APPENDIX TO CHRONICLE. 



185 



Joseph Archeband and Petci" 

 Fall proved that tliey liad known 

 the plaintiff on the Congo, and 

 had always heard and understood 

 that he was an American. 



The plaintiff's case here closed. 

 The attorney-general addressed 

 the jury for the defendant, assur- 

 ing them that he stood forward 

 not in his public capacity of a 

 servant of the Crown to defend 

 Colonel Maxwell, if he had been 

 guilty of any excess of his juris- 

 diction, but merely to see that his 

 case wad duly conducted and in- 

 quired into. Jt was unfortunate 

 for this deserving ofhcer that the 

 Court of Justice of Sierra Leone 

 had so mistaken the piovince to 

 which it was limited, as to proceed 

 to convict the plaintiff and the wit- 

 ness Biotlie, when they liad been 

 taken out of the boundary of the 

 colony ; but being no lawyer, and 

 incompetent to construe tlie clause 

 in the act of Parliament, which 

 might even puzzle the members 

 of tlie profession ; he ha<l imagin- 

 ed that the Court had suHicient 

 jurisdiction. With regard to the 

 amount of the pecuniary damage 

 jL the plaintifl' had sustained, very 

 ^L uncertain and unsatisfactory evi- 

 ^Bdence had been given ; if the fac- 

 ^Htory were in truth the plaintiffs, 

 ^H it was singular that he had never 

 ^Vso represented it ; and how he had 

 ^■become possessed of a sum large 

 ^f enough to buy it was a mysteiy 

 which none of the \\'itnesses had 

 attempted to clear up. 



Mr. Justice Bayley here inter- 

 rupted tlie learned counsel, to 

 suggest, that the pecuiiiaiy da- 

 I mage the jilaintiff had sustained 

 shouhl be made the subject of ar- 

 bitration ; the persoiial i)art of 



the injury was peculiarly for the 

 consideration of a jury. 



Aftei' some considtation between 

 both sides, an arbitration upon 

 tiiis point was finally agreed to. 



The attorney-general then ad- 

 dressed himself to the other part 

 of the case, admitting that his 

 client had acted indiscreetly, and 

 had so far exceeded his authority 

 as to render himself liable to an- 

 swer in damages. He insisted that 

 little or no credit ought to be 

 given to the plaintifTs first wit- 

 ness, who had himself an action 

 pending on tiie same subject, and 

 who was interested in the verdict 

 tliis day given. The learned coun- 

 sel then adverted to the measures 

 adopted by this and other govei'n- 

 ments ineffectually to put an end 

 to the slave trade, which could 

 never be effectually abolished un- 

 til the whole swarm of factors 

 on the African coast, not merely 

 Spanish, Portuguese, or American, 

 but English, were destroyed. Un- 

 der this conviction the defendant 

 had directed an expedition against 

 the CongOj by which he had ren- 

 dered himself amenable in the 

 present action. He insisted that, 

 as the Court of Sierra Leone had 

 .sent the plaintiff in custody to 

 England, the defendant could only 

 be answerable for the confinement 

 which had taken place before sen- 

 tence. As the defendant could not 

 make out a legal justification, a 

 ^ erdict must pass again t him ; but 

 the learned counsel was persuaded 

 tliat the case called for no vindic- 

 tive <laniages 



]\Jr. Justice Bayley, in charging 

 tlie jury, expressed a clear opinion 

 that tiie defendant was resjjonsi- 

 ble in damages for the wliole im- 

 prisonment 



