London in the Jacobite times, Volume IIDoran, Dr. (John)
History
London in the Jacobite times, Volume II
Doran, Dr. (John)
London (England) -- History -- 18th century
◆[Sidenote: _MR.
JUSTICE FOSTER._]◆ Mr. Justice Foster, however, made an effort to
save the prisoner. The latter had pleaded that he was not the Charles
Radcliffe named in the indictment. The jury had found that he was. At
this point the prisoner pleaded the king’s general pardon. The other
judges held that the prisoner must stand or fall by his first plea; it
failed him, and execution, it was said, must follow. ‘Surely,’ remarked
the benevolent Foster, ‘the Court will never _in any state of a cause_
award execution upon a man who plainly appeareth to be pardoned.’ He
thought that if anyone could show that Mr. Radcliffe was entitled to
the benefit of the Act of Pardon, he should be heard. The Chief Justice
ruled otherwise, and it was ultimately shown that as the prisoner had
broken prison when under attainder, he came within certain clauses of
exception in the Act――and could therefore not be benefitted by it.
The papers of the day make an almost incredible statement, namely, that
Radcliffe was informed, if he himself would _swear_ he was not the
person named in the indictment, he should have time to bring witnesses
to support him; but he remained silent. Still, ‘he was very bold,’ is
the brief journalistic comment on his hearing. It is quite clear that
Charles Radcliffe did not keep his temper, and he therefore lost some
dignity on the solemn occasion of his being brought up to Westminster
Hall to have the day of his execution fixed. He is described, in the
Malmesbury correspondence, as acting with unheard-of insolence, and
apparently wishing to set the whole Government at defiance. This is
the evidence of a contemporary. Lord Campbell (in the ‘Life of Lord
Chancellor Hardwicke’) says, on the contrary, that the calmness of
his demeanour, added to his constancy to the Stuart cause, powerfully
excited the public sympathy in his favour. Moreover, Lord Campbell does
not think that the identity of the Charles Radcliffe of ’45 with him of
’15 was satisfactorily established by legal evidence, though he has no
doubt as to the fact.
[Sidenote: _CONDUCT OF RADCLIFFE._]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account