The Statesman. — London, England, 1822-11-22 00:00:00

_ !Al ipikkoki eICTO . fle4 sat _ whelk : . •. ~ ' , • . . - _ 'am - TAE sTATESVA..W..... . .. ‘ 1 1•11911P • . . • .... COUR. T)FeCHANCERY, uuneuev, NOV. 21. thing •If the deseriPtieu.of t e Ill ergy of Dorliain was for a libel n* the Duiltamelergy f ag/that ould not bare not I armee dcri ne the past week, in expectation that th e Mr. Weinearec, at then g octal Court, seeded to I • o • explained as referring to some part of the " nuited 'tended all his strength in show it was not a f *timid lie heard, and was present in t e ear ' h p ly p al , lint retired, as no chance a 'seared - t r 4 f tar i his Lordship to tixTuesday next for hearing two injunctions c lurch, then the acquittal appted to the larger included libel on the Established Church. • tie should nnt. have i n „,„i nz. the less ;If it v'as taken independently, then it referred made quotation upon quotation from the works of pious I its being taken. After his return , he remained i Tl ia 'o l u o rt to teetrain from selling or o th erwise disposing a certain salt-works. - 3• ' to no recognise) body, and had no meing at all. • This men to s how how that c hurch bad been charecterized ; ! :ill the rule to show cause wan gra'nhell. ._ The 'Loan, CILINcRILLOR des'red his compliments to be brought him to the second objection - that the offence but he •houldhave bent nil his strengths ta show that the •ear,„ mix vto wliti 01 GRIFFIN. Riven to the Vice-Chancellor. with a request to hear them, charged was altogether Uncertain. First, there was no pracrepla contained no libel on the clergy in and ne .r These defendants. who were convicted at the last .• . This Court was so oVerwheimed with questions o f Wane- thin tholefine theme theantng•ef the word ..clergy" Dorhatu. On that point he had not yet ! f uel beard ; . Cons that it could not dispose of appeal case., of which -nothing whatever to limit it le the ministers oldie Es- of that on ;nonhich he bad been heard the de ent an oras 1 amen and hit stile in efWy, because the wife hail b een , tome were *even years old.-The plane had a tight to coin- tablished Church. . iscroitted - plain of this delay. Mr. Justice BEST.-A re . dissenters ever called was found guilty. Had Le been daily apprised that this I and maiming. were brimil , t up for judgment, and s t.g M. bitumens. said, that if next Tuesday could not be Cl ergy a was the pith of the information, and applied itimerlf to I reneed to bd imprisoned for win months in the gani en. • fixed, any other day would do. , Mr. Brusecnam replied, that they were so milted in that point, the Jury might , have arrived at a different i M a id a i aa p, an d to g i ne seeer ity ( o r their good behavien at e I . he LOW, t . use said he Wald not fix a day. Lora many Acts of Perliament • amon g others, in the 43th of conclusion. His p e st ground. for a new trial was, that for five rare, theloseives in 511 f. smi two sureties i n 20 /. Portsouth's case must he decided as early as possible ; • • • and the case of " Beer and Wa involving a question '. ti ie. A he verdict teas s ninst eviderce treatise , he Court each , rho conduct /tithe 314 d I . ' ' George 111., which in !Is title moon" to be a Alt.t or an 5 agmtrates of Cie _o 'r..uset to grant warrants afai siren el' i that might much affect lunatics, would not be delayed be concerning the Clergy of Scotland." But if the dissent- char t. rite defend a n t t.rlt y.g• i . . . .. . tary.wit ef yond.the shortest period in which the Court could dispose ing preachers were nut legally denominated cherry, Ciorl Id the nit of it. • . , . he contended that they were), the Catholic priests bed that Mr. Williams was nlecttPtrlTtcrtilnTelr."Yiessl"" due judgment of else Court. • • . P 71 gel' r aminasiverfeePos by the SoCciter•Benend ' aiil ea e • f t ; •ed " skit rintin aoti o thlishing." t er i . . Mr. Mayo said, the Bar were fully sensible of the in- unquestionably a right to the title: they were so treated The LORD Cuter Jciriggple eel if . the N'ewsaaper did tc, 7144 PSG V. eM.GIDSAM: d ;l: r si . z ,t es s f e t a ii n n a d e , sa , :i a l g t o b a ro li4v4h il d i, e-c i ffi ur cei mi e, o e Lon nt tlie 1 ;1 7 ; This defendant. convicted at the l as t C um b et i lni convenience which his Lordship complained of. in the Acts of Henry VIII.; and they had only to ab- not purport to be printe_en Mr. Williams ? ge t: -es-- j h n ig re hes to t b di e g c n om iti e es at o o f n ti c me e . . IbOIIRT OF KING'S BENCILNov, 21.- c i h n u fa re l b l . ord A er t s t , b a is nd ve t ir o y r t e i r m ei e ve th er the e proMyre.dS;cbauutt.hererhasitiatinloThheer paper t u l! l e a c p t a t r : p i:o r 13 1 s o r r t p; t m l i •• :TIM 'MING O. JOHN AMBROSE WILLI.AAIS. was a Bishop who had never taken orders'in the Pro- he printed and pu,blished by audio' . the defeoulant. assault was.of an ag g ravated nature; b u s aa the 4 ,, f , tat. Mr. Sa lo Moved for judgment on this ilefendant, testant church, bnt had merely passed from the Raleigh The I,oun Cuter JUSTICZ obeerveul, that, at all au t bud su g• re d s i lt men the i;opeiwininent, the Caul: 4 1' who lobed guilty at the last assizes for the, county church into ours. The to "cfergY , " thereforetwa s alto . events, the objection might be obviated by applying si•oteneed four inontime imprisonment in tle. ef Durham, o'n a criminal information granted by this gether vaguewithoutfnetherexplanationtfer it wasimpos- to the learned Judge, for leave to aniend ihe verdict House of Correction at Carli<le f and to f in d „,.„ i .; , Cl/nit:for a libel. . .. sib[ to import that part of the description of which the hy entering it on another count for publishing only. for his good behaviour for five years , himself in let. as I The LORD CHIZEJUSTICC-Mr. Brougham two 111 defendant haul been acquitted: into the other part of Mr. BROUGHAM said, he did not rely on this point. two sureties in 281. each. sweet of judgment? which lie had been found guilty: on the contrary, the though he thought it right to mention it. Ills sleet et , .i LI VVCIIOI l' ( . 11' STK • , ' T • ' a. . oat.- %Tit - F. Pe:.lel7:s V. BALOUGHAM.- Yet, Lord, and also for aWI opposite finding seem to neg a tive all tonn-xion between groun d was t h e rn i s .di ree ti o n o f the learned Jndge. And es' ' ' " • .. , _ ...- i.snowtrrn:- (M Snndav the Sot inetent, a boat .4..1' . them. Next , what was meant by the 'term " near?" first, Mr. Baron Wood in his charge told the Jtiry. , - I •, a - ... • .. ..1 • upset . _ n w t a i raweir and Snapoodity. by witici melee per. :. .Lowp Cater duence.-Theethe defendant Is, 'pie- Was it one. or two, or ten, or twenty mile*? Each man o The Court ot King's Bea, elm have been of opinion that ' - •. . . • .hithda, in Court? would reply according to his own ideas of , this is a libel. and a lit stiliject for prosecution." NOW t ons me lting k. sou i • s .• , a•- • .Mr. linoiaanen.-He has been here, my Lord ; • but weitemram tepant at ._ oi AR,. flradsay; F:i•rr, aret Siotl•, suburbs" was again ambigeous ;so that bete was a given o Anion that it was a fit suhtect fora Jury to eon- t j n l n i r 40 4 ' .' ° '" a g W . : 4 , ' at " ' . soul perhaps no two persons would agree as to the limits the first meet of this direction was incorrect • the Court i t • did not in the least expect the case to come on to dad. and "I largaret, and Fltiemla, Igioi thileeekest dmmnglam-r- -. 1 • believe he ii goae. I can, at lerist, move in arrest ofjudg- „ mem, and 1 dare say be will Wiens before I find it meets- veld • 11 d der resided. Ttre teem •• but liad mere: • • within eh the 'the e clergy . had not prelim opinion plait was a libel; y . le t HA& t Eros l Mar, • ; 1 I son a (te,, iso , nary to state my gronuds for a new trial, further latitude of proximity almost running into ' dig- eider w tether it was or was net a libel. Bitt if the Jerry 4 . 4 • ffil 4 wit Leask , '. 4 . _ ► t'''' .et 4 . Mr. Scanswrw.-ml•kuole that the defendint la in town, tance.-(A laugh.) Here, then, the word " clergy . ' supposed that the rave was inerely sent to them te ext.- iaet , 1 ram rem Inc there: filisistmalt Peace, his wife ; Sego as tobek, Ilia is/o th er; s aid Plc • and has been here this morning. As far, therefore, as lam was ambiguous; the class of clergy was ambiguous ; cute the opinion of the Court- r ' Peace, his wife'e tic in•brother, These - met VI camerae& I beg to wave any objection to Mr. Broughant's and the Court could find no-meaning . in what the Jur) . Mr. Justice BATLEY-11e aid not tell them that, I sup ,vests ltsveleft•tte 'reistiv 'lf *' P t A n e.. c. '. v proeee.ting. had s ou fnd, they would not look far it in what they had, pose? rit i %HMI. a Li f e ith,..rf.ra 1 The LorraTinar JIIISTICE.-Thell Mr. Brougham may negatived. And now, leaving these points. he would Alt. BROVGHAM.--- No • but they might inferit. dependent - On.. rlttblie •benevelencee-e(eefedestieti RPM. 4noweed... Yoe move first for a new trial? ' - contend that even supposing-the clergy of the Eetablished Mr. Jostler Bavnee-bidlfehot tell them what Ms eery.) '-' • . • •:";- • •• - .:. -... i: , Mr. litnovenau.-No, first in arrest of judgment; and Church in the city of Durham to be intended, these did not • own opunion was ? • . . , II in :forstay (tlie.l9th. inst.) ;be eurjoeif bf elm goo I i • then I shall ehow•my grogards for thinking that a new trial for m &ARK te bnagrootiadv bi - liC aot y whom t e ourt meant to protect when they Mr. BA01:011AM.-Yiiiriatiket is another grourd • 2 (Oa ef Fling andltedbriut -ge, was Pachird tp en slew t de • ree li b trio a - lancers esti' . I'' •'• . ' . Ms. Jodie' en read Mr. Barna Wood . , report or granted the rule. Aube time when the rule Was arened,the fur a new trill. • .01,*I; I • .1 tn imaged ltn • ~ • •V g. t Y '`' ief ti W s , .__. v , r doe* t wee persists, iti br a, Maim .selitat a .. • . tisatrull. TN J a ggy had s t a t e d the needle[ to b e publication was called • Aliheton thettinircheflingland.' LORD t The ...HMV Reievf.i- Theft utmost awry onager . less hichiathd ...di,_ oho , * Cob a 0144 of th4W , :. . •,toglikatlt y litalay wood count of the information." Mr. Scarlet theri demanded protection forthit church, who !mai tried a caie•of libel ;Ince the art Famed how was ' ''''. Pr littea --• had been off•reil, ad.szkut via betn.Loncerned ivr mods. . N.: • -.. Ille. itmestenan mid he should first draw the attention of the Lord Chief Justice three tunes intternYted the arga• b e en in error ; for it 'has been - the uniform prittSeetfiln ~k.• g i the pAglimet Thom' ef lticria i Cioircheell slum • alliiCiemeteehereconi, and thew teat it was so defective meet when proceeding on the ground that the•clerey of the Joefge to state hid miiffibte. !Mktg • th e Joi'v . tb Pg-' " 4- 1 Ira.N . h . ••_A e -,,. .i,;‘' • en s could be pronounced upon it. This would Durham were the applicants, •, m oe. Lad eels csc rimer,. .e. cap s ontlirl; efXr._ by obseetiag, " thie is a cerise-their own judgment. •' ' ' •- • ' . " ' ' • . *•' ' • 4. •.• aelpetres MING particularly - comparing Ws verdict with the libel on the church of England ." and 'Sawn he(Mr. Mr. BROCGMAI.-UndOLlbts4ll%, ; buChe -ought:Mß-to. kileiefliempfee CAreerele.) , . ... ~• ~ e . . _ fedemastalia,-.: ...... , •„. . triawica te l oi..-It gppraisly % I li otder erri. Brougham) contended that it only to the dergy state it es the o pinion of the Oesinembeisasemety said . .. __ ~ ~ . ~_ ._,.. an • .g. ~ li m c _.„. , s. • ' . . • Mr. Justkiehavtay.-The verdict Is catered up on the • • . • of Durham , be was met by the sime answer . Now, he that is a fit subject for inquiry.' , :sitls, na shw as c fro , ' ' 4 °"•..'.••• n$ O ••!7E. Y... V . !, 51 ,• it ', F 6 .1, 1 / 2 1 6 ,in,lie itingeed uistenteat the Intorenetiow., amad .„,„, t , ta , kept within tie nails of is ern Tx yaoi er Paw anew. did not believe that the Court ever would have grante d \le lattice Bern. -la it IMOrt'Ale s L milt ,r .B gstak....-No, my Lord; it is on the lest count, . of •' " - • ~• • . • ... 777:w. .. • rod log, and ebeit no servant ofthit Cout•ty elialtdifictt a Wildlis hi weadee-•chilty of a libel ow the clergy re- the rule hail it been ipphed for In the terms a verdict, grand jury have toned a bill? • '. * ' •• - •• . • • - • . • . • or indirectle aill env throg to the primmer*, tine-tie Mats M. lime/wham inn the suburbs thereof." " fora libel on the clergy residing in and 'dear the city Mr. Ileouunam submitted that it •eine'vielf ffifftirebt • •••4 • •-- • •• = • • . - confined. Lige/tee. th at no ape, :ritteer. or ,other' rt. Plk. Boadtmerr.=-Aloe..it is on the learned Judge's notes. of Durham and the suburbs thereof t" for whenever the it was almost ove rwliehning Bie,..tnibde of the lirY, to - - comm itted li e i di i , t i •. . i , N:. M r. lissidaams beynedurefer to the record. ~ Court had thus - interfered, it Wee either in behalf of tell thein in effect that if they' firma tke publication tor sons VOITIGI yg a rit e,.as pn nts ittenti nor any . person senteneed ,et :the Semierisetes confilfrinefet as a 0 0 Mr. Jastleoßerter aecordinely looked at the recortr - - some Whitton!, or some definite body of wee recognized a r libel, libel, they differed from the higheet..eriminal court in ' •• • I • .. -111metadeesement on die=eorrespondedwithtlielearned by the law. Everrsese cited by Mr . Scarlet' cm that th e kingdom . Ilia Lordship alsomid..., 1, ain „ Ili fed puttishuaeet, will h..e10 'Ate preheat vicunas Se to r . ' • ege's semei basstbe lam 1( was la [heel w a r d s- occasion was consistept With this principle The eh 1 . • • o lawn" •Meri again be was (fluattYfrciuP theirkiluaiii t a fi rs h • PI that ihu i ltati4jesr - •• wor m du4hbeinstegalernesidisay that he the said defendant K . . • 1 yOW to give tou way y take of tto Rehm ird than the Oepyty • albswente a %OM • •lIP metiolidrerlbiebet count as charges . ti libel on King v. the Jrtsticessfi __ _ Staffordshire was lettirely of this incorrect ;he wail sot remtirede hsvonly authorised to I and water, isle in Ctrs of Peltiseet the l ttrgl'ea Ad • As ebergyeeiddlwrin and near Durham mid the suburbs nature; for where could be fountl . ,a more t . "I"' body give his i ion at in other etwies• and Lord Ellenbe- sop n , s a p o thecary, whit admirals the prism, Steil 4ti oiler '. .:. m . 11011wedesnalkathelthe Test of the lest ,:cioutt. Me otner of men than those in the commission or the peace far a rough once, in a similar case, hadingtnadeertently need user , :• ettleabiformallon, be is not ty"--te • exactly particular county? In the case where' application was the word •• reTtiroti," correeted himself, and enbstie ° • . On • Werinesilay mOrning • ,tite 64;1 • ** gie'inuastX .. , • entottair. '-• ' made against certain justices. of Middlesex fitting in toted " not required, but it le expected or me. . , • . , •., *' le TrOWOOS W draw the Litchfield-street, the motion wastefased midi affidavits Mr . Justice Bleu:v.-004o; mills. think' yea ean • - - uf- an ale-honse,. ot Holli,romed; wir . sewed by te'.. • c (reef a umo n emnareetly . t . dietiees., e . e .1):th of the ...' us 111111111Alerattlfd • "lifortnation, were produced showing what particular 11Ingl ttttt e eat, prevail on the 'Court to reat:yort n.nele trial, becaiie - ..• 433 eat *or& CO oessitob to "weds is 'there - and then the rule was granted. In "the Nine C. a J udgq has us-d the word g " remain 'Mitered of - ApTie, andle wus • einan ifjsw, yettej thrte, y l idf a rfen 1 deleadent w eon all the otheim. • This woof Jermne," which was a libel on the Dir e etorsot th e East tboriled „IA; does .44 tat b-' ti" 415 61 ' 1 ..femilPi , tin i fiter • tic li•M: ll 4*,,slt. - qtlite • I,' • lid Wits lisbiasilt Binh stand . noesay. . aspres. •.. P " I .1• dead; ac i d in .bisioclfity we e ferandreet arse ttcs • India Company, tl nt d 'bee& • le information was gra e , use satisfied beeimeefid.so ? ;u p ,. ~. , • .-. . . ... : As united. eland anAketand and of •u i c i f locke 44 ' ulinsgiat lintiie trial tut it ‘ , ;r -..- the Directors were a distinctddly, chartered by'Ambf, m el • 'II report issilent on th;t .- . . 4 " 1 4 .. , ~► . _ .:„4 .. • :., . . sand ceasensing the clergy Millet church, and the clergy reside V. ROUGH•M -N0 . leater 4 byrtmset , oponArso. qdg s 'phiP., 4 ,a ye t ! . latiallillalfrartbetittyeregehato and these mebs thereof ;• lease bar • • . Parliament, and not like the courisel . at a port . . _ ~ su b jec t : . h e sa y s n e tt l ing either wag,. (. ugh.) T h e ' o Aceed ent O x s4led.r,•- f -t ro t it le dgylatpudinnetiost th e. not remettellapakeaseede -" amid comerniny," before the or a particular circuit. The lash ' the King v. Dense Leatned Judge alito_broadly. stated- 7 ", . cat teb.HCIP . . l i i m pant._ an „ lisTa'2lpl) tit* in ::-PMiil fa woydistit Al airgefaiiiiing .11 and near the city •of Due- and Nutt," reporter! in I Leird Raymond, 400, wan alio fi at% 14,416 g t 0 I ifiTieo . l; , eite htf e lkaint ' tots c hit:sty , p .. 4 ,7 ‘ trei T' , lr • •., ~s . • ..,,r... -- rli liate" , *. a."•• • • •• -•.. • - more %de reported as to' this particular yelwt•i 3' into hatred or cdetempt is alibi l."" :71iI'd s blfai ta p; - • -&Z atui ltuir.'''i, *.•'• ' r •••-• eteterf • ).'....0.i- •,... li 1 -..• me. Aeaararer•agearardt. tbeit Vier verde ",tend gem , Balkelti, 224. 1 . • ....t ,-,; I 1; . . . iJaVie . ” Wiyi • ' tilde ;itmibt be s at lj te itigheettiree ' ti' .- . • 7 . 77 - ..'‘' • "in ''' e, .e s .4 .• .•• . • • s ty lediadiMMlL •' • I Mr. Justice Bente -TM rd'ltaiitehl 1:44002; . : ti: s. Joeffeellaretrareendu diewassagie teem the VeIIOVC /10aable au thoostri•-se retteellentioreref MAO peewee Ackilkellensghemmas'earrecut.' . e""•. e - ' . liatUMMltt ; a.p-t .. If -..) _ - • e -,N. , . • ... 1 * Itimef. of thole itelmrts• - • '-' 2 ' 1 ''' -" -• Ate t hatedrbe done away; the'' iyebyliety 'tirithyrefdie 11r t 1:n . '. P . e. smear 4 .'" s' .• it!. Hieleip.en fide- , NA' tildsautree.ltiamsessia Income; I was equally coa- Aff:.8110,011AM Reid he tedeametre of thi leak! be 4 . hd de t , - "„fldent with you. ..s“ .- • a. let of ' an . *ftemyt wituldlitendlan the easeribe-th otooger . ,.. irl t re iiii ' 'Of .'" vendee, ifes hike:: .. quoted it had it differed front the report 1 1 . • Ma. Baouolfru.-Y es ; b ut t h e „ was • t bi s dif y„„„ raid not have . . . . i w nth it was pursued. There were ntanylefeelleit ineo take!) down.;; .the • u idep . .serat the i eitiii US arismitit in Lord Raymond ; but it Was consistent with :41,..tind Mb hadOmerted all their powers teualfoldle no ise dtbur , - . ...or* were ettefidene tad wrong; I was cenfident and.,._,. war. itanding'4o 'feet distant from:WC . ''ilheiii eie. onlycarried the statement a . little he bord• n s.u..l . • 'light: (A laugh.). The di ff erence was merely between u , . that t , e s ~ en further . ~ „. in , • estaamormante ; sad who bad puma aitre:l of boommbewe a wei "py gat..,Rifit, surd gitbild 4 se a n ei a mt r i aa use well foundeor oblerevation, and one that hid no foam " di aymone it appeare d . the noel nos "'" ' Sail fortifferyarpose without reproache . i..fhat. which It 'i t ;,' (n a t i o) u .btatlining iya•o 4 o'it , et fi e dec eas e'. es of Londott.' which se •as removed by certiOffirf, 'be. dtltion at all' '1 'tinly• mention this to prevent any fur-._,_,, one tits was earful. 'night .beCMIIMPIOPRIMM at aestlwr.f. killed b i ds 0 1 , tbdiput.._Teidici: !t , ::, 11.2344 , f i di t 5 , . 0 . 1 \ • . 110(111terrOptiOn;MtA:shiCh I have bad . tie already.- cause II Recorder stated that he • ie it; -( a thought •Int°66'''' at. and waiii‘ sot then to be brought item biered•ar &dos- p i a . d f u._.- • - • '.. 7 ' . 7 : 7' . ".71177 T , •• • .. a en o e. r . -anti io Selkirk! , it was tempt in order to its removal? - The Small Pox ha s ps- - ..1:' • Tbe learned .couneet Use en .procee t . (a loud lan I.) -- . d•d to take two objec- fecteti by • . gi laid down that " where a writin g invei g hs agalitt min-.li mes I. . • Quid est meineet eitifilatuodlolimiSt ''. f ons . tothe recorfii-firit, that the could dinged an of- kind . ingeneral, or against a particular rimer ix. latta-, , , keg itlitieht.frhtatthat which the 'or bad found ; and• - • libel • founded; hat *flee h acc , te e ine• mooed SO WES 9 .11. ' - - 4 i a' - xy E a-Permit itle.. Waugh the.timite..ef same im R. IMO s for instance men- of the gown-is no ; but it must v red it meanie pernicious • and Lord te lenboronieb in- - •• secand.tbatthe oirence.of which for had !mind the 1 ! . u • dto articulate and?'ndividnals to Make it &libel."' - r • : ' ••' rusticated. effsfeadnat iitY, 'appeasing it to be the sante with that 1 t e l scen r p or a t e d 'het it might be p as a pes e o b , no--, tisefulneas mule; to society from ;deed sin the.. rare :et . . .1 Reymon I pp d•t a eared that more II ecific aver- P less its baneful effects were prevented: et y here Pas en .; certain toaladies., by a partial:sr _desert 'lon of • mclieat 41ItelerLle"SIS illigiague and uncertain t° be made tents to point out the individuals designed was neces- the foundation of bay : judgment. And firat be would a establishment, chattered ,by Act of I, l arliamelit ? ,e , gbt 'pisctiffortera, whit are - Prequently sffitustlsed Irifth the ,pi- ty and probably these were supplied. .conteedthat die infoirliation charged one offence, andone period among the noblest of our'chalitia. _ere ,het • •• disinterested Impourtors." . There is 1 Hetet distant. .hit Justice Bavtxtr.-Yes : because you cannot say a were other establishments which it might be tletedity of don to be observed. whteh *a pesters es Went to ate, arid'l t • the jury bad fogad, another. The count set forth the - writing hf Eo is false and scandal "' " leas ye°. know - t° all good men to expose. For Instance,thiloffiteef third thiNk weeld . do to to others, Miemed of prejodleir .tae, 1 ' . libelbe' o .of mid contenting the united Chum o g-.. whom it awes. Secretary of State.-(.k laugh') . Was it *crime th thew were the sdvertising practitioner,* COOSeirefieee a bud add Ireland, andotand concerning the Clergy of tltht tibarelt,' Mid the Clergy residing in the city of Due. • Mr BROUGHAM replied that Otis was preelsely his ar- that this establishment was uselese--to etteree t •.1 ta lse,ri. sullied 'novice, ilways bearisg truth fer his motto. ant I - lasi lad the stiburbsthereof.;" " King b " • ' ' and the jury had found gement. Be then came to The v. Os orne, dimile-to shfaw that it was despicable and a b uo idtbi e who niatuiseeme of an atherdeement as a vehiste to. tool: forth theobjects of Indiscretioa. that vine in misery. e-, t that thee wits -rio Mier' on the united Church or the which had been cited by Mr. Swanston, a reporter. to in threxisting state of the country.? ~ t •.t.A I ~ . blush at the thOnglit of, their .ease being ,lotown to th.dr fs Clergy thereof, but elf the Clergy of Durham. Now he whose industry and research the profession were greatly - The Loa, Undue JUSTICS.--.1 aai nottympberitillitiny mil practitioner; end those noheopy objects are brougt would contend 'ha), even if the words 'of and concert - indebted, and who had searched the MSS. in Liocoln's. •that this may be done by publication. Thesis* place forth , sad restored to health. while "they might have If r i.,.. bad been ripeited„ind even if the Clergy of Due- inn Library, for his materials, in the notes to th e ease where such arguments may be used with. freedom. At siterlked, or left to wander . their day's in wrestdiednets - bamerere • body distin ct from the body of the united for the Bedford charity, wide!' was argued in Chancery the same titne, Ido not say that an •argocesentative dis• ;An instance of which I beg lostierteiltithex la a letter a' Church-thus patt4. die case far crow!' than it was in ISIS, and where the legal relation of the Jews came mission of tbei establishment designed to show its insult- bl . A Ileedwbatief'Silio. Leaden • dre .. sved to De. Se g. , , , • - . foe thteprosecasteie-seabat the description was one entire chiefly in question . This was a Mel charging that err- ay w o uld be a libel. eriet,-Whiso i awes apes yoar dams.M VI 'q - . deseripdoo, moil eeniallacte be severed. Net only was a n h o w amoity, ant libereitty, tome. laity distressed. ietwil.es. tails Jews who had lately strived from , Portugai and bi r , st eo trgesea.-In that I e ntirely agree; the sation. when saw se for six taco o 0 tistrodo separative/art foes libel un the Clergy a Due • lived near Broad-street, had Murdered aumman and her distinction lies in the manner. and this distinosioa .tot i 1 4 . a 1 t . es "a i i tortaires easeot describe, ant which Itaillsafile4 al . jam (the introduction of which would balm been the child, in consequence of width numbers of por n wets Learned Judge never submitted to else Jury. .. of , the usedicel .assistabee I had applied to for relief, nod whet • 06ili as thi n g i n few j ett ed) b u t th ere was 'not even i n assanlied..and terrible riots were excited. It was one Mr..Jnetice Besr.-Yes ; become he says any, .4.as hopeless from the.inefilcacy of *impel ne tette ip vain ' tots count any eadivided averment of a libel ou them. of those charges cie bodies of men of systematic murder cation tending to bring AD establiehment ingot .r.: lo assuage ieflimmatiou still inertmaiing. which Wis eoceett Suppose a libel Isere chaiged 'of and concerning A and which were freptently made in dark times to inflame tempt:" that cannot be by fair diecussioo. ..ueh e if; .ed by gangrene mortification, and at last death marina B t . and suppose A and - B were distinct persona, e ntirely the passions of their higetted neighbour* , sad which •.Al r. BROUGHAM.--10 yea, my Lord. To bales at to the fem. At ibis Peeled of my disorder, I aetteipsted. ' Alneennected with each other; eat! the Turd found that called imperiously for the interference of courts- at jut- w hich is p e rnicious .inte .tentompt is the objece . all 'so grist distance disseintioa as. inevitable. with alt it f .' • the libel was concerning A only, ther would find an of- tier. In that case, the Judge seemed to co usidiest the discussion, and roe ridicule is often a fair weapon.. I so; attendant baron death preesames the beam Mee I•ei nce diff eren t f ro m th a t oe w hi c h t h;.y were c h arge d to information as improper for a lib e l ; but regardillidit as sure we should:not Pie sow sitt i ng under a reformed embittered by the . deg rofieedoei. " Blame thy (oohs • inquire: There Was a ease. not, nearly so drone as this;isdemeanonr which it was absolute! eburch--that " mated ckurch" °rabid' the information self"-I say. w bet oa•ifemsbea•olista. courtesy. se good fora great in , • _ Y -, , . . - • • • tib e ralityi slum I o head i er, fekstedlecoum_ l ' necessary to repress. He bad now finished his argm s peaks would never bare existed-)mt for the use of tilts , that of Lewis & Walter, which had been argued - , but the , 4 - coed had not decided,where a similar objection was taken tent in arrest of judgment , andhopedthat he weapon against Popery , Th ese ;patina t h e erne t , • _,_, L, ~,,,a rAlly ~., t. r lt ta \ and where the leaning of some, if not all the Judges, shown enough to induce the court to grant a rale to C ou ns e l) were his grounds for asking a , new trial. in .r„, • •= i 7 x . o 7.l7;"e or l s t it y s au it i,,), s e, fain 1 ' • seemid strongly io favour of the objection. There de- show cause. , case the judgment his s -mold not be arrested ; but 4e alai' , id - kis . tileat ist Uto d tw ,A f f i vi . cfa ani ,,,,... aad or 11 , . . fondant watt - diarged with 'libel . "ot and coneerning the Time LORD CHIEF JUSTICS intionstett that It would be submitted, on the two points which he kid. brought to Bah ia ea t a l a tt, ts 4,,,A,...,,6(,..„1,„46., „„„,.., 4 ' • ' Plairitiff, and of and concerning him as an attorney ;' at more convenient to hear the whole ease now . • the consideration of the Court, th at Lisa record was 140 b e i ng ti , gra sbfgl s o • 'yet iv l ain f A rbaiiieg *row to else ttial - fliere was no proof Isis professional character, Mr. BROUGHAM raid he would proceed *Pry shortly inconsistent with the finding. and so imperfect is ‘ itself, world, nr !Meeting Net imilaqtabile . why of yew beam • ' ~' it:the Lord Chief Justice accordingly non-suited the to state his grounds for a . new trial ; and he thought, e judgment could be fonudid opon it. , levies to wadies I. Wm. , lei 1P( . 111 !..• :-, , . rook govoiedsolt es all. At iti . 7 infiff. because, though thiiiiiblication would be a libel that even if the Court should not see in the variance be - hate Th LORD Cum Juirrice.- Yob do not mean to say • " AA, Ait:weassisabe sli ! '• • • •14 ham la st wjelek this obit , hiui in his personal c h a ra c ter , he hel th d es c ri p tion tureen the information anti the verdict, sufficient reasem that the Learned Judge did not leave the questton at thou' Plan mighaile diniamtehl, •, ' ! tope so desirnble. night be , tal. tied the bp.. • • " and . 14 his averment, antfthat it was one dcp of for arresting the judgment, they would suffer the argil. last to the Jury ?. ' • . mot only others bet to yourself felt as imet ri sively si e • 1 0 ne wrong. The case ci•ed in argument for the plainti ff meet strodgly to incline them to a new trial. If they Mr. gstotremese.--Cereainly not. my Lord. .ssisli it ; sad therefore le yore de 1 peeper la any stay if " Dickens e. Cogswell," nal clearly inapplicable; for saw that they had granted the information* for one of- The loan Cuter Jnerica consulted with the other mention my ease, so lain to Met me alt the pale Teterli, 4,lllsere themverment "of and concerning the plaintiff as fence, and the defendant had been found guilty or ano- Judged, for a few uiinutes, and then said, " You May' SHIM acmepro on such a'sdhjeet, I hall ottly fret I so doe •_ "Mu appraiser aod a carpenter" was clemile partible c ase thee, if he had actnally been acmrittedafiliat whidt was take a rule to show cause why the judgment shim% not a •part of I owe yeti (Ind a loran part Mired Isola° , , •, ao the Court seemed to regard it. But the present urged before them, and convicted en a ground hardly,f be arrested ; but we all think that you have laid' d o 'ledge tit s ) : for m esa t il odes . sa d am p ef iescr,e se • was far stronger than " : Lewis o. Welter ;" because here. at all, in the contemplation of either side-they •woniti• ground before us for a new trial. The pointain' Omen than I have emer /M Of tees. nseiiretan of .i." . • instead of referring to two distinct characters of the same feel disposed to submit the case to anothgripry," •The of judement are those - on which you yourself 'Melly idle, ias summit that nothing coolest:ice from toy memo! ' • person, or two distinct individuals like " A and B.' the defendant was placed in a most unfortunate aaflon by rested." serebeer iny seines more. tams the•eleatelottranee of a nal • limey of Durhatie(if they meant any !lemon at all) were the course ufproceedings; for had the rule been moi-ed for Mr. BILOUGHAM.. -.1 relied on them chiefly; without "ilk .% can nossio'be tkaf-to tn. . 4 ,1 1 l) will* n'l life% - 1 AM, Slfp )0416 eincerety, included in the previous description, " the clergy of the on the ground upon w , iielt lie was found guilty-bad it doubt. .. ..To Doetar y. M. - ~ united Church. It was as- if the charge hadbeen "of been specally applied for solely on behalf of the Our- Mr. SCARLITO.-My Learned Friend would rather , . a. t h d _ and concerning* certain community," and "of and con- halo clergy, the Court would never have waved the have the verdict lie has at present,. than any disk i new. " .• ----!'!-..,--- s -!-----"-- --:---------- cerning a eertale person eta member of that eemitinnity;" salntary practice of c ompelling•each prosecutor to show. trial would give him. MARRIED. • . tnewhich case the libel; it any thing, would be a libel on by Ili oath. that lie mile into court with clean hands. The !ARP Cedar Jurricic-Will you contest - to a Oa Monday,the 18th last., at Madron church. Cornea • tier community, as the member gee memberscrold nut be Then the defendant would have bad the opportunity of new trial then, Mr. Scarlet' ?-(A laugh.) -'' George Gilbert Currey, M.D. sod F.R.9.. of llalf-wo !did of the late John Deals, W. 44. , • ' 'revered from it. But here the defendaut was actually showing the offences of which each individual had been Mr. SOARLITT sai•L•that as the defendant was in town, street , to Nary, on l y 6 , . are. • -a. quitted of )'bell the clergy in general f• sad yet guilty. sad of proving by a ffi davit the trut hs of every it would be desirable to know whether the cate . eoeld ve " ar4 laa r________- . 1------- ----- , i .. .. . hound f railty of libelliog a hotly who only bad existence tittle of his charge'. At. the trial, the counsel for Mr. come on this term. DI V°. Y . 4: . a• a part of this clergythis withobt any distinct al. Williams were entirely misled by the notice of the re. The boan enter (tome p that it aras quite On the 41st . instant. W. steal Rowley, Esq., of Urest Qm 1 . 1 1 :on , eras) , divisible averment. Here be might ad- cord, and by the speech of the prosecutor's counsel. The impossible that it cesuld on during the present litre'et• I•lnetit r ea 4an- fi elds vent to the oneertaiuty of the description, which he case (as the learned Judge might testify) proceeded en- term. - Moeda make a substantive objection , as ',meld- tirelv on the question whether the publication was a Mr. Briottooata took his rule to show cause why the ~,,.• n eMne that which lie was now arsine ; for even this part libel the Church of England : and to this point all judgment should not he arrested. - London : WM& Printed, and Published , et the ode -____- 100 oTwrisnAti" and " Tau dsertmerion" Vow le an • 207 Strand R • WAROSLL. LB• ~ • .._. : of the elierctie-at beast° be se taketts;-was DO, vaguely the reasoning .ot him his Brongham) was directed. After the argument of the case bad began, Mr. coil- r . ' • " b l • We *boss an eomaseeticatioas, Mors, A. us anus described, as, alien stetted from the rest, to mean nte Had he supposed that his client Initialed on t's 'answer liams came luto Court. lie has Imen• daily is mb e a dd resse d ; ii- ! r . ' - . ',PM. . . • . •. . .. • . . -. ` .. 1 A ...: • • , 4.. - . 4 : , -4. - .... ..._.. • ..„...... . ~.• .......• roine- . • )1,11g!! Kr , jp Toth. rime& die fooliat% des beano- bpal• Itely ss I ,y %city I? rellectioe doinz ,a 0, 4" Mare imakoo. • • ow •- SA. of , ( *am/ Ct.& wawate