . . 375 


•«^ 


*•• 


505 


.956-Q58 


<«* 


#•• 


512 


876 


••«r 


«•• 


506 


.959—960 


*<•- 


#•• 


518 


, 877-878 


••# 


• •• 


507 


961—962 


Mi 


»•• 


514 


879—880 


*#» 


• •• 


508 


963—965 


«#* 


#•• 


515 


881 


«*« 


• •• 


509 


966—967 


#*• 


••• 


516 


..882-S84 


•v« 


• •• 


510 


.968-^9 


«#* 


«•• 


517 


883—886 


• «» 


toL VIII. 7 1 


970—971 


tf#4- 


^. 


518 


. 887-388 


«•» 


«•• 


8 


972—974 


«tf4. 


^« 


519 


. 889-390 


• #» 


• •• 


9 


975—576 


»«« 


••• 


520 


391—893 


• 


• •• 


10 


977—978 


««« 


^» 


521 


894—895 


«•• 


«•• 


11 


. 975-880 


««« 


!»• 


522 


.' .896—897 


« Atr 


k»* 


12 


. 981-^92 


4«« 


A* 


52S 



¥ * 



StktSi fRiAiSL^xmx oi kmvvMmcit t0 ^msl CcdttoiriL MSI 



f.KlL^Hf 985 

• 986 — 987 
988—989 
990 — 991 

•992—994 

• 995 — 996 
r997 — 998 

99a— l«X) 
1001—1003 
1004— i<K)5 
1006—1007 
1008—1009 
1010—1011 
1012—1014 
1015—1016 
1017-4018 
101 9l— 1020 
1021—1023 
1024—1025 
1026—1027 
1028—1029 
1030—1032 
1083—1034 
1035—1036 
1037— 10S9 
1040—1041 
; 1042—1043 
1044—1045 
1046—1047 
1048 
1049—1050 
1053—1054 
1055--1O56 
1057—1058 
1059—1060 
1061—1062 
1063—1064 
1065—1066 
1067—1068 
1069^1071 
1072—1073 
1074 
1075—1079 
1164—1165 
1166 
1167 
1168 
1169—1170 
1171—1172 
1173—1175 
1176—1182 
1183—1184 
1185— U86 
li87_U89 
1190—1191 
> 1192—1194 
1195~1196 



'•it 

• * 
• t • 

Hi 

HI 
**• 

■■ «•• 

«•• 
•«• 

•^ 

^1 
in 

-At 
'An 

««• 

u%- 



• •• 



• •• 



• •• 



'••• 






525 
526 
527 
528 
529 
530 
531 
532 
533 
534 
535 
536 
537 
538 
539 
540 
541 
542 
543 
544 
545 
546 
547 
548 
549 
550 
551 
552 
553 

• • • Od4 

tok VIII. 37 
38 
39 
40 
41 
42 
43 
44 
45 
46 
47 
48 
49 
50 
49 
50 
51 
52 
53 
54 
55 
56 
57 
58 
59 
60 



'••• 



•••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



■••« 



•-••• 



^••* 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



*4% 

0i% 



••-#»■ 
Mir 



••• 



• •• 



••• 



••• 



• •• 



«•• 



••• 



••ff 



••• 



' ••• 



••• 



«•• 



'<••• 



•«•• 



••• 



••• 



•••• 



<••• 



>••• 



«•« 



«t« 



Hi 



OCTAVO. 

F.XILIig7*>I198 

1199—1200 

1801 

X202 

X237— a238 

1239 

1240—1241 

1242—1243 

1245—1246 

1247--a248 

1349—1250 

1251—1253 

1254—1255 

1256—0257 

1258—4260 

1261—1262 

1«63— 1264 

1265—1266 

1267 

1568 

1269 

1270—1271 

1272-1275 

1276 

1877 

1278— 1S80 

IS91 

1292 

1359 

1360 

1361—1362 

1363—1365 

1366— J367 

1368—1369 

1370— J372 

1373— J374 

1375 

1376— J378 

1377—1379 

1380 

1381—1382 

1383—1384 

1385—1386 

1387—1389 

1390—1391 

1392—1393 

1394—1396 

l^_1398 

1399—1400 

1^1.^I|;02 

1403—1405 

]l4j06— 1407 

1408—1409 

1410—141 1 
1412—1414 

1415—1416 

H17— 1418 

X2 



^•^ 



, ••• 

' ••••> ■ .' ••• 

9 

• ••• ■- ••• 



• ••» 



• •• 



FOLIO. 

62 
63 
64 
voL X* app. 39 

^•» w^ 41- 

»<^ «9i.yiJi.63 

«•%.... «*b 65 

• ♦•• ' ♦•• 67 
««v •^^ 68 
i«<» - ••$ 69 

: *•* . .- ..l 70 

««^ t*^ 71 

«••' •••♦ • If* 

4*1 ckk 7S 

.: •••> .••• .,7fj 

7^ 

74 
75 
76 
77 
78 
.^.mkX^app. 41 

... 42 

tt)i. IV. 553 

554 
555 
55Q 
557 
558 
559 
560 
561 
562 
561 
562 
563 
564 
565 
566 
567 
568 
569 
370 
571 
.... 572 
573 

..., . \f 575 

• •• ... o /o 

•*•< ■ ... o i i 

;..•. -••• 578 

.. 579 



,..•>■• ... 
• •.<• ■ ... 

*•*• - ... 



• •• 



^ * •»• - .. « a 

_••'••- .... 

,..••- ••• 

}••* «... 



«... 



<•••- 



308 ATA'PE TRIALS.- 


->Ixri»SX OF RXFEEEH Gt TO BOtlt EdITIOKS* 




OCTAVO. 


FOTJOe 




OCTAVO. 


FOLIO* 




KXn.l419tol421 


... voL IV. |j 


^580 


Fof. XIII. 85 to 87 


...voLlVip 


u6S7 


142^—1424* 


••• 


••• 


581 


88—89 


■•. 


tat 


638 


1425—1428 


••• 


•*• 


582 


90—91 


#•• 


aat 


639 


1429—1430 


..• 


••• 


583 


92^93 


. ••• 


tat 


640 


1481—1432 


••• 


••• 


584 


94—95 


•»•- 


••• 


641 


1433— U34 


#•• 


••• 


585 


96— 97 


••• 


•at 


642 


4435—1437 


••. 


••• 


586 


98—99 


•#• 


aat 


643 


1438—1439 


••• 


••. 


587 


. .100—102 


•«• 


tat 


644 


1440— 144<1 


••• 


••• 


588 


103—104 


••• 


• at 


645 


1442—1443 


••« 


••• 


589 


105—106 


••• 


tat 


646 


1444-.144f6 


•#• 


•t« 


590 


107—109 


••* 


••• 


647 


1447—1448 


••• 


••• 


591 


110—111 


••• 


• a* 


648 


1449^1450 


••• 


••• 


592 


112-^113 


••• 


ta« 


649 


1451—1452 


••• 


*•• 


593 


114—115 


••• 


• at 


650 


1453—1454 


••• 


••• 


594 


116—118 


••• 


•a* 


651 


1455—1456 


••• 


#•• 


595 


119—120 


••• 


ta« 


652 


1457—1458 


••• 


••• 


596 


. 121-^122 


••» 


tat 


653 


1459^1460 


••• 


••• 


597 


123—125 


••• 


•at 


654 


1461—1466 


••• 


••• 


598 


126—127 


••• 


ta* 


655 


Vol. XIII. 1— . 2 


••j 


•• 


599 


128—129 


#•• 


• •t 


656 


• > 3' ' * 4 


••• 


••# 


600 


130UP.131 


••* 


ta» 


667 


6— 6 


••• 


• • 


601 


132—134 


t*« 


• a* 


658 


. . 7— 9 


••• 


••» 


602 


135 


••• 


• •• 


659 


lO- 11 


••• 


••• 


603 


.136—140 


••» 


• a* 


660 


• 12 — 13 


••• 


.•• 


604i 


139^140 


••• 


ta« 


661 


• 14— 15 


•t» 


••• 


605 


. 141—142 


••• 


ta» 


662 


16 17 


••• 


• • 


606 


143—144 


••• 


tt» 


663 


18— 20 


••• 


••• 


607 


145-^147 


#•• 


*•• 


664 


21-, 22 


••• 


••• 


608 


148—149 


•«• 


• a« 


665 


-23— 24 


•#• 


••• 


609 


150—151 


••• 


••• 


ODD 


.25— 26 


••• 


••• 


610 


. .152—153 


••• 


• •• 


667 


. 27— 28 


••• 


••• 


611 


154—155 


••• 


••• 


668 


. .29 — 30 


••• 


•ft 


612 


156—157 


#•» 


• •• 


669 


. ^1 — 33 


••» 


•f • 


613 


158—159 


••• 


••• 


670 


34— 35 


••• 


• t. 


614 


. .160—162 


••• 


•at 


671 


36— 37 


••• 


••• 


615 


163—164 


«•• 


•tt 


672 


•38— 39 


••• 


*•• 


616 


165-^166 


••• 


«•• 


673 


40— 42 


••• 


•f • 


617 


. .167—168 


tat 


ta» 


674 


43— 44 


••t 


••# 


618 


169—171 


tt* 


•at 


675 


45— 47 


••• 


•#• 


619 


172—173 


• •t 


• at 


676 


48— 49 


••• 


.•• 


620 


174—175 


ttt 


••• 


677 


50— 51 


••• 


••• 


621 


. 176—177 


• tt 


• •• 


678 


52— 53 


•f* 


••• 


622 


178—180 


••• 


• •« 


679 


54— 65 


••• 


••• 


623 


181—182 


t«» 


• •• 


680 


66— 68 


••• 


••• 


624 


183—184 


• •« 


ta* 


681 


69— 60 


••• 


.•• 


625 


185—186 


tat 


• •m 


682 


^1— 65 


*•• 


••• 


626 


187-^189 


•at 


• at 


683 


S3 


••• 


••• 


627 


J90— 191 


ttt 


• •♦ 


684 


66^ 67 


. •* 


•*• 


628 


. 192—193 


ttt 


• •• 


685 


€8— 69 


••• 


•t* 


629 


194—196 


•at 


tat 


686 


70— 71 


••• 


• •" 


630 


197—198 


• •• 


• a* 


687 


72— 73 


••• 


.#• 


631 


199—200 


.at 


tat 


688 


74— 75 


••• 


.•• 


632 


501-^302 


• a* 


• •• 


689 


76— 78 


••• 


••• 


633 


20S— 204 


• •m 


• at 


690 


79— 80 


• •r 


••4 


634 


205—207 


••• 


«a* 


691 


81— 82 


• •• 


•#• 


635 


208—209 


• at 


• •* 


692 


«9^ H 


«•» * " 


••t 


6S6 


«1(W2U 


M* 


«•# 


69S 



STATE TRIALS 

• 


.— IlTDSX OP RSVEESVCE TO l&0!r» EomOM. 


.309 


OCTAVO. 




FOLIO. 


• r 


OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




Fa/.XUL212*o213 


...voLlV.p 


^694 


Fb/.XIII.33Ui}33S 


•••^ 


volAW.^ 


p.747 


214—216 


«•• 




695 


334—335 


••• 


•i« 


748 


. 217-^18 


••• 




696 


336—337 


«•• 


••• 


749 


219 


«•• 




697 


338—340 


«•* 


••• 


750 


220—222 


••* 




698 


341 


•.. 


.«. 


751 


221—222 


••• 




697 


342—343 


1... 


••• 


752 


228 


«•• 




698 


344—345 


••# 


. ••• 


753 


228—225 


••• 




699 


346—348 


••• 


••• 


754 


226—227 


••• 




700 


349—350 


••• 


••• 


755 


228—229 


••• 




701 


351—552 


**• 


••• 


756 


230—231 


«•• 




702 


353—354 


••• 


••• 


757 


282-^34 


«•• 




703 


355—557 


••• 


••• 


758 


235—236 


••• 




704 


358—359 


•.• 


••• 


759 


237—238 


••• 




705 


360—361 


•.• 


••• 


760 


239—240 


•#• 




706 


362—363 


« •. 


••• 


761 


241—243 


••t 




707 


ssi^ses 


••• 


... 


762 


244—245 


••• 




708 


366^867 


••• 


••• 


763 


246—247 


••• 




709 


368—369 


•«. 


#•• 


764 


248—249 


•»• 




710 


370—372 


••• 


•#• 


765 


250—251 


••• 




711 


373—374 


«.• 


••• 


766 


252—253 


••• 




712 


375—376 


«•• 


•*• 


767 


255—256 


••• 




713 


377—378 


••• 


«•• 


768 


257—258 


••• 




714 


379—380 


••• 


••# 


769 


<d59— 260 


••• 




715 


381—383 


..• 


••• 


770 


261—262 


•#• 




716 


384—385 


«•• 


•#• 


771 


263—264 


••# 




717 


386—387 


#•• 


••• 


772 


265—267 


••• 




718 


388—389 


••t 


••# 


773 


268—270 


«•• 




719 


390—392 


••• 


«•• 


774. 


271—272 


.*• 




720 


393—394 


••• 


••• 


775 


273—575 


••* 




721 


395—396 


••• 


«•• 


776 


276—277 


••• 




722 


397—399 


«*• 


••• 


777 


278—279 


« •• 




723 


400—401 


••• 


•*• 


778 

, 1 II rh 


280—281 


••• 




724 


402 


••• 


•*• 


779 


282—284 


••• 




725 


403 

• ■ > 


•ft 


••• 


780 


285—286 


••• 




726 


405—407 


...wd.X.app.^ 


287—288 


•#• 




727 


408—409 


••» 


••• 


44 


289—290 


••• 




728 


410—411 


«•• 


••• 


45 


291—293 


•.. 




729 


412—413 


«• 


••• 


46 


294—295 


••• 




730 


414—415 


... 


•t* 


47 


296—297 


••• 




731 


416—418 


••• 


••• 


48 
49 


298—299 


••• 




732 


419—420 


••• 


••• 


300—301 


••• 




733 


421—422 


••• 


••• 


50 


302—303 


••• 




734 


423—424 


••• 


••• 


si 

£2 


304^—306 


••• 




735 


425—427 


•#• 


••• 


307—308 


••• 




736 


428-r429 


#•• 


••• 


309 


«•• 




737 


430—431 


••• 


••• 


5* 


310 


«#• 




738 


432—434 


••• 


••• 


55 


311--312 


«•• 




737 


435—436 


••• 


••* 


S6 
S7 

£9 


313 


••* 




738 


437—438 


••• 


••• 


314—315 


••• 




739 


439—441 


•••. 


••• 


316—317 


«•• 




740 


442—443 


••• 


••• 


318—320 


••• 




741 


444—445 


••• 


k«* 


60 
61 


321—322 


••• 




742 


^fl!0*^"W»O 


••• 


••• 


323—324 


••• 




743 


449 


••. 


... 


62 


325—326 


•t* 




744 


451—452 


••• 


wrf.V. 1 


,327—328 


#•• 




745/ 


453 


•t* 


•••9 


2 

Mm 


329—930 


«•«. 




74^ 


454i«456 


M 


••• 


s 



^iO ' 'fimnrs *nU ALft^-^hrMiY m R«ti&Ecir<!S y^ torn ^mrtovi. 



OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 


oc 


FAVO. 


FOLIO. 




r«;.xin.4^4»458 


— 


«rf. V. 


«.4 r^ixn 


I.680l<r581 


••• 


V0€. T« 


».59 




459...460 


•■• 


• »• 


6 


•582—583 


••• 


••• 


60 




461-^-^2 


••• 


•«• 


6 


'584—686 


»•# 


••• 


61 




463-^*464 


••• 


• •• 


7 


S87.'^88 


•• • 


• • » 


62 




465..-466 


%•• 


• •• 


8 


58^—590 


••• 


••• 


63 


• 


467-468 


••• 


• •• 


9 


591—692 


••• 


.•• 


64 




469-^-470 


••• 


••• 


10 


593—695 


»•• 


• • • 


65 




471—472 


*•• 


• •• 


11 


596—697 


••• 


■ ■• 


66 




473—475 


••• 


• •• 


12 


•598—699 


••• 


•■• 


67 




476—477 


••• 


• •« 


13 


600-*«0l 


••• 


••• 


68 




478—479 


••• 


• •• 


14 


602—603 


»•• 


■ •• 


69 




480—481 


••• 


• #• 


15 


604—605 


••• 


• ■• 


70 




. 482—483 


••• 


• •• 


16 


606^^-608 


k«* 


••• 


71 




' 484 


••• 


• •• 


17 


•609-^10 


• •• 


••• 


72 




484 


••• 


• •• 


18 


•611—612 


• •• 


• •• 


73 




485-^-486 


•«• 


• •• 


17 


'613—614 


• •• " 


••• 


74 




. 487--488 


••• 


• •• 


18 


615—616 


••• 


••• 


75 




•489—492 


••• 


• •• 


19 


•617—619 


• •• 


••• 


76 




493—495 


••• 


• •• 


20 


620*^21 


• •• 


••■ 


77 




496—497 


••• 


••• 


21 


•622—623 


••• 


• •■ 


78 




498—499 


••• 


• •• 


22 


624—625 


♦ •• 


• •• 


79 




500—501 


••• 


• •• 


23 


• 626—628 


• •• 


••• 


80 




502—504 


••• 


• « « 


24 


629—630 


• t* 


« • • 


81 




505—506 


• a* 


f • • 


25 


631—632 


• •• 


•■• 


82 




507—508 


• •• 


• •• 


26 


633—634 


• •• 


>•• 


83 




509—510 


• •• 


.•• 


27 


635—636 


• •• 


• •• 


84 




511—512 


• •• 


«•• 


28 


. 637-^39 


« « • 


• •f 


85 




-513—515 


• «• 


• •• 


29 


640-^41 


. • • 


• •• 


86 




516—517 


«•« 


• •• 


30 


•642—643 


• •■ 


• #• 


87 




518—519 


• •• 


• •• 


31 


644-^-645 


> 

• •• 


••• 


88 


• % 


520—521 


• •• 


!•• 


32 


.646—648 


• •• 


••• 


89 




52^—523 


• •■ 


• •• 


33 


649—650 


• •• 


• •• 


90 




524—525 


• •• 


• •• 


34 


651—652 


• •• 


■ •• 


91 


• 


526—528 


«•• 


• • • 


35 


'653—654 


• •• 


• •• 


92 


\ -s 


529—530 


• *■ 


• •• 


36 


655—656 


• •• 


• •• 


93 




' 531—532 


▼•• 


• •• 


37 


651^-^5% 


• •• 


• •• 


94 




' 533—^85 


• •• 


• •• 


38 


659—661 


••• 


• •• 


95 




• 536—538 


• •« 


#•• 


39 


662-^63 


• aa 


••• 


96 




539 


• •• 


#•• 


40 


664—665 


• •• 


• •• 


97 


• 


•540—641 


• •• 


• •• 


41 


.666—668 


• •• 


• •• 


98 


1 

>■ 


- 542—543 


• •• 


• #• 


42 


669-^70 


• •• 


'«•• 


99 


t 


. 544—545 


• •• 


• •• 


43 


671—672 


• •• 


'••• 


100 





' 646—548 


• •• 


• •• 


44 


673—674 


■ •• 


• •« 


101 




549—651 


• •• 


• #• 


45 


675--676 


■ •• 


• •• 


102 


Ki 


'552—653 


• •■ 


• •■ 


46 


677—679 


• •• 


'••• 


103 


t • 


• SSii^'-^S 


• •• 


• #• 


47 


680-681 


• •• 


■ ■« 


104 




• esS'-^&sy 


• •• 


• •• 


48 


682—683 


• •• 


."•• 


105 


« 


' 558—659 


• #• 


• •• 


49 


684—685 


• •• 


• ■• 


106 


t 
1 


•560-^562 


• #• 


• •• 


50 


. 686—687 


' ••• 


• •• 


107 


tf 


663-^*564 


• f • 


• •» 


51 . 


.688—689 


• •• 


• •• 


108 


i' 


. aes-^see 


• •• 


• •• 


52 


. 690—691 


• •• 


• •• 


109 


4 


.567-^568 


• •• 


. ••• 


53 


' 692—694 


• •• 


• •• 


110 


4b 


569—571 


• •• 


• •• 


54 


• 695—696 


• •• 


• •• 


111 




572—673 


• •• 


• •• 


55 


697—698 


• 

• •• 


• •• 


112 


* 


574—^75 


■ •• 


• •• 


56 


699—700 


• •• 


• •• 


lis 




. 576—677 


• •• 


• •• 


51 


. 701—702 


• #• 


••• 


114 


' 


.673—679 


• •• 


«•• 


68 


^ 703—704 


• «• 


• •• 


115 



flTA31i TRIALS.-*-IirQKx or Itsymireii to i|<yrtt ^niTtovi. 91 1 



ogTAVp. 

IW.XIU-70S^o7O7 
708—709 
710—711 
712—713 
714—715 

'716—717 
718—719 
720U-721 
722—724 
725—726 
727—^28 
729—^80 
731—732 
733-^735 
736-^737 
738—739 
740—741 
742—743 
744^745 
746—747 
748—757 
'758 
759 
760 
761—762 
763—764 
765—766 
767—768 
769—771 

'772—773 
774—775 
776—777 
778—779 
780—782 
783—785 
'•786 
939^40 
941- d42 
943—944 
945-^7 
948—949 
950-^52 

955—956 
957—958 
959—961 
962—963 
964—965 
966—967 
968-1^9 
970-972 
973-r^74 
975—976 
977-^78 
'979^981 
982—983 
984—985 



FOUO, 




OCTAVO. 


••• 


MtV. » 


.116 


F.XIIl. 986/0 987 


••• 


• 


117 


9881- 989 


••• 




118 


990—992 


••• 




119 


yM3"""" Jttv 


••• 




120 


995— 996 


••• 




121 


997— 998 


«•• 




122 


999—1000 


•«• 




123 


1001—1002 


•*» 




124 


1003—1004 


«•• 




125 


1005—1007 


•4* 




126 


1008— lb09 


«•■ 




127 


1010—1011 


•♦• 




128 


1012—1013 


• •• 




129 


1014—1016 


• •• 




130 


1017— 1018 


• •• 




131 


1019—1020 


• •• 




132 


1621—1622 


• •« 




133, 


1023—1024 


• •• 




134 


1625—1627 


•«• 




135 


1628—1629 


• •• 




136 


1630 


• •« 




138 


i03l— 1032 


vol. X. «79p. 


63 


1033 


• •• 




64 


lp33 


• •* 




65 


1034—1035 


• •• 




ee 


1036—1037 


• •• 




67 


1038-1039 


• •• 


• •• 


68 


1040—1041 


• •• 




69 


1042—1043 


••• 




70 


1044—1046 


• M 




71 


1047—1048 


• •« 




72 


1049— }050 


••• 




73 


1051—1052 


«•• 




74 


1053**-1054 


••• 




75 


1055—1056 


••• 




76 


1057—1058 


• •• 


w/^V. 


137 


1059 


• •• 




138 


io6o 


••» 




139 


1.105 


»•• 




140 


1106 


••• 




141 


1107—1108 


#•• 




142 


1109—1110 


••• 




143 


IIU—}.U2 


• •* 




144 


1113—1115 


• •• 




145 


J116— II17 


••p 




146 


J118-U19 


»•• 




147 


1120—1121 


r«f 




148 


M22— }i23 


*ff 




149 


1124—1125 


•t» 




150 


i 126— i 128 


f»f 




151 


1129-.h^0 


»•• 




152 


1131— J <32 


• •• 




153 


1133—1134 


»»f 




154 


1 135— 1136 


f*« 




155 


1137—1139 


• •• . 




156 


1140—1141 

|i42— i;4» 


• t«. 




157 



FOUO. 

1 




• «« 


vfd* \,p. 


158 


• •• 


••• 


199 


*•% 


••« 


160 


• ••. 


*•• 


161 


• ••. 


•«• 


162 


*•• 


••• 


163 


• •* 


••• 


164 


• •# 


••• 


165 


• •* 


••• 


166 


• *• 


»•• 


167 


• •« 


♦•• 


168 


• •• 


• M 


169 


• M 


• •• 


170 


%m 


• •*- 


171 


• M. 


f»» 


172 


*•* 


• •• 


173 


♦•t 


• «« 


174 


f 


• •• 


175 


• •^- 


• •• 


176 


• •• 


• •• 


177 


• •• 


• •• 


178 


»•« 


• •• 


180 


«•• 


• •• 


179 


»•« 


♦ •• 


180 


••• . 


♦ •» 


181 


••« . 


• •» 


182 


Mf 


• •• 


183 


••'• 


• t» 


184 


»•• 


••» 


185 


• •t 


••f 


186 


t»» 


••♦ 


187 


»«» 


*»f 


188 


• •• 


••♦ 


189 


• •♦ 


• •♦ 


190 


••• 


• •* 


191 


• •». 


• •• 


192 


• »• 


••t 


193 


••» 


••♦ 


194 


• •f 


••» 


193 


••• 


• •• 


194 


••• 


• •» 


195 


•■• 


• •• 


196 


••9 


?•! 


197 


»•• 


• •» 


198 


• •» 


■•> 


199 


• •9 


••• 


200 


•«• 


••• 


201 


• M 


• •• 


202 


• •♦ 


• f • 


203 


• •• 


••• 


204 


• •• 


• •• 


205 


• •• 


••♦ 


206 


• •• 


••• 


207 


ff 


••• 


208 


••# 


••♦ 


209 


• •• 


•*• 


210 


•«• 


••• 


211 



314 STATE TRIALS. 


— ^Ikdex OF Repekevce to both 


EoiTioiirtr. 




OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




Vol. 1144/0 114*5 


••• 


voL V.p 


.212 


Vd. 1283tol284 


...w/. V.p, 


.239 


XIII. 1146—1148 


••• 


• •• 


213 


XIII. 1285 


••• 


••• 


240 


1149—1150 


••• 


«•• 


214 


1286 


••• 


•• 


241 


1151—1152 


••• 


• •• 


215 


1286 


••• 


••• 


242 


1153—1154 


••• 


• •• 


216 


1287 


••• 


••• 


243 


1155—1156 


••• 


#•• 


217 


1287—1288 


••• 


••• 


244 


1157—1159 


••• 


• •• 


218 


1289—1290 


••• 


••• 


245 


1160—1161 


••• 


• •• 


219 


1291— '1292 


••• 


••% 


246 


1162—1163 


••• 


*** 


220 


1293—1294 


... 


••• 


247 


1164—1165 


••• 


• •• 


221 


1295 


••• 


••• 


248 


1166—1168 


•#• 


• •• 


222 


1296—1297 


••• 


••• 


249 


1169—1170 


• • • 


• •• 


223 


1298—1299 


••• 


••• 


250 


1171—1172 


••• 


• •• 


224 


1300—1301 


••• 


. •• 


251 


1173—1175 
1176—1177 


••• 


• •• 


225 


1302—1303 


••• 


••• 


252 


••• 


!•• 


226 


1304—1305 


••t 


••• 


253 


1178—1179 


••• 


• •• 


227 


1306 


• •• 


••• 


254 


1180—1182 


••• 


• •• 


228 


1307-1308 


••• 


••• 


255 


1183—1184 


••• 


#•• 


229 


1309—1310 


••• 


••• 


056 


1185—1186 


••• 


• •• 


230 


1311—1312 


••• 


••• 


257 


1187 


•#• 


• •• 


231 


1313 


••« 


••• 


258 


1188 


••• 


• •• 


232 


1314^1315 


••• 


••• 


259 


118^—1191 


voL VTIL app. 


485 


1316—1317 


••• 


••• 


260 


1192 


••• 




486 


1318—1319 


••• 


.«• 


261 


1193—1195 


••• 


• •• 


487 


1320—1321 


••• 


••• 


262 


1196—1197 


••• 


• •• 


488 


1322—1323 


••• 


••• 


263 


1198—1200 


••• 


« *• 


489 


1324 


••• 


••• 


264 


1201—1202 


••• 


• •• 


490 


1825 


#•• 


••• 


265 


1203—1204 


••• 


• •• 


491 


1326—1327 


•#• 


••• 


266 


1205—1207 


••« 


• •• 


492 


1327 


#•• 


••• 


265 


1208—1209 


••• 


• •• 


493 


1328 


••• 


••• 


266 


1210—1211 


••• 


• •• 


494 


1328 


••• 


•§• 


265 


1212-1213 


••• 


• •» 


495 


1329 


••• 


••• 


267 


1214—1216 


••• 


• •• 


496 


1330—1332 


•#• 


••• 


268 


1217—1218 


••• 


• •• 


497 


1332 


••• 


••• 


267 


1219—1220 


•#• 


• •• 


498 


1332 


••• 


••• 


268 


1221—1222 


••• 


••• 


499 


1333 1334 


••• 


••• 


269 


1223—1224 


. ••• 


• •• 


500 


1335—1336 


••• 


••• 


270 


1225—1226 


••# 


• •• 


501 


1337 


••• 


••• 


271 


1227—1229 


#•• 


• • • 


502 


1338 


••• 


••• 


272 


1230—1231 


••• 


• •• 


503 


1338—1339 


••• 


••• 


271 


1232—1233 


••• 


• •• 


504 


1340 


••• 


••• 


272 


1234—1235 


••• 


• •• 


505 


1341 1342 


••• 


••• 


273 


1236—1237 


• !• 


• •• 


506 


1343—1344 


••• 


••• 


274 


1238—1240 


• •• 


••• 


507 


1345—1347 


••• 


••• 


275 


1241—1242 


• •• 


• •• 


508 


1S48— 1349 


••• 


••« 


276 


1243—1244 


• •» 


#•• 


509 


1350—1351 


••• 


••• 


277 


1245—1246 


• •• 


••• 


510 


1352—1353 


••• 


••• 


278 


1247 


• •• 


••• 


511 


1354—1855 


••• 


••• 


279 


1248 


• •• 


• •• 


512 


1356—1357 


••• 


••• 


280 


1249 


• •• 


TO/.V. 


231 


1358—1359 


••• 


••• 


281 


1250 


• •• 


•»• 


232 


1360—1361 


••• 


••• 


282 


1251—1252 


• #• 


• •• 


233 


1362—1363 


••• 


• • • 


283 


1253 1254 


«•• 


«•• 


234 


1364—1365 


••• 


••• 


284 


1255 1256 


• •• 


• •• 


235 


1366—1367 


••• 


•«• 


285 


1257—1258 


• •* 


••• 


236 


1368 


••• 


••• 


286 


1259—1260 


• •• 


••« 


237 


Vol. XlY.l— 2 


... 


vol. XL 


. 136 


1261—1262 


••••. 


••• 


238 


3— 5 


•»•• 


• •• 


187 



STATE TRIAl 


^S.— Indb 


X OF HeVSRSITCS to aOTB 


ISfiiTioViJ. 313 


OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 


* 


FW.X1V. 6<o 9 .. 


• voL XI. p 


.138 


ro/.XIV.193<al94 


... 


vol. V. 


319 


10 — 13 


1. •»• 


139 


195—196 


... 


... 


320 


14^-^ 17 


1. .*• 


140 


197—198 


».. 


• •# 


321 


18 — 22 


•• ... 


14) 


199—200 


..» 


... 


322 


23—26 


1* ••• 


142 


201—203 


• •-• 


• «• 


323 


' 27— 32 


>. «•• 


143 


204—205 


«•« 


... 


324 


33 — 37 


•• ... 


144 


206—207 


... 


**• 


325 


38— 41 


I* ... 


145 


208—209 


... 


• •• 


326 


42— 45 


•• ••• 


146 


210—211 


... 


• #• 


327 


46 — 50 


>• *•• 


147 


212—213 


• •« 


... 


328 


51—55 


1. ••• 


148 


214—215 


... 


f 


329 


56—59 


1. ••• 


149 


216—217 


... 


... 


330 


60-- 64 


1. ... 


150 


218—219 


... 


• •• 


331 


G3~-^ 68 •! 


)• • ... 


151 


220—221 


*.• 


... 


332 


69^ 73 


t. ... 


152 


222—223 


• • • 


• «• 


333 


74—77 


)• ... 


153 


224—225 


t •• 


• .• 


334 


78— 82 


»• ••• 


154 


226—227 


• a. 


... 


335 


83— T 86 


»« •«• 


155 


228—230 


• •* 


... 


336 


87— 91 


»• ••• 


156 


231 


... 


... 


337 


92— 95 


f ... 


157 


232 


... 


.•• 


338 


96—100 


)• •«• 


158 


233—238 


... 


... 


339 


101—104 


» ... 


159 


239—240 


... 


... 


340 


105—109 


1. ... 


160 


241—242 


... 


... 


341 


110—113 


• .•• 


161 


243—244 


... 


... 


342 


114 


)• ... 


162 


245—247 


• •• 


• •« 


343 


128—127 


1. vol. V. 


287 


248—249 


... 


... 


344 


128—129 


1. ... 


288 


250—251 


«.. 


• •• 


345 


130 


• ••. 


289 


252—253 


... 


«•• 


347 


131—133 


1. .*• 


290 


254—255 


... 


... 


349 


134—135 


)•' ... 


291 


256—^9 


«.. 


..• 


351 


136— J 38 


>• .•• 


292 


259 


• •. 


... 


S52 


139—140 


. «•• 


293 


259—260 


• •. 


... 


353 


141—142 


)• ... 


294 


261 


... 


« • • 


355 


143—144 


f ... 


295 


262—^63 


»•• 


... 


356 


145—146 


1. •«. 


296 


263 


... 


... 


357 


147—148 


>• ... 


297 


263—264 


... 


• •• 


346 


149^150 


». ... 


298 


265—267 


• •• 


... 


348 


151—152 


1. ... 


299 


268 


• f . 


... 


350 


153—154 


». ... 


300 


269 


... 


.... 


352 


155—156 


>. ••• 


301 


270—271 


.•• 


1 

... 


354 


157—158 


». ... 


302 


272—274 


... 


... 


356 


159—160 


1. ... 


303 


274—275 


• •• 


«.# 


357 


161—163 


•* ... 


304 


276 


... 


... 


358 


• 164—165 •« 


i. ... 


305 


277—279 


... 


... 


359 


166—167 


>• ... 


306 


280 


.•• 


..a 


360 


168—169 


t. ... 


307 


281 


• •. 


... 


361 


170U-171 


>• •.. 


308 


281 


... 


• •• 


362 


172—173 


>• ... 


309 


281—282 


... 


... 


361 


174—175 


). ... 


310 


283—^84 


... 


... 


362 


.176—177 


»* ... 


311 


285 


... 


••• 


363 


178—179 


». ... 


312 


285 


.«. 


.*• 


364 


180—182 


». •.. 


313 


285—286 


... 


..• 


863 


183—184 


1. ... 


314 


287 


... 


... 


362 


185—186 


». »•• 


315 


287 


.«. 


... 


363 


-187—188 


1. a • • 


316 


288—^89 


«•• 


... 


364 


189—190 


1. ... 


317 


289—290 


*•• 


... 


365 


19l-,.192 


»• *•.• 


318 


291— ^93 


••« 


... 


366 



914 JTATB TRIAL9*i^iiBSx or 1tm»x9bi M itm EmfuM. 



QOTAVO. 


FOilO. 1 


QOTAVO. 


Foua 




¥0t.my.^»stQ99^ 


»•« VOim } 


f.p.d&i 


r4;.XIV.4«Sto443 


.M< 


po/..v« p.m 


. 295-r296 


• •• •• 


. 369 


AAA, 

V Ml J.' 


••» 


••• 


417 


. 297—298 


#•• •! 


. 871 


.445-..446 


•♦• 


••• 


418 


299--900 


• •• •• 


.. 368 


. 471-r472 


»•* 


.../ 


419 


S01--r302 


• •• •• 


. 370 


. 473 


»•• 


••§ 


420 


303 


«•• •< 


,. 372 


. 474-rT475 .' 


• •• 


■•• 


421 


304 


• •» •< 


. 371 


476-r477 


••• 


••• 


422 


S05 


f«» •• 


.. 373 


478—479 


• •• 


»•• 


423 


306 


«••■ •< 


• 374 


480-r481 


• •• 


•I* 


424 


307—308 


t— •* 


.. 375 


48?-r-483 


»«• 


•If 


425 


309 


• •• •< 


. 376 


48^^85 


*•• 


••• 


426 


310 


• *• '•* 


. 377 


. 486-rr487 


»•• 


••• 


427 


.311 


• •• •• 


. 378 


. 488-r489 


• •• 


>•• 


428 


311 


■ *• •< 


. 374 


. .49a-TT49l 


• •• 


••• 


429 


, 312--313 


!•• •< 


. 376 


. .492.«493 


• •• 


••• 


430 


.313 


*»« •« 


• 378 


. 494-r*496 


• •• . 


••• 


431 


,313-314 


f •• •< 


. 379 


497--498 


«•* 


••• 


432 


, 315-:^16 


fa« •! 


.. 380 


499-r^OO 


•#• 


•§• 


433 


317-r318 


»•• •« 


. 381 


501—402 


••• 


•0« 


434 


.318 


• »• •< 


• 378 


503-^05 


■ «• 


••• 


485 


.319 


«•• •< 


>. 381 


506-,«507 


*•• 


••• 


436 


. 320—321 


#•• •« 


. 382 


. 508-r^09 


I •• 


••• 


437 


,322 


f** •< 


. 383 


510—511 


• •• 


§•• 


438 


.328 


!•• •• 


.. 384 


512—514 


• •• 


••• 


439 


'377 


#•• •• 


.. 383 


515-^16 


• •• 


••• 


440 


378 


«•• •< 


.. 384 


. 517 


«•• 


••• 


441 


, 379-r380 


f*« •< 


.. 385 


. 526-r529 


»•♦ 


•§• 


441 


381—382 


»•• • •* 


.. 386 


530—531 


#•• 


••• 


442 


383-384 


• •• •« 


,. 387 


532-^533 


• •• 


• c* 


443 


385—386 


l^ft •! 


,. 388 


534>-^35 


• •• 


••• 


444 


387—388 


!•• •• 


.. 389 


536 


«•• 


•«• 


445 


S89-r390 


• •• •< 


,• 390 


536 


««• 


••• 


446 


391—392 


• •• •< 


>. 391 


537-^38 


♦ •• 


••• 


445 


.393-^394 


• •• •* 


>. 392 


. 539-^40 


• •• 


• •• 


m 


395—396 


• •• •! 


« 393 


541— £42 


«•• 


••• 


447 


397—398 


*•• •« 


• OsVT 


543-rr546 


• •• - 


. • • * 


448 


399—400 


•pm •« 


. 395 


545 


• •• 


w/.Vni. 82 


401—402 


«•• •< 


. 396 


. 546—547 


«t* 


••• 


83 


403-:404 


•#• •• 


. 397 


548—549 


«•• 


. ••• 


84 

4% M 


405-t406 


• »• •« 


. 398 


550-7-551 


«•• 


••• 


85 


407— ^08 


• *• •« 


. 399 


. 552—553 


f»» 


••• 




409—410 


••• - •• 


,. 400 


554-n556 


«»f 


«§• 


87 


411--412 


«*• •« 


.. 401 


557-7-558 


f»» 


••• 


^ 


413—414 


•*• ' •! 


.. 402 


. 559-r560 


• •• 




^ 415-7*16 


«•• •« 


>. 403 


561-r563 


«•• 


■ §• 


4dU 


417-t418 


«*• •• 


.. 404 


564—565 


• •• 


!•• 


451 


,419—420 


• «• ■• 


.. 405 


566-«667 


. <•• 


• •• 


452 


421—422 


»•• .." *i 


.. 406 


MS-T8e9 


• •• 


• •» 


453 


' 423—424 


f*» •« 


.. 407 


570-7572 ' 


• •• 


• •• 


454 

1 ^0 


425-^26 


.♦*• •« 


.. 408 


573—574 


• •« 


••• 


455 


427—428 


#*• t< 


>• 409 


575-H560 


••• • 


. ••• 


456 


. 429-7430 


#•• •< 


.. 410 


.577—579 


♦ •• 


• •• 


457 
458 
459 


, 431—432 


«•• •< 


.. 411 


580-n581 


• •• 


*•• 


433—434 


• •• •< 


.. 412 


. 582-7-583 


*t» 


• •• 


, 435—436 


• •« • 


.. 413 


584—585 


••• 


• •• 


460 


, 437—439 


• *• • 


414 


586—588 


• ••. 


• •• 


461 
462 


440*7441 


M# •< 


.. .415 


589-r590 


«••' 


..••• 



STATS TRIALS.>^Iirttix w ftBynnrnipd thtu EhitioitM. 31S 



tti 



'»^^mmm»m^»»mtfir'yffmm 



OCTAVO. 

IW.XIV.56U0592 
593-^^95 
596 
597--«98 
599—600 
601-*-602 
603—604. 
605—607 
608—609 
610—611 
612—613 
614—615 
616—619 

6fi3^»624« 
625—626 
627—629 
630—631 
632—633 
634—635 
€36 
639 
639 
640^1-642 
643—645 
646—647 
648—650 
651—652 
653-«»654 

657—659 
660—661 
662—663 
664—666 
667—668 
669—670 
671—672 
673—674 
675—677 
678—679 
680L-^8l 
682-€83 
684—686 
687 
688 
689—690 
691 
692—693 
694—696 
695—697 
698—699 
700—701 
702—703 
704—705 
706—708 
709—712 
713—714 



'A 



• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 



• •• 

*•• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 
k«» 

• •• 

.•*• 

• ••' 
•«• 

• •• 
«•• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 
*•• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •■ 

• •• 

• «• 

• #• 

»«» 

• •* 

• •* 

»•• 
*••. 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• * • 

• •• 
*'•• 

• •• 

• •• 

• • • 



• •• 

• •• 

• •• 
^•« 
»•• 

«•• 

• •• 

• #• 



roLio. 

••• voi, V*l>«4o3 
••• 464 
*•• 465 
*•• 465 

466 
467 
468 
469 
470 
471 
472 
473 
474 
475 
476 
477 
478 
479 
480 
481 
482 
481 
482 
483 
484 
485 
486 
487 
488 
489 
490 
491 
492 
493 
494 
495 
496 

497 

498 

499 

500 

501 

502 

503 

504 

503 

504 

505 

506 

vol. VIIL 89 

90 

91 

92 

93 

94 

95 

96 



••• 

•■• 
••• 

••• 
*•• 
••• 



••• 
«•• 

••• 
••• 
•■• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
*•• 
•«• 
• •• 
*•• 



«•* 

••• 
••• 
••• 
«•• 
••ft 
••• 
••• 

••« 

••• 



••• 

••• 
«•» 
••» 
*•• 
••• 



SB 



p««aia«aiMn 



wmmmmmmm 



OCTAVO. 

Fo/vXlV. 71510716 
717^718 
719—722 
723—724 
725—727 
728—729 
730—731 
732—733 
- 734—5^35 
736-J738 

^ 741—742 
743—744 
745—746 
747—749 
750—751 

. 752—753 
754—755 
756—757 
758—760 
761—762 
763—764 
765—766 
767—768 
769—770 

.77I--773 
774—775 

776—777 
778—781 
782 
783—784 
785—786 
787—789 

•790—791 
792—793 
794—795 
796—797 
798— "799 

*800— aoi 
802-^04 
^05 
806—807 
808.*4{10 
811_812 
813-.814 
815-4(16 
817—818 
S19«--820 
821~822 

^823—824 
825—826 
827—828 
829-^31 
832—833 
834-^35 
836—837 
838—839 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



•.• 



••• 



••• 



^ 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



FOLIO. 

98 
99 
100 
101 
102 
103 
104 
105 
106 
107 
108 
109 
110 
HI 
112 
113 
114 
115 
116 
117 
118 
119 
120 
121 
122 
123 
124 
125 
126 
127 
128 
129 
130 
131 
132 
133 
134 
135 
136 
137 
138 
139 
140 
141 
142 
143 
144 
145 
146 
147 
148 
149 
150 
151 
152 
153 



•<« 

«!• 
«i» 

*•» 

• •« 

• •• 

*'•• 
•*• 
«•• 

• •• 
••« 
*•• 
*'•• 
«•• 
••ft 
•'•• 

• •• 
••• 
••• 
■•• 
«•* 

■ •• 

•• 

• 
••• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

••• 
••• 
••• 
*•• 
••• 
••• 

• •• 
*•• 
*•• 
•*• 
«•• 

■ •• 

• •• 

• •• 
••« 
••• 
••• 
••• 

• •'•' 
••• 

• •'• 
•»• 

■ •• 

• •• 
«» 



*•• 



4 •• 



•I* 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



• •• 



• •• 



••• 



••» 

••• 

' ••• 

*•• 

• •• 
'••• 

••• 
••• 



« • 



• •• 



816 .STATE TRIALS.— Ihdk or Referenck to bmh fLtartcmn. 



3E! 



OCTAVO, 

IW.XIV,840to842 
843—844 
8i5-.-846 
.847— 84« 
349—850 
851—853 
854—855 
856—857 
858—859 
860U-863 
864^—665 
866—867 
868—869 
870—871 
87^—874. 
875—876 
. 877—878 
879—880 
881—883 
884—885 
886—887 
888 
888 
.889 
890—891 
•• 892 
893—894 
895—896 
897—901 
902—903 
904—906 
907—908 
909—910 
911—912 
913—914 
915—917 
918—919 
920—921 
. 922r-923 
924—925 
926—927 
928—930 
931—932 
933--934 
935—937 
938 
938 
937—939 
940 
.941— 942 
943—944 
945—946 
947—948 
949—950 
951—952 
953—954 
956—956 



••• 



•• 



•• 



••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••» 
••• 
•»• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 



••• 



»•# 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



«•• 



•§• 



•I* 



••• 



••• 



«•• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••» 



••• 



••» 



••• 



••• 



••• 



•• 



•• 



•t 



FOLIO. 

Fo/.VlILp. 154 
155 
156 
157 
158 
159 
160 
161 
162 
163 
164 
165 
166 
167 
168 
169 
170 
171 
172 
173 
174. 
175 
176 
175 
176 
177 
178 
177 
178 
179 
180 
181 
182 
183 
184 
185 
186 
187 
188 
189 
190 
191 
192 
193 
194 
195 
196 

vol. VIIL app. 535 

536 
537 
538 
539 
540 
541 
542 
543 
544 



•• 



•f 



•• 



•• 



•• 



•t 



•• 



•• 



•• 



•• 



•• 



•• 



•• 



•• 



•• 



•• 



•• 



•• 



•• 



«t 



•• 



•• 



•f 



■• 



•• 



•t 



•• 



•• 



M»- 



• • 



OCTAVO. 

F.XIV.957to 958 

959— 960 

961— 963 

96^— 965 

066— 967 

968— 969 

970— 971 

972— 973 

974— 975 

976— 977 

978— 979 

980— 981 

982 

982 

983 

984 

985 

986 

987— 988 

989 

990—991 

992— 994 

995— 996 

997—998 

999—1000 

1001—1003 

1004—1005 

1006—1007 

1008—1010 

1011—1012 

1013—1015 

1016—1017 

1018—1019 

1020—1022 

1023—1024 

1025—1026 

1027—1028 

1029—1031 

1032 

1033—1035 

1035—1036 

J037— 1038 

1039—1040 

1047—1048 

JQ4,9_1050 

1051—1057 

1058—1059 

1060—1061 

1062—1063 

1064—1066 

J 067— 1068 

1069—1070 

1071—1072 

1073—1074 

1075—1076 

1077—1078 

1079—1981 



FOLIO, r 

•Do;.VlILjp. 545 



••• 
••• 
••• 
•«» 
••• 
••• 

• a» 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 



• •• 



• •• 
••• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 
«•• 
••• 
••• 

• •• 

• •• 



• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

••• 

• •• 
••• 

• •• 

• •• 

• #• 

• •• 

• •• 
••• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •» 

• #• 

• •• 

• •• 
#«• 

• •» 

• •• 



547 
548 

m 

560 
551 
552 
553 

555 
556 
557 
55S 
wl. v. 505 
506 
507 
508 
507 
508 
509 
510 
511 
512 
513 
514 
515 
516 
517 
518 
519 
520 
521 
522 
52S 
524 
525 



••• 



••• 

••• 

••• 

••• 

••# 

••• 

••• 

•#• 

••• 

••• 

••• 

•#• 

••• 

••• 

••• 

••• 

•§• 

••• 

••» 

••• 

«•• 

••• 

••» 

••• 

•#• 



527 
528 

:::»otvuLi95 

197 
198 
199 

201 
202 



••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
««• 
••• 
••* 
••• 
••• 
«•• 

«4*- 



• •• 

• #• 
••• 
#•• 
«#• 

• •• 
••• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• #• 
••• 
••• 
«•• 

• •* 

• »• 



204 
»5 



207 



210 
2» 



STATE TRIALS.— Index of llErsRENCE to both Editioks. 317 



OCTAVO. 

r.xiy.io82foio8s 

1084^1065 
1086—1087 
1088—1090 
1091-^1092 

1093 

1094 
1095—1096 

1097 
1097—1099 
1100—1101 
1102—1103 
1104—1105 
1106—1108 
1109—1110 
1111—1112 
H13— 1115 
1116—1117 
1118—1119 
1120—1121 
1122—1124 
1125—1126 
1127—1128 
1129—1130 
1131—1133 
1134—1135 
1136—1137 
1138—1140 
114.1—1142 
1143—1144 
1145—1147 
1148—1149 
1150-1151 
1152—1154 
1155—1156 
1157—1158 
1159—1160 
1161-1163 
1164—1165 
1166-^1167 
1168—1170 
1171—1172 
1173—1174 
1175—1176 
1177—1178 
1179—1181 
1182—1183 
1184—1185 
1186—1188 
1189—1190 
1191—1192 

1193 
1194—1195 
1199—1209 

1210 
1211.P.1212 



... 



••• 



••• 



••• 



... 



.«• 

•t. 

••• 

•«. 
••• 

••« 

••* 
«•* 
... 
• • • 
••• 
•f . 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••* 



FOLIO. 

w/.VIILp.212 
213 
214 
215 
216 
217 
218 
vo/. V. 227 
528 
529 
530 
531 
532 
533 
534 
535 
536 
537 
538 
539 
540 
541 
542 
543 
544 
545 
546 
547 
548 
549 
550 
551 
552 
553 
554 
555 
556 
557 
558 
559 
560 
561 
562 
563 
564 
565 
566 
567 
568 
569 
570 
571 
572 
571 
572 
57$ 
«M «t« 574 



••• 



.«. 



••* 



••* 



... 
... 
•• • 
»•. 

••• 
... 
•*. 
•I. 
... 
... 

... 
••• 

••« 
.•• 
•«. 
•«. 
«.« 
*•• 
•*. 
••» 
... 
«»• 
.#• 
••« 

• a* 
... 

• •• 

• t. 
«•• 
«.. 



.§ . 
••• 

..• 

• •• 
«•• 

• •* 

• •• 
«.t 

• •• 

• c« 

• •• 

• •* 

• •• 

• •# 

• •• 

• •• 
••• 



• •• 

• •• 
... 
... 

• •• 

• •• 

• •» 

.«. 
... 

• a. 

• f a 

• •. 
... 

• at 
... 
..a 
«a. 
.a. 

• a* 

• a. 

• a. 
.a. 
«a. 
.a. 

• a* 

• •• 

• a. 
«a. 
«a. 

• a* 



OCTAVO. 




FOLIO. 




F.XlV.l2l5tol2l6 


• •9 


voi.y.p 


*575 


1217—1219 


aat 


••• 


576 


1220U.1221 


.a. 


• •• 


577 


1222 


• •• 


.aa 


578 


1223—1225 


• a. 


• •• 


579 


1226—1227 


• • • 


• •• 


580 


1228—1229 


• at 


.aa 


581 


1230—1231 


• a. 


• aa 


582 


1232—1234 


• aa 


• •• 


583 


1235—1236 


a.* 


• at 


584 


1237—1238 


• •• 


• a* 


585 


, 1239—1240 


• aa 


• • • 


586 


1241—1243 


• •* 


• •• 


587 


1244—1245 


• •• 


• •• 


588 


1246—1247 


••.•• 


• at 


589 


1248—1249 


• aa 


..a 


590 


1250—1252 


••• 


••• 


591 


1253—1254 


• a. 


••• 


592 


1255—1256 


• a. 


• •• 


593 


1257—1258 


• a« 


• at 


594 


1259—1260 


• a. 


• at 


595 


1261—1263 


• •• 


■••• 


596 


1264—1265 


• •• 


«•• 


597 


1266—1267 


• a. 


• at 


598 


1268—1269 


• •• 


• a* 


599 


1270-1271 


• a* 


tat 


600 


1272—1273 


• •• 


.•• 


60. 


1274—1276 


..• 


t.« 


602 


1277—1278 


.a. 


• a. 


603 


1279—1280 


• •• 


m«» 


604 


1281—1282 


• a. 


• aa 


605 


1283—1284 


• • • 


.a. 


606 


1285—1287 


mf 


• at 


607 


1288—1289 


• aa 


... 


608 


1290 


« •• 


• •• 


609 


1291 


«a. 


• •• 


610 


1291 


• a. 


• •• 


609 


1292—1327 


aa* 


• aa 


610 


1328—1329 


aa. 


m*^ 


611 


1330—1332 


• •• 


• •• 


612 


1333—1334 


.•• 


• •• 


613 


1335—1336 


• •• 


• •• 


614 


1337—1338 


• •• 


• •• 


615 


1339—1341 


• •• 


• •• 


616 


1342—1343 


• a« 


• •« 


617 


1344—1345 


• a. 


• aa 


618 


1346—1347 


... 


• a« 


619 


1348—1350 


• 9» 


• •. 


620 


1351—1352 


• •• 


• •• 


621 


1353—1354 


• •• 


• aa 


622 


1355—1356 


• •• 


• at 


623 


1357—1359 


at. 


• aa 


624 


1360—1361 


• a. 


• •• 


625 


1362—1363 


• ac 


• •• 


626 


1364—1365 


• •• 


• •• 


627 


1366 


• •• 


^•» 


628 


1369 


«tt 


• •f 


627 



Jl« «f AT* f RlALS;^!*bfeic ^f kifukft^tt W Bdril loiffft**: 



.^ . 


''■^^^' •' - ■ 










^ms^^^^^B 




laSegL- 


OOtAVb. 


FDLIO. 




OCtAVD. 


mhm. 


'. 


ntXiV. 1369 


u\ 




;62S 


rw. XV. Uto 87 


... «* v* p 


#4^ 


1870 


\A 


629 


. . 88—89 


iU 


HI 


664 


1371 


l\X 


••• 


630 


90—92 


lU 


hi\ 


665 


137 Uo 1378 


,i»voLX.app, 77 \ 


93— 94 


U4 


U» 


666 


1379 


i%i 


« 4 
• • • 


78 


95— 97 


iii 


lU 


667 


1380—1381 


I'A 


1 
• • • 


79 


98— -99 


u* 


«•• 


668 


1382—1383 


• • • 


• •• 


80 


400— iOl 


iU 


• •• 


669 


1384—1386 


Hi 


• • • 


81 


. 102—404 


iU 


Hi 


670 


1387—1389 


• •• 


• • • 


82 


105— lr06 


Hi 




671 


1390—1391 


iU 




83 


. 107 108 


' m 


~it 


672 




1394 


• •• 


• • • 


84 


109—111 


.u 


• kt 


673 




1395 


i'.i 


^;V. 


629 


^ 112—113 


.u 


.A 


674 




1395—1396 


. . I 
• •• 


* 
• • • 


630 


114—115 


•u 


'•»* 


675 




1397 


• • • 


• • • 


631 


116—418 


..i 


<.l 


676 




1398—1400 


i.i 


• • • 


632 


.1 19—420 


•a 


..t 


677 




1401—1402 


iA 


• • • 


633 


. 121—422 


•w 


.'•i 


678 




1403—1404 


•• • 


• • • 


634 


. 123—425 


.u 


•>i 


679 




1405—1406 


- « 

••• 


• « • 


635 


> 126— 127 


*.i 


•^ 


680 




1407—1409 


i%i 


.U 


636 


. 128—429 


••* 


M 


681 




1410—1411 


1 

••• 


« 
• • • 


637 


130-^^32 


•U 


.U 


682 




* 1412—1413 


••• 


• • • 


638 


133—134 


.^1 


^>« 


683 




1414—1415 


•'•i 


.;; 


639 


135—156 


•u 


•%« 


684 


, 


1416 


iii 


u< 


640 


137—459 


•%t 


•\f 


685 


mXY. 1— 12 


•^. Vilt ikfrn- 


557 


. 140—441 


■ v%» 


»Vi 


686 


.13— 15 


• • • 


• • • 


558 


, 142—443 


.;* 


-.\*^ 


687 


' 16— 17 


•a 


'.;. 


559 


144—146 


• vi 


V.i 


688 


48— 19 


••• 


'••S 


560 


. 147 448 


*U 


%%* 


689 


20— 21 


'■•• 


.;t 


561 


149—150 


,U 


^ir 


690 


Q2— 23 


;;i 


-.'.t 


562 


151—453 


*.t 


•\* 


691 


24— 25 


••■ 


..i 


563 


154—455 


M 


•V* 


692 


♦26— -27 


•• • 


■ k 
• • • 


564 


156—457 


M 


•»i 


693 


28— 50 


••k 


• * • 


565 


158—459 


.v« 


U» 


694 


SI— S2 


• • • 


• • • 


566 


- 160—462 


>U 


%%• 


695 


^— 34 


9 9 # 


• « • 


567 


163—464 


>•« ' 


..» 


696 


35 


#•• 


• • • 


568 


- 165—166 


•u 


'•ki 


697 


56— 37 


• • • 


vot.y. 


641 


. 167—169 


•>•« 


%^. 


698 


58— 59 


•^4 


• • • 


642 


170-471 


,\k 


v.* 


699 


40— 41 


* • 
• •• 


.\-. 


643 


172—173 


•"•A 


>.^i 


700 


42— 43 


• •• 


« • • 


644 


174—176 


•i. 


'•i» 


701 


44— 46 


• • • 


« • • 


645 


177—178 


'•\*' 


•^« 


702 


47— 48 


• • • 


'« .* 


646 


179—1^0 


'•%• 


'•%» 


703 


49 50 


'••• 


'•^« 


647 


181—153 


>,%« 


>*t« 


704 


51— 53 


• »• 


• (k 


648 


184—155 


%*k 


%«• 


705 


54 55 


• • • 


• • * 


649 


186—157 


•\. 


V** 


706 


56 57 


• • '< 


• • • 


650 


188—1^0 


Vt* ~ 


sU 


707 


58— ^0 


• • • 


• '•i 


651 


191—1^2 


'.^* ■ 


•%• 


708 


61— 62 


•'•. 


••• 


652 


193—454 


'.%*■ 


%%• 


709 


.-63— 64 


'• '• • 


• k'* 


653 


195—497 


Vi* 


>•%• 


710 


^5 67 


• •'• 


'i.^-. 


654 


198—499 


'•%• 


'•^. 


711 


68— 69 


'• • • 


'««li 


655 


200-^201 


•i* 


U. 


712 


70 


•v. 


'..« 


656 


: .202—^4 


U* 


%%• 


713 


71— 73 


••i^ 


• t* 


657 


205—207 


'%»,, 


•«• 


7l4 


. 74— 75 


'•^« 


1 

'• •• • 


658 


208—209 


'.-W* 


U. 


715 


76— 77 


'••r 


v.; 


659 


SlO— 211 


'.«• 


%%♦- 


716 


78— SO 


'••* 


•«« 


660 


212—2.14 


•t* 


*•. 


7l7 


81— 82 


V»V 


•#• 


661 


- 215—216 


«'*• "' 


" ' If 


718 




53— 54 


'•«« 


••• 


662 


217-^8 


s«» 


• \lk0 


719 



STAlr£ tRiALS«*^iri»ft& Of flBf£itEirci to botiI EDtfi6^8i dtl 



ooTuro. 


POLIO. 




OCTAVO; 


FOLIOi 




M.KVi2\9io 221 


i.i t0U V. p 


.r2& 


FW. XVi 347*0349 


Mii \^. V; j#. 


m 


. 222-^224. 


i«r 




721 


. 350-T^5l 


Ak« 


••• 


778 


. . .225-.^27 


»K« 




722 


352-^53 


iU 


s 
*'••• 


779 


.228—229 


^u 




723 


354-^56 


«»# 


••• 


780 


230l-^2 


%h9 




724 


357—358 


*^^ 


••• 


781 


. .283—234 


Vtl 




725 


359-^60 


i^M 


••• 


782 


235—236 


%*t 




726 


361—362 


iU 


••• 


783 


. 237-r239 


(i* 




727 


363—565 


ilt 


••• 


784 


240-^41 


il« 




728 


366—367 


iu 


••• 


785 


242-^43 


. It 




729 


. .368—369 


U. 


••• 


786 


. 544-r^4^ 


il« 




730 


3701.^72 


4t» 


•#• 


787 


. 546-^48 


ii. 




731 


373—374 


if 


••• 


788 


.^249^250 


k*« 




732 


375—376 


«»• 


••• 


789 


. 251-^52 


ii. 




733 


377—379 


i»« 


'••• 


790 


.553-^54 


4U 




734 


380—381 


ik* 


• •0 


791 


555— S'Je 


«u 




735 


. 882—383 


if* 


^•» 


792 


. 557-^258 


iu 




736 


384-^386 


lit 


*•• 


793 


. 559—260 


iu 




737 


387—388 


h* 


• •• 


794 


. 26l-r262 


a* 




738 


.389^--390 


i*. 


• •• 


795 


. 263-r264 


•u 




739 


39l-p^92 


i»«' 


«•• 


796 


265-^266 


*i* 




740 


393—395 




«•• 


797 


. 267—268 


4l0 




741 


396—397 




• •• 


798 


269-.270 


iU 




742 


398—400 


iU 


«•• 


799 


• . 271—272 


ii0 




743 


401—402 


• •• 


• •• 


800 


. 273-^275 


*i» 




744 


403—404 


«•• 


• •• 


801 


. 276-r277 


*im 




745 


405—407 


4;« 


• •• 


802 


.278—279 


*'•• 




746 


408—409 


*•• 


• #• 


803 


. 280-t281 


4U 




747 


. 410—411 


i«» 


• •• 


804 


. 282—283 


«•* 




748 


412—414 


!»• 


• •• 


805 


. 284--286 


• •• 




749 


4l&«-r4l6 


• •» 


• •• 


806 


. 287—288 


• •• 




750 


417—418 


»V> 


• •• 


807 


289^290 


4i» 




751 


419—421 


••« 


• •• 


808 


. 291—292 


kirn 




752 


422—423 


•«■ 


• •■ 


809 


.293—295 


• '*• 




753 


424—426 


■lU 


'... 


810 


296—297 


%•• 




754 


427—428 


4*0 


-%%• 


811 


. 298—299 


4 




755 


429—430 


• •• 


• •• 


812 


. 300—302 


«4« 




756 


431—433 


ri*« 


• •• 


813 


303—304 


«i« 




757 


434—435 


• •• 


^•« 


814 


. 305—306 


<!• 




758 


436—437 


&•» 


• t» 


815 


. 307—308 


•d« 




759 


438--.440 


• •• 


'••• 


816 


309—31 1 


•«• 




760 


441—442 


b»» 


• •• 


817 


. 312—313 


••• 




761 


443—444 


\-mU 


h«* 


818 


. 314—315 


• «v 




762 


445 — 447 


Uh 


• •• 


819 


.316—317 


• •• 




763 


448 — 449 


••• 


• •» 


820 


S18--.320 


«4t 




764 


450—451 


• •» 


*•• 


821 


. 321—^22 


• 4>« 




765 


452—453 


•U 


• •• 


822 


. 323-^24. 


k'i* 




766 


454.^^6 


••• 


'••• 


823 


. 325-nS27 


*•* 




767 


457—458 


• »• 


• •• 


824 


.328—329 


iit 




768 


459—460 


%i# 


;•• 


825 


. 330-^31 


»•« 




769 


. 461-^63 


•i» 


»•• 


826 


. 332— J33 


i*« 




770 


.464—465 


'•(• 


4»* 


827 


334--3S5 


ii« 




771 


466—467 


• »• 


•f • 


828 


336— .338 


ik* 




772 


468-^9 


• •• 


• • • 


829 


339—^^ 


*•• 




773 


. 470—472 


;•• 


••• 


830 


. :$n^-^^2 


••» 




774 


473 


&»•- 


••• 


831 


, 3*8—344 


•i* 




775 


474 


••• 


i«* 


832 


. S45^-^|f6 


M» 




776 


475 


••• 


4 
• •• 


831 



390 STATE TRIALS. — ^Ivdex op Refeeevce to both £]>itioii8; 



OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




Vol. XV. 47610477 


... 


vot V.p 


.832 


yd. XV. 60Oto601 


...vo/.Xm.245 


478 


.*• 


... 


833 


602—604 


•«• 


••* 


246 


4!7*^'^'4foU 


••• 


• •• 


834 


605—609 


••. 


#•• 


247 


480 


••• 


• •* 


833 


610—611 


•«• 


... 


248 


481 


••• 


... 


834 


612 


... 


•*. 


249 


482-488 


... 


... 


835 


613—614 


•«• 


••• 


250 


484—486 


•ft 


..§ 


836 


613—614 


... 


•.. 


249 


487-^488 


•»• 


• •• 


837 


615 


... 


••# 


250 


489^490 


••• 


..* 


838 


616—617 


.*• 


•.• 


251 


491 


... 


... 


839 


618— 6J 9 


..# 


•.. 


252 


492-WI9S 


..a 


... 


840 


620—621 


••• 


... 


253 


494 


«•• 


... 


839 


622—623 


••• 


••• 


254 


495 


.*• 


... 


840 


62^^^25 


•.• 


••• 


255 


.496--497 


*•• 


... 


841 


626-627 


•#• 


••• 


256 


498-^99 


.«• 


... 


842 


628^-630 


#•• 


••• 


257 


500—501 


».• 


... 


843 


631—632 


••• 


••• 


258 


.502—508 


• •• 


... 


844 


633—634 


... 


••• 


259 


503 


... 


... 


843 


635—636 


• a. 


•«• 


260 


504 


... 


• • • 


844 


637—638 


... 


•*• 


261 


505—506 


• at 


... 


845 


639—640 


• .• 


.*• 


262 


507—^08 


... 


.1. 


846 


641—642 


• «• 


• •• 


263 


509—510 


*•• 


.*• 


847 


643—645 


».» 


••• 


264 


511—513 


• •• 


• •• 


848 


646—647 


... 


••# 


265 


514 


•*« 


».. 


849 


648—649 


.•• 


•»• 


266 


515—516 


... 


... 


850 


6,^ 


• •• 


..• 


267 


516 


• •• 


• «# 


849 


651—652 


.»• 


... 


268 


517 


• «• 


• t* 


850 


651—652 


..« 


••• • 


267 


518--519 


• «• 


«•• 


851 


653 


... 


..« 


268 


520—522 


• *• 


• a. 


852 


651—652 


• ••• 


••• 


267 


521—^28 


...« 


voLVUl 


.217 


653 


... 


••• 


268 


524—526 


... 


• •• 


218 


654-655 


• •• 


•*. 


269 


527—544 


*•• 


.•• 


219 


656—657 


... 


••• 


270 


545—547 


• • • 


... 


220 


658—660 


• *. 


... 


271 


548—549 


• •• 


... 


221 


661-^662 


... 


... 


272 


550—552 


• •• 


... 


222 


663—664 


.. 


•*t 


27S 


553^^54^ 


... 


• t. 


223 


ees-^-^sGs 


... 


... 


274f 


SBS-^SS 


• «* 


... 


224 


667—668 


... 


«.• 


275 


* 557—558 


... 


... 


225 


669—670 


*•• 


••• 


276 


559—560 


... 


... 


226 


671—672 


... 


•*# 


277 


561—562 


«•• 


... 


227 


673—675 


• •• 


... 


278 


563—565 


... 


... 


228 


676—677 


*•• 


•*• 


279 


566--567 


... 


• «• 


229 


678—679 


• •• 


*•• 


280 


568—569 


... 


• •• 


230 


680—681 


..• 


•.. 


281 


570—571 


• •# 


• .» 


231 


682-683 


... 


•»• 


282 


572—573 


... 


... 


232 


684-686 


• •• 


• 9* 


283 


574—575 


• •r 


• • • 


233 


687—688 


.*• 


• •• 


284< 


576—577 


... 


... 


234 


689-^91 


• f. 


• •» 


285 


578-^79 


... 


• •• 


235 


692--693 


• •• 


• •• 


286 


580— 5S2 


... 


... 


236 


694—695 


• •• 


• • ■ 


287 


583—^84 


••# 


... 


237 


696—697 


• •• 


• *• 


288 


585—^86 


.«• 


... 


238 


69a— 699 


• *» 


• •« 


289 


587--588 


• *. 


... 


239 


700—702 


• «. 


• «• 


290 


589^-^90 


... 


• •• 


240 


703—704 


voL VIIL app> 


569 


591—592 


• •# 


• .# 


241 


705—706 


••• 


• •• 


570 


593—594 


. ••• 


•.• 


242 


731—732 


••• 


vO.VL 


1 


595—597 


••• 


«•■« 


243 


733 


••• 


••• 


2 


598-*599 


••« 


.*• 


244 


734^736 


ftf 


•ft 


3 



STATE TRIALS. — Index of Referekce to both Editioks. 321 



OCTAVO. 

vd.xy.7si tolas 

739—740 
741—742 
74.3—746 

.. 747— 74?8 
749—750 
. 751—752 
753—754 
755—757 
758 
759 
761—762 
763 
764—766 
767—768 
769—776 
777—779 
780—781 
782—783 
784—785 
786—788 
789—790 
791—792 
793—794 
795—796 
797—798 
799 — 800 
801 
802 
805—808 
809—810 
811 — 812 
813—814 
815—816 
817—818 
819^-820 
821—823 
824—825 
826—827 
828—829 
830—832 
833—834 
835—836 
837—838 
839^—840 
841—842 
843—844 
845—846 
847—849 
850—851 
852—853 
. 854^--855 
. 856—858 
859—860 
861—862 
863-*-»864 

. 865..,^67 
VOL XXXIV, 



FOLIO. 
••• vol* IX. p» 



•f • 
••• 
••f 

••• 
• • • 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••■ 
••• 
••• 
••• 
•»• 
••• 
••» 
•#• 
•#• 
.•• 
••• 
•■• 
••• 
••• 
.•• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
•f • 
••• 
••• 
.«• 
••• 

• •a 



• •« 

• •• 

• •• 

.«. 

• •. 

• •• 

• •• 
.•• 

• •• 



vol. VI. 



••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
•.« 
••• 
••• 

• a . 

• •• 

• .« 

• ». 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 
■ •• 

• •• 
.*• 



• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 
■ •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •■ 

• •• 



.•• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• #• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• f • 

• •• 

• •• 
••• 

• •• 
« • • 

• •• 

• •f 



4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

29 

30 

31 

32 

33 

34 

35 

36 

37 

38 

39 

40 

41 

42 

43 

44 



OCTAVO. 

To/. XV. 868 to 869 
870—871 
872 
873—874 
. 875—876 
877—878 
879—881 
882—883 
884—885 
886— «87 

891—892 

893 

894 

897 

897 

898—900 

901—902 

903—904 

•905—906 

907—909 

910—911 

912—913 

914—915 

916—917 
918—920 
92l-r.922 
923—924 
925—926 
927—928 
929—931 
932—933 
934—935 
936—938 
939—940 
941—942 
943—^44 
945—946 
947—948 
949—950 
951—952 
953—954 
955—956 
957—959 

960—961 
962—963 
964—966 
967—968 
969-970 
971—972 
973—974 
975—977 
978—079 
980—981 
982—984 
985-^986 
. 987<^88 



••• 

••• 
•#• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
•#• 
»•• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
• • • 
••• 
••• 
••• 
•f • 
•#• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••« 
••• 
••• 
•#• 
■•• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
,••• 
••• 
••• 
•#• 
••• 
••• 
•f • 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 

• k« 

• #• 

• •• 

• •• 



FOLIO. • 
vol. VL 



••• 

••• 
••• 
•#• 
••• 
••• 
«#■ 
••• 
••• 
•»• 

• • 9 

• #• 

• •• 

• •■ 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 
»•• 

• •« 

• •• 

• •• 
■ •• 

• •• 

• •■ 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •» 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 
•t* 
*•• 

• ■• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• f • 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• • • 

• #• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 
*•• 



45 

46 

47 

48 

49 

50 

51 

52 

53 

54 

55 

56 

51 

58 

57 

53 

59 

60 

61 

62 

63 

64 

65 

66 

67 

68 

69 

70 

71 

72 

73 

74 

75 

76 

77 

78 

79 

80 

81 

82 

83 

84 

85 

86 

87 

88 

89 

90 

91 

92 

93 

94 

95 

96 

97 

98 

99 



3i2 8TATE TRIALS.^^kiibk ot tlErsftftKefc w Mtx Snttio^t. 



OCTAVO. 

rol.XV.9S9io99i 

992 
993—1044 
1045— KH9 
1050 
1051—1052 
1053—1055 
1056—1057 
1058—1062 
1063— 10§4} 
1065—1066 
1067—1068 
1069—1071 
1072—1073 
1074—1075 
1076—1077 
1078—1079 
108O— 1082 
1083—1084 

1085—1087 
1088—1089 
1090—1095 
1096—1097 
1098—1099 
HOO— 1102 
1103—1104 
1105—1106 
1107—1109 
1110—1112 
1113—1114 
1115—1116 
1117-^1118 
1119^1121 
. 1122—1123 
1124—1125 

1126—1127 
1128 — 1130 
1131_1.1S2 
1133—1134 
1135—1136 
1137—1138 
1139—1140 
1141—1142 
1143—1145 
1146— W 47 
1148—1149 
1150—1151 
1152—1154 
1155—1156 
1157—1158 
1159—1.160 
1161—1163 
1164—1165 

1466—1167 
1'168— 1169 
1170—1171 
1172—1174 



•»• 

o« 
*•• 

• •• 

• • 

■ •• 

»•• 

• •■ 

• •• 

• a • 

• •• 

• «• 

• •• 

«■• 

• • • 

• • • 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •■ 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

#•• 

• •• 

• •• 

«•• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• §• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •'• 

t«* 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

«•« 



■ ^% V S>.^F%. 




OLK). 




wAVLy. 


loa 


• •• 


101 


••• 


102 


• •• 


101 


• •• 


102 


• •• 


103 


• •• 


104 


• •• 


105 


• •• 


106 


• •• 


107 


• •• 


108 


• •• 


109 


• •• 


110 


• •• 


HI 


• •• 


112 


• a* 


113 


• •• 


114 


• •• 


115 


ar* 


116 


••• 


117 


••• 


118 


••• 


119 


••• 


120 


••• 


121 


••• 


122 


••• 


123 


••• 


124 


••• 


125 


••• 


126 


■•• 


127 


••• 


128 


••• 


129 


• • • 


130 


■•• 


131 


••• 


132 


••• 


133 


*•• 


134 


••• 


135 


•• • 


136 


••• 


137 


••• 


138 


••• 


139 


•#• 


140 


••• 


141 


•»t 


142 


••• 


143 


••• 


144 


••» 


145 


•f« 


146 


••• 


147 


••• 


148 


••• 


149 


••• 


150 


••• 


151 


••• 


152 


••• 


153 


••• 


154 



OCTTAVO. 

VqL U75toll76 

XV. 1177 

1195—1201 

1202—1206 

1207—1210 

1211—1215 

1216—1219 

1220—1223 

1224—1228 

1229 

1231 

1231 

1232—1233 

1234—1235 

1236—1238 

1239—1240 

1241—1242 

1243—1244 

1245—1246 

1247—1249 

1250—1251 

1252-^1253 

1254—1255 

1256—1257 

1258—1260 

1261—1262 

1263—1264 

1265—1266 

1267—1268 

1269—1271 

1272—1273 

1274—1275 

1276—1277 

1278—1280 

1281—1282 

1283—1284 

1285—1286 

1287—1289 

1290—1291 

1292—1293 

1294—1295 

1296—1298 

1299 

1300 

1301 

1302 

1303—1^05 

1306—1307 

1308 

1309—1312 

1313— L314 

1315— L316 

1317 

1317 

.1323 

1324—1325 

1326 



FOLK). 




.» Mf. vip. m 


»•• 


••• 


156 


••• 


Mt.XI. 


295 


•f • 


• •# 


296 


«•• 


• •t 


297 


• •• 


§•• 


298 


«•• 


• •• 


299 


••• 


• •• 


300 


*•% 


• !• 


301 


••• 


• •a 


502 


• •• 


W/.VI 


. 155 


• •» 


•■• 


156 


k«* 


•«• 


157 


• •■ 


••• 


158 


• •• 


••• 


159 


• •• 


••• 


160 


«•» 


•*• 


161 


• •• 


•■■ 


m 


«•« 


••• 


163 


• • • 


•*t 


164 


• •• 


•*• 


165 


• •• 


tft 


166 


• •• 


••• 


167 


«•« 


••• 


168 


k«« 


••• 


169 


• •• 


••• 


170 


••« 


••t 


171 


• •• 


• fa 


172 


• •• 


• *• 


173 


r*» 


a*t 


174 


• •• 


• •• 


175 


• •• 


t*a 


176 


• »• 


• la 


177 


• •• 


• »• 


178 


mn 


taa 


179 


• •• 


• • • 


180 


• •• 


• •• 


181 


«r*» 


•M 


182 


•••* 


*t* 


183 


• •fe 


• •• 


m 


••• 


t*« 


185 


• •• 


• •• 


186 


••WW 


a* 


187 


099 


• at 


188 


*V* 


• •• 


187 


• •• 


••• 


188 


• aft 


• •• 


189 


«r«« 


• •• 


190 
191 


»V9 


••• 


192 


v«« 


a»t 


193 


999 


• •• 




•V* 


a*a 


195 


r*« 


••• 




•«• 


t«« 


196 


9W9 


t*{.IX.679 






680 


9t* 


••• 
•It 


681 



STATS TRUbS.-^|i»0£x av Rkfk^jmici; tq nmn i$]>iTi*ir«. 99? 



OCTAVO. 


FOLKX 




OCTAVO. 


Fowa, 




Jro4 l$mio\S29 


••• voltl^^p 


.682 


V^l. XVL 46/0 47 


M.wi. VI. 1^209 


XV. 1330—1331 


••.•■ ••• 


683 


48— 50 


t»» 


• 

• •• 


210 


1332—1334. 


• • • • • • 


684 


51 


••• 


• •• 


211 


1335—1336 


••• •'•• 


685 


52 


M» 


• •• 


212 


1337—1338 


•«A ••• 


686 


53— 54 


• •• 


• •• 


211 


1339— J.341 


•t* ••• 


687 


55 


*•• 


• •• 


212 


1342—1343 


••• ••• 


688 


5&- 58 


#•• 


... 


213 


1344-1345 


••A ••• 


689 


59— 60 


• •• 


• • • 


214 


1346—1347 


••• ••• 


690 


61— 62 


»•• 


• #• 


215 


1348—1349 


*.• * • • • 


691 


63— 64 


• • • 


• •• 


216 


1350—1351 


»•• ••• 


692 


65— 66 


*•• 


• •• 


217 


1352—1353 


• • • • • • 


693 


67—71 


#•• 


• •• 


218 


1354—1355 


• • • • « • 


694 


72^ 73 


#•• 


• •• 


219 


1356—1358 


• • • •• • 


695 


74— 75 


*•• 


• •• 


220 


1359—1360 


•_• • • • • 


696 


76— 77 


«•• 


• •• 


221 


1361 1362 


••• ••• 


697 


78— 80 


• •• 


• «• 


222 


1363—1364 


••• • •• 


698 


81— 82 


• ■• 


• •• 


223 


1365^1367 


••• ••• 


699 


83— 84 


• •• 


• •• 


224 


1368—1369 


• • • • • • 


700 


85— 86 


• * ■ 


• •• 


225 


1370—1371 


••• ••• 


701 


87— 89 


^•« 


• •• 


226 


1372—1373 


■•• ha* 


702 


90— 91 


• •• 


• •• 


227 


1374^-1375 


»•• ••• 


703 


92 


«•• 


• •■ 


228 


1376—1378 


••• ••• 


704 


93— 95 ^ 


• •• 


• • • 


229 


1379—1380 


••• ••# 


705 


96— 97 


• •t 


• •• 


230 


1381—1382 


»•• ••• 


706 


98—100 


• #• 


• •• 


231 


1383—1385 


••• ••• 


707 


101—102 


«.•• 


• •• 


232 


1386—1387 


••* ••• 


708 


103—104 


««• 


• •• 


233 


1388—1389 


••t ••• 


709 


105—106 


■••• 


• #• 


234 


1390—1392 


•-•.•v ••• 


710 


107—108 


• •• 


• •• 


235 


1393—1394 


••• ••• 


711 


109—111 


• •• 


• •• 


236 


1395—1396 


••• ••• 


712 


112—113 


•••• 


• •• 


237 


1397 1399 


• •_• ••• 


713 


114—115 


• •• 


• •• 


238 


1400—1401 


0«* ••• 


714 


116—117 


• •• 


• »• 


239 


1402 


• • • • • • 


715 


1 18—120 


••• 


• •• 


240 


1403 


«•• ••• 


716 


121—122 


• #• 


• •• 


241 


1407 


voL %• app^ 


85 


123—124 


• •• 


• • • 


242 


1408 


•••^ ••• 


86 


125 126 


• •• 


■ •• 


243 


1409—1410 


••• ••• 


87 


127—128 


• •• 


• •• 


244 


1411—1413 


• • • • • • 


88 


129—131 


• •• 


• •• 


245 


1414—1415 


^•* ••• 


89 


132—133 


• •• 


• •• 


246 


1416—1417 


»•» ••• 


90. 


134—135 


• •• 


••• 


247 


1418—1419 


••• •»• 


91 


136—137 


••• 


• •• 


248 


1420 


••• ••• 


92 


138—139 


• •• 


• »• 


249 


JW. XVI. 1— 5 


••• ••» 


195 


140—142 


• •• 


••• 


250 


6 


••• ••• 


196 


143—144 


••# 


• •• 


251 


7—15 


♦.•jp ••• 


197 


145—146 


••• 


• »• 


252 


16— 17 


.«•• ••• 


198 


147—148 


• •• 


• »• 


253 


18— 20 


••• ••• 


199 


149—151 


#•• 


• •• 


254 


21— 22 


••• ••• 


200; 


152—153 


• •• 


• •• 


255 


23— 30 


••• ••• 


201 


154—155' 


• •• 


• •• 


256 


31— 32 


*•.•. ••• 


202; 


156—157 


♦ •• 


• •• 


257 


33— 34 


«•• ••• 


203; 


158—160 


• •• 


• •t 


258 


35— 36 


, »•♦. ••• 


204; 


161—162 




• •' 


259 


37— 38 


••• ••• 


205 


163—164 


••• 


• #• 


260 


39— 41 


••• ••• 


206. 


165—166 


• •• 


* • « 


261 


42— 43 


••• ••• 


207 


167—168 


♦«• 


• f 


262 


4^— 45 


«•• Vft 


208 


169—170 


«•• 


• »• 


063 



Y2 



324 STATE TRIALS. — Index of Reference to both Editions. 



OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




F(rf.XVL171tol7S 


.•. vol. VL p 


.264 


ro^.XVl.295to296 


... wi/- VI.^ 


.321 


174^175 


••• 


••• 


265 


297—299 


•.. 


••• 


322 


176—177 


••• 


••• 


266 


300—301 


••• 


•.• 


323 


178—179 


••• 


••• 


267 


302—303 


••• 


••• 


324 


180—181 


••• 


••• 


268 


304—305 


..• 


••• 


325 


182—183 


•• 


••• 


269 


306—307 


... 


••• 


326 


184—186 


••• 


• ' • 


270 


308—310 


••. 


••■ 


327 


187—188 


' ••• 


••• 


271 


311—312 


••• 


••• 


328 


189—190 


••• 


••• 


272 


313—314 


••• 


••• 


329 


191—192 


••• 


••^ 


273 


315—317 


••• 


••. 


330 


19S— 194 


••• 


••• 


274 


318—319 


• .• 


•• • 


331 


195—196 


••• 


••• 


275 


320 324 


••• 


••• 


332 


197—199 


. • . 


••• 


276 


325—326 


••• 


••• 


335 


200—201 


••• 


••• 


277 


327 


• • • 


■•• 


336 


202—203 


••• 


••• 


278 


328—329 


••• 


••• 


337 


204—205 


••• 


••• 


279 


330—332 


■•• 


••» 


338 


206—208 


••• 


••• 


280 


333—834 


••• 


••• 


339 


209—210 


••• 


••• 


281 


335—836 


••• 


■•• 


340 


211—212 


••• 


••• 


282 


337—338 


••• 


••• 


341 


213—214 


••• 


••• 


283 


339—340 


*.• 


••• 


342 


216—216 


••• 


••• 


284 


341-342 


••• 


•.• 


348 


217—218 


••• 


••• 


285 


343—344 


••• 


••• 


344 


219—221 


••• 


••• 


286 


345-^6 


••• 


••* 


345 


222—223 


••• 


••• 


287 


347—348 


••• 


••• 


346 


224--.225 


••• 


••• 


288 


349—351 


••• 


••• 


347 


226—227 


••• 


••• 


289 


352-^53 


••• 


••• 


348 


228—229 


••• 


••• 


290 


354—355 


•»• 


••• 


349 


230—231 


*•• 


••• 


291 


356—857 


.•• 


••• 


350 


232—233 


••• 


••• 


292 


358—359 


••• 


••• 


351 


234—236 


••• 


••• 


293 


360-361 


••• 


••• 


352 


237—238 


••• 


••• 


294 


362—364 


••• 


• • . 


358 


239^240 


••• 


••• 


295 


365—36(5 


• • • 


••• 


854 


241—242 


. ••• 


••• 


296 


367—368 


••• 


••• 


855 


243 245 


••• 


••• 


297 


369—370 


• 
••• 


••• 


356 


246—247 


••■ 


••• 


298 


371—372 


••• 


••• 


357 


248—249 


••• 


■•• 


299 


373—374 


•.• 


••• 


858 


250—251 


••• 


••t 


300 


375—^76 


••• 


••• 


359 


252—254 


••• 


••• 


301 


377—379 


••• 


••• 


860 


255—256 


••• 


••• 


302 


380—381 


••• 


•••. 


861 


257—258 


••• 


••• 


303 


382—383 


••• 


••• 


862 


259—260 


••• 


••• 


304 


384--385 


••• 


••• 


36S 


261—262 


•#• 


••• 


305 


386—387 


••• 


••• 


m 


263—264 


••• 


••• 


306 


388—389 


••• 


••• 


965 


265—266 


••• 


••• 


307 


390—391 


••• 


••• 


966 


267—268 


••• 


••• 


308 


392—393 


••• 


••• 


367 


269u^271 


••• 


••• 


309 


394—395 


••• 


••• 


968 


272—273 


••• 


••• 


310 


396—398 


••• 


••• 


869 


274--275 


••■ 


••• 


311 


399—400 


••• 


••• 


370 


276—277 


•#• 


••• 


312 


401—402 


••• 


••• 


871 


278—279 


••• 


••• 


313 


403—404 


••• 


••• 


872 


280—281 


••• 


••• 


314 


405—406 


••• 


••• 


873 


282-^283 


••• 


•»• 


315 


407—408 


••• 


••• * 


374 


284—286 


••• 


•#• 


316 


409—410 


••• 


••• 


375 


287—288 


••• 


••• 


317 


411—412 


••• 


••• 


376 


289—290 


•t« 


••• 


318 


413—415 


••t 


••• 


877 


291—292 


••• 


••• 


319 


416—417 


•»• 


•t* 


378 


293-i*294 


t«f 


•#• 


320 


418--419 


f«« 


ff« 


379 



STATE TRIALS.- 


—Index of 


RsrEitfiNC^ TO BOTH 


Editions. 


325 


OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 

• 




Fa/.XVI.420to42l 


Vol. VI. p 


.380 


Fo/.XVI.590^o591 


...voLVLp 


• 437 


422—423 


••• 


••• 


381 


592—593 


••• 


••• 


438 


424—437 


••• 


••• 


382 


594—596 


••• 


••• 


439 


438—439 


••• 


••• 


383 


5J97— 598 


••• 


••• 


440 


440—442 


••• 


•«• 


384 


599—600 


••• 


••• 


441 


443—444 


••• 


••• 


385 


601—602 


••• 


••• 


442 


445—446 


••• 


••• 


386 


603—607 


••• 


••• 


443 


447_4t48 


••• 


••• 


387 


608—609 


• • • 


••• 


444 


449—450 


••• 


••• 


388 


610—612 


••• 


• • • 


445 


451—452 


••• 


••• 


389 


613—614 


••• 


••• 


446 


453—467 


••• 


••• 


390 


615—616 


••• 


•0* 


447 


468—477 


••• 


••• 


391 


617—618 


••• 


••• 


448 


478—479 


••• 


••• 


392 


619—620 


••• 


••• 


449 


480—482 


••• 


••• 


393 


621—623 


••• 


••• 


450 


483—484 


••• 


••• 


394 


624—625 


••• 


••• 


451 


4«5— 486 


••• 


••• 


395 


62ft-^27 


••• 


••• 


452 


487—489 


••• 


•*• 


396 


628—629 


••• 


••• 


453 


490-r-496 


••• 


••• 


397 


630—632 


••• 


••• 


454 


497—498 


••• 


••• 


398 


633—634 


••• 


••• 


455 


499— .501 


••• 


••• 


399 


635—636 


••• 


••• 


456 


502—503 


1 
••• 


••• 


400 


637—638 


••• 


••• 


457 


504—505 


••• 


••• 


401 


639^—646 


••• 


«•• 


458 


506—507 


••• 


••• 


402 


647—649 


••• 


••• 


459 


508—510 


••• 


••• 


403 


650-^^53 


••• 


••• 


460 


. 511—512 


••• 


••• 


404 


654—655 


••• 


••• 


461 


513—514 


••• 


••• 


405 


656—657 


••• 


••• 


462 


515—517 


••• 


••• 


406 


658—660 


••• 


••• 


463 


518—520 


••• 


••• 


407 


661—662 


••• 


••• 


464 


521—522 


» • • 


••• 


408 


663—670 


••• 


... 


465 


523—524 


••• 


••• 


409 


671—672 


••• 


••• 


466 


525—527 


••• ■ 


••• 


410 


673—674 


••• 


••• 


467 


528—529 


••• ■ 


••• 


411 


675—676 


••• 


••• 


468 


530—581 


••• 


••• 


412 


677—679 


••• 


••• 


469 


532^533 


••• 


* • « 


413 


680—681 


••• 


••• 


470 


53^i—535 


••• 


••• 


414 


682—683 


• ••• 


••• 


471 


SS&'^SS 


••• 


••• 


415 


684—686 


••• 


••• 


472 


539—542 


••• 


• • 


416 


687—688 


••• 


••• 


473 


543—544 


••• 


••• 


417 


689—690 


••• 


••• 


474 


545—547 


••• 


••• 


418 


691 


••• 


••• 


475 


548—549 


■•• 


••• 


419 


644 


••• 


*•* 


476 


550—551 


■ • • 


••• 


420 


695 


.^- 


vol. VUI. 289 


552—553 


••• 


••• 


421 


695 


••• 


«•• 


290 


55if'-'555 


••• 


••• 


422 


^ 696—697 


••• 


• •• 


291 


556S57 


••• 


••• 


423 


698—699 


••• 


• •• 


292 


558—559 


••• 


•■• 


424 


700—702 


••• 


• •• 


293 


560—562 


••• 


••• 


425 


703—704 


•t« 


• •• 


294 


563—564 


••• 


••• 


426 


705—706 


••• 


• f • 


295 


565—566 


••• 


••• 


427 


707—708 


••• 


••• 


296 


567—568 


*•• 


••• 


428 


709—710 


••• 


••• 


297 


569—573 


••• 


••• 


429 


711—712 


••• 


• •• 


298 


574—576 


••• 


••• 


430 


713—714 


••• 


• »• 


299 


577—578 


••• 


••• 


431 


715—716 


••• 


• •• 


300 


579—580 


••• 


••• 


432 


717—718 


••• 


• •• 


301 


581—582 


••• 


••• 


483 


. 719L— 721 


••• 


#•• 


302 


583—584 


••• 


■•• 


434 


722—723 


••• 


• »• 


303 


585—587 


••• 


••• 


435 


724—725 


••• 


••• 


304 


588-^89 


••• 


••• 


436 


726—727 




<•• 


30$ 



AS 



ATikTB ITIIALS — Irbftx ot RtyERENcr. to both iDmdNs. 



OCTAVO. 

780—731 
732—733 
734—735 
736—738 
739—740 
741—742 
743—745 
746—747 
748—750 
751—752 
758—754 
755—756 
757—758 
759—761 
762—763 
764—766 
767—768 
769—770 
•771—773 
774--775 
776—777 
778—779 
780—782 
783-^784 
785—786 
787—788 
789—790 
791—793 
794—795 
796—797 
798 
799 
800 
801 
802—804 
805—806 
807—808 
S09— 811 
812—813 
814—815 
816—818 
Sl9— 820 
821—822 
823-.J825 
826—827 
828—829 
830— 8S2 
833— «85 
836—837 
838-B39 
840—842 
843—844 
845—847 
848—849 
850—851 
852—853 



■ ^■■r nn*!— 



*•*•« 



• •• 



• •• 



• •• 



••• 



• •• 



• •• 



• •• 



• •• 



• •• 



••• 



• •• 
••• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 
•#• 

•K» 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• »• 

• •• 

• »• 



• •• 



• •• 



• •• 



• •• 



• • 



• •• 



t«* 



• •• 



• •• 



• •• 



«•• 



• •• 



••• 



• •• 



• »• 



• a* 



• •• 



• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 
' ••« 

• •• 

• ♦• 

• •• 



• t* 



• •• 



POLIO. 

W.Vni./f.306 
307 
308 
309 
310 
311 
312 
813 
314 
315 
316 
317 
318 
319 
... 320 
... 321 
••• *j^£ 
vol. VI. 477 
478 
479 
480 
481 
482 
483 
484 
485 
486 
487 
488 
489 
490 
491 
492 
491 
492 
493 
494 
495 
496 
497 
498 
499 
500 
501 
502 
503 
504 
505 
506 
507 
508 
509 
510 
511 
512 
513 
514 



••• 



••• 



••t 



••• 



••• 



«•• 



••■ 



»•• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



».. 



••• 



••• 



•*• 



»•• 



OCtAVO. 

r(rf.XVl.854fti856 
857—868 
♦<59— 860 
e61--862 
863—865 
*J66— 867 
868—869 
870—871 
872—873 
874—875 
876—877 
678—880 

Dol ODZ 

883—884 
885—886 
887—888 
689—^1 
892-^893 
894—895 

896 -'897 
898—^900 
901-^902 
903—904 
905—906 
907-^)8 
909—910 
911—912 
913-^14 
915—917 
918— *JI9 
920—1^21 
922—^3 
924—925 
926—927 
928—^129 
930—931 
932—934 
935—936 
937-938 
939—940 
941—942 
943—944 
945—946 
947—948 
919—950 
951— .952 
953—954 
955—956 
957—958 
959—961 
962—963 
964-4J65 
966—967 
968—969 
970—971 
972— S74 
975--^76 



POLIO* 

... w>i.VI*/K5l5 

516 



• »• 
... 

• k. 

• •. 

• •• 

• • 

k.. 

• •• 

.•• 

• •• 
... 
.»• 
... 

• »• 

• ». 
k*. 

• >• 

• •• 

• • • 



• • • 



»•• 



• •• 



«•» 



• •a 

^•» 

• •« 

• • . 

• •• 



• ■ a 
aa* 
kaa 

»• • 



• •< 



«a< 

• •) 

. .1 

• • . 

• •< 
«a< 



4ai 



«•! 



STAf« TRfAL«.- 


-Ikdsx ©r : 


(tEfCMirCC TO IftdTH 


EbiTxioks. 


337 


OCTAVO. 


FOLro. 




OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




fd. mii^ 978 


%>oL Vf . p 


.572 


Fdl. 1103#«11O4 


...1 


whVhp.em 


XYI. 979— 980 


••• 


1 
••• 


573 


XVI. 1105—1107 


••• 


•'•• 


630 


981 — 982 


••• 


•#• 


574 


1198—1109 


••• 


'«•• 


631 


983 — 064, 


••• 


••• 


575 


1110—1111 


• •• 


••• 


632 


985— 9M6 


••• 


••• 


576 


1112—1113 


••• 


••• 


633 


987— 989 


■•• 


••• 


577 


1114—1116 


••• 


••• 


634 


990 — 991 


• •• 


••• 


578 


1117—1118 


••• 


••• 


635 


992— 993 


••• 


••• 


579 


1119—1120 


••• 


«•• 


636 


994— 995 


■•• 


••• 


580 


1121—1122 


••• 


••• 


637 


996 — 997 


••• 


••• 


581 


1123—1124 


•<• 


••• 


638 


998 999 


••• 


• ■ • 


582 


1125—1126 


••• 


••• 


617 


1000— 1001 


••• t 


••• 


583 


1127—1129 


••• 


••• 


618 


1002— iOOS 


••• 


••• 


584 


1130—1131 


••• 


••• 


619 


1004^—1006 


••• 


• • • 


585 


1132—1133 


••• 


••• 


620 


1007—1008 


••• 


••• 


586 


1134—1135 


••• 


••• 


643 


1009—1010 


•»• 


••• 


587 


1136—1137 


••• 


••• 


644 


1011—1012 


•*• 


••• 


588 


1138—1139 


••• 


••• 


645 


1013—1014 


'••• 


'••• 


589 


1140—1141 


••• 


••• . 


646 


1015—1016 


•*• 


•'•• 


590 


1142—1143 


••• 


t«* 


647 


1017—1019 


• 

••• 


••• 


591 


1144—1145 


••• 


«•• 


648 


lOSau.1021 


••• 


••• 


592 


1146 


••• 


•■• 


647 


1022—1023 


••• 


••• 


593 


1146—1148 


••• 


••• 


648 


1024—1025 


••• 


•#• 


594 


1149 


••• 


••• 


649 


1026—1027 


* • • 


••• 


595 


1149—1150 


••• 


••• 


650 


1028—1029 


••• 


••• 


596 


1151—1152 


••• 


••• 


651 


1030—1031 


••• 


••• 


597 


1153—1154 


••• 


••• 


652 


1032—1034 


• • • 


••• 


598 


1155—1156 


••• 


••• 


e5S 


1035—1036 


••• 


••• 


599 


1157—1159 


• • 


••• 


654 


1037—1038 


••• 


••• 


600 


1160—1161 


•t« 


••• 


655 


1039—1040 


'••• 


••• 


601 


1162—1163 


••• 


••• 


656 


1041—1042 


••• 


••• 


602 


1164—1165 


••• 


••• 


657 


1H3— 1045 


••• 


••• 


603 


1166—1167 


••• 


••• 


65s 


1046— 1047 


••• 


•#• 


604 


1168—1169 


• • . 


• •• 


659 


1048—1049 


••• 


••• 


605 


1170—1171 


••• 


••• 


660 


1050—1052 


••• 


••• 


606 


1172—1174 


••• 


••• 


661 


1053—1054 


••• 


••• 


607 


'1175—1176 


••• 


••• 


662 


1055—1056 


••• 


••« 


608 


1177—1178 


••• 


••• 


663 


1057—1059 


••• 


••• 


609 


1179—1181 


••• 


••• 


664 


1060 


••• 


••• 


610 


118^—1183 


••• 


••• 


665 


1061—1063 


••• 


••• 


611 


1184—1185 


••• 


••» 


666 


1064—1066 


••• 


••• 


612 


1186—1187 


••• 


• • ■ 


667 


1067—1068 


••• 


••• 


613 


1188—1189 


•• 


••• 


668 


1069—1070 


••■ 


••• 


614 


1190-1191 


••• 


••• 


669 


1071—1073 


• ••• 


••• 


615 


1192—1194 


«•• 


••• 


670 


1074—1075 


••• 


••• 


616 


1195—1196 


••• 


••• 


671 


1076—1077 


••• 


•■• 


617 


1 197—1 198 


••• 


••• 


672 


1078—1080 


••• 


• « • 


618 


1199—1200 


••• 


••• 


673 


1081—1082 


••• 


••• 


619 


1201—1202 


••• 


••• 


674 


1083—1084 


••• 


•t* 


620 


1203—1204 


• • • 


•#• 


675 


1085-^1087 


*t« 


••• 


621 


1205—1206 


•t • 


••• 


676 


1088—1089 


••• 


••• 


622 


1207—1209 


••• 


••• 


677 


1090—1091 


•#• 


•• • 


623 


1210—1211 


•** 


••• 


678 


1092—1093 


• • • 


••• 


624 


1212—1213 


••• 


••• 


679 


1094—1096 


••• 


••• 


625 


1214—1215 


■•• 


••• 


680 


1097—1098 


•#• 


■•• 


626 


1216—1217 


••• 


••• 


681 


1099—1100 


••• 


••0 


627 


1218—1219 


••• 


••• 


682 


1101-.1102 


••• 


•t0 


628 


1220—1221 


••• 


r 

• ••> 


663 



328 



STATE TRIALS. — ^Iitdbx of Refikewce to both Editioks. 



OCTAVO. 

Vol. l^22tol224f 
XVL 1225—1226 
1227^1228 
1229— 12S0 
12S1— 12S3 
1234—1235 
1236—1237 
1238—1239 
1240—1241 
1242—1243 
1244—1246 
1247—1248 
1249—1250 
1251—1253 
1254—1255 
1256—1257 
1258—1260 
1261—1262 
1263—1264 
1265—1266 
1267—1268 
1269—1270 
1271—1272 
1273—1274 
1275—1276 
1277—1279 
1280U.1281 
1282—1283 
1284^1285 
1286—1287 
1288—1289 
1290—1292 
1293—1294 
1295—1296 
1297—1299 
1300—1301 
1302—1303 
1304—1305 
1306—1807 
1308—1309 
1310—1312 
1313—1314 
1315—1316 
1317—1318 
1319—1320 
1321—1322 
1323—1324 
1325—1326 
1327—1328 
1329—1331 
1332—1333 
1334 
1334 
1334^1335 
1336—1337 
1338—1339 
1340—1341 



FOLIO. 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



•«• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



•*• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



••* 



••• 



••• 



OCTAVO. 



vol.\L 


;i.684 


VoL 1342 to 1343 




685 


XVL 1344—1346 




686 


1347—1348 




687 


1349—1350 




688 


1351—1353 




689 


1354—1355 




690 


1356—1357 




691 


1358—1360 




692 


1.S61— 1362 




693 


1363—1364 




694 


1365—1366 




695 


1367—1368 




696 


1369—1371 




697 


;372— 1373 




698 


1374^— 1375 




699 


1376—1377 




700 


1378—1379 




701 


1380—1381 




702 


1382—1383 




703 


1384— 13a5 




704 


1386—1388 




705 


1389^1390 




706 


1391 




707 


1392—1393 




708 


1394 




709 


1395 




710 


r.XVIL29— 30 




711 


31 




712 


31— S3 




713 


34— 35 




714 


36— 37 




715 


38— 40 




716 


41— 42 




717 


43— 44 




718 


45— 47 




719 


48— 49 




720 


50— 51 




721 


52— 54 




722 


55 




723 


56 




724 


57— 59 




725 


601— 62 




726 


63— 64 




727 


65— 67 




728 


68— 69 


••• 


729 


70— 72 




730 


73 




731 


74 




732 


74— 76 




733 


77— 78 




734 


79— 80 




735 


81— 83 




736 


84— 85 




735 


86— 88 




736 


89— 90 




737 


91— 92 




738 


93— 94 



FOLIO, 



••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 



••< 



••• 

«•• 
••• 
••• 
••• 

••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
•*• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••* 






••' 



vol. 



• •' 



• •I 



• •I 



• •• 



• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 



•M 



• •a 



•M 



p. 739 
740 

741 

742 
743 
744 
745 
746 
747 
748 
749 
750 
751 
752 
753 
754 
755 
756 

757 
758 
759 
760 
761 
762 
763 
764 
IX. IS 
H 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
61 
62 
63 
64 
65 
66 
25 
26 
27 
28 
29 
80 
SI 
S2 
SS 
S4 

35 



S'l'A'lE TR 


lALS 


. — Indi 


EX OF J 


iEFEREVCE TO BOTH 


Editions. 


329 


OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 


Val.XVlU95io 97 


••• 


vol. IX. 


p. 36 


Vol. XVIL 213 


voL IX. f), 69 


98— 99 


••• 




37 


214 


••• •< 


. • 70 


100—102 


••• 




38 


215/0216 


••• •• 


71 


103—104? 


••• 




39 


217 


«•• •< 


72 


105—106 


'... 




40 


218—219 


••• •< 


73 


107—109 


••• 




41 


2201-^22 


••• •< 


74 


110—111 


••• 




42 


223 


••• •< 


75 


112—114 


••• 




43 


224—226 


••• • 


76 


115—116 


••• 




44 


227 


••• • 


75 


117—118 


••• 




45 


227 


••• .< 


76 


119—121 


••• 




46 


228 


••• .1 


77 


122—123 


••• 




47 


228 


••• •< 


78 


124—125 


••• 




48 


229—230 


• •• •! 


77 


126—127 


••• 




49 


231—232 


• •• •! 


78 


128—130 


••• 




50 


233—234 


• •• •< 


.. 79 


131—132 


••• 




51 


235—236 


• • • •< 


80 


133—134 


••• 




52 


237—238 


• • • •« 


8i 


135—137 


••• 




53 


239—240 


*.a .« 


82 


138—139 


••• 




54 


241—243 


• • < 


t •« 


83 


140—141 


••• 




55 


244—245 


• •< 


t •< 


84 


142—143 


••• 




56 


246—247 


• •< 


p • 


85 


144—145 


••• 




57 


248—249 


• •< 


1 •< 


•• o6 


146—148 


••• 




58 


250—251 


«. 


t •i 


87 


149—150 


••• 




59 


252—254 


• • 


» • 


88 


151—152 


••• 


••• 


60 


255—256 


■ • 


1 •< 


89 


153 


...'ool.X.app. 91 


257—258 


mat 


> •« 


90 


153 


••• 




92 


259—261 


• •« 


1 a< 


91 


154—158 


••• 




93 


*262— 263 


• • < 


1 •< 


92 


159—160 


••• 




94 


264 


• •< 


1 ftl 


93 


161 


••• 




93 


264 


• •< 


> •' 


94 


161 


••• 




94 


265 


• •« 


• t 


93 


162—163 


•• • 




95 


266 


• •■ 


• « 


94 


164—165 


••• 




96 


267 


• •« 


> •« 


93 


166—168 


••• 




97 


268 


• •1 


> •« 


94 


169—170 


••• 




98 


269—270 


• •) 


> a4 


95 


171—172 


••• 




99 


271—272 


• • 1 


» •< 


96 


173—174 


••• 




100 


273—274 


• •! 


t •< 


97 


175—176 


••• 




101 


275—277 


.*« 


» •« 


98 


177—178 


••• 




102 


278—279 


• . < 


t •! 


99 


179—180 


••■ 




103 


280—281 


. ai 


1 •< 


.. 100 


181—182 


••• 




104 


28 ^.i— 283 


• •1 


> •< 


.• 101 


183—184 


••• 




105 


284—286 


• ■I 


1 •! 


». 102 


185—186 


••• 




106 


287 


• •• 


• 4 


103 


187—188 


••• 




107 


288 


• •• 


* . 


.. 104 


189^190 


«•• 




108 


287—289 


• •< 


• •< 


.ft 103 


191—192 


• •• 




109 


290 


• •< 


> •! 


. 104 


193—194 


••• 




110 


291—293 


• • 1 


• • 


.. 105 


195—196 


•t • 




HI 


294—295 


• •< 


> •< 


►ft 106 


197—198 


••• 




112 


296 


• •< 


I •! 


.. 107 


199—200 


•t* 




lis 


296 


• •< 


1 a 1 


.. 108 


201—202 


••• 




114 


297—298 


a. 


1 • 


.. 107 


203—204 


••• 




1]5 


299—300 


• •< 


1 •( 


.ft 108 


205—206 


•. • 




116 


301—302 


• a 1 


• •( 


109 


207 


#•• 




117 


303—305 


• •< 


» •) 


.. 110 


208 


••• 




US 


306—307 


• • 1 


( •< 


HI 


209—211 


• • • 


vo/VlX. 67 1 


308 


• •< 


» ft 


.. 112 


212 


•*,^ 


v» 


68 


3.09 


• •.< 


t ft4 


111 



3M STATE TRIAL8.«^Iv0«E dt ItevBMnic^ to iiotH KbiiPHo^l 



OCTATO. FO 


LK). 


OCTAVO. 


FOEKX 




r«;. XVlk 309 voi 


MX.}kll2 


Vol. 42»lb4e6 


IMfk IX. p. 


.165 


' S10toSi2 


... 113 


XVII. 427—428 


... 


... 


166 


BIS— ^H 


».. 114 


429—431 


..« 


... 


167 


315—316 


... 115 


432—483 


... 


... 


168 


317_^18 


... 116 


434—435 


VA 


• .. 


169 


31^—320 


... 117 


436—487 


..'• 


•.. 


170 


32I--822 


... 118 


488—439 


'.•• 


*.. 


171 


323--324> 


... 119 


440—441 


■».■. 


... 


172 


325—326 


... 120 


442-448 


..-. 


•.. 


173 


327—828 


... 121 


444 — 446 


%^ 


... 


174 


329^—331 


... 122 


447—448 


... 


... 


175 


332—633 


... 123 


TtVU ~^f9K/ 


••V 


... 


176 


334—^5 


... 124 


451-^^3 


*.w 


... 


177 


386—337 


... 125 


454^-455 


..1» 


... 


178 


338 — 339 


... P26 


456—457 


'..% 


i.. 


179 


340—341 


... 127 


458—459 


... 


&.. 


180 


342—344 


... 128 


460 


'..• 


... 


181 


345—346 


... 129 


.461—462 


... 


... 


182 


347-348 


... 130 


461—462 


'..« 


i.. 


181 


349—350 


... 131 


463—464 


... 


... 


182 


351--353 


... 132 


465—466 


... 


... 


183 


354-^355 


... 133 


467—468 


' V.W 


4.. 


184 


356—357 


... 134 


. 469—471 


h,^ 


i.« 


185 


358-^60 


... 135 


472--473 


... 


1.. 


186 


361-— 362 


... 136 


474—475 


... 


... 


187 


368—364 


... 137 


475-477 


.r. 


... 


188 


565—367 


... 138 


478—480 


'..^ 


... 


189 


368—369 


... 189 


481-482 


... 


... 


190 


370—371 


... 140 


483-^484 


... 


««• 


191 


. 372—373 


... 141 


485-486 


..• 


•.. 


192 


374—375 


... 142 


487—489 


..\ 


... 


193 


376—378 


... 143 


490-491 


!•• 


*.. 


194 


379—880 


... 144 


492—493 


... 


*•• 


195 


881 


... 145 


494^^495 


..• 


... 


196 


382 


... 146 


496—497 


... 


•.• 


197 


388 


... 145 


498—500 


... 


... 


198 


384—385 


... 146 


501—502 


... 


«.« 


199 


886—387 


... 147 


508—504 


*.• 


... 


200 


388—389 


... 148 


505—507 


... 


... 


201 


3i^()— 891 


... 149 


508—509 


... 


... 


202 


392—894 


... 150 


510 


... 


... 


203 


895 


... 151 


510 


... 


• •m 


204 


, 89o ••• 


... 152 


511-^12 


... 


4«. 


203 


35)7 


... 151 


513 


... 


i.. 


204^ 


398 


... 152 


514—515 


..W 


... 


205 


399—401 


... 153 


516-^18 


... 


... 


206 


402—408 


... 154 


. 519—520 


... 


... 


207 


404—405 


... 155 


521—522 


• ■ • 


... 


208 


406—407 


... 156 


523 


... 


.. . 


209 


408—409 


,.. 157 


524 


... 


• * • 


210 


410—411 


... 158 


525 


...' 


... 


209 


412—413 


... 159 


526—527 


a.. 


' ••• 


210 


414—416 


.,. 160 


528-n529 


... 


... 


211 


417—418 


... 161 


530—531 


... 


..« 


212 


419—420 


... 162 


532—633 


• .<• 


... 


213 


421—422 


... 163 


534-^536 


' • • ■ 


»«. 


214 


423—424 


... 164 


587—538 


«*• 


... 


215 



STATE TR] 


FO 


^I«Bix or RosraxMOi to B&tit Botfioffs. 331 


OOTAVa 


lUO. 




OCTAVO. 


FOUO. 


Vok SS9io540 


voL IX. p> 


. £16 


Vok 64810649 


«,.m^IX.;ik265 


XVIL. 541 542 


«•• 


• •'• 


217 


XVII, 650-^51 


w*^ v.. 266 


i>43— 544 


*•'• 


• t« 


218 


652—654 


>.. "^67 


545 


•«• 


• «• 


217 


6^55—656 


... 268 


545 


•«• 


• •• 


218 


657—658 


>.. 269 


546—547 


**• 


• •• 


219 


659—660 


' 270 


548—549 


'•<• 


••• 


220 


661—663 


•«• ♦.. ^/ 1 


550—551 


••• 


••• 


221 


664—665 


<i'4a •#• lil It 


552—554 . 


••• 


»•• 


222 


666S68 


♦', . ... £i o 


555-^56 


••• 


««-t 


223 


669—670 


... 274 


557—558 


••• 


«•• 


224 


671—672 


fc«. ... 275 


559-^60 


•*• 


««• 


225 


673—674 


.«« \ . . 276 


561—562 


««• 


••• 


226 


675 


%4% ».. 275 


563 


-••• 


«•• 


225 


675 


««• 1 . . 276 


563 


*¥» 


•«• 


226 


676S77 


■k«« ♦•• 277 


563—565 


■ ••• 


•♦•• 


227 


678—679 


- *w« ♦.. 278 


^66--^67 


««• 


«•'• 


228 


680--682 


««• > ' . £19 


568—570 


•«• 


»»■• 


229 


683—^84 


^ »«• %•• 280' 


571-472 


■ »•» 


*»•• 


230 


685—686 


««• ».. 281 


573—574 


••• 


• •• 


231 


687—688 


««• «.. 282 


575—576 ^ 


»«• 


• ff» 


232* 


689—691 


••• «.. 283 


^77— m 


%r. 


♦ •• 


233 


692—693 


... 284 


^79—580 


••• 


••• 


234 


694—695 


k»» • . . 2o5 


581 


k»« 


»t* 


233 


696—698 


ftk* « • • 286 


581 


*•• • 


»•• 


234 


699—700 


»fca «•• 287 


582—584 


•«• 


• •• 


235 


701—702 


\m% 4.. 288 


585—586 


•*• 


• «• 


236 


703—704 


%b» «•• 289 


587—588 


•«• 


• •• 


237 


705—707 


,.. 290 


589—^90 


•»• 


• •i» 


238 


708—709 


•«• *.. *•»! 


591-.592 


• k« 


• •• 


239 


710—711 


»•• «.• <692 


593—594 


• •• 


'•«• 


240 


712—714 


«•• ».. 293 


595-496 


• •■ 


* ••• 


241 


715—716 


*.. 4.. 294 


597—598 


V«* 


^•* 


242 


717—718 


*'«« ••• ^"5 


. 599 601 


• •• 


*•• 


243 


719—721 


296 


602—603 


*(i» 


4t% 


244 


722—723 


•*• *•• 297. 


604 605 


*••■ 


««* 


245 


724—725 


•«» 4.. ^98 


606—607 


*«« 


• •• 


246 


726 727 


• 9B 4»« 299 


608—609 


• •* 


*•» 


247 


728—729 


300 


610—611 


■ •'• 


• •M 


248 


730—731 


M. 301 


612—613 


»•• 


• •• 


249 


732—734 


*.. 302 


614—615 


• »• 


• •ft 


250 


735—736 


«•• 4.. 303 


616 


W\»b 


• •• 


251 


737—738 


i». ».. 304 


616 618 


k » » 


»»b 


252 


739—741 


%•• •»•• 3O5 


619—620 


»»• 


•»» 


251 


742—743 


%k» •#• 306 


621 


• «• 


• •» 


252 


744—745 


»«. *.. 307 


622 623 


• •« 


» • k 


253 


746—747 


*•• *•• «5Uo 


624 


• h» 


• •b 


254 


748—750 


♦.. 309 


625 628 




• •• 


255 


751—752 


••• «•• olO 


629 630 


• •• 


• •• 


256 


753—754 


••• «•• 511 


631—632 


• •• 


• •• 


257 


755—757 


*•. ••• %i\.£t 


633 634 


;•»• 


• •• 


258 


758—759 


• b» ••• dlo 


635 637 


• •• 


• #• 


259 


760—761 


••• ».. 514 


638—639 


»** 


« » • 


260 


762 


••• ' *•• 515 


640 641 


• «» 


«•• 


261 


763—764 


••• ••• oio 


642—643 


• • • 


• ■ • 


262 


- 801 


voL X,«/jp. 117 


K (544—645 


• •■• 


• » • 


263 


802 


••• ••• 118 


646—647 


• • • 


■ • • 


264 


803—804 


••• «•• 1 19 



332 



STATE TRIALS. — Index of Refeeehce to both Editioks. 



OCTAVO, 


FOLIO. 


OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




VoL 805/0806 


voLX,api 


t>. ». 120 


Vol. 918<o 919 


vol, X. app. p 


.173 


XVII. 807—809 


m A 


.. 121 


XVII. 92(f— 921 


••• 


• •• 


J 74 


810—811 


• •• •« 


.. 122 


922 


••• 


••• 


175 


812—813 


• •• •< 


.. 123 


923— 924 


••• 


• »• 


176 


814—815 


• •• .1 


.. 124 


923— 925 


••• 


vol.M. 


. 763 


816—617 


• •• .4 


.. 125 


926 


*•• 


••• 


764 


818—819 


■ •• •! 


.. 126 


927— 929 


••• 


••• 


765 


820 


■ •* .4 


.. 127 


930— 931 


■•• 


••• 


766 


820 


• ■• •< 


.. 128 


932— 933 


••• 


••• 


767 


821—822 


• •• •< 


,. 127 


934— 935 


••• 


••• 


768 


823 


• •• •< 


.. 128 
.. 129 


936— 938 


..• 


••• 


769 


824—825 


• •• •< 


939^ 940 


.. • 


..• 


770 


826—828 


« • • •< 


.. 130 


941— 942 


... 


••• 


771 


829—830 


*•• •< 


.. .131 


943— 944 


»•• 


... 


772 


831— 8S2 


• •• •< 


.. 132 


y^f*^^^ Stto 


••• 


•■• 


773 


883— 834 


• •• •< 


.. 133 


947— 949 


... 


.•• 


774 


835—836 


• •• •« 


»• 194 


950— 951 


••• 


••• 


775 


837—838 


• •• •« 


.. 135 


952— 953 


••• 


••• 


776 


839—840 


• •• •< 


.. 136 


954— 955 


••• 


• a • 


777 


841—842 


• •. •« 


•• 137 


956— 957 


••• 


• •• 


778 


o4S ovv 


• »• •« 


.. 138 


958— 959 


••• 


• •• 


779 


845 


• •• •« 


,. 137 


960^ 961 


••• 


• •• 


780 


845 


• •• •< 


. 138 


962— 964 


■•• 


• •• 


78i 


845—847 


• •• •• 


.. 139 


965— 966 


••• 


• •• 


782 


848—849 


• •• •* 


.• 140 


967— 968 


• • • 


• ■• 


783 


850—851 


• •* •< 


. 141 


969— 970 


... 


• •• 


784 


852—853 


• •• •* 


. 142 


971— 972 


••• 


• •• 


785 


854—856 


• .• •• 


.. 143 


973— 975 


• a* 


• at 


786 


857—858 


• •• •• 


.. 144 


976— 977 


• .. 


• •• 


787 


859—860 


• •• .i 


. 145 


978— 979 


• •• 


• •• 


788 


861—862 


• •• •« 


. 146 


980— 981 


••• 


• •• 


789 


863—864 


• •• 


147 


982— 983 


• •• 


• •• 


790 


865—866 


• •• • 1 


148 


984— 985 


• •• 


• •• 


791 


867—868 


• •• • • 


149 


986— 987 


• •• 


• •• 


792 


869—870 


• •• • I 


150 


988— 989 


#•• 


• •• 


793 


871—872 


• •• 


151 


990—1002 


*•• 


«•• 


794 


873—874 


• •• •« 


,. 152 


1003—1004 


• •• 


• •• 


795 


875—876 


• #• •• 


.. 153 


1005—1006 


• •• 


• •• 


796 


877—878 


• •• 


. 154 


1007—1008 


• •• 


• •• 


797 


879—881 


• •• •• 


. 155 


1009—1010 


«•• 


■ •• 


798 


882—883 


• •• .1 


.. 156 


1011—1013 


• •• 


• •• 


799 


884—885 


• •» •« 


,. 157 


1014—1015 


...' 


.•• 


800 


886—887 


• •• •! 


.. 158 


1016—1017 


• •• 


• *• 


801 


888—889 


• •• •• 


• 159 


1018—1019 


• •• 


• •• 


802 


890—891 


• •• •< 


.. 160 


1020—1022 


• •• 


• •• 


805 


892—894 


• •• •< 


.. 161 


1023—1024 


• •• 


• •• 


804 


895—896 


• • • •< 


.. 162 


1025—1026 


• •• 


• •• 


805 


897—898 


• •• .4 


.. 163 


1027—1029 


• •• 


• •• 


806 


899—900 


.*• .4 


.. 164 


1030—1031 


... 


• ■• 


807 


901—902 


• •• .1 


.. 165 


1032—1033 


• •a 


... 


808 


903— W4 


• .• •( 


.. 166 


1034—1035 


• a. 


.*• 


809 


905—906 


• •• .4 


.. 167 


1036—1038 


..,. 


..% 


810 


907—908 


• •* •* 


. 168 


1039—1040 


• •• 


• •• 


811 


909—910 


■ ••• •< 


. 169 


1041—1042 


.«• 


• •• 


812 


911—913 


• •• •« 


. 170 


1043—1044 


• •• 


• •• ' 


813 


914—915 


• a. •• 


• 171 


1045—1046 


• •• 


• •• 


8^4 


916-^17 


*«• •! 


.. 172 


1047—1049 


*tV 


••• 
• 


814 



STATE Trials. — Index of IIeferencr to both ^Iditions. 3^3 



OCTAVO. 

Vd. 1050^01051 

XVII. 1052—1053 

1054—1055 

1056—1057 

1058—1060 

1061—1062 

1063—1064 

1065—1066 

1067—1069 

1070—1071 

1072—1073 

1074—1075 

1076—1078 

1079 

1080 

1079—1081 

1082—1083 

1084—1085 

1086—1088 

1089L-.1090 

1091—1094 

1093—109* 

1095—1096 

1097—1098 

1099—1100 

1101—1102 

1103—1104 

1105— U07 

1108—1109 

lllO— nil 

1112—1114 

1115—1116 

1117—1118 

1119—1120 

1121—1122 

1123—1125 

1126—1127 

1128—1129 

1130—1132 

1133—1134 

1135—1136 

1137 

1138 

1139 

1143_1144 

1 145—1147 

1148—1149 

1150—1151 

1152 

1223 

1224—1225 

1226—1227 

1228—1230 

1231—1234 

1235—1236 

1237—1230 

1240-^^1241 



••• ••• 

••• ••• 

•»■ ••• 

••• ••• 



••• 
••• 

••• ' ••• 
••• ••• 

••• ••• 

••• »•• 



••• 



••• 



••• 



•#• 



•t* 



••• 



••• 
••• 
•#• 



••• 



••• 
••• 

••• 
••• 



••• 
••• 

••• 
••• 



FOLIO. 

..• vo/.VL/?.8l6 
817 
818 
819 
820 

• •• ••• O^J. 

^•« ••• oJuiU 

823 
824 
825 
826 
827 
828 
829 
830 
829 
830 
831 
832 
833 
834 

..« vo/« IX, 315 
316 

317 
318 
319 
320 
321 
322 
323 
324 
325 
326 
327 
328 
329 
330 
331 
332 

334 
335 
336 
379 
381 
382 
383 
384 
385 
386 
387 
388 
389 
390 
391 
392 
393 



•»• 



••• 



••• 



••• 

• •• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 
••• 



••• 
••• 

a #• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 



• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 
••• ••• 

••• ••• 

f«« •!• 

••• ••• 



• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 



OCTAVO. 

Vd. l24f2tol2^ 
XVII. 1245—1246 
1247—1248 
1249—1250 
1251—1252 
1253—1255 
1256—1257 
1258—1259 

1260 
1289—1290 
1291—1292 
1293—1294 
1295—1296 
1297—1299 
1300—1301 
1302—1303 
1304—1305 
1306—1307 
1308—1309 
1339—1341 
1342—1405 

1406 
1407—1408 
1409—1410 
1411—1413 
1414—1415 
1416—1417 
1418—1420 
1421—1422 
1423—1424 
1425—1427 
1428—1429 
1430—1431 
1432—1434 
1435—1436 
1437—1438 
1439—1440 

1441 
1442—1454 

voi.xvm. 1 

2 

8— 4 

5— 7 

8— 9 

10— 11 

12— 13 

14— 15 

16— 17 

18— 20 

21— 22 

23— 24 

25— 26 

27— 29 

SO— 31 

32— 33 

34— 35 

36-N 87 



••• 



••• 
••• 

••• 
••• 

• a* 

• •• 

• •• 

• a« 

• a* 

• a* 

• •• 

• a* 
aa* 



a«« 

• *a 

• a* 

• •9 

• a* 



aa« 

• •• 

• *• 

• •• 

• •• 

• »• 

• •• 

• aa 

• t» 

• •• 

• •m 



• •• 



• •• 



•aa 



• •a 

• aa 



• a* 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• a* 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• •• 

• a* 

• •• 

• •* 

• •a 



• •• 
{§•• 

• •• 

• •• 

• a* 



FOLIO. 

• a. VO/a IX. p. 394 

••• ••• 395 

• •m va* S^tO 

.a. 397 

398 
399 
•*■• ••• 400 
401 
402 
403 
404 
405 
406 
407 
408 
409 
410 

... 411 
412 
413 
414 
415 
416 

— 417 

• aa 418 

419 
420 
421 
422 
423 
424' 
... 425 
426 

.a. 427 
aa. 428 

429 
430 
431 
432 

• a. 431 

432 
433 
434 
435 
436 
437 
438 
439 
440 
441 
442 
443 
444 
445 
446 
447 
448 



aaa 

• *• 

• •• 

• a* 
« • • 



• a* 



• •• 



a.» 

• »• 

• a« 

• •• 

• aa 

• a* 

• a« 

• a* 

• a* 



• aa 

• a* 

•a. ••• 
.•• ••• 
.a* ••• 
• a. ••• 

• •V 



• •• 



#ff 



♦ •• 



tS4 



SffAfB TRIALS.— 4sasx or ftirusves to aora EniTiAV* 



OCTAVO. 


FQiia 




OCTAVO. 


FOW0(. 




VoL S8to 40 


••• V0» 


.IX.j!io449 


VcL imtoisi 


..^ V9^ IX. 


2V«)4 


XVIII. 41— 42 


• •• 


••• 


450 


XVIII. 152—163 


*•<► 


•Af 


505 


43 


• •« 


ooo 


451 


154—155 


•o^ 

• 


B^f 


506 


44^45 


••« 


oo« 


452 


156 


o«* 


•V 


507 


45 


*—■ 


M* 


451 


157—159 


•«« 


•»m 


508 


46 


• *9 


• •« 


452 


160—161 


•^ 


•,V 


509 


47— 48 


• •• 


• •0 


453 


162 


•M 


• 


510 


49— 50 


*•• 


• •• 


454 


163— J64 


••• 


••s- 


511 


51~ 52 


••'« 


• •• 


455 


165—166 


••• 


^? 


512 


55^ 54 


••• 


••• 


456 


167—168 


• •• 


••m 


S13 


55-^ 56 


• •♦ 


• •• 


457 


169L— 170 


••• 


^-t» 


5145 


57-- 58 


• •* 


• •• 


458 


171—172 


• •• 


••.« 


515 


59— 60 


••• 


• • • 


459 


173—174 


• •• 


^•.» 


516 


61— 62 


• •• 


• •• 


460 


175—176 


• - • 


• •• 


517 


63— 64 


«•• 


■ •• 


461 


177^178 


mf 


• •• 


518 


65—67 


*•# 


o»o 


462 


179—180 


• • 


••• 


519 


68— 69 


••• 


• •• 


463 


181—182 


• •0 


••• 


520 


70-. 71 


• •• 


••• 


464 


183—184 


• •• 


•«• 


521 


72—73 


• •« 


••• 


465 


185—186 


•o°* 

• 


• •• 


522 


74-. 75 


•«» 


••• 


466 


187—188 . 


• •• 


••« 


523 


76— 77 


• •• 


• •• 


467 


189—191 


*** 


• •• 


524 


78—79 


*•• 


• •• 


468 


192—193 


• •• 


• • • 


525 


80— 81 


*•• 


• ■• 


469 


194 


• • 


••o 

• 


526 


82— 83 


• •« 


o«o 


470 


.197 


«• 


*•• 

> 


385 


84— %S 


»•• 


••• 


471 


197 


• •• 


•«• 


336 


86— 87 


••• 


••• 


472 


198—200 


••« 


••p 


3S7 


88—89 


*«• 


«•• 


473 


201—202 


• •• 


••.• 


338 


90— 91 


• •• 


••• 


474 


203—204 


• •• 


ooo 


339 


92— 93 


••• 


•*• 


475 


205—207 


• •• 


»*• 


340 


94 95 


• •• 


••m 


476 


208—209 


*•• 


*— 


341 


96— 97 


• *• 


•-•« 


477 


210—211 


• •• 


• •• 


342 


98— 99 


• •« 


••• 


478 


212—213 


• •• 


• •• 


" 345 


IOOl— 101 


»«• 


■•»0 


479 


214—^15 


• •• 


• •• 


344 


102—103 


• •• 


• •■ 


480 


216—217 


• •• 


•f« 


345 


104—105 


••« 


• •• 


481 


218—219 


»•• 


• •• 


346 


106—107 


• »* 


• »• 


482 


220—221 . 


■ •• 


4iOO 


347 


108—109 


♦•• 


• •• 


483 


222—223 


««o 


• oo 


348 


110—111 


••• 


• •• 


484 


224-r225 


• r* 


«oo 


340 i 


112—113 


••• 


•«• 


485 


226—227 


••• 


#oo 


350 


114—115 


• •• 


•«• 


if» 


228—229 


#*• 


.ooo 


351 


116 


• •• 


• •• 


487 


. 230—231 


• •0 


• • • 


352 


117—118 


• •• 


• •• 


488 


232—233 


•«• 


• •• 


353 


119—120 


• •• 


• •• 


489 


234—235 


• •• 


• •• 


354 


121—122 


• •• 


• to 


490 


236—237 


• •• 


• •• 


355 


123—124 


• to 


• •• 


491 


238-r-239 


««0. 


•oo 


356 


125—126 


• •• 


••• . 


492 


240-r-242 


«••. 


• • • 


357 


127 • 


• •• 


• •• 


493 


243—244 


'**!*, 


• 0* 


358 


128—130 


• •• 


• •• 


494 


245—246 


•,•», 


.100 • 


359 


131—132 


•••• 


••• 


495 


247—248 


»f» 


• •o 


360 


133—134 


• •• 


• •• 


496 


249—250 


«•• 


• 0« 


361 


135-rl37 


••• 


• •• 


497 


251—252 


-••* 


M« 


362 


l38-rlS9 


• •• 


• •• 


498 


253—254 


••« 


«•• 

> 


363 


140-:J41 


• •o 


ooo 


499 


255—256 


• •• 


•t* 


364 


142—143 


• •• 


• •• 


500 


257—259 


♦••f 


•f 


S6$ 


144-rJl45 


oto 


• •• 


501 


260—261 


• ••. 


•?• 


366 


146—147 


• ••. 


•••« 


502 


262—263 


M« 


^f' 


S67 


148— }49 


•t« 


•tf 


503 


264—266 


•♦A. 


•f* 


368 



j 



STATS THIALS««t-Ikou o* RurBm^ncJi to 90ta EDiTi^sa. 336 



«: 



OCTAVO. 


FOUO. 




Wfi^ S(67«o268 


••• vo/. IX. 


».369 
3Tb 


XVIII. 269--^0 


•*• 


••• 


271—272 


•»• 


••• 


371 


273^^745 


••• 


••• 


372 


275-276 


••• 


••• 


373 


277—278 


•.• 


••• 


374 


279-^80 


••• 


••* 


375 


281-^83 


•»• 


• • • 


376 


284-^85 


•.. 


• • • 


377 


286—287 


«•• 


••* 


378 


288 


t«» 


• .a 


379 


289—290 


••• 


• •• 


380 


289—291 


••• 


• • • 


527 


292—293 


••• 


• .• 


528 


294— fi95 


••• 


• •• 


529 


296--297 


••• 


*W 


530 


298—299 


••• 


• •• 


531 


300--302 


••• 


• •• 


532 


303r*-S05 


••• 


• •• 


533 


306—309 


••• 


• •• 


534 


3ia--3l3 


«•• 


• •• 


535 


314* 


•.• 


• •• 


536 


315—316 


•.• 


• a. 


537 


317—318 


••. 


• •a 


538 


319—320 


•«• 


a. a 


539 


321—322 


••• 


*•% 


540 


323— ^24? 


*•• 


• a* 


541 


325 


••• 


• •* 


542 


332 


... 


%•• 


543 


333—334 


••• 


• •» 


544 


335—336 


••• 


*•• 


545 


337—338 


••• 


%m% 


546 


339--340 


«•• 


• •a 


547 


341---343 


••• 


a.a 


548 


344—346 


«•• 


%•• 


549 


347—348 


••• 


aaa 


550 


349—350 


••• 


• a« 


551 


351—352 


••• 


aca 


552 


SbS 


••• 


aaa 


551 


353 


••• 


..a 


552 


353—^55 


••• 


• a* 


553 


356—357 


•«• 


• a* 


554 


358 


••• 


• a* 


SS5 


359—360 


»•• 


• a* 


556 


359—360 


••• 


• • • 


555 


361—362 


*«•• 


• aa 


556 


363 


•*• 


aaa 


557 


364 


... 


a.a 


558 


365 


«*• 


• m^ 


5.37 


366—367 


•#• 


• •a 


558 


368 


••• 


a.« 


559 


368 


-••'• 


aaa 


560 


367—369 


•t» 


• .• 


559 


370 


••• 


• •• 


560 


. 371 


••• 


• aa 


559 


371 


■••« 


• •% 


56a 


372^-^373 


*•* 


• •• 


561 



r<rf. 

XVIII. 



rrAvo. 


FOUO. 




374 io 383 


vol. IX. p. 


592 


384—385 


'••a 


• 


563 


386—387 


'••m 


.a. 


564 


388 


««« 


• •• 


565 


389—390 


' aa. 


aa. 


566 


391 


• • • 


.aa 


565 


392 


• •m 


aa. 


566 


393 


• •• 


• a. 


567 


394 


aaa 


• a. 


568 


395—396 


aa. 


aaa 


567 


397 


m** 


• •• 


568 


3*/0 ' ' wUU 


• •• 


aaa 


569 


401-^-402 


aa-. 


• •• 


570 


403—404 


• •* 


..a 


571 


405—407 


a*. 


• a. 


572 


408—409 


• •• 


aaa 


573 


410—411 


aa« 


aa. 


.574 


412-^13 


•«« 


m0» 


575 


414 


**m 


a.a 


576 


415—416 


.va 


• am 


575 


417 


..• 


• a. 


576 


418^^19 


■ a. 


• a. 


577 


420—421 


»•« 


• aa 


578 


422—423 


«a. 


aaa 


579 


424 


• •• 


aaa 


580 


425 


.«. 


aaa 


579 


426 


• •it 


• •• 


580 


427 


.*• 


• • • 


581 


428 


»** 


• aa 


582 


429 


»•• 


aa. 


581 


430—431 


• •• 


aaa 


582 


432—435 


• •» 


• •• 


583 


436—439 


• a. 


• • ■ 


584 


440 


•■0% 


aaa 


585 


440-^442 


•«. 


.a. 


586 


443—444 


• a. 


• • I 


587 


445 


•»• 


••• 


588 


446—447 


.•« 


• •• 


589* 


448—449 


• •• 


... 


590* 


450—451 


• a. 


.a. 


§91* 


452-*-454 


•*• 


• a* 


592* 


455.-.456 


««• 


.aa 


593* 


457—458 


WW 


... 


594* 


459-.460 


««• 


.•* 


595* 


461—462 


.a. 


... 


596* 


463-..464 


• *k 


aa. 


597* 


465—467 


•»* 


.a. 


598* 


468—469 


• t. 


... 


599* 


470—471 




... 


600* 


472--473 


«t» 


a.. 


601* 


474—475 


aa. 


... 


602* 


476—478 


.a. 


..a 


60S* 


479—480 


«.. 


• .• 


604* 


481-^82 


.a. 


a.a 


605* 


483^.484 


•m 


• • . 


606* 


485—486 


• .« 


.a. 


607* 


487 


... 


• •f 


608* 



336 



STATE Trials. — Ivdex or IlEreRBBCE TO BOTH feoino^s. 



OCTAVO. 


FOLIO 


• 


OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




Vol. 488/0 489 


t»^lX. 


p-609* 


Vol. 603/0604 


vol. IX. p 


.649* 


XVIII. 490—491 


••• 




610* 


XVIII. 605—606 


••• 


• •• 


650» 


492—493 


••• 




611* 


607—608 


••• 


••• 


a5i* 


494^-495 


••• 




612* 


609—610 


••■ 


• •• 


652* 


496—498 


••• 




. 613* 


611—613 


••• 


• •• 


653* 


499—500 


••• 




. 614* 


614—615 


•*• 


• •• 


654* 


501 


«•• 




615* 


616-617 


••• 


• •• 


655* 


502 


••• 




616* 


618—619 


• • • 


• •• 


656* 


50S : 


oo/.X. 


api 


p. 175 


620— (521 


* ■ « 


••• 


657* 


504--505 


»•• 


■ 1 


176 


, 621^—624 


••• 


■ ••• 


658* 


506—507 


••• 




177 


625— i526 


••• 


• •• 


659* 


508— .509 


••• 


■ 


178 


627—628 


• •V 


• •• 


660* 


510^511 


• • • 




179 


629—630 


••• 


• •• 


661* 


512—513 


••• 




180 


631—632 


• t« 


• •• 


662* 


514—515 


••• 




181 


633—634 


• •• 


• •• 


663* 


516—517 


••• 




182 


635—636 


• •• 


• •• 


664* 


518—519 


•'•• 




183 


637—639 


• •• 


• •• 


ees* 


520—521 


•'•• 




184 


.640—641 


••• 


• •• 


666* 


522 


••• 




185 


642—643 


• •• 


• • • 


667* 


523—525 


•#• 




186 


64,4_646 


• •• 


••• 


668* 


525 


••• 




185 


647—648 


••• 


••• 


669* 


525 


••• 




186 


649^—650 


••• 


• •• 


670* 


526—528 


••• 




187 


651—653 


• •• 


• •• 


671* 


529 


... voL D 


L 615* 


654—655 


• •• . 


• •• 


672* 


530 


••• 


••• 


616» 


65&-657 


• •• 


• •• 


675* 


531—532 


••• 


••t 


617* 


658—659 


• •• 


• •• 


674* 


533—535 


••• 


* • • 


618* 


660-661 


• •• 


• •• 


675* 


536—537 


••• 


••• 


619* 


662—664 


• •• 


• •• 


676* 


538—539 


••• 


••• 


620* 


665^-^^66 


• •• 


• •• 


677* 


540^-541 


••• 


••■ 


621* 


667—670 


• •• 


• •• 


678» 


542—543 


••• 


••• 


622* 


671—672 


• •• . 


• •• 


679* 


544—545 


•*• 


••• 


623» 


673—674 


• •• 


•«• 


680* 


546—548 


••• 


••■ 


624* 


e75.'-676 


•••' 


. •«• 


681* 


549—550 


••• 


••■ 


625* 


677-^78 


• •• 


• •• 


682» 


551—552 


••« 


••• 


626* 


679—680 


• •• 


• •• 


683» 


553—554 


••• 


■•1 


. 627* 


681—682 


■ •• 


••• 


684* 


BUB— 556 


••• 


••« 


628* 


683—684 


0«« 


• •• 


685* 


557-^58 


••• 


••1 


629* 


685—686 


• •• 


• •• 


686» 


559—561 


••• 


••i 


630* 


687—688 


• •• 


••• 


687* 


562—563 


••• 


••t 


631* 


689—690 


• •• 


• •• 


688» 


. 564—^5 


••• 


••< 


, 632* 


691—692 


• •• 


• •• 


6S9* 


566'-^67 


••• 


••• 


. 633* 


693—694 


• •• 


• •• 


690* 


568--570 


••• 


••< 


, 634* 


695—696 


■ •• 


• •• 


691* 


571—572 


••• 


••t 


635* 


697—699 


/••• 


• •• 


692* 


. 573—574 


••• 


••• 


636* 


700—701 


• •• 


• •• 


693* 


575—576 


••• 


••< 


637* 


702—703 


• ••• . 


• •• 


694* 


. 577--581 


••• 


••• 


. 638* 


704—705 


• •• 


• f 


695* 


. 582-^83 


••• 


••< 


639* 


706—707 


• •* 


• •• 


696* 


584—585 


••• 


••• 


640* 


708—715 


■ ••• 


• •• 


697* 


. 586--^87 


••• 


••« 


641* 


716^717 


••'« 


• ••• 


698* 

_ _ — ^ 


. 588—589 


••• 


• •a 


642* 


718—719 


• •• 


• •• 


69^ 


, 590—591 


•f»- 


••• 


643* 


720—722 


• •• 


• •• 


700* 


592—593 


••• 


• »< 


, 644* 


723-.724 


• ••. 


• •• 


701* 


594—595 


• ••• 


• •« 


645* 


725—726 


• •• 


• t« 


702* 


. 596—598 


••• 


••■ 


646* 


727—728 


• •• 


••• 


703* 


599—600 


«•» 


• •1 


647* 


729-,730 


• •• 


• t* 


70** 


601--602 


#ff 


• ft 


648* 


. 731-^^732 


ft* 


' ••• 


70S' 






pqTAyp. 


.FQ¥% 


OCTAYOi 


. fPLJO, 




^h 


788*«7.S4 


^^v^rs^^yw 


.m. W8/09.64 


•*• 


v<*ix. 


588 


. 781-737 


-4 -; -M :-W; 


XVIII.. 863-^864 


» * 


f4f 


58S 




...738-^289 


m4 ... 708* 


fi65-rm 


• *\» 


• 4. 


590 


• 


..740-r741 


,.j ^M 709* 


...867—868 


•}• 


•\* 


591 




. ,742—748 


.,4 -* 710» 


. . .869^870 


«^* 


«4* 


592 


« 


.744-^745 


v» -4 7ii» 


. .871-t873 


fU. 


.44 


593 


, 


. 746-^747 


; 4*! M 712* 


.874-r875 


. .'^^ 


•>4 


594 




. 748--749 


.,* . .M 713« 


. .876-877 


• *• 


f44 


595 


• ■ 


. .750l_751 


•M .M 714» 


. 878-r879 


■ M* - 


•«4 


596 


\ 


. .752-r753 


..i •.* 715* 


880-^881 


««4 


.4r 


597 




. 754--755 


*.t ^1 716» 


. 882—884 


f.i 


•^4 


598 


' 


.756—757 


... ..| 717» 


,..885—886 


• ■•>♦ 


.44 


599 


i» 


758—759 


«•♦ . «•( 718* 


887-T888 


• •4 


.44. 


600 


• 


, ,760u^761 


V* -« 719» 


. 889—890 


• •4 


444 


601 




, .762—764 


i.^ «« 720* 


, .891—892 


... 


4*4 


602 


1 


.765-7-766 


^.4 .M 721* 


...893-T895 


f.4 


m4 


60S 


' 


.767 


.>4 ..4 722* 


. .896—897 


f*f 


•^4 


604 




768-t770 


vi -4 723» 


898—899 


•*. 


•«4 


605 


* r 


771—772 


^* .^ 724* 


900—901 


444 


•.4 


606 




. .773 


..4 .*^ 725» 


902—904 


•k^ 


**4 


607 


1 


„774-t775 


•M ..4 726* 


. .905—906 


444 


*44 


608 


- 


,776—777 


..♦ ..4 727* 


. . 907—908 


.4« 


444 


609 


^ 


778—7.88 


..4 m4 728* 


.909l-^10 


44f 


4M: 


610 


• ^ 


.789-r-790 


4.V ..* 729* 


. 911—918 


4^4 


♦•4 ■ 


611 


! 


791—792 


i.k /.i 730* 


. 914—915 


••k 


•0. 


612 


1 . 


. .79S-rJ:94 


..* ^.* 731* 


, 916—917 


444 


f.4 


61S 


• 


795—796 


d..k rf.« 732* 


918—919 


«^4 


♦4f' 


614 




797—799 


^4 .M 733* 


920—022 


M^ 


..4 


615 


t 


800—801 


.•♦ ..4 734* 


923—924 


4.4 


..4 


616 


_ 


802—^03 


..4 .M 735* 


925—926 


*** 


••* 


617 




;, ;804— 805 


J..4 .'.«• 736* 


927—928 


••• 


• t4 


6lS 


ft . 


806—807 


y** d5.t 737* 


929—931 


..• 


«•. 


619 




808—809 


.•4 i.4 738* 


982—933 


... 


•«14 


620 


. 


810-t812 


rf.4 ..* 739* 


. 934—935 


4.. 


••4 


621 


I> 


813—81* 


*.> «4 740* 


936—937 


**.* 


... 


622 




815—816 


.>4 ... 741* 


. 938—939 


••• 


..f 


623 




817—818 


.:.4 W.4 742* 


. .940—942 


••« 


... 


624 


; 


819—820 


w.« M 743* 


. 943-r944 


f.f 


... 


625 


, 


821—823 


4.4 «•• 744* 


945—946 


.... 


'••• 


626 


" 


824. 


v.* .,4 745* 


. .947—948 


4'«f 


••• 


627 




.. «25 


i,, ^.* 746* 


949^51 


•«• 


•'•• 


628 




826—827 


••f ••• 747* 


, 952-953 


• *'• 


•.•• 


629 




828—830 


..4 *.i 748* 


954—955 


•'•'• 


..• 


630 


- • 


8ai-u432 


.it .., 749* 


956—957 


•V. 


*H 


631 




833—834^ 


..4 ••• 750* 


958—960 


••'• 


••'• 


632 




. 835—836 


.•^ 751* 


961—962 


' ••» 


.V* 


633 




837—841 


... ..4 752* 


963—964 


••'« 


•'•'• 


634 




842 

• • 


VoLlLft^. 190 


. 965—966 


^.> 


••• 


635 




842—^43 


m2 191 


. 967—969 


••« 


••• 


636 




844—846 


. ..t ... 192 


970^971 


^«> 


•«• 


637 




847—848 


..4 .•• 193 


' 972—^73 


•^.> 


M. 


&% 




84&— 850 


v.t ..# 194 


. .974--976 




••> 


639 




851-^52 


«.. f«« 195 


977—978 


4.* 


f.!. 


640 




853—854 


•tft. ,«•• 19o 


979—980 


..'• 


?•'• 


641 




857—859 


«•• V9J|^IX.585 


981—983 


f.« 


T 

••• 


646 




860—861 


••• '••• 586 


984—985 


• 


f^. 


64S 




-. v^62 


Mt fft 5W 


986-.987 


. 94. 


f... 


644 



338 



STATE TRIALS^ — Ivdbx or Rbrkbvcb to both BinnoM 



OCTAVO. 


FOUO. 




OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




Vol. 96Sto 990 


' •••wrf.DLiiu645 


Vol. 1114tolll6 




xnn. 991— 99e 


••• 


••o 


6i6 


XniLlin— 1118 


•oo 


vokX. 


1 


993— 99v 


••• 


ooo 


647 


1119 


••• 


••• 


2 


995—997 


••• 


••• 


648 


1120—1121 


•••' 


••• 


3 


998—999 


••• 


••m 


649 


1122—1123 


••o 


••• 


4 


JOOO— 1001 


••• 


••• 


650 


1124^11% 


••• 


••• 


5 


1002—1003 


••• 


••• 


651 


1127—1128 


•••' 


«•• 


6 


1004—1006 


••• 


•M 


652 


1129—1130 


••o 


••• 


7 


1007—1008 


••• 


• •• 


653 


1131—1133 


••• 


••• 


8 


1009—1010 


••• 


• •• 


654 


1134—1135 


•*o 


••• 


9 


1011—1013 


••• 


• •• 


655 


1136—1137 


• •• 


••• 


10 


1014—1015 


••• 


• •• 


656 


1138—1139 


•oo 


ooo 


11 


1016—1017 


••• 


• •• 


657 


1140—1143 


•oo 


ooo 


12 


1018—1020 


• • • 


• •• 


658 


1144—1145 


« 

••• 


••• 


13 


1021—1022 


••• 


• •• 


659 


1146—1147 


••• 


ooo 


14 


1023—1024 


••• 


• •• 


660 


1148—1149 


••• 


••• 


15 


1025—1026 


••• 


• •• 


661 


1150—1151 


<••• 


ooo 


16 


1027—1029 


••• 


• •• 


662 


1152—1153 


•oo 


ooo 


17 


1030—1031 


••• 


• •• 


663 


1154—1155 


ooo 


• •• 


18 


1032—1033 


••• 


• •• 


664 


1156—1157 


••• 


••• 


19 


1034^1036 


••• 


• •• 


665 


1158—1159 


• • • 


«•• 


20 


1037—1038 


••• 


• •• 


666 


1160—1161 


• •• 


••• 


21 


1039—1040 


••• 


• •• 


667 


1162—1163 


••• 


••• 


22 


1041—1042 


••• 


• •• 


668 


1164—1165 


•oo 


ooo • 


23 


1043—1045 


••• 


• •• 


669 


1166—1168 


ooo 


••• 


24 


1046—1047 


••• 


• •• 


670 


1169—1170 


••• 


ooo 


25 


1048—1049 


••• 


• •• 


671 


1171—1172 


••• 


o«« 


25 


1050—1052 


••• 


• •O 


672 


1173—1174 


• •• 


•oo 


27 


1053—1054 


••• 


• •• 


673 


1175—1177 


• •• 


• •• 


28 


1055—1056 


• to 


• •o 


674 


1178—1179 


000 


• •• 


29 


1057—1059 


• •• 


• ■ * 


675 


1180—1181 


«ao 


• •o 


30 


1060L-1061 


• • • 


• •• 


676 


1182—1184 


oao 


••• 


31 


1062—1063 


••• 


• •• 


677 


1185—1186 


• •• 


• •• 


32 


1064—1066 


••• 


• •o 


678 


1187—1188 


• 00 


••• 


33 


1067 


••o 


••• 


679 


1189^1190 


••• 


• • • 


34 


1067—1068 


• •• 


• •• 


680 


1191 


••• 


• • • 


35 


1069 


• 0* 


• •• 


715 


1192—1194 


• •• 


••o 


36 


1069 


••• 


• •• 


716 


1193—1194 


• •• 


oo^ 


35 


1070—1072 


••• 


• •• 


717 


1195 


• •• 


• ao 


36 


1073—1074 


• •• 


• •• 


718 


1196—1197 


• 

• •• 


o»o 


37 


1075—1076 


• •• 


• •• 


719 


. 1198—1199 


oao 


• ao 


38 


1077—1079 


o*o 


• •• 


720 


1200 


• ao 


• ao 


39 


1080—1081 


• •• 


• •• 


721 


1201—1202 


• •• 


• •• 


40 


1082—1083 


• •• 


• •• 


722 


1203 


wd. 


X. app 


. 195 


1084—1085 


• •• 


'•0* 


723 


1203 


• a* 


• 09 


196 


1086—1088 


• •• 


••• 


724 


1204—1205 


1 

• •• 


• a* 


197 


1089—1090 


••• 


• •• 


725 


1206—1207 


»•• 


• •• 


198 


1091—1092 


• •• 


• •• 


726 


1208—1209 


• •9 


• •• 


199 


1093—1095 


• •« 


• •t 


727 


1210—1212 


• •• 


• aa 


200 


1096—1097 


• •• 


••• 


728 


1213—1214 


• a* 


• a* 


201 


1098—1099 


• •• 


• •• 


729 


1215—1216 


• •• 


• a^ 


202 


1100—1102 


• •• 


••• 


730 


1217—1218 


• •• 


• 99 


205 


1103—1104 


• •• 


• •• 


731 


1219—1220 


aa« 


.••• 


204f 


1105—1107 


• •• 


• •• 


732 


1221—1223 


• •9 


• a* 


205 


1108—1109 


• •• 


• •• 


733 


1224—1225 


• •• 


• •• 


206 


IIJO—IIU 


• •• 


• •• 


734 


1226 


• aa 


aa* 


207 
?p8 


1112—1113 


• •• 


° ••• 


735 


1227—1229 


a«o 


»»9 



STATE TRIALS. — Ikdbx of Refeeskcr to both Editions. 


339 


OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




Vol. 1229/01230 


• voL X. p. 


139 


Fo/. XIX. 18 to 19 


.. vol. X.p. 


47 


XVIII.1231— 1232 


I* ••• 


140 


20— 21 


i« ••• 


48 


1233—1234 


»• ••• 


141 


22— 24 


I. .•• 


49 


1235 1237 


• • »•» 


142 


25— 26 


». .«« 


50 


1238—1239 


•• ' ••• 


143 


27— 28 


!• ••• 


51 


1240—1241 


I* ••• 


144 


29— 31 


t. .•« 


52 


1242—1244 


>• ••• 


145 


32— 33 


)• ... 


53 


1245—1246 


I* ••• 


146 


34— 35 


)• ■•* 


54 


1247—1248 


I* ••• 


147 


36— 38 


• •.• 


55 


1249—1250 


>• ••• 


148 


S9— 40 


)• ... 


56 


1251—1252 


• • ••• 


149 


41— 42 


1. ••• 


57 


1253—1254 


•• St* 


150 


43— 45 


1. ••• 


58 


1255—1256 


I* ••• 


151 


46— 47 


1. ... 


59 


1257—1258 


• • ••• 


152 


48— 49 


1. ... 


60 


1259 


>• ••• 


153 


50— 52 


t. .*• 


61 


1260—1261 


!• ••• 


154 


53^ 54 


• • ... 


62 


1262-1263 


•• ••• 


155 


55— 51 


»• «.• 


63 


1264—1265 


• • ••• 


156 


58 59 


1. ••• 


64 


1266—1267 


•• ••• 


157 


60— 70 


• • ••• 


65 


1268—1269 


!• ••• 


158 


71— 72 


>• ••• 


66 


1270—1271 


• • ••• 


159 


73- 78 


»« ••• 


67 


1279—1273 


• • ••• 


160 


79— 80 


>. ••• 


68 


1274—1275 


!• ••• 


161 


81— 82 


!• ••• 


69 


1276—1277 


• • ••• 


162 


83— 84 


• • ... 


70 


1278—1279 


•• ••• 


163 


85— 87 


»• *•• 


71 


1280—1281 


l« ••• 


164 


88— 89 


>• «•• 


72 


1282—1284 


>• ••• 


165 


90— 91 


1. ••• 


73 


1285—1286 


>• ••• 


166 


92— 93 


)• ••• 


74 


1287—1288 


f ••• 


167 


94— 96 


«• ••• 


75 


1289—1290 


»• ••• 


168 


97— 98 


»• •.• 


76 


1291—1292 


>• ••• 


169 


99—100 


• • •.. 


77 


1293—1295 


f ••• 


170 


101—103 


1* ••• 


78 


1296—1297 


»• ••• 


171 


104—105 


1. ... 


79 


1298—1299 


>• ••• 


172 


106—108 


• • ••• 


80 


1300—1301 


)• ••• 


173 


109—110 


1. .•• 


81 


1302—1303 


•• ••• 


174 


111—112 


►• .t* 


82 


1304—1306 


•• ••• 


175 


113—114 


• • •' « • 


83 


1307—1308 


f ••• 


176 


115—119 


• • •*• 


84 


1309—1310 


1. ••• 


177 


120—121 


»• ... 


85 


1311—1313 


•• ••• 


178 


122—123 


► • ... 


86 


1314—1315 


■ • ••• 


179 


124—126 


>• ••• 


87 


1316—1317 


•• ••• 


180 


127—128 


»• •«• 


88 


1318—1320 


•• ••• 


181 


129—130 


»• ••• 


89 


1321—1324 


•• ••• 


182 


131—133 


• «• 


90 


1323—1329 


»• vol, XI. 


349 


134—135 


1* •.• 


91 


1330—1334 


1* ••• 


350 


136—137 


1. ••• 


92 


1835—1341 


1. ••• 


351 


138—140 


>• ... 


93 


1342—1347 


•• ••• 


352 


141—142 


)• •.• 


94 


1348—1359 


)• ••• 


353 


143—144 


». ••• 


95 


r<rf.XIX. 1 


• vol, X. 


39 


145—146 


). ... 


96 


2 


1 • '• • • 


40 


147—149 


»• ••• 


97 


3— 4 


!• ••• 


41 


150—152 


>• ••• 


98 


5— 7 .. 




42 


153—155 


• • ... 


99 


8— 9 .. 


»• ••• 


'43 


156—157 


• • ••• 


100 


lO- 12 


)• ••• 


44 


158—159 


»• ... 


101 


13— 14 


»• ••• 


45 


160—161 


»• ••• 


102 


15— 17 


• • ••• 


46 


162—164 


1. ••• 


103 



Z2 



340 STATE TRIALS.~In2>£x em REPsaxxcfi to ju>kh Bi>HriM[9« 



OCTAVO. 

• 


FOLIO. 




OCTAV<). 


?0llO, 




F0/.XIX. 165^0166 


• •• 


99^. X^ J 


f. 104 


rqi.XIX.285/o286 


•*« 


«a/.Xv 


pu906 


167—168 


••• 


••• 


105 


287—288 


•M 


»•!• 


«07 


169—170 


••• 


••• 


106 


289—290 


•M 


0— 


20s 


171—173 


•«• 


• •• 


107 


291—293 


•%• 


•M 


209 


174—175 


••• 


••• 


108 


294—295 


9%* 


»•• 


210 


176—177 


•«• 


••• 


109 


296—297 


P%* 


»•• 


211 


178—180 


•«• 


••• 


110 


298—299 


P%» 


••• 


212 


181—182 


••• 


•0« 


111 


300—301 


• •• 


• •• 


213 


183—184 


••• 


•«• 


112 


302—304 


• •* 


*•• 


214» 


185—186 


• >• 


••• 


113 


305—306 


• «• 


• •»• 


215 


187—188 


••» 


••• 


114 


307—308 


••• 


••« 


216 


189L— 191 


••• 


••• 


115 


309—310 


• •• 


•«• 


217 


192—193 


••• 


••• 


116 


311—312 


#»• 


••• 


218 


194—195 


•t» 


••• 


117 


313—314 


♦•• 


• m.9 


219 


196—197 


••• 


••• 


118 


315—316 


•*• 


• •• 


220 


198—200 


• M 


••• 


119 


317—319 


♦•• 


»•• 


221 


201—202 


• t* 


••• 


120 


320—322 


»*• 


»•• 


222 


203—204 


• •• 


••• 


121 


323 


• *• 


♦•• 


22s 


205—206 


• «• 


••• 


122 


324 


••• 


>** 


224* 


207 209 


• •• 


••• 


123 


325 


•M 


»M 


225 


210—211 


• «• 


••• 


124 


326 


#•« 


^•0 


226 


212—214 


• »• 


••• 


125 


327 


♦•• 


♦ •• 


227 


215—216 


• •• 


••• 


126 


328 


•— 


f^ 


228 


217—218 


• •• 


••• 


127 


329 


• •• 


••9 


229 


219^-220 


• »• 


••• 


128 


330 


M» 


>•? 


230 


221—223 


• &* 


••• 


129 


831—332 


• •• 


.*•• 


231 


224—226 


«•• 


••• 


130 


333 


•«• 


*•» 


232 


227—228 


*** 


••• 


131 


334 


.**' 


• •m 


233 


229—230 


•M 


••• 


132 


335 


••* 


»•» 


234 


231—232 


• •• 


••• 


133 


336 


• M 


••# 


235 


233—235 


?•• 


••• 


134 


337 


••» 


••P 


236 


. 236—237 


»•• 


••• 


135 


338-339 


••• 


f»f 


237 


238—239 


tt« 


••• 


136 


340—341 


••f 


9ft 


238 


240—247 


• •• 


••• 


137 


342—343 


• •• 


••f 


239 


248—250 


?•• 


••• 


138 


<7W 


f** 


^» 


240 


261—262 


«•■ 


••• 


223 


345—346 


••* 


»*f 


241 


263 


?•• 


••• 


224 


347 


^•» 


t*f 


242 


264 


<•• 


••• 


225 


348 


••« 


^•t 


243 


265 


• •• 


••• 


226 


349 


ff 


»»f 


244 


266 


• •• 


••• 


227 


350 


»•# 


9*f 


245 


267 


• «t 


••• 


228 


351 


f 


ff 


246 


268 


«•• 


••• 


229 


352 


P»P 


ff 


247 


269 


^•» 


••• 


230 


353 


f* 


• •f 


248 


270 


^•» 


••• 


231 


354--355 


• •* 


9*t 


249 


271 


• •• 


••• 


232 


356—357 


• •f 


€•# 


250 


272 


•'«• 


• • • 


133 


358—359 


Pff 


t»» 


251 


273 


M« 


••• 


134 


360—361 


•M 


t»f 


252 


274 


*** 


••• 


135 


362—363 


♦*t 


• •f 


253 


275—276 


••.« 


••« 


136 


364 


«f 


«94 


254 


275 


• •• 


ft* 


242 


865—366 


• •• 


«#• 


SM 


276—277 


••A 


••• 


243 


S67_868 


• •• 


• •• 


256 


278 


••« 


••• 


244 


369—370 


• •• 


• •• 


257 


279 . 


••• 


••• 


245 


371—372 


• ••. 


• •• 


258 


280 


• •# 


••• 


246 


373—374 


1 
• •• 


4 
••• 


259 


281 


• •A 


•t* 


247 


375—376 


• •• 


• •t 


260 


282—284 


••• 


••• 


248 


377—378 


• •• 


• •• 


261 


283^284 


• •t 


•tt 


205 


379—380 


• •• 


• •• 


262 



SftXlE TRIAIS.— ^Iwuxx OF Refers vet to both 


EDiTionrf. 


341 


OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 


OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




ltaLTnX.3BUoSS2 


.•• toLJ 


I. p. S63 


ro2.XIX.494/o496 


... vol, 2L, p'. 


320 


- -SSS— 384 


••• •« 


.. 264 


497—498 


•.. 


.a* 


321 


885-^86 


••• .1 


. 265 


499 


••• 


• a* 


322 


387— «88 


• ta •« 


.. 266 


SOO-^^Ql 


•.•° 


• .• 


323 


389—390 


• •• •« 


.. 267 


502—503 




..• 


324 


S91— S92 


• •• •« 


.. 268 


504—505 


• •• 


• *• 


325 


393— S945 


*•• •« 


.. 269 


506-^507 


• •• 


• •• 


326 


395--396 


1 
4m» .< 


.. 270 


508 


• •• 


• •• 


327 


397— S98 


• •• .1 


.. 271 


509—510 


• .• 


• aa 


328 


399^-^400 


••• ' •• 


.. 272 


511—512 


••• 


• •• 


329 


401 


• .• •« 


,. 273 


513—514 


• a* 


• a* 


330 


40^-403 


«•• .1 


.. 274 


515—^16 


... ' 


• •• 


331 


404—405 


• •• .1 


.. 275 


517—^18 


... 


• a« 


332 


406—407 


• •• ai 


.. 276 


519 


• •• 


• •• 


333 


4Uo ' 'jAj%j 


».• •« 


.. 277 


520-^21 


• •• 


• •• 


334 


410 


••• '•! 


. 278 


522—523 


• a. 


• aa 


335 


411—412 


• •• •« 


.. 279 


524-^525 


• •• 


• •• 


336 


413—414 


..• •< 


.. 280 


526—527 


• a« 


• a« 


337 


415—416 


• «• .4 


,. 281 


528—529 


• •• 


• •• 


338 


417 


• •• .4 


.. 282 


530—531 


• a* 


• •• 


339 


418-^19 


• •• .4 


,. 283 


532—533 


• •• 


• aa 


340 


420-421 


• 0. ^4 


>. 284 


534-^35 


•%• 


• •• 


341 


422—423 


• •• •• 


.. 285 


536—537 


• •• 


• •• 


342 


424^-425 


.•• •< 


.. 286 


538 


• • • 


• •• 


343 


426—427 


• •• •! 


.. 287 


539—540 


• •• 


• •• 


344 


428—429 


• •• m» 


.. 288 


541—542 


• •• 


• •• 


345 


430—431 


• •• •4 


.. 289 


543—544 


.•• 


««• 


346 


432-434 


• a* ^4 


.4. 290 


545—546 


• •• 


• •• 


347 


435-436 


• ■ • •< 


.. 291 


547 


.•• 


••• 


348 


437—438 


• •• •« 


.. 292 


548—549 


• •• 


• •• 


349 


439—440 


• •• '4 


,. 293 


550-^51 


• a* 


*a* 


350 


441—442 


• •• •• 


. 294 


SBQ'-SSS 


aa« 


• aa 


351 


443 — U5 


• •• 


295 


554^^55 


••. 


•••, 


352 


446-447 


• •• • < 


. 296 


556—557 


• •• 


«•• 


353 


448—449 


• •• • • 


297 


558 


• •• 


aa. 


354 


450—451 


• »« • < 


298 


559—560 


• a* 


»•• 


355 


452-454 


• •• •4 


.. 299 


561—562 


• a* 


T 

a.a 


356 


455—456 


• •• .4 


.. 300 


563—564 


• a. 


• •• 


357 


457-458 


• •f 


. 301 


565—566 


• •• 


... 


358 


459—460 


• •• •« 


.. 302 


567 


..• 


• •• 


359 


461-463 


• •• •! 


.. 303 


568—569 


..a 


..a 


360 


464-465 


• •• •« 


,. 304 


570—571 


• •• 


4 

• •• 


361 


46&-467 


• .• •« 


.. 305 


572—573 


aaa 


• •• 


362 


468—469 


• •• .4 


,. 306 


574—575 


• a* 


• •• 


363 


470-471 


• • •4 


,. 307 


576 


• a* 


• •• 


364 


472 


• •• •< 


,. 308 


577—578 


• .• 


• •• 


365 


473—475 


• • • 9t 


.. 309 


579--580 


• •• 


• •• 


366 


476—477 


• •* •< 


.. 310 


581—582 


• a* 


• •• 


367 


478—479 


• •• •! 


.. 311 


583—584 


• a* 


• •• 


36S 


480 


• •• •< 


.. 312 


585—586 


• •• 


• •• 


369 


481—482 


• •• .4 


.. 313 


587—588 


... 


• a« 


370 


483—484 


• •• •4 


.. 314 


589—590 


• a« 


• a* 


371 


485—486 


• •• •• 


. 315 


591—592 


• •• 


• aa 


372 


487—488 


• ••' •4 


.. 316 


593—594 


• •« 


• •• 


373 


489-490 


• •• •4 


.. 317 


595—596 


• a* 


• •a 


374 


491—492 


• *• .4 


.. 318 


597 598 


• • • 


.a* 


375 


493 


f ••' ' •! 


.. 319 


599—600 


a.a 


• •• 


376 



343 



STATE TRIALS. — Ikdex of Refe&ekcb to both Eoitioits. 



OCTAVO. 


FOUC 


>. 


OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




Vol. 601/0602 


••• oo/.X.p.877 


Vol. 124 to 725 


' ••• 


00/.X. 


p.l9S 


XIX. 603-^.604 


••« •« 


.. 378 


XIX. 726—728 


• • » 


• • • 


199 


.605—607 


•«• mt 


.. 379 


729—730 


••• 


•.• 


200 


608—611 


• •• •< 


.. 380 


731 


••• 


••• 


201 


612—613 


• •• •« 


.. 381 


732—734 


••• 


••• 


202 


614—616 


• •• •! 


.. 382 


733 


••• 


••• 


201 


617—618 


• *• •< 


M 383 


734 


••• 


••• 


202 


619—620 


• •• •< 


,. 384 


735—736 


••• 


••• 


203 


621—622 


«*• .1 


,. 385 


737—739 


••• 


••« 


204 


623—624? 


• •• •! 


,. 386 


745—747 


••• 


••• 


417 


625—627 


• •• •! 


.. 387 


748 


•«• 


••• 


418 


628—629 


• •• •« 


.. 388 


749—750 


••• 


••• 


419 


630—631 


• •• •• 


.. 389 


751—752 


••• 


• • • 


420 


6321.^33 


• •• .1 


.. 390 


753—754 


•*• 


••• 


421 


634—636 


• •• •« 


.. 391 


755-757 


••• 


... 


422 


637—638 


• •• •• 


.. 392 


758—759 


••• 


••• 


423 


639—640 


• •» •! 


.. 393 


.760 


••• 


••• 


424 


641—643 


• •• •« 


.. 394 


761—762 


••• 


••• 


425 


644—645 


• •• •! 


.. 395 


763—765 


••• 


••• 


426 


646-647 


• •• •« 


.. 396 


766—767 


••• 


••• 


427 


648—649 


• •• •« 


. 397 


768—769 


••• 


•»• 


428 


650—652 


• •• •< 


.. 398 


770—771 


••• 


••• 


429 


653—654 


..* •« 


.. 399 


772—773 


••• 


••• 


430 


655—656 


• •• •! 


.. 400 


774—775 


••• 


••• 


431 


657—658 


• •• .4 


.. 401 


776—777 


••• 


••• 


432 


659—661 


• •• •! 


.. 402 


778—779 


•••- 


••• 


433 


662—663 


• *• •! 


.. 403 


780—782 


••• 


••• 


434 


664-.r665 


• •» •< 


.. 404 


.783—785 


.•• 


••• 


435 


. 666—667 


• t* •< 


.. 405 


786—787 


••• 


••• 


436 


668—670 


• t« .•< 


.. 406 


788—789 


••• 


»•• 


437 


671—673 


• •• .4 


.. 407 


790—791 


•.• 


••• 


438 


674 


••» 1 ^4 


.. 408 


792—793 


••• 


••• 


439 


675—676 


• •r •! 


. 409 


794—796 


•*•* 


••• 


440 


677—678 


• •• •« 


.. 410 


797—798 


••• 


••• 


441 


679 


• •• •! 


.. 411 


799—800 


••• 


••• 


442 


680 


• •• 94 


.• 412 


801—802 


••• 


••• 


443 


680—681 


• •• 44 


.. 411 


803—804 


••• 


. • • 


VVif 


682—683 


• #•> •« 


.. 412 


805—806 


••• 


••• 


445 


684—685 


• •• .4 


.. 413 


807—813 


• rr 


••• 


446 


686—687 


••• 9t 


.. 414 


814 


• •• 


••» 


447 


688—689 


• •• .•« 


.. 415 


814 


••• 


••• 


448 


690—692 


• •• •< 


.. 416 


815—816 


• •• 


••• 


447 


693—694 


t«r •< 


.. 183 


817 


• •• 


••• 


448 


695—696 


• •• •! 


.. 184 


818—819 


••• 


••• 


449 


697—698 


• •• •< 


,. 185 


820—821 


• •• 


••• 


450 


699—700 


• •• • 


.. 186 


822—823 


• •• 


••• 


451 


701—702 


• •• •! 


.. 187 


824^-625 


• •• 


••• 


452 


703—705 


••• •! 


.. 188 


826—827 


• •• 


••• 


458 


706—707 


• •r •« 


.. 189 


828—629 


• a* 


••• 


454 


708—709 


• a* »4 


.. 190 


830L-631 


• •• 


•1* 


455 


710—711 


• •• •« 


.. 191 


832—833 


• •• 


••• 


456 


712—713 


• •• •< 


.. 192 


834—836 


• •• 


••• 


457 


714—715 


• •* •« 


.. 193 


837--838 


• •• 


••• 


458 


.716—717 


• •• .1 


.. 194 


839—840 


• •. 


..• 


459 


. 718—719 


• •• •! 


.. 195 


841....642 


• •• 


..« 


460 


720-^721 


• •• •« 


.. 196 


843 


• •• 


••• 


461 


722—723 


»• • •( 


.. 197 


844-^46 


»•• 


••• 


462 



STATE TRIALS.-— Ikdex or REF£iiEvct^ iC^oth Edxtioxs. 



34a 



as 





OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




OCTAVO. 


Vol. 


XIX. 845 


oo/. X.p 


.461 


Vol. 95Sio 960 




846 


••• 


••• 


462 


XIX. 960 




847/0848 


••• 


••• 


463 


961 




849-.850 


••• 


••• 


464 


961— 963 




851—852 


••• 


••• 


465 


964— 966 




853—854 


••• 


••• 


466 


967— 968 




^55 


••• 


•.• 


467 


969— 971 




856—857 


«•• 


••• 


468 


972— 97S 




858—859 


••• 


••• 


469 


974— 975 




860—861 


•••■ 


••• 


470 


976— 977 




862—863 


••• 


••• 


471 


978— 979 




864—865 


••• - 


••• 


472 


981— 982 




866—867 


••• 


••• 


473 


983— 986 




868—869 


..• 


••• 


474 


987— 990 




870—871 


••• • 


••• 


475 


991— 995 




872—874 


••• 


••• 


476 


996—1000 




S75-^^76 


•.•■ 


••• 


477 


1001—1004 




S77-^7S 


«•• • 


•.. 


478 


1005—1009 




885 


••• 


••• 


477 


IOIOl-1016 




885—886 


.•• 


••• 


478 


1017—1020 




887—888 


••• - 


••• 


479» 


1021—1025 




889—890 


••• 


••• 


480* 


1026—1028 




891—892 


••• 


••. 


481* 


1029-1031 




893—894 


••• 


••• 


482* 


1032—1036 




895—896 


••• 


••• 


483* 


1037—1041 




897—899 


... 


••• 


484« 


1042—1045 




900-^901 


••• 


••• 


485* 


1046—1050 




902—903 


••• 


••• 


486* 


1051—1054 




904 


••• 


••• 


487* 


1055—1059 




905—906 


••• 


... 


488* 


1060—1063 




907—908 


••• 


•.• 


489* 


1064—1068 




909 


••• 


••• 


490* 


1069—1072 




910—911 


• • • 


••• 


491* 


1073—1075 




912—913 


• •• 


.•• 


492» 


1075—1080 




914—915 


••• 


••• 


493* 


1081—1085 




916—917 


••• 


••• 


494» 


1086—1089 




918—919 


••• 


••• 


495* 


1090—1094 




920—921 


••• 


••• 


496» 


1095—1098 


* 


922—923 


••• 


••• 


497* 


1099—1103 




924—925 


•»• 


••• 


498* 


. 1104r-1108 




926—927 


••• 


••• 


499* 


1109—1115 




928 


••• 


••• 


500* 


1116—1119 




929—930 


••• 


••• 


501* 


1120—1123 




931—932 


••• 


••• 


502* 


1124—1138 





933—934 


••• 


••• 


503* 


1137—1140 




935—936 


••• 


••• 


504* 


1141—1144 




937—938 


•t* 


••• 


505* 


1145—1149 




939—940 


••• 


••• 


506* 


1150—1152 




941—942 


••• 


••• 


507* 


1177—1178 




943—944 


••t 


••• 


50a* 


1179 




945—946 


••• 


••• 


509* 


1180—1181 




947—948 


••• 


••• 


510* 


1182^1184 




949—951 


.«• 


•*• 


5ll» 


1185—1186 




952—953 


••.• 


.«• 


512* 


1187—1188 




954—955 


••• 


••• 


513* 


1189—1190 




956 


••• 


•.• 


514* 


1191—1192 




956—957 


••• 


•*• 


515»l 


1193—1194 



FOLIO. 

voL X. p. 5l6f 
vol. X. app, 207 
208 
209 
210 
211 
212 
-213 
214 
... 215 
... 216 
vol. XI. 302 
303 



••• 
••• 

*•• 
••• 
••• 

••• 
••• 



••• 





304 




305 




306 




307 




308 




309 




310 




311 




312 




313 


• 


314 


• »„ 


315 




316 




317 




318 




319 




320 




321 




322 




323 




324 




325 




326 




327 




328 




329 




330 




331 




332 




833 




334 




335 




336 




337 




338 


vo/. X. 517» 




518* 


- ••• 


519* 




520* 




521* 




522» 


# • #^ 


523* 




524* 




525* 



344 STATE TRI ALS^^I VB12C ov : 


RlFBREirci TO BOTH 


KDmovs. 




OCTAVO. 


FOIIO 


K 


OCTAVO. 


POLKX 




ra. XIX. 1195 


s..'oot.X.p.6t6^\ 


Vol 1315fol3l7 


• •• 


voL X*p.5l5 


Il96ton97 


•t* • 


.. 527* 


XIX. 1318—1319 


• «. 


••• 


514 


1198—1199 


••• • 


,. 528* 


1320—1321 


. • • 


« • • 


515 


1200—1201 


••• •( 


.. 529* 


1322—1324 


« • V 


• • • 


516 


1202—1203 


••• •< 


.. 530* 


1325 


. • • 


• • • 


517 


1204^1205 


••• •< 


.. 531* 


1326—1328 


• •• 


••• 


518 


1206—1207 


••• •( 


.. 532* 


1329 


• •• 


• • ■ 


519 


1208—1209 


••• •< 


.. 533* 


1330—1331 


• «• 


»•• 


520 


1210 


••• •< 


.. 534* 


VoL XX. 1— 22 


••• < 


Do£.XI. 


339 


1211—1212 


••• «< 


.. 535* 


23— 26 


••V 


• •• 


340 


1213— 1214< 


• • • # 


». 536* 


27— S5 


••• 


• •• 


341 


1215—12^16 


• •• • < 


.. 537* 


36— 40 


• •• 


»«• 


342 


1217—1^18 


•0* •< 


,. 538* 


41— 46 


• •• 


'••• 


343 


1219—1220 


• • • •• 


,• 539* 


47— 51 


• •• 


»•• 


344 


1221—1222 


••• •( 


,. 540* 


52— 56 


• •• 


».• 


345 


1223—1224. 


••• •< 


,. 541* 


57— 60 


• •• 


••• 


346 


1225—1226 


••• •i 


,. 542* 


61— 65 


• •• 


• •• 


347 


1227—1229 


• 0* •! 


.. 543* 


66— 67 


• .. 


«•• 


348 


1230U-1231 


• •• • 


.. 544* 


81— 85 


• •• 


• •• 


162 


1232 


• •• • 


.. 54^* 


86— 89 


• •• 


• •• 


163 


1283 


• • ■ •! 


.. 546* 


90— 93 


• •• 


• •• 


164 


1234* 


• •• •< 


,. 547* 


94— 97 


• •• 


• •• 


165 


1284—1236 


• 

• •• • 


.. 548* 


98— 101 


• •• 


• •• 


166 


1285-1237 


• •• •< 


.. 479 


102— 105 


• •• 


••• 


167 


1238—1239 


• •• • 


.. 480 


106— 110 


• •• 


• •• 


168 


1240—1241 


• •• •< 


.. 481 


111— 114 


• •• 


••• 


169 


1242—1243 


• • • ai 


>. 482 


115— 119 


• •• 


• •• 


170 


1244—1246 


• • • • 1 


.. 483 


120 


• •• 


'•«• 


171 


1247—1248 


f«« 


.. 484 


121— 127 


• •• 


••• 


172 


1249—1250 


• •• •< 


.. 485 


128— 131 


• •• 


• •• 


173 


1251—1255 


• •• •< 


.. 486 


132— 135 


• •• 


° ••• 


174 


1256—1259 


• •• •< 


.. 487 


136— 138 




••• 


175 


1260—1261 


• •• • 


.. 488 


139— 142 


• •• 


• •• 


176 


1262—1263 


• •• 


.. 489 


143— 147 


• •* 


••• 


177 


1264—1266 


• •• •< 


.. 490 


148— 151 


• •• 


••• 


178 


1267—1268 


• •• »« 


.. 491 


152— 156 


• •• 


••• 


179 


1269—1270 


• •• ■ 1 


.. 492 


157— 160 


• •• 


• •• 


180 


1271—1272 


• •• •• 


.. 493 


161 — 165 


• •• 


• •• 


181 


1273—1275 


• •• •« 


.. 494 


166— 169 


• *• 


• •• 


182 


1276—1277 


• •• •! 


.. 495 


170— 174 


• •• 


• •• 


183 


1278—1279 


• •• •< 


.. 496 


175— 178 


• •« 


• •• 


184 


1280—1281 


• •• • 


., 497 


! 179_ 152 


• #• 


• •• 


185 


1282—1284 


• •• •( 


.. 498 


183— 186 


• •• 


• •• 


186 


1285—1286 


• •• 


. 499 


187— 190 


• •• 


• •• 


187 


1287—1288 


• •• • 


.. 500 


191— 195^ 


• ••- 


• •• 


188 


1289—1290 


• •• • 


.. 501 


196— 199 


• •• 


••• 


189 


1291—1292 


• •• 


.. 502 


200— 204 


•>•• 


• •• 


190 


1293—1297 


*»• 


.. 503 


205— 208 


• •• 


••• 


191 


1298 


• •• •< 


.. 504 


209— 212 


• •• 


• •• 


192 


1298—1299 


• •• 


.. 505 


213— 217 


• •• 


• •• 


193 


1300—1301 


• • • • 


.. 506 


218— 221 


• •• 


«•• 


194 


1302—1303 


• • • • 


.. 507 


222— 226 


• •• 


• •• 


195 


1804—1305 


• 0« •( 


►. 508 


227— 231 


• •• 


•••• 


196 


1306—1308 


• •• 


.. 509 


232— 235 


• •• 


• •• 


197 


1309—1310 


• • • • 1 


.. 510 


236— 338 


• •• 


«•• 


198 


1311—1312 


• • • • 


.. 511 


359— 366 


• •• 


• •• 


199 


1313—1314 


• • • • 


,. 512 


367— 370 


t*« 


• •• 


200 



STATE TRIALS. — ^Index of Reference to both Editions. 



345 



OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




OCTAVO. 


FOLIO. 




roLliX.S7Uo37A 


vo/.XLp.20l 1 


Fo/.XX. 596^0598 


••% voL XI. p. 249 


375-579 


•• ••• 


202 


599—602 


••• 


•'? 


250 


38*0-^83 


■ • •.• 


203 


603—606 


••• 


•.• 


251 


384—587 


•• ••• 


204 


607—611 


•• 


••• 


252 


388—391 


i • • • • 


205 


612—614 


••• 


•.• 


253 


392—396 


•• •*• 


206 


615—618 


••• 


••• 


254 


397—400 


■• ..• 


207 


619—622 


••• 


•*• 


255 


401—405 


>• ... 


208 


623—624 


••• 


••• 


256 


406—409 


•« ••• 


209 


625—629 


•»• 


••• 


257 


410—414 


•• ••• 


210 


630-633 


.•» 


••• 


258 


. 415—418 


•• ... 


211 


634—638 


••• 


••• 


259 


419—423 


>. ••• 


212 


639—641 


••• 


••• 


260 


424—427 


•• ••• 


213 


642 


..• 


••• 


261 


428—432 


t* ••• 


214 


642—643 


••• 


... 


262 


433—436 


»• ••• 


215 


644—648 


••• 


«•• 


^65 


437—441 


!• •.• 


216 


649—650 


••• 


••• 


264 


442—447 


»• ••• 


217 


a51— 653 


••• 


••• 


264 


448—451 


»• ••• 


218 


654—657 


••• 


••• 


265 


452—456 


1. ••• 


219 


658—661 


••• 


•*• 


266 


457—460 


'• ••• 


220 


662—666 


••• 


••• 


267 


461—464 


>• ••• 


221 


667—670 


••• 


••• 


268 


465—471 


»• ••* 


222 


671—674 


••• 


••• 


269 


472—475 


»• «.• 


223 


675—679 


••• 


••• 


270 


47G— 481 


I« ••• 


224 


680-684 


••• 


••• 


271 


482—485 


!• ... 


225 


685—691 


••• 


••• 


272 


486—490 


>• .•• 


226 


692-696 


••• 


••• 


273 


49l-4i94 


)• ••• 


227 


697—701 


••• 


••• 


274 


495^499 


»• ••• 


228 


702—705 


••• 


••• 


275 


5O0L-503 


• • ••• 


229 


706—710 


••• 


••• 


276 


504—^07 


• • ••« 


230 


711—714 


••• 


••• 


277 


508—512 


!• ••• 


231 


715—718 


••• 


••• 


278 


513—516 


!• - 


232 


719—723 


••• 


••• 


279 


517—520 


t. ••• 


233 


724—728 


••• 


•*• 


280 


521--525 


!• • 1. 


234 


729— 73S 


•.• 


••• 


281 


526—529 


I* ••• 


235 


734^737 


••• 


••• 


282 


530—534 


> • ••• 


236 


738—741 


••• 


••• 


28S 


535-^45 


)• ••• 


237 


742—745 


•f • 


••• 


284 


546—556 


»• ••• 


238 


746—749 


»•• 


••» 


285 


557—559 


»• «.• 


239 


750L— 754 


••• 


••• 


286 


560—562 


»• .*• 


240 


755—758 


.•• 


••• 


287 


563-.566 


»• ••• 


241 


759^763 


• « • 


••• 


288 


567—569 


»• ••• 


242 


764—767 


••• 


••• 


289 


570—576 


I. ••• 


243 


768—771 


••• 


••• 


290 


577—580 


It ••• 


244 


772—775 


.•• 


••• 


291 


581—584 


• • •§• 


245 


776—780 


••• 


••• 


292 


585—588 


»• ••• 


246 


781—785 


••• 


••• 


293 


589—591 


• ••• 


247 


786—789 


••• 


••• 


294 


592—595 


»» .•• 


248 











THE END. 



T. C. HaBMrd, 

Printer, 

Pater<iiofter>row, Londoa. 



{ 




bios Qb2 112 till? 




r - -• 

3 bias ObS 112 till?
Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Books

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "Cobbett's complete collection of state trials and proceedings for high treason and other crimes and misdemeanors from the earliest period to the present time"

See other formats
