informed the Court, that he was greatly surprised at this attempt, not only as the court of King's-bench had, on the last day of last term, absolutely refused to grant these writs, although applied for by the prosecutors; but as the defendants had acted so very fairly, as to have given them (what they were not obliged to give) eight days notice of trial, and had now near an hundred witnesses attending, many of them brought from great distances, at a vast expence, to manifest the innocence of the defendants to the world. Upon which the person who at tended with these writs, being asked by the Court, Who he was? How he came by them? And how those writs had been obtained? He informed the Court, that he was clerk to Mr. Miles, (an attorney) who was out of town; that he had the writs delivered to him by Mr. Miles's brother, the distiller; and that he himself knew nothing further of the matter. Which answer not being satisfactory to the Court, the Court was pleased to order him to take the writs back again, to recommend an inquiry how these writs had been obtained, and the trials to be called on. Whereupon the jury were charged with the following indictment against John Gibbons:

FIRST INDICTMENT.

London. The jurors for our lord the king

Certiorari might be obtained by application to a judge during a vacation, at the instance of a prosecutor in a criminal cause, as a matter of right; because it is the king's privilege, who in criminal causes is the plaintiff, to sue in what court he will. Therefore the attorney for Canning was unwilling to try them at the Old Bailey, where sir Crisp Gascoyne had a seat; and went down to Totteridge, to lord chief justice Lee's, and got his hand to the Fiats; upon which the Certioraris were issued out to remove the indictment into the court of King'sbench; and next term a motion was made to enforce a return of them. Upon this motion a rule was made, for the Court at the Old Bailey to shew cause, why a return should not be enforced. The attorney against her prayed a particular day, which was allowed; and he undertook to be ready on that day. He moved, that the Certioraris might be superseded; alledging, that the lord chief justice had been imposed upon in signing the fiats: but his lordship not being present, a rule was made for hearing the merits of that suggestion at a future day. On this future day the counsel for the countrymen moved, that the writs might be superseded, in the absence of the lord chief justice. But as the motion to supersede these writs was founded on a suggestion, that the lord chief justice had been imposed upon; and as none but his lordship could know, whether he was imposed upon or no; both motions were ordered to stand over, till his lordship should be present: but as he died without ever coming into court afterwards, the writs are not superseded to this hour." Refutation of sir Crisp Gascoyne's Address to the Livery, p. 20, 21.

upon their oath present, that at the delivery of the king's gaol of Newgate, holden for the county of Middlesex, at Justice-hall in the Old Bailey, in the suburbs of the city of London, on Wednesday the 21st day of February, in the 26th year of the reign of our sovereign lord George the second, king of Great Britain, &c. before sir Crisp Gascoyne, knt. mayor of the city of London, sir Martin Wright, knt. one of the justices of our said lord the king, assigned to hold to hold pleas before the king himself, Nathaniel Gundry, esq. one of the justices of our said lord the king of the court of Common Pleas, sir Richard Adams, knt. one of the barons of the court of Exchequer of our said lord the king, and others their fellows justices of our said lord the king, assigned to deliver the gaol of our said lord the king, of Newgate, of the prisoners therein being, Mary Squires, late of the parish of Enfield, in the county of Middlesex, widow, was tried and convicted upon an indictment against her, for that she, on the 2d day of January, in the 26th year of the reign of our sovereign lord George the 2nd, king of Great Britain, &c. with force and arms, at the parish aforesaid, in the county aforesaid, in the dwelling-house of one Susannah Wells, widow, there situate, upon one Elizabeth Canning, spinster, in the peace of God and our said lord the king then and there being, feloniously did make an assault, and her the said Elizabeth in bodily fear and danger of her life then and there feloniously did put, and one pair of stays of the value of ten shillings, of the goods and chattels of the said Elizabeth, from the person and against the will of the said Elizabeth, in the dwelling-house aforesaid, then and there violently and feloniously did steal, take, and carry away, against the peace of our said lord the king, his crown and dignity. Upon which same trial, one John Gibbons, late of Abbotsbury, in the county of Dorset, victualler, on the 21st day of February, in the year aforesaid, to wit, at Justice-hall aforesaid, in the parish of St. Sepulchre, in the ward of Farringdon Without, in the city of London, came in his own proper person as a witness on the behalf of the said Mary Squires, of and upon the matters contained in the said indictment; and the said John Gibbons, then and there in the court aforesaid, before the said justices last above-named, and others their fellows assigned as aforesaid, upon the trial aforesaid, was in due manner and form sworn, and took his corporal oath upon the holy gospel of God, as such witness (the same Court then and there having a sufficient authority to administer the same oath to the said John Gibbons in that behalf.) And the said John Gibbons, on the said 21st day of February, in the year aforesaid, not having God before his eyes, but being moved and seduced by the instigation of the devil, and wickedly and unjustly devising and intending to pervert justice, and to procure the said Mary Squires unjustly to be acquitted of thesaid crime laid to her charge in the said indictment, then and there

upon the trial aforesaid, upon his oath aforesaid, falsely, maliciously, wilfully, wickedly, and corruptly, did say, depose, swear, and give in evidence to the said Court, and the jurors of the said jury, upon the trial aforesaid, as follows, (that is to say) on the 1st day of January, 1753, (meaning the year of our Lord 1758) the prisoner Squires (meaning the abovenamed Mary Squires) came into the house (meaning the house of the said John Gibbons, at Abbotsbury aforesaid, in the said county of Dorset.) There was George her son, (meaning George the son of the said Mary Squires) and Lucy her daughter (meaning Lucy the daughter of the said Mary Squires) with her (mean ing the said Mary Squires.) And that the said John Gibbons, upon the trial aforesaid, upon his oath aforesaid, on the said 21st day of February, in the year aforesaid, at Justice-hall aforesaid, in the parish of St. Sepulchre aforesaid, in the ward of Farringdon Without aforesaid, did falsely, maliciously, wilfully, and corruptly, say, depose, swear, and give in evidence as follows: she (meaning the said Mary Squires) came with handkerchiefs, lawns, muslins, and checks, to sell about town (meaning Abbotsbury, in the county of Dorset); she (meaning the said Mary Squires) stayed there (meaning at Abbotsbury in the said county of Dorset) from the 1st to the 9th day of the month (meaning from the 1st to the 9th day of the month of January, in the said year of our Lord 1753,) and lay at my house (meaning the house of him the said John Gibbons, at Abbotsbury aforesaid, in the said county of Dorset.) And the said John Gibbons, then and there, upon the said trial being demanded to look at the said Mary Squires, then a prisoner at the bar there, and being asked whether or not he was sure that she was the same Mary Squires, whom he had so as aforesaid deposed and sworn to have come to his said house at Abbotsbury aforesaid, on the said 1st day of January, in the said year 1753, and to have stayed there from the said 1st day of January aforesaid to the 9th day of the said month; he the said John Gibbons, upon the trial aforesaid, upon his oath aforesaid, in answer to the said demand and question, did falsely,

of Dorset. And whereas, in truth and in fact, the said George, the son of the said Mary Squires, and the said Lucy, the daughter of the said Mary Squires, or either of them, were not in the house of the said John Gibbons, at Abbotsbury aforesaid, in the said county of Dorset, on the said 1st day of January, in the year of our Lord 1753, with the said Mary Squires. And whereas, in truth and in fact, the said Mary Squires did not stay at Abbotsbury, in the said county of Dorset, from the 1st to the 9th day of the month of January, in the said year of our Lord 1753. And whereas, in truth and in fact, the said Mary Squires did not lie at the house of the said John Gibbons, at Abbotsbury aforesaid, on the said 1st day of January, in the year of our Lord 1753, until the 9th day of the same month. And whereas, in truth and in fact, the said Mary Squires did not lie at the house of the said John Gibbons, at Abbotsbury aforesaid, on the said 1st day of January, in the said year of our Lord 1753, nor on the said 9th day of the said month of January, in the year last-mentioned, nor at any time between the said 1st day of January, in the said year of our Lord 1753, and the said 9th day of the same month of January. And whereas, in truth and in fact, the said Mary Squires, on the said 1st day of January, in the year last before mentioned, was not at the house of the said John Gibbons, at Abbotsbury aforesaid, nor at any other house or place at Abbotsbury aforesaid. And so the jurors aforesaid, upon their oath aforesaid, do say, that the said John Gibbons, on the said 21st day of February, in the 26th year aforesaid, at Justice-hall aforesaid, upon the trial aforesaid, in the court aforesaid, (the same Court then and there having a competent authority to administer the said oath to the said John Gibbons in that behalf) falsely, maliciously, wilfully, wickedly, and corruptly, in manner and form aforesaid, did commit wilful and corrupt perjury, to the great displeasure of Almighty God, to the evil example of all others in the like case offending, and against the peace of our said lord the king, his crown and diguity.

All the witnesses, on the back of the bill, were called out to give evidence; but no one

appearing, except Mary Woodward, and she declaring she knew nothing of the matter, an officer was sent to the prosecutors to attend the Court; but none of them appearing, the jury acquitted the defendant.

A third indictment was preferred against Thomas Greville, for swearing he saw Mary Squires at Coombe on the 14th of January; and he was acquitted likewise for want of evidence.

During the time a messenger was sent to the prosecutors to attend the Court,

Mr. Davy, counsel for the defendants, took

that opportunity of addressing himself to the Court as follows:

My lord; I have the honour to appear before your lordship in behalf of the three defendants; who stand indicted for perjury, sup posed to have been committed by them in this place, upon the trial of Mary Squires, for the robbery of Elizabeth Canning, at EnfieldWash, in January last.

Gibbons and Clarke are charged with falsely swearing, that Mary Squires was at Abbotsbury from the 1st to the 9th of January; and Greville, that she was at Coombe on the 14th.

If their testimony was true, Mary Squires was unjustly accused; but it was hers, and their misfortune, that it then obtained no credit.

They were strangers, unknown to every body at the trial.-Canning was positive, and being by unfair means confirmed in her evidence, Squires was convicted.

Upon this charge of perjury, great care hath been taken, attended with great expence, on either side, to search this matter to the bottom; every circumstance hath been scrutinized, and nothing omitted to investigate the question thoroughly.

It hath a long while been the general subjeet of conversation, and hath engaged the attention of the public, more, perhaps, than any private transaction ever did before.

Here are the names of no less than fifty witnesses indorsed upon each of their indictments; yet only one of them, a poor woman, whose evidence is immaterial, appears to pro

It may perhaps be attributed to a compromise.- may be said, that these defendants are to be acquitted by consent, and that the indictment against Canning is to be dropped. One cannot easily imagine what rumours malice may raise.

For this reason, and to prevent any imputation upon those who are concerned for the defendants, I beg leave to assure your lordship, and all who hear me, that the defendants now come prepared for trial; that their witnesses attend your lordship, ready to give their testimony with such clear, ample, convincing circumstances, as would demand universal assent; and fully prove the innocence of the three defendants, and the falsity of Elizabeth Canning's story in every particular.

Here are witnesses, more in number than perhaps ever appeared in any one cause, collected together at a vast expence, and from different remote places.

Here is other evidence also ready to be pro duced, such as, in its nature, cannot deceive. The prosecutors have been invited to meet them here before your lordship and the jury; and su desirous were the friends of the defen

dants that this matter should be fairly tried, that they have offered to bear part of the charges of this prosecution.

The public hath been a long while amused with promises, that, in the trials of these indictments, the guilt of the present defendants should be clearly manifested, and the whole of this mysterious transaction unravelled.

The time is come to perform these promises, and thousands expect it.

Why do all these boasters now hide their faces? Because they are covered with confusion. They are aware how dangerous it is to pursue a prosecution, founded in the foulest and most daring perjury; and wisely withdraw themselves from a trial which would involve them in ruin.

Had I considered the case of the defendants alone, without regard to any other person, I should have thought it needless to give the Court any trouble upon this occasion.

They are private countrymen, without any connexions in this part of the world, and totally unconcerned at any reports which may prevail here:-within the narrow circle of their acquaintance, their characters will remain unblemished, let fame do its worst; because the charge against them is the attestation of a fact, which all their acquaintance, all their parish, and their whole country, know to be true.

But there is one, whose near relation to this great city makes it necessary for me to say thus much.

It is impossible for him to be unsolicitous for public approbation, after having done so much to deserve it.

Yet all the reproaches which malice could suggest to little, dark, designing men, have been levelled at the chief magistrate of this city, only for doing what the love of justice and humanity inspired him to do.

For his sake, therefore, I have thus trespassed upon your lordship's patience, and only beg leave to add a few words more, to shew how unmerited those reflections were.

As his lordship was at the head of the commission at the trial of Mary Squires, and was totally uninfluenced by the infamous endeavours which at that time had been used to give credit to a most improbable narrative; he was directed, merely by a regard for truth, to make further inquiry into a story pregnant with absurdities, and unlike any transaction that ever went before it.

And the evidence of Elizabeth Canning depending entirely upon this question, whether the account which these three men had given was true, where could his lordship so properly direct his inquiry, as to those places, where they swore they had seen her?

The success of that inquiry answered the wishes of his humanity; and the most indubitable proofs of the convict's innocence warmed the royal heart to mercy.

One should have thought, that this conduct of a magistrate, whose sole motive to it was a desire of rescuing a wretched, friendless con