 |
[Bligh, Governor, rebellion against
– rule of law – courts, legality of in rebel
period – Atkins J.A., treatment of, during rebellion against
Governor Bligh – judge, challenge to impartiality of – contempt of
court – Crossley, George]
R.
v. Macarthur
Court of Criminal Jurisdiction
Atkins J.A., 25-26 January
1808
Source: Historical Records
of Australia,
Series 1, Vol. 6, pp 221- 235[1]
The Trial of John Macarthur
[221] Proceedings of a Court of Criminal Jurisdiction
assembled at Sydney, in New South Wales, under the authority of
His Excellency Governor Bligh’s Precept, bearing date the 20th January,
1808.
Sydney, New South
Wales, 25th January, 1808. Members – The
Judge Advocate; Captain Anthony Fenn Kemp,
Lieutenant John Brabyn, Lieutenant William Moore, Lieutenant Thomas Laycock, Lieutenant William Minchin, Lieutenant William Lawson,
New South Wales Corps.
The Precept read and Members sworn by the Judge Advocate.
John McArthur, Esq., the Prisoner at the Bar, addressed the Court,
praying that he might be allowed to state an objection to Richard
Atkins, Esq., the Judge Advocate, sitting as Judge on his Trial,
which the Members of the Court, conceiving it but Justice due to
the prisoner, have required his objections to be stated previous
to the Judge Advocate being sworn. The Prisoner read the Paper marked
A, and solemnly protests against the said Richard Atkins being allowed
to take his seat as Judge on his Trial, for the reasons bearing
stated. The Court having taking the same into their mature and deliberate
consideration, are of opinion that the objections set forth in the
Prisoner’s Protest are good and lawful objections to Richard Atkins,
Esq., sitting on his Trial, and feeling themselves bound to state
their opinion to His Excellency the Governor on the Subject, do
therefore stayed as follows:–
Court-house, 11.15 a.m., 25th January, 1808.
Sir,
We, the Officers composing the Court of Criminal Jurisdiction
this day assembled, beg leave to state to Your Excellency that a
Right of Challenge, as per paper A, has been demanded by the Prisoner
now before us to Richard Atkins, Esq., sitting as Judge on his Trial,
which we have, after mature and deliberate consideration, agreed
to allow as a good and lawful objection. We, therefore, submit to
Your Excellency to determine on the propriety of appointing another
Judge Advocate to preside on the present Trial. We further pray
Your Excellency's protection in the execution of our [222] duty,
having been grossly insulted and threatened by Richard Atkins, Esq,
with a seeming view to deter us in our legal proceedings.
We have, &c.,
Signed by the Members
of the Court.
Answer.
Government House, Sydney, 25th January, 1808,
Half-past Noon.
Gentlemen,
In answer to your Letter, just received, I conceive that there
could have been no cause of Challenge to the Judge Advocate, who
is the Officer appointed by His Majesty’s
Patent, and without whose presence there could be no Court.
And I consider that the Judge Advocate had a right
to commit any Person who might commit any gross Insult to him while
in his official capacity as Judge of the Court. I do not consider
the Court to be formed without the Judge Advocate, and when legally
convened I have no right to interpose any Authority concerning its
legal Acts.
I, therefore, can do no otherwise than direct that
the Judge-Advocate take his Seat and act as directed by His Majesty’s
Letters Patent for the constituting the Court of Criminal Jurisdiction,
which, being authorised by an Act of Parliament, is as follows:–
“And We further Will, Ordain, and Appoint that the
said Court of Criminal Jurisdiction shall consist of Our Judge Advocate
for the Time Being, together with such our six Officers of Our Sea
and Land Services as Our Governor (or, in case of his Death or Absence,
Our Lieutenant Governor) shall by Precept, issued under his hand
and Seal, convene from time to time for that purpose."
I am, &c.,
William Bligh
Directed to the Members
by Name.
From
the Court to the Government.
25th January, 1808
Sir,
We have had the Honor of Your Excellency's Opinion with respect
to the objection made by a Prisoner (John McArthur, Esq.) at our
Bar, to the Judge Advocate. We beg Your Excellency to be assured
that we have at all times the utmost deference to any Opinion delivered
by Your Excellency; but, in the present case, we cannot, consistent
with the Oath we have taken, or with our Consciences, sit with Richard
Atkins, Esq., on the Trial of John MacArthur,
Esq., knowing as we do that the greatest enmity has for these thirteen
or fourteen years past existed between the Parties. We pray Your
Excellency’s further consideration in the present case.
We have, &c.,
Signed by the Members
of the Court.
Answer.
Sydney, 25th January, 1808, quarter past 2 o'clock.
Gentlemen,
In reply to your second Letter of this date, I require
that you deliver to Mr William Gore, Provost Marshal, and Mr Edmund
Griffin, my Secretary, who accompanies him on the occasion, all
the Papers that the Judge Advocate left on the Table, and which
were refused to be sent to him by the Constable, and also those
which the Prisoner, John McArthur, has read before you, that they
may be delivered to the Judge Advocate, His Majesty’s legal Officer.
I am, &c.,
William Bligh
Directed to the Members
by Name.
[223]
From the Court in Reply.
Court House, Sydney, 25th January,1808.
Sir,
We are honored with your Excellency's
letter requiring us to deliver to Mr William Gore, Provost Marshal,
and Mr Edmund Griffin all the Papers the Judge Advocate left on
the Table and also those which the Prisoner, John McArthur, Esq.,
read before us. As it is necessary that we should hold the Papers
alluded to by Your Excellency for our own Justification, We beg
Your Excellency will be pleased to excuse our giving them up. We
are ready to render Your Excellency attested Copies of the whole
if you require it.
We have, &c.,
Signed by the Members.
Answer.
Government House, Sydney, 25th January,
1808,
Three-quarters past
Three o'clock.
Gentlemen,
I have required the Judge Advocate’s Papers, with those that were
read by John McArthur, and I now demand finally Answer in writing
whether you will deliver those papers or not; And I again repeat
that you are no Court without the Judge Advocate.
I am, &c.,
William Bligh
Directed to the Members
by Name.
From
the Court in Answer.
Sydney, 25th of January, 1808
Sir,
In answer to your Excellency's Letter, we beg leave to say that
we are ready to furnish Your Excellency with attested Copies of
all the Papers required, but the originals we are compelled to keep
in justification of our Conduct; Should Your Excellency be pleased,
for the furtherance of the Public Service, to appoint another Judge
Advocate for the Trial of John MacArthur,
Esq, we are ready to deliver all the Papers to the Person so appointed.
The Members of the Court, constituted by Your Excellency’s Precept,
and sworn in by the Judge Advocate, beg leave to acquaint you that
they have adjourned to wait Your Excellency’s further pleasure.
We have, &c.,
Signed by the Members,
Four o'clock. The prisoner, John McArthur, Esq., in a Paper marked
B claims the Protection of the Court on the grounds therein stated,
a Copy of which Court feel it necessary to transmit to His Excellency
the Governor with the following Letter: –
Sydney, 25th of January, 1808
Sir,
We take the liberty to enclose your Excellency a copy of the deposition
made before us as members of the Criminal Court yesterday assembled,
under your Excellency’s precept, by John McArthur, Esq., a Prisoner
at our Bar and we earnestly entreat that your Excellency will be
pleased to order such protection to be given Mr McArthur as in our
humble opinion the nature of his complaint merits.
We have, &c.,
Signed by the Members.
Four o'clock P.M. The Prisoner, John McArthur, Esq., is remanded
to his former Bail and Mr William Gore, the Provost Marshal, acquainted
therewith by the Senior Members of the Court.
[224] Five o’Clock p.m. The Court adjourned
till to-morrow morning 10 o'clock.
10 o'Clock, 26th January, 1808.
The Court met pursuant to adjournment, and the Prisoner, John McArthur,
Esquire, not appearing at the Bar, and the Sureties being called
on by the Court to bring forth the Body of the said John McArthur,
Esq., or to forfeit their recognizance, deliver into Court that
Deposition marked C. The Court taking the same into consideration,
feel themselves bound to record on their minutes that the Testimony
therein quoted, and made by Mr William Gore, the Provost Marshal,
before a Bench of Magistrates (as set forth in the Judge Advocate's
warrant) is False; the Court therefore, on further consideration,
think themselves bound to address His Excellency the Governor, as
the Executive Authority of the Colony, on the Subject, as follows:–
Court-house, Sydney,
26th January, 1808
Sir,
We have the Honor to enclose Your Excellency an attested Copy of
the Address delivered to the Court yesterday by John McArthur, Esq.,
a Prisoner at our Bar. The address we trust will induce Your Excellency
to concur in the Opinion we have given, that "The Judge Advocate,
Richard Atkins, Captain squire, has been challenged on good and lawful grounds,
and he is ineligible to sit as a Judge in the Cause before us."
We also take the liberty to submit to cat your Excellency, that,
having taken and Oath "well and truly to try, and a true deliverance
make between cat our Sovereign Lord the King and the Prisoner at the Bar, and a true
Verdict given according to Evidence," that we are bound to
proceed to the Trial of John, Esq, or to violate out. We therefore pray that Your Excellency will be pleased to
nominate some impartial person to execute the Office of Judge Advocate.
It is with much concern we have learned by the enclosed Deposition
made before us by G. Blaxcell, Esq., and N. Bayly, Esq., that the Body of John McArthur, Esq., the Prisoner
arraigned before us yesterday, has been forcibly arrested from the
Bail which the Court remanded him in, which the legal Act of the
Magistrates (grounded on the false Deposition of Mr William Gore,
Provost Marshal). We beg leave to represent to your Excellency,
is in our opinion calculated to subvert the legal Authority and
Independence of the Court of Criminal Jurisdiction constituted in
this Colony by His Majesty’s Letters Patent, and we therefore pray
Your Excellency will discountenance such Magisterial Proceedings,
pregnant with the most serious consequences to the Community at
large, and that Your Excellency will be pleased to take measures
to restore John McArthur Esq., to his former Bail, that the Court
may proceed on his Trial.
We have, &c.,
Signed by the Members.
Three o'Clock. The Court not being able to obtain an Answer from
His Excellency (although by a verbal Message he promised to send
one), and having waited since half past Noon, now adjourn till his
Excellency's pleasure is known.
Signed by the Members’ Order,
A.F.Kemp, J.P.
[225] Copy of a Circular
Letter sent to each Member of the Court after their Adjournment.
By His Excellency William Bligh, Esquire, Captain General and Governor
in Chief in and over His Majesty’s Territory
of New South Wales
and its Dependencies, &c., &c.
The Judge-Advocate having presented a Memorial to me, in which
you are charged with certain Crimes, You are therefore hereby required
to appear before me, at Government House, at nine o'clock, to-morrow
Morning, to answer in the Premises.
Given, &c., this 26th January, 1808.
William Bligh
To Captain Anthony Fenn Kemp,
Of His Majesty’s New South Wales Corps.
By Command of His Excellency,
Edmund Griffin, Secretary
Compared with the Original by us, of which is a true Copy.
A.F. Kemp, J.P.
[Paper marked A.]
To the Members of the Criminal Court.
Gentlemen,
It will, I am convinced, excite your surprize,
as I think it must be that of every impartial man, to hear that
I am brought a Prisoner to this Bar, utterly unacquainted, except
from rumours, of the nature of the Accusation against which I am
to defend myself.
Such, however, is the fact; for although I have made
three written applications to the Judge-Advocate for a Copy of the
Indictment or Information, I have not been able to obtain it.
In this unprecedented Situation, and having been informed
that the charge against me has been founded on certain events, which
originated in the legal and arbitrary conduct of the Judge Advocate,
as exemplified in the Correspondence and Warrants, I did consider
it prudent, and a piece of Justice I owed to the Community, to protest
against Richard Atkins, Esq., being appointed to sit as a Judge
on a Trial wherein he is so much interested, and in which his own
Security is so materially involved.
To prevent unnecessary delay and other consequences
that I apprehended, I did, in a Letter to His Excellency Governor
Bligh, protest against the Judge Advocate, and respectfully required
that a disinterested person might be appointed to preside at my
Trial. To this His Excellency was pleased to answer "That the
law must take its course, as he does not feel himself justified
to use any interference with the Executive Power," by which
I suppose he meant the Judicial Authority, as I humbly conceive
His Excellency’s own Power must be the Executive.
Defeated in this Attempt to obtain what I know to be
my lawful Right, my only alternative is to resort to the Members
of this Court; and I do so under an entire confidence that whatever
I can prove to be my Right, you, as Men of Honor, will grant me.
To you, then, Gentlemen, I appeal, and now solemnly
protest against Richard Atkins, Esq., being allowed to take his
seat as one of my Judges at this Trial.
To support this Protest, my first Objection is because
there is a Suit pending betwixt us for the recovery of a Sum of
Money that he unjustly withholds, and, as he is screened from the
operation of the Law, is to be submitted to His Majesty’s Ministers.
[226] My second Objection is because I can prove he
has for many years cherished a rancorous inveteracy against me,
which has displayed itself in the propagation of malignant falsehoods,
and every act of Injustice that can be expected to proceed from
a person armed with powers against a man whose life and conduct
is, I trust, a public satire on his own.
My third Objection is because I have been long in the
object of his vindictive malice, in consequence of my having been
called as an evidence to support an accusation made against him
by John Harris, Esq., that he was a Swindler.
My fourth Objection is because he has dissociated and
combined with that well known dismembered Limb of the Law, George
Crossley (and others of as wicked minds, although not quite so notorious)
to accomplish my destruction. In proof of this charge I have Evidence
to prove that Crossley has prepared the Information to be produced
on this Trial, and has arranged a whole plan of the Evidence, he
being considered eminently qualified to conduct that part of the
business, from his past extensive practice in that particular branch
of legal knowledge. I have also Proof in my hand, in the writing
of the Veteran Practitioner, Crossley, which will convince the most
sceptical Mind that other schemes have been agitated to deprive
me of my Property, Liberty, Honor, and Life. Here it is, Gentlemen,
read it; and after, read the Proceedings of a Bench of Magistrates;
and you will see that, for presuming to complain of a most unlawful
seizure of my property (which the Judge Advocate joined in reprobating),
it has been determined to ruin me. This precious Document came into
my hands, as it were, by the interposition of Divine Providence;
it was dropped from the Pocket of Crossley and brought to me; that
you may consider it at your leisure I annex a Copy of it, and of
the Proceedings of the Bench of Magistrates.
My fifth Objection is because Richard Atkins, Esq., is my Prosecutor
in this Trial, and is so deeply interested to procure my Conviction
that, should he fail, nothing but the arm of Power can save him
from a Criminal Prosecution at this very Bar for his false Imprisonment
of me.
My sixth and last Objection is founded on his having already pronounced
sentence of condemnation against me, as is presumptuously lead proved
(and can be clearly) by his declaring that the Bench of Magistrates
had the power to punish me by Fine and Imprisonment, thereby clearly
demonstrating an intention to deprive me of the benefit of my present
Trial.
It will not, I presume, be denied that the Judge Advocate,
from the Constitution of this Court, combines the two characters
of Judge and Juror, and that it follows as an indisputable consequence
that any Objection which applies to either character is strictly
applicable to him. All that therefore remains for me to do is to
labor for you the legal Authorities on
which I ground my Right of Challenge.
1st. Authority.– "The suspicion of Prejudice may be reasonably inferred
against a Juror from the circumstance of his having an interest
in the Cause whereby he may be led to wish the condemnation of the
Prisoner.
"The prisoner must assign his cause of challenge of the Relevancy
or Validity of which the Members are themselves the Judges. The
most valid causes of Challenge are – Suspicion of Malice, of Prejudice,
and infamous Character." Tytler
p. 226.
[227] 2nd Authority.– "So jealous is the Law of
the perfect impartiality of Jurors that it is allowed to be a good
cause of Challenge that the Juror has been heard to give his opinion
beforehand that the Party is guilty.” Tytler p. 228.
3rd. "Two causes of Challenge impossible
to be overruled are the charge of Corruption or Bribery verified
by competent Proof, And Malice or hostile Enmity expressed by Word
or Deed, against the Prisoner. Infamous Character is also a most
relevant ground of Challenge." Tytler
p. 227.
4th. "It hath been allowed a good ground of Challenge
on the Part of the Prisoner that the Juror hath declared his Opinion
beforehand that the Party is guilty." Burnes Justice, 2nd vol., p. 813
5th. "The Mayor of Hereford was
laid by the Heels for sitting in Judgment in a cause where he himself
was Lessor of the Plaintiff in Ejectment, though he by the Charter
was sole Judge of the Court." Burne,
vol. 3, p. 26.
6th. "In the case of Foxham,
Tithing in the County of Wilts, a Justice of the Peace was Surveyor
of the Highways and a matter which concerned his Office coming in
question at the Sessions, he joined in making the Order, and his
name was put in the Caption. Determined by Lord Chief Justice Holt:
it ought not to be, as if an Action be brought by my Lord Chief
Justice Trevor, in the Court of Common Pleas, it must be before
Edward Neville Knight and his Associates, And not before Thomas
Trevor, and it was quashed." Burne,
vol.3, p. 27.
7th. "And the better to remove all cause of suspicion of Partiality,
it was wisely provided by the Statutes 4 Edward III, c.2; 8
Richard 2, c.2; and 33 Henry VIII, c.24, That no Judge of
Assize shall hold Pleas in any County wherein he was born or inhabits."
Blackstone's Commentaries, vol.3, p. 355.
8th. "Jurors may be challenged for suspicion of bias or partiality;
this may be either a principal challenge, or to the favor.
A principal Challenge is such where the Cause assigned carries with
it evident marks of suspicion either of Malice or favour; as that
he has an Interest in the cause, that there is an Action depending
between him and the Party. These are principal grounds of Challenge,
and, if true, cannot be overruled." Blackstone, vol.
3, p. 362.
Gentlemen, It would be an unpardonable waste of your time and an insult
to your Understandings to press upon you more Authorities, for these
I have submitted are clear to the point. You will now decide, Gentlemen,
where Law and Justice shall finally prevail against the contrivances
of George Crossley. You have the eyes of an anxious Public upon
you, trembling for the safety of their Property, their Liberty,
and their Lives; to you has fallen the lot of deciding a point which
perhaps involves the happiness of misery of Millions yet unborn.
I conjure are you in the name of Almighty God, in whose presence
you stand, to consider the inestimable value of the precious Deposit
with which you are now entrusted.
For my own part, knowing you as I do, I have no apprehensions.
I feel assured that neither expectation of reward and favor
nor dread of Persecution will influence your decision. It is to
the Offices of the New South Wales Corps that the administration
of Justice is committed; And do that is
just as anything to dread?
Sydney, 25th January, 1808.
John McArthur
A true Copy compared with the Original by us.
A.F. Kemp, J.P.
[228] Copies of Papers Referred
to in the Preceding Memorial
[No. 1 referred to in Document
A.]
[1] Mr John McArthur to
Judge Advocate Atkins
Sydney,
20th January, 1808.
Sir,
I learn from your Letter of yesterday’s date to G. Blaxcell, Esq.,
that a Criminal Court is to be assembled on the 25th Instant, before
which I am to be brought, and that I have to subpoena my Evidences
through the Provost Marshal.
As I am yet in ignorance of the nature of the accusation you may
have to prefer against me to the Court, I presume you will see the
necessity of immediately furnishing me with a copy of the intended
Indictment or Information, to which, as you, sir, are well aware,
I am entitled by Law.
I am, &c.,
John McArthur
[2] Judge Advocate Atkins
to Mr John McArthur
20th January, 1808,
Sir,
As I am certain you are not, by Law, entitled to a Copy of your
Indictment or Information, at least in the present Stage of the
business, you will excuse my not complying with your request.
I am, &c.,
Richard Atkins, J.A.
[3] Mr John McArthur to
Judge Advocate Atkins
20th January, 1808.
Sir,
As you say you are certain I am not entitled, by Law, to a copy
of the Indictment or Information against me in the present Stage
of the business, will you be pleased to acquaint me with the means
by which I am to discover what Evidences I shall require to disprove
an accusation, the particulars of which it is thought prudent to
conceal from me. I say, thought prudent; for, to balance your certainty,
Sir, by another, I am certain your refusal to grant my request is
illegal, and such as you cannot justify. I therefore, hereby repeat
the request.
I am, &c.,
John McArthur
[4] Judge Advocate Atkins
to Mr John McArthur
20th January, 1808.
Sir,
In answer to your second Letter, I have only to refer you to my
answer of your first Letter, and to add that your Indictment or Information is not for High Treason.
I am, &c.,
Richard Atkins, J.A.
[5] Mr John McArthur to
Judge Advocate Atkins
20th January, 1808.
Sir,
As you repeat your first answer, and continue to refuse me a copy
of the Indictment or Information, I also must repeat my last question,
"By what means am I to discover what Evidences I shall require
to disprove an Accusation, the particulars of which it is thought
prudent to conceal?"
I am thankful for the assurance you have given that I am not to
be tried for High Treason, as you well know, Sir, I had too much
cause to apprehend it might be intended (that dreadful Crime [229]
having been publicly charged against me by the Provost Marshal in
the name of His Excellency the Governor); But whether I am to be
tried for Treason or a Misdemeanor, with
all due deference to your superior legal knowledge, I maintain that
I am entitled to a copy of the Indictment or Information, in either
case; and I take the liberty to say, if you will condescend to consult
your Law Authorities, that you will discover Trials for Misdemeanors
are never brought on (unless by consent of Parties) until the next
Assizes or sessions after the Indictment or Information has been exhibited.
I am, &c.,
John McArthur.
A True Copy compared with the Original by us
A.F. Kemp, J.P.
[No. 6] Mr John McArthur
to Governor Bligh
Sydney,
22nd January, 1808.
Sir,
I have been apprized by a Letter from the Judge Advocate to G.
Blaxcell, Esq., that I am to be brought before a Criminal Court
on Monday, the 25th Instant, and I have also learnt that the Members
of that Court had been nominated without any notification of Your
Excellency's intention to appoint for the time being a Judge Advocate
to preside at my Trial who is not interested in the Event. I should,
therefore, be wanting in Justice to myself if I neglected to Protest
against Richard Atkins, Esq., being suffered to sit as the Judge
had been pending Trial.
The reason on which I found my objection is because
that Gentleman is deeply interested to obtain a Verdict against
me, in so much that, should he fail of so doing, he, in the ordinary
course of things, must inevitably descend from the proud Character
of a Prosecutor to the humble and degraded one of a Prisoner, called
upon to defend himself at the very Bar to which he is about to drag
me, for the false imprisonment I have suffered under the authority
of his illegal warrant.
On this ground it is, Sir, that I do solemnly protest
against the said Richard Atkins, Esq., as a Judge upon my Trial;
and, with all due deference to your Excellency, that I require as
my lawful Right, that an impartial Judge may be appointed to discharge
the duties of that sacred Office.
I have, &c.,
John McArthur.
[No. 7 ] Secretary Griffin to Mr John Macarthur
Government House,
22nd January, 1808.
Sir,
His Excellency has directed me to acknowledge the Receipt of your
Letter of yesterday's date, protesting against Richard Atkins, Esq.,
Judge Advocate, as Judge upon your Trial.
Mr Atkins being the Judge appointed by His Majesty,
and the only person having the Power to sit as a Judge in the Courts
in this Territory, His Excellency directs me to give you for answer
that the law must take its course, as He does not feel himself justified
to use any interference with the Executive Power as by His Majesty
appointed.
I am, &c.,
Edmund Griffin,
Secretary.
[230] [No. 2 referred to
in Document A.]
Mr John Macarthur to Governor Bligh
Parramatta,
1st January, 1808
Sir,
I did myself the honor to address a Memorial to Your Excellency on the 29th
Ultimo, containing the particulars of a Claim I have upon the Judge
Advocate, Richard Atkins, Esq., for a debt of £82 9s 5d that I cannot
induce him to pay, and praying that Your Excellency would be pleased
in some manner to interpose Your Authority in my Behalf, or to cause
a Court of Civil Jurisdiction to be Constituted with powers to compel
the said Judge Advocate to Answer my demand according to law. In
reply thereto I yesterday received a letter from your Excellency’s
Secretary, acquainting me that a Court of Civil Jurisdiction is
open to take cognizance of all Civil Actions, and that my Memorial
will be further answered by the Judge Advocate.
From this, I understand it is Your Excellency’s Opinion
that I ought to apply to the present Court of Civil Jurisdiction,
of which the person by whom I am aggrieved, is Judge, and to call
upon Mr Atkins to issue a Writ to bring himself before himself to
Answer my Complaint.
This, Sir, I hope I shall be excused for saying, would be a proceeding
so Novel, would be so extremely opposite to the practice of every
Court of Law, and, in my humble Opinion, so entirely inimical to
the principles of natural Justice and Equity, that I take the liberty
to entreat Your Excellency will be pleased to give my Memorial a
reconsideration; for I persuade myself that you will then see the
propriety of the request it contains, and that you will be induced
to grant me an opportunity of establishing my claim before an impartial
and disinterested Tribunal.
I have, &c.,
J. McArthur
Judge
Advocate Atkins to Mr John Macarthur.
10th January, 1808.
Sir,
Through the favor of His Excellency the
Governor, I have been furnished with two Communications of yours,
the One under the Shape of a Memorial and the other under that of
a letter, on the subject of a Bill drawn by me on my Brother, Lieutenant
Colonel Bowyer, of nigh 15 Years’ standing. Sir, that Bill comes
to me in a very questionable shape (all its circumstances considered),
no protest having yet been produced; but, let that be as it may,
I cannot consider it at present (under the point of view you now
stand, to take your trial at the next Criminal Court) as an Object
for discussion. I must, therefore, decline entering on this or any
other subject deal after that period, our relative Situations not
admitting it.
I am, &c.,
Richard Atkins.
P.S. It never was, nor is it now, my Intention of availing myself
of the Statute of Limitations, as my Letters will show.
Mr John Macarthur to Governor Bligh
Parramatta,
12 January, 1808.
Sir,
I take the liberty to enclose you the Copy of a letter I received
yesterday from the Judge Advocate, that
I conclude that the manner in which Your Excellency's Name is introduced
may be intended as an Answer to the letter I had the Honor to write
you on the 1st Instant.
[231] What Mr Atkins can mean I am unable to conjecture,
by saying that Bill I hold "comes in a very questionable shape
(all its Circumstances considered), no protest having yet been produced";
but for the satisfaction of Your Excellency I beg to leave to state
that when the Bill was first presented for payment it was, on being
dishonoured, regularly noted, and sent back to this Colony by Captain
Brooks. Mr Atkins, however, instead of shewing
any solicitude to get rid of such a disagreeable testimony, had
the address to persuade Captain Brookes that if the Bill was again
presented to his Brother it would be paid; and to give the greater
probability to the Assurance he wrote a declaration to the effect
and signed it officially as Judge Advocate. The Bill was, in consequence,
taken again to England, but unhappily met with the
same fate it had done at first.
On my return here in 1805 I communicated this unpleasant
event to Mr Atkins, and I received a written assurance that the
Bill should soon be paid. More than two Years have expired since
that promise was given, and I am now, in lieu of payment, told that
a Bill drawn near 15 Years cannot be considered "at present,"
because I am to take my trial at the next Criminal Court.
If this withholding from me my Money to be intended
by the Judge Advocate as a sort of precurser of a much more severe vengeance that he is mediating
at this threatened Trial, and if your Excellency should continue
to sustain his refusal to pay me by not allowing me to prove my
claim before a disinterested Tribunal, I must submit with patience;
nor will I any further trouble Your Excellency upon the Subject
until there may be an opportunity to send, with Your dispatches,
a Memorial to His Majesty’s Secretary of State for the Colonies.
I have, &c.,
John McArthur.
A True Copy compared with the Original by us.
A.F.Kemp, J.P.
[No. 3 referred to in Document
A.]
The Memorial of John Macarthur
To William Bligh, Esq, &c., &c.
May it please Your Excellency, The Memorial of John
McArthur, - Respectfully Sheweth:
That Richard Atkins, Esq, Judge Advocate of this Colony,
stands indebted to Your Memorialist in the sum of Eighty Two pounds
nine Shillings and five pence on account of the principal and Interest
due on a Bill of Exchange, drawn on the 14th of February, 1793,
either said Judge Advocate, on his Brother, General Bowyer, and
which on being presented for payment was refused by the General
in the following remarkable words: "I will not pay a Shilling
for him." That repeated applications for payment of said Bill
have been since made to the said Judge Advocate without effect.
That on the 21st Instant Your Memorialist called at
the House of the said Judge Advocate with intention personally to
require his Money; but the Judge Advocate first caused himself to
be denied, and, afterwards finding that Your Memorialist remained
in his Garden, he sent a Servant to say he could not then be spoken
with.
That Your Memorialist then left a Memorandum containing
the [232] particulars of his demand, and on the next day he wrote
to the Judge Advocate as follows:
"Mr MacArthur will be thankful to Mr Atkins if he will have the
goodness to send him this Morning payment of the Bill which he delivered
yesterday for £82 9s 5d, being the principal and Interest due on
Mr Atkins's draft, in favour of Captain Boyde,
drawn near fifteen Years ago."
That the Messenger who took Your Memorialist’s
note brought back the following Answer:
"Sir,
I have received your Account of a Bill drawn by me on Sir William
Bowyer, so far back as the Year 1793, for £26 6s. Though I am well
aware that by the Statute of Limitations I am not legally bound
to pay it, yet, Sir, on your producing with the Original Bill, together
with the Protest, &c., I will pay it, together with the legal
Interest from the time it was so protested, but not this day.
Richard Atkins."
That your Memorialist immediately after the receipt of this Letter
caused the returned Bill (which is regularly noted for Non-Payment)
to be presented to the said Judge Advocate, when he declared there
was a mistake as to the Sum and interest, but he would be punctual
to do what he had before said.
That Seven days have since elapsed, and Your Memorialist
has heard nothing further from the Said Judge Advocate, which gave
Your Memorialist cause to apprehend that the Judge Advocate intends
to be avail himself of the Statute of Limitations,
as he has expressly stated in his letter he can if he pleases.
That Your Memorialist being sensible he may have some
trouble to set aside such a Plea, humbly submits to Your Excellency’s
better Judgment the unhappy effects it might produce on the Morals
of this Colony if it should appear that a Judge resists the payment
of a just Debt, without any other reason to Offer in his Defence
than that he chose to take advantage of the Merciful and indulgent
spirit of his Creditors.
Your Memorialist humbly trusts that this candid statement
of facts will induce Your Excellency to interfere on his Behalf;
and, at all events, Your Memorialist respectfully intreats
that Your Excellency will be pleased to Constitute a Civil Court
of Jurisdiction, powers to compel the said Judge-Advocate, Richard
Atkins, to answer your Memorialist’s demand
according to law.
John McArthur.
Sydney, 29th of December, 1807.
Secretary Griffin to Mr
John Macarthur
Government House,
Sydney,
30th December, 1807.
Sir,
His Excellency directs me to inform you, in Answer to Your Memorial
of yesterday's date, that a Court of Civil Jurisdiction is open
to take cognizance of all Civil Actions, and that he has communicated
Your Memorial to Mr Atkins, the Judge Advocate, who will further
Answer it.
I am, &c.,
Edmund Griffin,
Secretary.
A True Copy compared with the Original by us.
A.F. Kemp, J.P.
[233] [Deposition referred
to – Marked B]
25th of January, 1808.
The prisoner, John McArthur, Esq., now before the Court, claims
their protection, he having received information from divers friendly
persons that a large Body of Men are Armed with Orders to carry
into execution a Warrant from the Judge Advocate against him for
exercising his lawful Right of Challenge against the said Judge
Advocate, and assigning his reasons for it, as he was directed to
do by the Court. The Deponent further swears that, from the information
he has received, he considers his Life in danger from the unprincipled
and atrocious Characters that are combined against him under the
direction of the Infamous George Crossley; he therefore declines
giving any Bail, and entreats the Court will be pleased to put him
under the protection of a Military Guard, they being the only persons
in whose hands he could consider himself secure.
J. McArthur.
A True Copy compared with the Original by us.
A.F.Kemp, J.P.
[Paper marked C.]
Depositions of Blaxcell
and Bayly
To the Court of Criminal Jurisdiction Assembled, Garnham
Blaxcell and Nicholas Bayly, Esquires,
do make Oath before this Court that John McArthur, Esq., was this
Morning, about nine o'Clock, forcibly wrested from their Charge
by two Constables by Virtue of a Warrant of which the following
is a Copy, although he (the said John McArthur) was delivered in
the charge of the said Garnham Blaxcell
and Nicholas Bayly Yesterday, when the Court adjourned, by the Officers
composing that Court:
Cumberland
To wit } Whereas Oath hath been made before us this day by
William Gore, Esq., Provost Marshal, that John McArthur, Esq., being
surrendered into his Custody in discharge of his Bail, is at large,
although he stands charged with certain Misdemeanors in inciting the people to hatred and contempt
of the Government, and has escaped out of his Custody contrary to
law.
These are, in His Majesty’s Name, to require and strictly to charge
and command you, and every of you, to take into your Custody the
Body of said John McArthur, and him safely keep and secure in His
Majesty’s Gaol at Sydney, to answer to all such Misdemeanors,
Matters, and Things whereof he stands charged on the information
exhibited against him, and him safely keep until he shall be delivered
by due course of Law: hereof fail not at your peril.
Given, &c., this 25th January, 1808,
Richard Atkins
Thomas Arndell
Robert Campbell
John Palmer
The said Garnham Blaxcell and Nicholas
Bayly do farther state that they do not
consider the person of John McArthur States, as he was when first put into Gaol delivered in charge of a Constable
of notorious bad Character who formerly lived in His House, from
whence he was turned away for robbing his Master, and who, as the
said Garnham Blackcell
and Nicholas Bayly are informed, was appointed
to do this duty although not his regular turn.
[234] The said Garnham Blaxcell and Nicholas Bayly
therefore humbly hoped that the Court takes such Measures as in
their Wisdom may appear to them necessary to restore to them (the
said Garnham Blaxcell and Nicholas Bayly)
the Body of the said John McArthur, Esq., there Bail Bond not being
yet Cancelled.
G. Blaxcell
Nicholas Bayly
Sydney,
26th January, 1808.
A True Copy compared with the Original by us.
A.F. Kemp, J.P.
Note
[1]
For other cases concerning the coup against Governor Bligh, see
R.
v. Gore, 1808; R.
v. Sutter, 1808; R.
v. Macarthur, 1808; Crossley
v. Johnston and others, 1810.
|