There is another circumstance, which is an aggravation of your crime, which is from the situation of life in which you are as an attorney you must have taken the oaths of allegiance to the king; these words that you have uttered, show, in your conduct and your carriage, how very little regard you have paid to the oaths you have taken; that therefore is a high aggravation of your offence. * two; and that after the expiration of your imprisonment, you do find sureties for your good behaviour for the space of five years, yourself in 500l. and your two sureties in 100%. each; and that you be further imprisoned until such sureties be found. Lord Kenyon.-And also struck off the roll of attornies of this Court. In a periodical publication for the month of June, 1793, I find the following passage: "It is somewhat remarkable that as one of the witnesses against Mr. Frost was waiting to hear sentence passed, he was seized with an apoplectic fit. By order of lord Kenyon he was carried into the Court of Requests for the benefit of the air; he remained there some time in violent convulsions: amongst the persons who collected about him was Mr. Frost, who disregarding the agony he was in, upbraided him, and declared, that divine vengeance was hurled on his guilty head." The Court have taken all these circumstances into their consideration, and upon mature deliberation, the sentence of the Court is-That you be imprisoned in his majesty's gaol of Newgate for six calender months, and that during that time you do stand in and upon the pillory at Charing-cross for the space of one hour, between the hours of twelve and other things in his sleep, is the same person, and is answerable for any mischief he shall do in it. Human laws punish both, with a justice suitable to their way of knowledge; because in these cases they cannot distinguish certainly what is real, what counterfeit and It appears that in December, 1813, Mr. so the ignorance in drunkenness or sleep, is Frost received from his royal highness the not admitted as a plea. For though punish- Prince Regent, acting in the name and on the ment be annexed to personality, and per- behalf of the King, a free pardon, in consesonality to consciousness, and the drunkard quence of which, on February 8, 1815, the perhaps be not conscious of what he did; yet court of King's-bench was moved, that his human judicatures justly punish him, because name should be replaced on the Roll: but, by the fact is proved against him, but want of the Court: Though the pardon releases him consciousness cannot be proved for him. But from all the effects of the sentence upon him, in the great day, wherein the secrets of all it does not necessarily follow that he must be hearts shall be laid open, it may be reasonable replaced on the roll of attornies; more parto think, no one shall be made to answer for ticularly as want of practice and experience in what he knows nothing of; but shall receive the profession for one or two and twenty his doom, his conscience accusing or excusing years must have induced a degree of unfitness him." Locke's Essay concerning Human for the employment, which could not be supUnderstanding, book 2, ch. 27, s. 22. See posed to attach to an attorney on his first apMotion also on this subject the letters from Mo-plication to be placed on the rolls. lyneux to Locke, December 23, 1693; Locke refused. to Molyneux, January 19, 1694, Molyneux to Locke, February 17, 1694; Locke to Molyneux, May 26, 1694. Mr. [I have accidentally omitted in pp. 502, 503, to subjoin to the extract from Burke, a reference to his Works; the passage will be found in his Speech at Bristol, previous to the Election, 1780.-Works, vol. 3, pp. 390, 391.] • December 19, 1793. Between eleven and twelve, Mr. John Frost was brought out of Newgate, and placed in a coach, apparently very feeble, and rolled in blankets. Kirby, the keeper, accompanied him to the streets, stopping at every marked place, partihouse of Mr. Justice Grose, in Bloomsbury- cularly St. James's palace, Carleton House, square, where he, with two sureties, entered Charing-cross, &c. to shout and express their into the recognizance required by his judgjoy; and in this state they conducted him to ment for his keeping the peace He was then discharged out of custody. As soon as he was at liberty, the multitude took the horses out of the carriage, and drew him along the his own house in Spring-gardens, where Mr. Thelwall made a speech, and intreated them to separate peaceably, which they accordingly did, Ann, Reg. Chron. 576. Proceedings in the Court of the Vice Chancellor, and in the Court of Delegates, in the University of Cambridge, and in the Court of King's Bench, Westminster, in the Case of WILLIAM FREND, Clerk, M. A. for writing and publishing a scandalous Book or Pamphlet intituled, "Peace and Union recommended to the Associated Bodies of Republicans and AntiRepublicans." 33 & 34 GEORGE III. A. D. 1793, 1794.* ON Saturday the ninth of February, 1793, the following Advertisement appeared in the Cambridge Chronicle. "In the press, and in the course of next week will be published, Peace and Union recommended to the Associated Bodies of Republicans and Anti-Republicans, by William Frend, M. A. Fellow of Jesus College." On the next Saturday, a second Advertisement appeared, stating, that the Pamphlet was published. Soon after the publication, the following members of the Senate waited upon the vicechancellor at different times, to express their disapprobation of the Pamphlet, and their wish, that such notice should be taken of the author's offence, as might best declare the censure of the University: W. Wade, B. D. Fellow of St. John's * Of the proceedings in the vice-chancellor's court, I have met with two reports, one by John Beverley, M. A. and Proctor of the vice-chancellor's court, and the other by Mr. Frend, the defendant. It should be observed that Mr. Beverley's report was formed from notes taken at the time by the late Dr. Jowett. The sources from which Mr. Frend composed his publication are thus described by him. "The proceedings of the two courts are given from official papers received from the registrary and bedell, and notes taken down by Mr. Lambert. Mr. Frend's speech was written down by himself a few days after the delivery of it, and though his memory is not very tenacious, he has been enabled by the notes of Mr. Lambert to give not only the order and leading ideas, but in general the very expressions used. The reader will naturally make allow. ances for a composition confined to the rules of speaking, not of writing, two very different things, and recollect that the latter is to the former what an engraving is to a picture." These two reports do not differ materially; -however the account now presented to the public of this most curious and interesting case is compiled from both, after a careful and minute examination of their respective contents. Mr. Frend's speech is given verbatim from his own report of it. P. Douglas, B. D. Tutor of Bene't. Fellows of Trin. Coll. R. Tillard, M. A. Fellow of St. John's In consequence of these applications, the vice-chancellor on the fourth of March, desired all the above gentlemen to attend him at his lodge, where he informed them, that, being called upon by so many respectable persons, he should now think it his duty to proceed against the author of the Pamphlet, in such manner as might be thought advisable. Being asked, "whether he meant in such manner, as might appear advisable to that meeting;" he answered, "No; but in such manner as should be advisable on the whole”—but added, " that he was very ready * Now [1816] Dean of Peterborough. † Now lord Bishop of Bristol. to hear, what they might think proper to be Cambridge, Queen's College, Resolved by the underwritten persons, members of the University of Cambridge, that William Frend, Master of Arts, and Fellow of Jesus College, be prosecuted in the vice-chancellor's court, for having publicly and notoriously offended against a grace passed by the senate of this University in the year 1603: and that the following gentlemen be a committee to manage the said prosecution, viz. Dr. Kipling, Dr. Jowett, the Margaret Professor of Divinity, the Public Orator, and the reverend Mr. Belward, Fellow of Caius College. Geo. Whitmore J. Plampin H. Jowett J. Smith J. Costobadie J. Wood T. Kipling J. Jowett G. King T. Lloyd W. Pugh F. J. H. Wollaston On the Friday following, the five gentlemen, who had been desired to undertake the management of the prosecution, met to draw up an accusation against Mr. Frend, to be lodged with the vice-chancellor. But, on considering the forms and precedents of the vice-chancellor's court, they found, that it had not been usual for the accuser to dictate to the Court, under what particular statute the offender should be punished. It was therefore thought necessary, that they should call a second general meeting; which was accordingly done: and on the 11th of March, the following resolution passed unanimously: Cambridge, 11th March, 1793. "Agreed, that the following words in the resolution made last Monday, viz. " against a Grace passed by the senate of this university, in the year 1609" be rescinded, and that in lieu of them be substituted these words, viz. "against the laws of the university." T. Kipling J. Jowett G. Whitmore J. Oldershaw W. Wade F. J. H. Wollaston G. King W. Wilson R. Ramsden W. Pugh E. Outram On a subsequent day the managers of the prosecution drew up an accusation against Mr. Frend; which was delivered to the vicechancellor, Dr. Kipling requested at the same time, that Mr. Frend might be summoned into the vice-chancellor's court, to answer to the charge. Mr. Frend was accordingly summoned to appear in the vice-chancellor's court, to be held in the law-schools, on Friday the 3rd of May, at ten o'clock in the forenoon, CITATION. To John Beverley, William Mathew, and Henry Gunning, esquire bedels of the university of Cambridge, or their lawful deputy or deputies. Summon William Frend, master of arts, and fellow of Jesus college in the university of Cambridge, to appear before me, or my lawful deputy, and my assessors, at my next court, to be held in the law-schools in Cambridge, on Friday the 3rd day of May next, between the hours of ten and eleven in the forenoon of the same day, in a certain cause of office promoted by the reverend Thomas Kipling, doctor in divinity, and member of the said university, the said cause of office or matter of complaint arising within the jurisdiction of the said university; then and there to answer to an accusation laid before ine, in which the said William Frend is charged with having violated the laws and statutes of this university (particularly the statute de Concionibus) by publishing and causing to be dispersed, within the said university, a certain pamphlet, intituled "Peace and Union recommended to the Associated Bodies of Republicans and Anti-Republicans," of which doctor Kipling, the above-mentioned promoter of this cause, affirms him to be the author, and in which, according to the accusation of the said doctor Kipling, religion, as established by public authority within this realm, and also all ecclesiastical ranks and dignities are impugned; and so from court day to court day until the said cause be ended, and further to do and receive as to law and justice shall appertain. Hereof fail not at your peril. Given under my hand and seal, at Queen's college, Cambridge, this 23rd day of April, in the year of our Lord 1793. (Signed) John Beverley. [Copy.] I. MILNER, (L. S.) Mr. Frend appeared, and the Court was adjourned to the Senate-house.* Dr. Colman appeared at the adjourned court. When and where, Mr. Frend excepted to the court, as in the following paper, purporting to be a renunciation of the jurisdiction of the said court; which paper he read and signed in the presence of the registrary, who attested the same, and delivered it to the vice-chancellor. "Mr Vice-Chancellor ; "I desire leave, before my accuser enters on his office, to offer a few things, in the way of objection to the mode of trial, adopted by him, and authorized by you. They will, I hope, be found not unworthy of your attention. "I acknowledge the receipt of a citation from you, to attend in this place at this hour, and my presence here is intirely owing to that circumstance: but I wish it to be considered, as proceeding more from civility and respect, than duty or obligation. The reason of which distinction will be obvious from what I am going to allege. "My accuser charges me with the publication of a pamphlet, intituled "Peace and Union recommended to the associated Bodies of Republicans and Anti-Republicans," and by such publication, with impugning religion, as established by public authority within this realm, and also all ecclesiastical ranks and dignities; and by such impugning, with having violated the laws and statutes of this univer sity, particularly the statute "De Concionibus.' "Now the violation of the statute "De Concionibus" being made the principal charge against me, I apprehend, that I ought not to cellor's court, but before the vice-chancellor, have been cited to appear in the vice-chanand a majority of the heads of colleges, all offences against that statute being made cogthere is no instance of any person being cited nizable by him and them jointly; and that ference between the vice-chancellor's court, to appear here for such an offence. The difand a meeting of the vice-chancellor and a majority of the heads of houses, I suppose to consist in the following particulars: "1. The vice-chancellor's court subsists by ancient custom, and charters confirmed by an act of parliament, and ought to be held at stated times, for the purpose of receiving complaints, and hearing and determining causes. Whereas the other meeting derives its existence and authority wholly from queen Elizabeth's statutes, and from the nature of it, can only be occasionally assembled, in the same manner, that the same or other persons meet occasionally in the senate or other place, for the execution of other parts of the same statutes. "2. The vice-chancellor's court is a court of record, from which no appeal can go to any of the courts in Westminster-hall, but only to the senate of the university.-Whereas, I apprehend, that no appeal can go to the senate from a determination of the vice-chancellor and heads, acting under the statute" De Concionibus," though such determination, like that of a mayor and aldermen in any civil corporation, may be liable to a review in the court of King's-bench. "3. The vice-chancellor sitting in his court, possesses the power of punishing all offences, cognizable in it, without the concurrence of a majority of the heads of houses, such concurrence being in no case necessary to punish, but only to punish in a particular manner. Whereas in the exercise of the power given in the statute " De Concionibus," such concurrence is in every step made absolutely necessary. "4. The immediate object of a citation into this court is punishment; whereas the immediate object of a citation, before the vice-chancellor and a majority of the heads under the statute "De Concionibus," is not punishment, but the revocation of error. "5. There is no pretence from the statute, nor from any practice under it, for the appointment or allowance of a promoter, such office being peculiar to ecclesiastical courts. "5. The vice-chancellor has undoubtedly in his court the power of compelling evidence, and that upon oath, neither of which can, I suppose, be done by him and a majority of This adjournment was made, as the Law-the heads, assembled for the purpose of enschools were too small to contain the au- forcing the statute " De Concionibus." dience. "For these reasons, at least till stronger ones to the contrary shall be alleged, I think myself obliged to renounce the jurisdiction of this court, and do hereby renounce such jurisdiction, so long as the violation of the statute "De Concionibus" is made the principal or any part of the charge against me. And, though I should in the first instance have willingly submitted to answer for any supposed breach of that statute, before the vice-chancellor and a majority of the heads of houses, or before the vice-chancellor in this court for the breach of any other law of the university properly cognizable in it, I now desire time to be advised, whether having been wrongfully cited to appear in this court, on a supposed offence against that statute, with the acquiescence at least, if not the approbation of the heads of colleges, I am any longer liable to a trial for the same offence, either before the vice-chancellor and heads under the statute so often mentioned, or to the vice-chancellor alone, under any other law and statute of the university. "W. FREND." Signed by W. Frend, in the presence of me, Not. Publ. and Registrary. The vice-chancellor, after deliberating with the assessors, pronounced for the jurisdiction of the court and ordered Dr. Kipling to bring forward his charge. Mr. Erend desired, that the renunciation might be entered on the records of the court, and that the Grace "Cum Statutis Academia," Oct. 24, 1609, might be read, part of which was read by Mr. Frendthe vice-chancellor objecting to the reading the whole at that time, and saying it might be read in the course of his defence. Dr. Kipling desired that the charges might be exhibited in writing; which was allowed: and the said charges or articles were read; and a copy of the same was ordered by the vice-chancellor to be delivered to Mr. Frend, and was so delivered. Then the promoter rose, and Mr. Frend, rising at the same time, addressed the vicechancellor, and desired that the accuser might not be permitted to speak till he had put on his proper academical habit. At this a violent burst of laughter and clapping from the audience ensued. The vice-chancellor seemed vehemently moved, and looked up to the gallery, as if going to reprimand the young men ; but the burst was over, and the noise had ceased before the vice-chancellor could speak to order. The promoter said, that the vice-chancellor, he supposed, would be required next to put on his robes too. The vice-chancellor treated Mr. Frend's requisition as frivolous; and Dr. Kipling began by praying, that the charges might be accepted in writing, and a copy of them, with a copy of the pamphlet annexed, given to the defendant. This was allowed, and the charges were read by the promoter. VOL. XXII. ARTICLES. University of Cambridge, In the name of God, Amen. We Isaac Milner, doctor in divinity, vice-chancellor of the university of Cambridge, and judge of the court of the chancellor, masters and scholars, of the said university, lawfully constituted and appointed; to you William Frend, master of arts, and one of the fellows of Jesus college, in this university, do give and minister all and singular the articles, heads, or interrogatories under-written, for certain crimes and offences, said by you to have been committed; but more especially for having written, published, and caused to have been dispersed, within the said university, a book or pamphlet, intituled "Peace and Union recommended to the associated Bodies of Republicans and Anti-Republicans; by William Frend, M. A. Fellow of Jesus College, Cambridge. Printed for the Author, by P. C. Croft, St. Ives, 1793, (price one shilling)." In which said book or pamphlet, religion, as established by public authority within this realm, and also all ecclesiastical ranks and dignities, are impugned. At the promotion of the Rev. Thomas Kipling, doctor in divinity, and a member of this university. And we do object and article as follows: (that is to say) In the first place, we article and object to you, the aforesaid William Frend, that the university of Cambridge was founded and endowed, and by an act of parliament, made in the thirteenth year of the reign of queen Elizabeth, was incorporated by the name of the chancellor, masters, and scholars of the university of Cambridge, for the maintenance of good and Godly literature, and the virtuous education of youth, within the said university : and moreover, that the letters patents granted to the chancellor, masters, and scholars of the university of Cambridge, in the third year of the reign of our then sovereign lady, queen Elizabeth, and all other letters patents granted to the said university, by any of the progenitors or predecessors of our said queen, were, by the said act of parliament, declared to be thenceforth good, effectual, and available in law, to all constructions and purposes; and we object and article the premises jointly and severally, and every part thereof. 2. Also, we article and object to you, the aforesaid William Frend, that in this present year of our Lord, one thousand seven hundred and ninety-three, you did publish, and cause to be dispersed, within this university, a scandalous book or pamphlet, of which you are the author, intituled "Peace and Union recommended to the associated bodies of Republicans and Anti-Republicans; by William Frend, M. A. Fellow of Jesus college, Cambridge. Printed for the Author, by P. C. Croft, St. Ives, 1793;" which said book or pamphlet is annexed to these presents, and 2 M C |