The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1869-02-06 00:00:00

ADVICE TO YOUTH.
Take aim to live worth money, timely got:
For men, when they die worth it, have it not.
—Punch.

THE QUEEN v. PATTISON.

This matter has again been brought forward in the
Court of Queen's Bench, and was an application by
Mr. Charles Hay Frewen for a criminal information
against a Dr. James Pattison, late of Welbeckatreet,
London, for certain libellous letters, and for threaten-
ing to publish certain libellous matter. The case was
this :
Dr. Pattison had attended the late Mrs. Frewen, who had
suffered under cancer, and subsequently died. lie had re-
ceived 150 guineas for his services, but claimed 104) guineas
more, and this being refused, lie wrote a set ies of letters to
Ste. Frewee of a very offensive character, and suggested that
he intended to describe the case in a work he was about to
publish, with all the details 01 that cruel and painful disease
Mr. Frewen referred hint to his attorney, and declared his
full readiness to meet the claim In ally fair and proper way.
But an action which had been commenced to recover the
money claimed was not proceeded with, and, instead of that,
these letters continued to be sent. When Mr. Frewen re-
turned them others were sent open, so that any one could
read them ; and the defendant threatened that the next
should lie on cardboard and sent to Mr Frewen's club. The
Court had at once granted the rule, and there was no affi-
davit in denial.
Mr. Chambers now appeared on the part of Dr. Pat-
tison to express his profound regret for what he had
done, and to declare that he had published his book
without including the case referred to. Under these
circumstances, he hoped it would not be necessary to
make this rule absolute.
The Hon. G. Denman (with him the Hon. Alfred
Thesiger) appeared for Mr. Frewen, and said the only
object of that gentleman had been to rebut the painful
reflections which had been made upon him, and, hav-
ing done so, he did not dekire (unless the Court thought
it was absolutely incumbent upon him to do so) to press
for the criminal information.
The Court, however, hesitated for some time before
they could accede to the suggestion.
Mr. Justice Blackburn observed that the case
seemed to come within a recent Act, which provided
that if any person should publish, or threaten to
publish, any libel, or should offer to prevent the
publication of any matter, with intent to extort
money, kuch person shall be liable to be imprisoned,
with hard Isle or, for three years. As the case stood,
he could hardly cinustive of a case more clearly within
the terms and spirit of the statute, and he felt a
great reluctance to acquiesce in the dismissal of such a

case.
Mr. Justice Mellor also remarked that he had never
felt more disgusted in his life than he had been at the
course taken by the defendant in this case, and it ap-
peared really to have the character of a criminal
offence.
Mr. Chambers suggested that, supposing the case
came within the criminal law, the party was liable to
indictment.
Mr. Denman observed tllat it was extremely dis-
tasteful, and, indeed, positively painful, to Mr.
Frewen to have to bring such a case forward; and it
would be still more so to have to prosecute it, though
if the Court went so far as to say be was bound to do
so be would not shrink from his duty.
Mr Justice Blackburn, after some consultation and
hesitation, said this was one of the numerous instances
which arose to mate him regret the absence of public
prosecutors; for he could very well understand that it
must be extremely distasteful to a gentleman to have
to prosecute such a case, and this Court could not
forget that they had no power to bind him over to do
so. To make the rule absolute for a criminal informa-
tion. therefore, in the face .4 the fact that the applicant
was satisfied, and was not desirous of pressing it, would
be only to place this Court ins false position. He he•
lieved there was no instance in which a rule for a crimi-
nal information had been made absolute notwithstanding
that the applicant had declared himself to be satisfied;
and the Court were not prepared in the present case to
make a precedent. It appeared to him, however, that
the case came clearly within the criminal law to which
he had referred, and he was sorry the applicant had
been satisfied with an apology; but he did not see that
any good could be done by attempting to force him to
prosecute the cake against his will. Tke rule, therefore,
might be discharged, as desired.
Mr. Justice Mellor said he concurred in consenting
to that course with very great regret; and, indeed, he
could not help thinking that when a gentleman came
for a criminal information in such a case he ought not
to be satisfied with an ars logy, however ample and
abundant. He confessed that in so extraordinary
and abominable a case he felt extremely te-
hietant to accede to a withdrawal of the charge ;
but, as there was no precedent of an applicant being
forced to prosecute a criminal information, he could
not oppose the discharge of the rule, however much
he might reel that a gentleman ought not to invoke
the special interposition of the Court without being
prepared to carry on the case to a conclusion.
Mr. Denman We were prepared to do so if there
had not been an apology.
Mr. Justice Hayes concurred.
The rule was discharged on condition of payment by
,rnistiTa I the defendant of all the expenses incurred.