From the Jersey Independent
25 August 1855
How to evade the laws
No one in Jersey is allowed to retail spirits or wines without a licence. So says the law. Now it happened that on Saturday last, the 18th, two persons were sued in the Royal Court by the Attorney-General, in virtue of his office, for being in the habit of selling wines and spirituous liquors, and of having done so especially on the 5th of August of the present year.
The parties sued were Francis Prosser, of the Victoria Club, Beresford Street, and Frederick Werndley, of the Civil and United Service Club, David Place.
The defendants in this case alleged that they were the mere servants of the members of their respective clubs, and that the gentlemen under whose guidance they acted should be summoned.
Now it happens that both the Chief Magistrate (Sir Thomas Le Breton) and the Attorney-General are members of one of the said clubs, and consequently found themselves in rather a queer and difficult position.
When the first of these two cases was called, Sir Thomas Le Breton, who hitherto had presided the Court, thought it his duty to doff his scarlet mantle and divest himself of his authority during the pending of the suit, being called upon as a party in the case.
The Attorney-General, however, stood his ground as public prosecutor, and argued that the defendants were alone responsible for the penalty attached to the violation of the law (£10), and that he was not bound to summon or prosecute the members of the club under whose authority the defendants sought to shelter themselves.
Prosecution abandoned
The Court, however, was of a different opinion, and decided otherwise. Upon which, to get rid of the difficulty, the Attorney-General – the public guardian of the laws, who is duty bound to see them duly executed – under pretence of his ignorance as to who were or were not members of the clubs mentioned above, said that, 'rather than have to summon the said members (of whom he was one and the Chief Magistrate another) he would forego the prosecution. And there the matter dropped. So much for Jersey justice.
May not the public be indignant at such a dereliction of principle. The law has been infringed – the defendants did not deny it, but naturally sheltered themselves under the responsibility of the members of their respective clubs, under whose guidance they had acted.
Now these members are for the most part officials of the Court, the Bailiff, the Attorney-General, one of the Sheriffs and the Clerk of the Court. Why not have brought them to the bar, either to justify their proceedings, or deny their participation in the guilt? The Magistrates on the bench ruled that they (the officials) should be summoned and be made parties to the suit; and spite that judicial order, he of all others who is bound and should see the law carried into effect, turns round and gives up the prosecution.
Had Messrs Prosser and Werndley, stewards of the Victoria and the Civil and United Service Club, been stewards either of a Mechanics' Institute or of the Working Man's Association, would the Attorney-General have acted as he did on Saturday last? We leave the question open for the consideration of the public.
