The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser. — London, England, 1820-12-06 00:00:00

. • • • • M REMO OP murrsu SEAMEN TO ADDRESS THE QUEEN. On Saturday evening a numerous meeting of the British Sea Men abiding in the port of London and the parts adjacent, was held at the Globe Tavern, Elackwall, for the purpose of considering the pro priety of presenting a Congratulatory Address to her Most Gracious Nlajeity Queen Caroline, on the defeat of the Milan Corsairs. At seven o'clock the Chair was taken by Mr. THOMAS NRWTON STANGER, of the East I►►dia service, and late of the Royal Navy. . The CHAIRMAN, in a very animated speech, ad dressed the meeting, and concluded with moving a aeries of Resolutions, and ■n Address founded ibereon, congratolating her Majesty on her triumph over her enemies. Captain ROBERT DAVIDSON. a ship-owner, then *win! forward to second the Address, and to read the Resolutions on which it was founded. He was received with reiterated buzzas. He ob 'served that it was impossible for him to express Ins feelings on the glorious occasion which called the otteudance of such a numerous meeting. He concluded an animated speech amidst loud ap plause. Tl►e Resolutions and Address were agreed to. Thanks were then voted to Lady Ana Hamilton, Alderman Wood, and to Mr. Stanger, fat his con duct in the Chair. The (Alamos" returned thahlts, and proposed that the meeting do adjourn till this (Wednesday) evening, for the purpose of forming a Committee for conducting the procession to Bratidenbergh House. The meeting, which amounted to •pwards of 500 person•, chiefly consisted of Captains and Ship-owners. CITY BUSINESS. Yesterday the Lent Mayor lucid Court of Aldermen at Guildhall fur the tesseral dispatch of public business, at which sundry 'seasons were awurn into the office of broker, aed where allowed, The Court was °crispier, at considerable length in the con sideration of presenting an Adds , as to his Nlajesty, urd agreed to 3 Resolution thtreret, which was ordered to be advertised. The draft of an Aflolress was then considered, mid after mach disci:moon finally agreed to, ordered to be fairly irsimeribril, signed tlw Town Cleik, and presented to his Majesty by the whole Court —god the Sheriffs, atteuded by the Reatembraneer, Orgised so wait noon his 111sjesty forth with, tu know his Royal pleasure when be Court should •ttend him with the same. BOXING. The plains of Mloleery Hurst, so distinguished for manly COMIMIA, WAI , a disgrace to the theatre of warfare yesterday, in a combat biter, ti Joshua Hudson, ■n intrepid n stone botur, a n d a gen.lematt's servant. named Williams, who fancied !simnel!' an a ntaarring man, but without the capabili ties of an operato►. Detail is quite unnec rrrrr y. A worse man never entered a ring; and although he made a line flourish its the first round, he hail nu other chance but that of briogitoored at his ail, y. pl . Hudson won the fight, of five rounds, in lens than nine minutes; and such an apology fur a fi g ht ing mail as Mi s ter Williams was never before seen. The Jay ens fine, hut the amateurs did not exceed two hundred, and the disappointment will probably be a damper to the very few respectable people, who vapid to knew bet. ter than to be plundered of theM _fitr proms i n had.. lialiClll7US. An immense multitude was assembled last morn ing in front of the Old Bailey, attracted by the execution of the Fix wretched beings doomed to puffer yesterday. The feelings of the spopulsce were strongly excited by the number of the victims, and their commiseration war greatly increased by the circumstance of a female and en officer, Captain !lamest, being two of the sufferers. TGr sct►tfold wa• erected opposite the Debtors' door at an early hour, and eery avenue leading thereto was literally cramn►ed to excess. Great numbers of females viewed the awful scene from the various windows of the heighbonrlmind, anti others were interspersed among the crowd. ‘V e likewise noticed a number of military gentlemen in the concourse. . . Sheriffs Waithman and Williams, and the City Marshals, with other proper officers to conduct the proceeding", arrived about half-part seven o'clock, and made every necessary arrengenment preparatory to leading the culprits to their unhappy destination. Madden, whose offence was that of uttering a forged note at the Lord Hood, Liinehouse, was the lint brought oat; he walked with a firm quick step, and appeared resolute, but fervent iu his devotion. Weltb, for sacrilege, followed ; this moo was convicted of entering the church, when it was in mourning for Lord Lisburne, and was apprehended just as he was taking the stolen pre. petty front the waggon/ he also entered fi rmly. Two others, for highway robbery, were next brought up: they committed the robbery under ordinary Circumstances. in Chapel-street, Mary.le-hone ; these prisoners wet e firm, and resigned to their fate. On the caps being put oh they requested their hand kerchiefs to be tied over them. Capt. Harnett was nest brought on the ecirffulil. He was supported by two men. his condition was so very weak. He mentioned something of a .private nature to Sheriff althman prior to their entering on the scaffold. The ropes being adjusted round their necks, Sarah Price, the female culprit, was led on to the plat. form. She ens dressed iu a suit of black, owl wore a white cap and frill, and riblissuds. The spectacle was very awful. She was exceedingly breent, end all the wry to the platform was ex claiming, la Lord have mercy on me I" &c. Her offence was passing forged now*. She was an old offender ; and her son, we understand, has been convicted for a similar Oftener. On the rope being plated rnuhd her neck; the rarities in; clergyman tercendett the plittforrer,' Mr. De verenx attending Captain Harnett, avid )dined in fervent prayer, until the time assiened fin the fatal signal, when the unhappy men wrrilatinched into eternity. After leingit:g the usual time the bo. rho. were cut down and delivered to their friends. The pickpockets were very numerous in attend. ounce at the awful ceremony. Captain Hargett was about 30 years of age. He bad been an raft, in the army: The whole lumber ordered for execution last morning was eight, but two have been respited during his Majesty's pleasure, via. John Newarhaes. con victed of forgery, for whom • respite was received on Saturday evening, and Henry 'Jarvis, oleo for forgery, for whom a respite strived at a late hour on Monday night. - f.AW INrzu.thikcE. a • COURT .OF CHANCERY, Locours TUMODAIN DICCIOIIIIEII S. This was the first seal day after Term. The LORD eIIANCELLOR came into Court at a quarter past ten o'clock. PRACTICE. WETHERBT P. nicit.us, STUBBS. AND OTHERS DICKSON AND OTHERS E. ANSI STUBBS AND oTtians. Mr. WETHERELL stated this was a motion on the bt hell of Mrs. Anne Stubbs, the Defendant in the last cause, requiring of the Court to stay the proceedings, in the cause; and that the Solicitors, Messrs. Vandercom HIM Comyu, might be dis missed from having the nianageuient of the cause. Ifc. the Learned Counsel, having read the affidavits in support of the motion, thought it was a duty he owed the Court and those most respectable Solici tors, to state that he abandoned the hitter part of his motion, as he did not see that the least blame was attached to them. The first part of the motion he had no doubt hut his Lordship would grant; it was grounded ou the fact that ten answer, purporting to be the answer of 4 51 rs. Anne Stubbs, filed in the last cause, hail never been seen or signed by her, although it pur ported to bear her signature, unit was signed by M r . D av id the managing civic of the solicitors, Messrs. Vandercont and Comp', as the attesting witness. The affidavit of Mrs. Anne Stubbs set forth, that she gave instructions to Messes. Vandercosn and Corny. is file a bill against the Plaintiff., the executors of her father, instead of which they had filed a bill against her, and put in the answer in Question as her answer, which she swears she never signed or sow until she saw it iu the Six Clerks Office. and that the signs tore was not hers, although it was a close imitation of her writing. David Creagh had filed an Bifida. vii, in which he admitted that he did not see Mrs. `Stubbs sigh the answer, or that he ever heard her acknowledge that It !ma ber signature, although he had signed it as the attesting witness, and that he had done so knowing the answer was sent to her for her signature, and its being returned with a sign. ture, winch lie believed to be hers. Mr. Creme!' also, in hie affidavit, set ford► that he could give such an explanation of the transaction as would exculpate his employers, for which reason he (the Learned Counsel) did not press the part of the motion against them. This Lady had. however, sworn most positively that the signature to the answer was not her writing, and she was joined in that affidavit by her bully...tad, Mr. Richard Stubbs, who swore he believed it was not her writing. Front the face of the answer it appeared to be filed op the 9•h of July, 1819; and Creigh swear* it war retinue(' to hum, with the signature of Mrs. Stubbs, on the 19th of Match previous; and it also a l ipearet: that the order of the Court fur the answer being received without oath was not made until the Ilth of March, two days dial the sop. posed aignatiare of Mrs. Stubbs; and even if it had been her signature, such a proceeding would be contrary to the known practice of the Court. Un. der throw circornatanera he liad no doubt but his Lordship would grant that pat of the motion which asked for the proceed:llga to be stayed. Mr. WAKEFIELD followed on the same side s and stated that Cre.igh had admitted that he had also pigned the answers of Mr. Downes and wife. as the attesting witness, without seeing them sign the answers. Mr. HORN t, Cnunetl foe Messrs. Vandercom and Comyn, and also for their clerk, Mr. Cresgh, stated the he was at a loss to know on what i grounds his Learned Friends sought to stay the proceedings: if it ....9 account of iv regolarity, they ought to have stated what the proceedings had been, and they not having done so, it became incumbent on him to pot the Court in possession of tiwir history. The to Mr. Neathby, died in 18 12, appointing Dixon, South, and Stubbs his executors, avid the t xectitors appointed Messrs. Vatidermn and Conijn their solicitors. A lady of the mane of Squires filed a bill .against the executors for the recovery of certain Parliamentary stock and. foods which had stood in her lame and that of the testator's father, which the testator had drawn oat and applied to his own use. Mr. Wetherby.who was a legatee under the will of the testator, also filed a bill ',Kanto the ear. cntors and Mrs. Anne Stubbs, in the year Iftl4. Mrs. Squire. in the first suit obtained a decree, giving her 4,000/. in the 4 per cents. out of the property of the testate!. Ice the suit instituted by Wetherhy..the Court ordered an account to be token before the blaster, sad en his report there did not appear to he assets sufficient of the testator to pay his debts, and there was no fund to pay the legatees. and Of course nothing was corning to Mrs. Stubbs, as the residuary legatee of the testator. abe being his natural child. The testator had devistd iu his will that his executors should call in the sum of 9,5001. due to him by Richard Stubbs, the husband of Anue Stubbe, sod one of the trustee', which the testator devised to such children of Anne Stubbs which might be living at her death ; a ques tion trose whether the interest of this sum should be advanced fur the maintenance of the children, during the life of Anne Stubbs, which Blade it twcriaary to institute a third snit to take the opi nion 01 . the Court. Messrs. Vandercom sod Cowin laid the !stew before Counsel. and they ad vised that the executors should be made Plaintiffs. and Mrs. Stubbs WWI her childreto Defendants; and on that occasion the answer in dispute was pat in, and on the hearing of that cause the Conrt ordered that Mr. Stubbs,. the husband of Anne Stubbs, one of the executors of the testator, and a pother its the house of Stuart, Ahsoloti. and Co. wholesale grocers, to pay Hilo Court the sons of 9,5001. hich he was itidebftd to the estate of the testator. Mr.'Stubbs and his partners paid in 7.0001. and wished the executors to allow the other 2.5001. to remain on mortgage on a freehold of theirs, but which they refused. On the :tdviee er Messrs. Vandercom and Compri. and imperatively called on Mr. Stubbs to pay the balance in, on which. for the first time. the objection was made by Mrs.' l Stubbs to her 31111 W, on the ground of the want of her signature. The affidavit of Cretigh, and of three other peisons. clerks to Messrs. Vandercom and Cosnyit, set forth, that the draft of Mrs. Silthblo ' d answer was delivered by Creagli to Mr. Stubbs, for the purpose of his carrying it to Clieshunt to his country seat, for Mrs. Stubbs to peruse ; that he returned it with s o me w i ni ng at. tesations; en which it was engrossed, and Mr. Stubbs carried if to Cheshunt for her signature; that it was returned by her ton, signed by Mrs. Stubbs, accompanied by a letter from Mr. Stubbs, pointing out a clerical error, Mrs. Squires's Chris. flan name having been written Samuel instead of Sarah; after which the word Samuel was erased out of the answer, and Sarah put in its place by one of the deponents, and on the fare of the answer the alteration was perceptible. The reason the answer was put in without oath was to oblige sirs. Stubb-, for the purpose of preventing her being forced to come up to London for the purpose of sweating it; and the deponent Crea!rit most positively swears that he believed then, and iteheves now, the signature to the answer is that of Anne Stull;., hating oriel; seen her write, winch caused him to six!) hispanic to the answer as the attesting witness, mod that lie had done so without the privity or knowledge of Messrs. Vandeicom and Comya. The Lotto CHANcot.Loo—" I have read the will and the 'opposed answer of this Lady. and cannot help saying that she could not have been advised to hive put to a better answer. Iles Richard Stubbs made any affidavit, for lie must know how this answer was signed. es he took it awry from the tare of Mesiwo. Votidereout and Comp', without a signature, and scut it back signed ?" • Mr. HORNE said there were affidavits of several persons who had been in the habit of seeinv...Anne Stubbs write. and they all swore that they believed the signature to the answer to be her writing. The LORD CIiANCELLOR—" Before the time of Lord Alranky, answers used to be put in without signatur-s, and from that time the attesting took place—for Malawi., if this Lath was prosecuted for prriury, it could not be proved except by the at testing witness, for the answer hissing being attested by a witness, no other permit could be examined us to that fact. lam convinced this will he sufficient citation to Mr. Creagh not to attest another answer under the same circumstances. If the signature of this Lady is a forgery, it is a forgery of sonic person at (Neshunt, as it was taken out of the Of f ice of the Solicitors by Richard Stnbbs. and sent back by him with the signature. Why has he not made an affidavit as to that bwt ?" Mr. Holism, in continuation, said. that Mrs. Stubbs had made mother affidavit in answer to that of Mr. Creagh. in which she admits the signed something. hut she believed it was the draft of the answer. and not the answer itself. The drat was in Court, and it bore no s;gnsture, but the answer did, and this was an admission in the fare of her former affidavit, where she had sworn that she had signed nothing. fie would ask. then, what credit was to be given to this lady ? He was convinced he had •hewn sufficient to his Lordship to induce him to dismiss the motion with costs. Mr. GARRETT followed on the same side. Mr. HART, Counsel for the executors, said ite knew but ono way of deciding the question as to whether Mrs. Stubbs had or not signed the answer, and that was by sending it to a Jury, iu a way that sass Hot necessary for born to melting. but ho had is. doubt if her Counsel pressed 136 Lordship for such a direction. that he weidel.geont The LORD CRANCILLOR—" The only wag I could bend it to a Jury would be on Mr.. Stubbs waiving the question that Mr. Cresgh did nut see her sign the answer. and if she did that. cud the Jury found it was her signature, ;t would then become my duty to send another proceeding to a Jury." Mr. Wrrszatu. replied. The LORD CIIANCELLOS--" Titus motion has occupied a considerable part of the Court, but it has been very properly employed, as it is a case of very greet importance in every view of ir. I give ibis Lady credit for wishing to have a main tainance for her children during her lifetime, but that kind of anxiety often makes persons think that a testator has done more by his will than he ever intended. If the decree of the Master of the Rolls iu this case is wrong. it can only be set right by an appeal; and not by a motion ; if the interest of the 9.500% could be supplied for the maintenance of the children. this Lady's is not the hand that would be entitled to administer it. It has been Mti mated to me by the bar, that no opinion of mine will satisfy this Lady ; that I am not surprised at. as male lawyers are not easily satisfied nr con. vineed, much less should female lawyers. therefore I will not attempt the task; but this I can tell her, that I have reed the mustier which she objects to with great care, sod if I _um a practitioner at the bar, it is the very answer I Would have advised her to put in. If the motion only aimed to stay the preceedings be would be doing nothing, as they could only be stayed until she pot in another an swer, °aid if she was admitted to do so. no good end could be obtained by it. Notice of this ono. tints au served on Messrs. Vandercom and Comyn, and on the executors, and if it was only served on the solicitors foe the purpose of making them an. swerable for any irregularity of their clerk. I should see no abjection to it : but when I find their names coupled with the charge of forgery, where there is no foga:fallen fur such a charge, and knowing them to be Dips 'nigh character in their profemion, I dipinno the motion against them and the executors with costs. As to the order for the answer being received with out oath, after it was signed, I have desired the re gistrar to inquire into what the practice is on the subject, and let me know to-morrow morning, fur if the practice is so, I have no hesitation in saving, that it is high time it ought to he altered. I trust it is not necessary for me to tell Mr. Creme)) that his conduct wits highly irregular in attesting to the sig nature of this lady without having seen her sign her name to the answer. at the same time it was ostural for him to suppose that it was her signa ller lions what is stated in the affidavits before lite. I am compelled again to ask why Richard Stubbs has not made en affidavit whetker he did or not Feed beck the answer signed by his wife Anne Stubbs ? I will allow him now to make an affidavit, if he idolises, to that fact. 1 do not invite him to do it, but if he does, I will read it, and we will stop here to see whether he makes the affidavit or not." Mrs. Stubbs attempted to address his Lordship from behind the bar. The LORD CHANCELLOR—" I have heard year Counsel, Madam, in the support of your motion, and I will not hear ycu. If you think proper to Lase your motion re-heard, on ti ring proper notices then I will hear you and not your Counsel." Motion dismissed with cools. A SUPPOSITITIOUS CHILD. SZROESIIOII V. SRRORIISON. Mr. HART stilted, that this was a ttlolion cer tainty of a novel nature. and one that he could nut flied any precedent for, but which was made neces sary by the peculiar circumstances of the case. It was to request of his Lordship to ipply to the Chief Justice of the Court of Kink's Bench for a copy of his notes on so issue directed by this Court, fur the purpose of their bring lodged with the M istet for the information of the Court. It would be in los Lordship's recollection that fur tunny years the in fant defendant was supposed to be the legitiMeste daughter of the late Cul. Sergesson and his trite. nod that it was only Lindy it had come to the know ledge of the relations of the late Colonel that she was the child of other parents, sod that she was im posed on the Colonel as his, and us such wan lett .heir by him to his vast property. A bill was filed in that Court stating those circumstances, and hie Lordship had ordered an action to be brought to try the question, and the Jury had brought in 11 verdict that she was not the child of Col. Sertorogon it was tried at Guildhall before the Chief Justice of the Court of King's Bench. On the last day of Term he, the Learned Counsel, had moved the Court that the order for allowing the infant 300/. per annum for mainiemince and education should be discharged, which was granted, it not being opposed. There was no opposition to the present motion, as it was grounded on the apprehension that the infint might hereafter stir the question again in that Court ; and some of the witnesses who had beeu eximained on the trial being far ad vanced in age. they might die before the case was again agitated, and if the notes of the Learned Judge were impounded, by being lodged with the Master, their depositiosis taken at the trial might be used. The LoRD CHANCEI.I.OR—u I do not know by what authority I could order the ileitis of the Chief Justice to lie impounded in this Court. It would be a difficult matter to get the 'Kites out of the hands of the Chief Justice, fur the Judges never put with their original notes, and • copy would lie no evidence. I will see the Chief Justice to. morrow. when I will have • conversation with bun on the subject. and afterwards let you know the result of it. The usual way now it i 0 such cases to call on the short-hand write► to prove his notes." Further consideration postponed. THE ♦TTORNEY-GENP.RAL P. HARTLEY. - GORDON V. GORDON. The LORD CHANCELLOR" 1 promised to give lodgment its those two cases to-morrow morning, but I find I shall not be able, as 1 have 4 st very heavy' Recortler'a report to consider. which occupies at resew my chief attention ; but I shall hr able to state to-morrow morning what day in the week I shell pronounce them." His Lordship rose at four o'clock. COURT OF KING'S BENCH, WM3IINITER 7 TUKIDAY, DICIIMBUL 5. Before the Loup CHIEF JCSTICE• CLEARY R. CORBETT. This was an action for a libel published by tl e Defendant in his Political Register. The Plaintiff having► read a letter purporting to be written by the Defendant to a Mr. John Wright, and dated the Ist Ap il, 1806, which reflected on the character of Mr. H. Hunt ; this letter was reud by the Plaintiff from the busting' during the Westminster election, in July, 1819. Oil t h e 28th November, 1818, the libel now complained of first appeared iu TI.: Political Register, in which it was intimated that the letter was a forgery, and that the Plaintiff was concerned in forging it. Mr. CHITTY hiving opened the pleadings, stet. log the libel as shave. to which the Defendant had pleaded not guilty of publishing the libel—. Mr. BROUGHAM said, that after what his Learned Frieoll had opened. it was necessary for him to 'Mew them who the Plaintiff was who came to a•k a re paration in damages at their hands. It was only necessary to mention the mine of William Cobbett to call to the imagination the name of the man who, of all others. was the most to be feared for his at. tacks as a writer ; the man who was most to be dreaded • fur his great talents—talents which it was hardly possible to overrate. and which were only exceeded by the zeal with which he exercised them; but that zeal was even less remarkable than the want of scrupulosity with which lie exercised them. The Geutleman who brought the present action was comparatively an unprotected individual, against whom► the great talents of the Defendant had been so zealously, so powerfully. and with so little scrupulosity exerted. Tl►e Gentleman had come front the sister kingdom, and was here in a respectable situation, lie wa■ now studying the law, and intending to take a higher station in that profession. When he arrived in this coaatry he immediately took part in politico, and being au elector of Westminster, he had exercised that valu able franchise : lie had early been connected with Major Cartwright. of whose opinion, whatever might be thought, no man could entertain a doubt of the Major's consistency in maintaining them. Con 'weird as the Plaintiff was with that Gentleman ; in habits of intimacy with him, and partaking of his hospitality, ►t was very natural for Mr. Cleary to be foremost in his cause. Another candidate was Mr. Henry Hunt, and it having pleased Hunt to attack Mr. Cleary, and go beyond even the usual license of such occasions, cud having read a private letter of the Plaintiff intending to sow discord between him and others, the Plaintiff retaliated upon Mr. Hunt. by reading a letter purporting to be front the Defendant, but which Mr. Cobbett had since thought proper to deny to be h►s. It was not necessary to read that letter at this moment ; it might be sufficient to state that it wasa letter in which Mr. Cobbett spoke of Mr. Hunt in terms very different from those he subsequently used when speaking of him. That Mr. Hunt stiould have com plained, would have been natural, but why the De fendent should feel himself aggrieved did not seem easy to be accounted for, since of him the Plaintiff had always spoken with reverence and admiration. That he should therefore tun► with such vehemence, not to say ferocity. upon him. did appear rather unaccottatable. Why should Mr. Cobbett com- ' • plain of the pahliealiciri or a letter in which he spoke differently of a man from whit he afterwards did? Woo . that the only instance of the kind ? Mr. Mut the only mina wimns he had abused. ere 'ay and lavishly praised on the twat ? Th+sr'who hail the pleasure of ►eadling Mr. ecibliett's winks, and had pleasure in observing tl•e servise I:•a great talents, must have •ern that thoo•r were steel common with him, and 'fiat in fart it would he ■ great inconsistency in him if such violent changes rlyl lint fAk. I.OltD CHIFP JUSTICE—" You ha►e not come to the inatter of charge yet." M. Colslrett—i• 1 wills Ili , Levrard Ge n tlemen le hove full seope, my Litrd." Mr. lkoustuaat.— lit consequence or !II- Moja. tiff hiving used the letter as he hart stated, there appeared in the Political filegizier a *lokh, thoegh Written in America. was polo halted, And cli•t.msnord iu tide erountry. I t that. Which wqc adderstr e d to the F boo of 71te Mere York I•eeniag Post, the Defendant said, •• I de (lace thst you hare republished a forgery. I de clare this letter a forgery. I occuse Cleary hefore all the poreple of America of forgery. I arrow hint, am I have done, 114 reall the people of Eng. laud, in a Itegister whit h I have sent there, of having forged that Irner ; or. what is the same thing, in point of baseness, of having obtained it from a man who had forged it." This libel Mr. Cohltett had, a. wits his manner. reiterated mud re peated in all the ways possible. in verse and iv prose; sometimes varying the word,. and mom... times repeating the •atue. until ultitnorly reel one who read hi. work, naturally associated in his mind the idea of Cleary end fort -Ty together, s o ul SO the purpose of the coltimny Wag COMlP'eted. In another part of the paper in which the libel was first published, the nowise for the forgery w o o s sssigned ; he was 'tressed of upholding Sir Prince , Burdett, whom lr hod formerly abused. for no other motive which the Defendant could devise bat for pecuniary reward from his opulent and hate employer. l'Re Learned Couture, then proceeded to argue, that as the Defendant lied put nn joi•tifi. cation on the record he must be taken to ackitow. ledge the falsehood of the accusation of for i ery, though he had repeatedly charged the POsintlfr with it. It was ittipostoble. tad, to anttciiiiite the line of defence which would be ad..pte , l ; all topics were open to the Defenitrini ; liberty of the press and liberty of discossion mieht I.a allutle'l ID by him; but they would remetulser that the widest advocate for the roost unlimited freedom of the preas never was insane enough to centrnil that 't ought to include the tight of attatAing pr vite character with impunity. He put it to the Ju yto say for what aunt they would have been corrsit to be exposed to the snarl which the Plaintiff had sustmoned, and estimate his dtem,ges arcuiditiely. Jelin Wright seas called and examiged by :11r. CHITTY.He said I am orquainted with the 1).- Tendon' ; 1 received a letter from him dated 8, 1808 (a letter was here .litsvn to the "its ; that is the letter: I have no doubt it is the De fendant's hand-writing. Crors-ezaraixed by the Dere truant:-1 never was your clerk; I Willi tour agent. It was nut a pri vate letter. I 'hewed it at the time I received it to Dr. Nlitford. There were accounts to be settled between us in 1810. 1811. nod 1812. I never said 1 would publish your private letters, if you did not give wny to rut in the settlement of tho.e ac counts. I mode no such threat, nor instructed uny one elm to do it. The letter was out of my hand's at different times; it wee so In 1808, and also in 1818, at the time of the election. I gave it to Mr. Place, at Charing-cross. I was directed by you, in the letter, to take it to the Westminster Committee. which 1 did, I believe, on the 11th of April, 1808. The letter was produried again in 1818. In consequence of your witting letters, abusing Ste F. Burdett and praising Mr. Hunt, I thought it my duty to go to the Westminster Com mittee, Q. by Defeterlint—To the Hump Comenitaer ? Toe LORD CHIEF JUSTICE—" I know ARANO( of any Rump Committee." ern's-examination resunied.-1 think MV: Misty was nut prevent when I delivered the lettetito the AVestrninster Committee.. I begird the letter read at the hustings. and I believe, but am not sore shot the whole weir read with the exception if taro line of postscript. I never carried a bundle of your private letter to 'hew to the tote Mr. Whitbread, but 1 have been cautioned by that gentlersien against you. I have 'hewn the Wert to - Mr. Brougham after you charged me with family ; I never carried a bundle of your private letter.. M Brooks, in the Strand ; I remember Sir Richard Phillips coming in when 1 was there; we were twit paring the hand-writing, with one or two otheiVrt your letters. The letter was put between two . glaiirs for the public to inspect. and to convince theta it was not forged by me. 1 did not receive i regriest from your sons to see the letter. heard they s44s applied, and 1 gave directions intake esrelt stsbold not be snatched. The book of letters *lf lit t h e Court of Ring's Bench last winter, and was so the hands of Mr. Scsrlett arid 41 ro Gurney. John Paul examined-1 know • Mr. Cubism's hand-writing (the letter of April 1. Mb, rhesus to witness). 1 have no doubt that is Mr. Cubbett's writing. J. Place examined-1 was preseLt at the eh-cCun for Weatminvter In 11118. (The letter 2 0 1 , ' , 4f1 lo witness.) The letter was produced by Mr. Wright. and I gave it to Mr. Cleary. The letter w.is to be read at the hustings. Cruss•examined' hy As Defendaiit.-I 'gave ehe letter to Mr. Chary. to read tare whole of it ut <tin hustings, and 1 did not tell hits to leave out any part. The letter was read. its 11518, sad was lot the purpose of excluding Hunt frogs tin confidence of the hump Committee, and it laud th it effect, • IVm. Adams examined—l was ptereut in 1818. at the Wertinitister Committee. I saw the letter is 1808. I heard Mr. Cleary read it at the hinting , . I can't say if all was read, as there was such a tioise nod confarion :, there was the same language. mud I have uo doubt it was the.letter whirti be read. eriist-exornined by :lir. Cohbett.—l war a member of the Committee in 1818. awl adr:sed the letter to be read, becaue•lltrut had made violent attacks on Slf Francis Burgett, nod I thought it necessary the public should know that you had not abgays entertained she same opinion Of Hunt. I believe the whole of letter wrs _....a. I l 4- ...~,