APPENDIX TO CHRONICLE. 



283 



Sir W. Scott did not give the 

 money because he thought he had 

 done plaintiff any injustice, but 

 merely from pure benevolence. 



The letter from plaintiff to Mr. 

 Espinasse was then read. The 

 purport was, thanking him for his 

 interference, and stating that he 

 received the bounty of sir W. 

 Scott as arising entirely from his 

 benevolence ; and that he did not 

 attribute to any unworthy motives 

 on the part of sir W. Scott, the 

 sentence ofexcommunicationwhich 

 had involved him in ruin. That he 

 had alwaj^s respected sir W. Scott, 

 and was very sorry to have been 

 obliged to have made a public ap- 

 peal, which had given an opportu- 

 nity to the disaffected to oppugn 

 the public justice. That he would 

 much moregladly receive the 150/. 

 as the gift of sir W. Scott's feel- 

 ings, than as recovered by any ad- 

 verse proceedings ; and that he 

 felt the warmest gratitude for the 

 money and for his promise of 

 future patronage. Another letter 

 was put in, dated the 14th of Feb- 

 ruary, 1812, in which plaintiffac- 

 knowledged the receipt of two 

 drafts for 2W. and 120/. asking for 

 farther assistance, and stating that 

 he was advised to petition parlia- 

 ment, and to bring a special action 

 on the case, and assuring sir W. 

 Scott that he had nothing to do 

 with the late application to parlia- 

 ment. 



Mr. Parke stated, that nothing 

 but his anxiety to have this cause 

 properly tried could have detained 

 him in London till that hour. In 

 this case there was no imputation 

 on sir W. Scott; but the whole 

 question was, whether, in point of 

 law, he was authorised to issue the 

 excomrauuication : and, however 



light some persons might make of 

 it, it was attended with serious 

 temporal evil. The excommuni- 

 cated person cannot sue, cannot be 

 a juror, cannot be a witness. In 

 equity, an officer of the court is 

 appointed guardian ; in courts of 

 common law, before an attach- 

 ment can issue, personal service is 

 necessary. Ecclesiastical courts 

 cannot have power that the com- 

 mon law courts have not. In case 

 of an irregular writ issuing, swear- 

 ing an affidavit on the subject does 

 not bring the party into court. 

 There was no imputation on the 

 defendant's moral character : giv- 

 ing an erroneous judgment was not 

 an immorality. The money given 

 by sir W. Scott could not, he con- 

 tended, have been an accord and 

 satisfaction. Giving this money 

 might have been an unguarded ac- 

 tion, but by it the defendant gave 

 judgment against himself : it prov- 

 ed that he knew his judgment was 

 erroneous. 



Lord EUenboruugh said, before 

 he adverted to other topics, he 

 should notice the last observation 

 of the learned counsel. He did 

 not agree either with the counsel 

 for the plaintiff" or for the defen- 

 dant : he did not think, with the 

 first, that the money was given 

 from a consciousness that his judg- 

 ment was erroneous; nor, veiththe 

 latter, that it was an act of volun- 

 tary charity. No, it was an in6r- 

 mity in a great man, whose cha- 

 racter was about to be questioned, 

 and who did not wish to iiave his 

 conduct drawn into question, and 

 his name bandied about in all the 

 public papers. He was aware of 

 the obnoxiousness of that mode of 

 sentence of excommunication, un- 

 fortunately the only method of en- 



