Page:Notes and Queries - Series 11 - Volume 6.djvu/426

 350

NOTES AND QUERIES. [ii s. vi. NOV. 2, 1912.

London among the Fellows of Lincoln's Inn. I think he must be the John Hervy who was admitted to Lincoln's Inn on 1 March, 1508/9. His son George was entered in the Visitation of 1561 under Hervye of Oulton. S. H. A. H.

[In 1885 the late CANON J. C. ATKINSON con- tributed to ' N. & Q.' (6 S. xii. 363) a learned article on the position of the " husbandman " in early agriculture in England. For " gentleman" see the discussion at 7 S. x. 383, 445 ; xi. 97, 173.]

MURDER OF LORD WILLIAM RUSSELL.

(11 S. vi. 170, 258.)

THE charges made against Mr. Charles Phillips with regard to his defence of Cour- voisier have all long since been thoroughly inquired into, and he has been proved to be free from blame. Catnach's report of the trial, referred to by MB. PIERPOINT, is not reliable. Mr. Phillips challenged the accuracy of the newspaper reports of his speech, and denied that he said that " God alone knew who committed this crime." Mr. Townsend in his ' Modern State Trials ' (1850), i. 244, deals with the whole subject, and what Mr. Phillips really said is given at p. 252. This is a well-worn subject amongst lawyers, and it would make this reply too long for me to quote what is there set out. Mr. Samuel Warren (the author of ' Ten Thousand a Year ') in articles in Blackwood's Magazine also deals with the subject, and these are reprinted in his ' Miscellanies ' (1855), ii. 1, article entitled ' The Mystery of Murder and its Defence,' while what Mr. Phillips actually said is again set out at p. 64. What passed between Mr. Phillips and Mr. Clarkson (the junior counsel for the defence) and the prisoner is set out at p. 27, and in Towns- end at p. 246. MB. PIERPOINT refers to the biography of Phillips in the ' D.N.B.,' where there is this passage :

"It is said that, though fully aware of his client's guilt, he pledged his word that he was innocent, and sought to fasten the crime on another."

These statements are both untrue, and both Townsend and Warren deal with them, and also with the charge that he improperly attacked the witnesses

What is really conclusive upon the subject is that Lord Chief Justice Tindal and Baron Parke (afterwards Lord Wensleydale), who tried the case, exculpated Mr. Phillips from all blame. See Townsend (p. 253) and Warren (pp. 61, 67, and 68).

The statement that Mr. Phillips never appeared in any other criminal case is also incorrect. His name is constantly to be found in cases in the Central Criminal Court Sessions reports up to the time of his ceasing to practise in 1842.

In 1842 Mr. Phillips was made Commis- sioner of the Court of Bankruptcy at Liver- pool by the Lord Chancellor (Lyndhurst), but he is better known as Commissioner of the Insolvent Debtors' Court in London, to which office he was promoted in 1846, I think by another Lord Chancellor.

Is it likely that a judicial office would have been given to a man who had disgraced himself as counsel ?

I wish to correct another mistake. Mr. Phillips was never the leader of the Central Criminal Court Bar. John Adolphus (the historian of the reign of George III.) was the leader of that Bar at the time when Mr. Philjips was practising there.

In conclusion, I should like to refer to an article by Dr. Showell Rogers, which appeared in The Law Quarterly Review of July, 1899, entitled ' The Ethics of Advo- cacy,' afterwards reprinted as a pamphlet (Stevens & Sons) ; see pp. 20-21. I strongly recommend all persons who want to under- stand what are the duties of counsel to read that article. When Mr. Phillips con- ducted the defence on the first day of the trial, the stolen plate had not been dis- covered. When it was discovered, and the prisoner had confessed his guilt, " My position," he asserts, with perfect truth, " at this moment was, I believe, without a parallel in the annals of the profession." HABBY B. POLAND.

Inner Temple.

It is not my wish to renew an old con- troversy on which nothing fresh remains to be said; but, as MR. PIEBPOINT has recalled the attacks made on Charles Phillips relative to the Courvoisier case, it is only fair to observe that Mr. Phillips published what The Times pronounced to be " the very complete justification of his conduct. A full account of the murder and trial will bo found hi S. Warren's 'Miscellanies,' ii. 1.