Why did you tell me, then, that you supposed the purpose of bringing the boy was that he should be introduced to Mr. Church?—No doubt about that. I don’t know any other reason he had than that, for bringing the boy. Did he say so?—I don’t know that he said that that was his reason. He said he had the boy there. Do you remember your declining to go in with Mr. Patrick to Mr. Church’s?—I told him I had no particular interest in the business. I had no intimacy with Mr. Church, except hearing him. I thought I had no business to be interested in the knowledge of the fact, being only a hearer. I thought therefore that my visit would be obtrusive. Because you had no particular interest in the business?—Why, I certainly had no interest in it. And therefore you declined going in and taking the boy with you?—I saw no necessity of so doing, as he did not acknowledge himself guilty of any thing bad. By Lord ELLENBOROUGH. But the boy being there, had you not the curiosity to examine the boy?—I did not, it being delicate subject. Did you not think it important to come at the truth upon the subject, as the boy was there and you might have examined him yourself?—If Mr. Church had confessed any thing, I should have thought it my duty to take the boy and have them face to face. But I should have thought that the circumstance of his not confessing would be the reason why you would take them face to face; or else why should you take the boy at all. But Mr. Church not having confessed any thing, you therefore would not examine the boy.—Was that your reason for not examining the boy?—Yes, my Lord. By Mr. BOLLAND.—But if he confessed any thing, you would have taken the boy to have them face to face?—Yes. Your object was to take the boy and have them face to face, if Mr. Church acknowledged the crime?—Yes. But surely when you found that Mr. Church had acknowledged his fault, then there would be no reason for taking the boy to have them face to face?—I should have thought it proper to take the boy in, if Mr. Church acknowledged his crime. I wished the boy in fact to come in with us; but when Mr. Patrick came out and said that Mr. Church did not acknowledge any thing of it, I did not think it necessary to have them face to face. Then you did not think it right to have the boy in?—I never spoke to the boy. You never asked the boy about this transaction?—No. Mr. Patrick never gave any opinion whether Mr. Church was implicated in the transaction; but in answer to a particular part of the transaction, he said that Mr. Church asserted that it was false?—Yes. Did you see the letter sent to Mrs. Hunter?—No. I mean the letter about the three points of the boy’s statement which Mr. Church said he was able to contradict?—No. Mr. JAMES REEVES _sworn_. _Examined by the_ COMMON SERJEANT. Were you the Clerk attending the Magistrate when the charge was made before him;—I was.