The National Register. — London, England, 1813-02-07 00:00:00

VIE NATIONAL REGISTER. 94- Your character, vonr precious reputaihm, on which you have now ooh to depend, might ditFer. In the Courts of Justice, there is a fly calleo investigation, from which you might catch some taint. and give it to al that is amiable. By Jingo von run a chance of losing both your nose and your ears, (here there was an allusion to a rib of beef, which we caught very imperfectly, and the meaning of which we did - hot com• prehend.) Sieee you are so fond of fishing for pike, I would advise yin to be more careful ; volt suffered the last fish to nibble all round t.te large fish, whbout hooking him, who was after the minion, which, from inexperience, allowed him to sieze what was hest of it. (Tin re were EOM remarks as to the plaintiff being partial to f,stina, and costiga Rion in his family, and advising him not to use so much of the whip, and to allow his fetidly sometimes to fill their bellies.) I'. S. As you have turned so complete a fisherman, lest-ova help con gratulating you on the Indian shark, iii the shape of an old Colonel: he deserVes to writhe under the harpoon, for sae is one oftlic hammer-headed fellows. I have not the s!iglitcst acquaintance with. or knowledge of, Mr. B. It is easy to kno s vou by your crest and m ath): the motto, vale et duke; crest, a pair of cuckold's horns, surrounded with a French Risotto, of which the following translation was given :- 1 " sly ears arc open, my eyes are shut, Gild my hours, and I will not butt." The SOLICITOx-C 7s7R s. remarked, that the meaning obviously was, that the was willing to prostitute his wife to the best bidder. He then called Tillyaol, who swore, that be resided near plaintiff and defendant ; that on the 19t1, of September saw plantain the front of his house, and saw defendant lift his hands over plantiff's rails, and say, it tie would come out he would beat him : plaintiff carne out, and leen dant got his head under his arm, and struck him several blows. On Airs. Lutyens's coining out, defendant ran away. On his cross exami nation' he persisted in his former statement, and said that both p arties used the words rogue, villain, and bloody thief, or words to that effect. He swore he did not see Mr. lonyens before a blow was struck : did not hear Mrs. lonyens call defendant a thief, but did hear her call him a white livered son of a b- did not see her run her talons into defendant's face : saw some blood on deleotlant's face, but thought he might have scratched his face with plaintes button ; did not hear her say, go out, he dare not t oich you. There were other persons nearer : he was a rope-maker, and never had orders to play a particular march by defendant's house. Routh, a partner in an iron-house, stated, that he knew defendant's hand writing, but had never seen him ; could not say whether the letter was the hand writing of the defendant ; could no: form any judgment upon it. He told plaintiff he could not speak with cer ki, twiny to it. The Socicitoit GENERAL then examined him, as to his agreeing with plantill; that the caoital letters were very like defendant's, this witness allowed,but stated,that altheitgii he knew that the writing was disguised, because it was dissimdar is ditLrent paits, yet he could dot form any opinion as to whose writing it was. Mr. TOPPING objected to the Soheitor- General carrying this exa k mination farther ; when the Sul..Z;lro , :-G£N&e(AL said, he intended it as a proof, and would go to the jury upon it. LORD ELLENEOROUGH.— I wilt not admit it; the only reason for allowing the re-examination, is to refresh the rocciiechoo of the wit ness, but his evidence must b.: the result of his recollection. Routh.-1 cannot give all opinion ; I have no preponderance cf opinion. Mr. TOPPING, for the defelo'ae*, stated, rlvit whoever had directed the Solicitor General to read the letter in his (veiling, which could not afterwards be snhaeantiated by proof, had acted very improperly . ; and that 1w should have stink under the eh:quoit opening, were tt not for coofideoce he hail in the integrity of the Jury, who would not allow their minds to be biassed by any thing which should met have been stetted ; and in the justice and wisdom of the Judge, whose direc tion they would act upon in point of law. Were the letter even proved to have heel: the detenclain's, he would have resisted it, as not being relevalit to tile assanir. The learned Gen:lent:el then stated, that the conduct of defendant . to a yeueg hely had nothing to do with this cis!: ; but he could assure 1)1.60,1; that whenever he might wish to try the question, defendant could defend himself against that charge. lie then stated, that it sooanimes is the lot of the most vir nrn to ta:l ieto situations, woere the temptation is so great as to b~ beyond the oovver of man to resist. Situations of which it might he said, " S:y ye severest, what would ye have done ?" However Sudicjetit to the day is !h: evil thereof," it has nothing whatever to do with this; assault; norhtu that passed hefore the I Ihn day of Sep. tember is in evit'enee. The learned Counsei then insisted upon the improbability of deteedant ch.illenging plaintiff to come out, witliout come provocation on the part of plaiota He then went through the evidence, and !taped that the Jury would recollect., that thi issue was , Id flaw -he eh,- ,1 thy' ~:.; • '~ tilt, ~. FEE. 7 w -.him , of defendant, there was not one word • . it whiehappired to the present action t in that case he would have allow d it, although with hesitation, to go to the Jury, to consider wherlser it itkci any reference to the case: but he should hate remarked to them, that it was irrel Nara to the cause, and should he left out of their considera. tion. He told the jury that they were hound, in discharge of their duty, to attend merely to what was in evidence before them ; for if the Jury were to be influenced by matters not -civen in evidence, mere would be no security for property, nay, .even for life, in criminal cases. That it was thectuty of the Jury to hnd lECUNDCM ALLEGATA ET PROBATA ; and to lay out of their consideratn.n, things irrelevant to this action, which, if Eftle, might bc se.stantive causes of other actions. Defendant m , ght be sued for a libel, It . the letter cou'd be proved to be his ; he might he -tied for the seduction, if it were true, that he had seduced the young lady. But these facts had nothing to do with the present action, it entirely depewled on the ev'dence of who proved, that a parson is desired to- come out to be beaten, and he came out and was beaten. Verdict for plaintiff—Da mages The SocletToe GurreAt, then stated, that lie would not have read the. letter, unless, on the gravest deliberation, he believed it would have been proved. WEar:EsnAy, Fss. g. TITE KING V• JOHN AND LEIGH rittxtr.. The Solicitor-General prayed thejinttnent nine Court ttpon these defendants, who were found gu lty at the Middlesex Sittings, after last Term, of a libel upon the Prince Regent in the E%aminer News paper. Lord Ellenhorough having read the libel, and his notes upon the trial, the defendants then put in the fillowing affidavit:— " John Hunt, and Leigh Hunt, severally make oath, and say, that in writing and publishing the paper of which they have been coo- , victed as flar a libel, they were actuated by no personal malice what. ever, nor any love or purpose of slander : and that they are conscious of no motives which were not honourable, in writing and publishing the same. And these defendants farther say, that with respect to their pecuniary resources, they are informed, and believe, that an er roneous opinion has gone abroad, greatly magnifying the same; and they feel they have not altogether a right, in regard to their families, to omit to notice, that although their concern in the said paper is at present in a promising condition, and such as to enable them to „main tain a respectable aline ranee, early difficulties, arising from heavy expellees of setting up their business, and other causes of a private nature, have nearly anticipated its profits up to the present hour ; and they further say, that, in addition to the encumbrances on their concern already mentioned, they have been put to very heavy expencos in three prosecutions, in one of which they were acquitted, and in the other two were never intought to trial ; and that their net profits, one year, were totally exhausted by expcnces attending one of such prosecutions which occurred within that year : and they submit to this honourable Court, if it shall be its intention to punish them by any tine, that this circumstance should be taken into its consideration, in mitigation of the amount of such fine." Lord Ellenhorough then asked the defendants, whether they had any thing to add to the affidavit ? Mr. Leigh Hunt.—No, my Lord : our affidavit contains all that we wish to say here ; and we do not intend to take up the time of the Court. The Solicitor-General then addressed the Court very shortly in support of the prosecution, and said, that this case stood upon the re cord itaelf, without any additional plater; for the Court could i'it take into its consideration what might be the defendants' understand ing of the motives by which they were actuated. The Jury, who were the judges of these motives, had found this a malignant libel ; and the defendants had judged wisely in offering no observations upon their affidavit. Every thing that could be said in defence, extenua tion, or apology, was, at considerable length, and with great ability, addressed to the proper tribunal, the Jury, who had found the de fendants guilty. In the Learned Counsel's judgment (which might be erroneous), if the present case did not speak fur itself, as calling for such a punishment as would secure the public from such libels, no observations which lie could add would have any elfzet .; and he, therefore, left it in their Lordship's hands. After some deliberation, Mr. Justice I.e Blanc (in the absence of Mr. Justice Grose) pronounced the judgment of the Court. lie told the defendants, that they had been tried and convicted of printing and publishing a scandalous and defamatory libel on the Prince Regent. The libel had been stated to the Court ; and it was impossible for any one who heard the terms in which it had been puhlishcd in their news paper, to doubt that this was a mischievous and daring attack upon a person who was to he looked upon as filling the first situation in the Government of the country. They had put in an affidavit, stating that they were actuated by no personal malice or purpose of clan ier, and that they were not conscious of any motives which were no honour able. What these motives could be, that were honourable, or for stir his libel —it oublished, if not for those of slander or .. . - to try an assault, an'l o.at t i t e r would rot alkw the eioqucilce Of the what purpose this libel was published, it not tor those or SlitlitlCl W. ~. Solicitor General to weigh with them as to 11n:damages. personal malice, it was impossible for the Court to conceive ; but .., Lord Et.t.z:vaoßouGti stated, that. this was an aLtion for an assault ; this they would venture to pronounce, that no man filling the elm- that evidence applicable to the ,isiatilt h.il beet: given ; awl that other racier of a gaol subject could have been actuated with any but a bad evidence had beer. attempted to he given ; bilt plaintiff had failed in motive ; for in no Government could the person standing at the head ectablishing it : if p!aw.til had established the letter to be the hand-'' of that Government, be sunned to be held up to the nation as an ob- , i \ 1