Fernandes, a Prisoner, &
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 23 April 1861 |
| Date | 23 April 1861 |
| Court | Exchequer |
English Reports Citation: 158 E.R. 296
IN THE COURT OF EXCHEQUER AND EXCHEQUER CHAMBER
S C 30 L. J. Ex. 321, 7 Jur (N S) 529; 9 W R 559, 4 L T 296 in Common Pleas, 10 C B (N. S.) 3, 142 E R 349 (with note)
[717J in the matter of fernandes, a Prisoner, &c April, 2.'} 1861 -A Court of assize is a superior Court, and consequently, in a warrant of commitment by a Judge of assize for contempt, the adjudication of contempt may be general, and the particular circumstances need not be set out [S C 30 L. J. Ex. 321, 7 Jur (N 8 ) 529; 9 W B 559 , 4 1, T 29G in Common Pleas, 10 C B (N. S.) 3, 142 E K 349 (with note) ] In November, 1859, Joze Luis Fernandea was examined as a witness before the Commissioners appointed under a commission of her Majesty to inquire into certain corrupt practices at the election for the borough of Wakefield in April, 1859 On the 25th day of January, 1860, the Commissioners granted him then certificate in these words.-"Certificate to witness Wakeneld Election Inquiry Commission : Whereas a commission, dated the 20th of August, A D 1859, was issued under the 15 & 16 Viet c 57, directed to us G. Pigott, W. H Willes and W. Slade, appointing us Commissioners to make inquiry under the said Act, into the existence of corrupt practices at elections for members to serve in parliament for the borough of Wakefield And whereast, in pursuance of the said commission, we have proceeded with the sard inquiry under the said Act, and in the progress of such inquiry arid of the proceed- (a} The cause was again tried before Erie, C. J., at the Norwich Summer Assizes, 1861, when the defendants proved that, before the cause of action arose, they had caused bills to be posted about the quays and public houses at Vat mouth frequented by fishermen, containing a notice similar to that printed on the back of the receipts The learned Judge left it to the jury to suy whether the contract between the plaintiff and defendants was made on those terms, and, the jury having found in the affirmative, the plaintiff elected to be nonsuited, 6 H & N 718 IN RE FERNANDES '297 ings connected therewith J. L. Fernandea has been examined by us as a witness, and has given evidence before us touching such corrupt practices as aforesaid Now we, the said G. Pigott, W H Willes and W. Slade hereby certify under our hands that the said J. L. Fernandes has, upon his examination, made a true disclosure touching all things to which he has been examined within the meaning and intent of the 9th and 10th sections of the said Act. Given undei our hands the 28th day of January, a.d. 1860-G. Pigott, VV. H. Willes, W. Slade" A cnminal information for bnbery at the said election, which was subsequently filed against one John Barff Charles-[718]-woith, came on for tiial, before Hill, J, at the Yorkshire Spring Assizes in 1861. On that occasion J. L. Feuiandes was present in obedience to a subpoena to attend and give evidence on behalf of her Majesty on the information, and was examined as a witness In the course of his examination the following question was put to him by the Solicitor General, who conducted the prosecution - " Did you receive any money from the defendant John Barff Charlesworth in the month of April 18591" The witness declined to answer the question, stating that he had been advised by counsel that he was not bound to do so. The Solicitor General asked the witness if he had been examined before the Commissioners, and whether he had received a certificate The certificate and the commission under the sign manual of her Majesty weie then put in. The learned Judge, after consulting Keating, J., stated that having considered the question whether the witness would be exposed to any peril by reason of answering the question proposed to him, they were both of opinion that he would be free from all penal actions, forfeitures, punishments, disabilities, incapacity, criminal proceedings of every kind and sort by reason of the certificate which had been granted to him, upon any matter connected with corrupt proceedings at the Wakefield election, and that he was bound to answer the question. The witness stated that he had been advised that the certificate was no sufficient indemnity against an impeachment by the House of Commons The learned Judge stated that in his opinion it was The witness however persisted in his refusal to answer, notwithstanding repeated remonstrances and warnings by the Court. The learned Judge then said that no other course wag left him than to state that, the evidence of the witness being material to the prosecution which was before the [719] Court, he well knowing that fact, had sought to evade giving the benefit of his testimony to the administration of justice, in a way which shewed that he was firmly persuaded that he would be in no...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Zdenek Simandl v Deputy Commissioner of Taxation
-
The State (Dowling) v Kingston (No. 2)
...L. R. 910. (7) [1924] 3 Domin. L. R. 229. (1) 20 Q. B. D. 1. (2) 15 A. C. 506. (1) [1923] A. C. 603, at p. 610. (1) 22 L. R. Ir. 98. (2) 6 H. & N. 717. (3) 10 C. B. (N. S.) (4) 22 L. R. Ir. 158. (1) 10 C. B. (N. S.) 3. (2) [1921] 1 I. R. 265. (3) 15 A. C. at p. 514. (4) Eshugbayi Eleko v. O......
-
Zdenek Simandl v Deputy Commissioner of Taxation
...Kotsis v Kotsis (1970) 122 CLR 69 distinguished Re Bryant: Ex parte Guarino (2001) 75 ALJR 478 followed Re Fernandes (1861) 6 H & N 717; 158 ER 296 at 300-301 Re Jarman and Others; Ex parte Cook (1997) 188 CLR 595 referred to The Commonwealth of Australia and Others v The Hospital Contribut......
-
Re Daniel M'Aleece
...Bench. IN RE DANIEL M'ALEECE. Ex parte Jose Luis FernandezENRENR 101 C. B. N. S. 3; S. C. 6 H. & N. 717. Bushel's CaseENR Vaugh. 135. The King v. ClementENRENR 11 Price, 70; 4 B. & Al. 218. Fernandez' CaseENR 10 C. B. N. S. 60. Burdett v. Abbott p. 150. Case of Sheriff of Middlesex 11 a. & ......