The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1874-03-10 00:00:00

me• Mitchell; seemed, if they were, were they
o sad Gemming the plsintiff. Now that the
▪ ,TOSOIDOSIOnOIIY spoken by the defendant they
▪ i.4ly would not entertain any doubt, bemuse the
oof mod quits eonoluerive and there wm.s no otes-
pr ore .
dieoge on that point. It teemed the defieroant was
Rothman who had taken an interest In the movement
.bell of the labourers for the purpose of endeavour-
kg to batter Geer condition—an object which if carried
ent lawfully and by legal means, of course, in a free
country like this, there can be no possible objection to.
On the other hand, the plaintiff, Mr. Ruegg, the edifies,
of the effee tarns Jourgal, hoe taken the opposite view, j
and his opinion is that these attempts to get Ilike
lahourers to ocialesee for that object are attended with
more barn than good. Jest as Mr. Mitchell ime • right
to his view, to Mr. Ruegg has a right to hie, provided
that each in earryieg out his views keeps within the
limit. of the law. Now, it appeared there waa • meet-
log on the 17th June at • place called Ham Hill, and in
a pert of Ham lidl which from the peculiar formation
of the ground goes by the awns of the Frying
Pan. At that meeting there wes a large attendance
of persons wbo like Mr. Mitchell advocate the move.
meat on behalf of the labourers, and it was largely
attended by tie labourers—there were some 6,000
present. Upon that 000111i00 Mr. Itittchell made •
speech, and it was in that speech be made use of the
words complained of. The words were proved first by
Mr. Gent, a reporter on the paper of the plaintiff, who
attended the meeting to report it, and he was aloes to
tbe speakers on Ilea occasion. The Press generally
at ouch meetiegs are sooommolated with seats where
they can hear what goes forward for the purpme of
publication. He said Mr. Mitchell on that occasion mod
tbs., words. 11e did not attend to report the very
words that be used, but for the purposes of giving a
summary. His notes, not thinking anything would
come of the matter, he hudestroyed, but he nedertakes
to swear positively the words he mentions were
substantially what were used by the defendant; and,
Indeed, there seemed to be no denial given to it. The
jury vuoild probably assume that something like them
was said. Mr. Gent says these were the words—
" There Is a certain man at Bherborne, the editor of the
paper there, who is trying to induce yen to set your
master's ricks he.. on fire • but tell him, friend., you
have more brains than 14 has." The jury would
observe there was but one paper at Sherburne, and bet
one editor there ; and when a person states "there is •
cer aio man at therborne, the editor of a paper there,"
it would be for them to say could they entertain the
slightest doubt that be meant to point tattle only editor
here, the present plaintiff. Another witness was called,
Mr. Henry Petra, a reporter for another neempaper
--the Somerset Gasses at Taunter. He had had
great experience ; be had been a reporter for? years,
and be had his note book. The words he heard the
defendant use were—" There is a certain man, in cos-
section with • certain paper at Eiberborne—lf bets here
I hope you won't Meg him out of the Frying Pan into
the fire—be wanted to kart.. re by all in his power to
set fire to the house., to set fire to your masters' ricks,
and to shed blood. But tell him you have more bream
than he has." Obey would notice there was here some
slighteaddition to the statement of Mr. Gent ; but pro-
bably they would think that substantially the words
meetionied in the declaration were uttered on that
eccasion by the defentleit They would observe Mr.
Oct said defendant used the words "editor of a paper,"
whereas Mr. Fearn said uron his note. it mg " •
eertsin man in cooneetion with • attain paper at Sher.
borne." Hut Mr. Fearn watt tert to say he vu certain
defirodeut used tb• word "editor' also ; and he
ameonteel for it not appeerlog on his notes by saying
that Mr. Mitchell lik• many other public speedier.
repeats himself substantially, and teat • reporter
in taking notes would not put down the repeti.
tines. The learned mussel has observed upon it
to lemi you to suppose the word "editor" was
not used ; but Mr. Fearn swore it wee It would
be for them to say whether they meld entertain
any doubt defendant did use the worts, and that
if they were used as stated they would be enderstood
at the Ham Hill meeting, by those hearing them, to
apply to the plaintiff, Me Romig. If the words were
used as applicable to kilm, then, at the learned grouped
for G.. plaistiff had told them, be alleged that Mr.
Ruegg incited men to commit arson and murder or
something like is, is., charged him with that whit*
would be punished on indictment, and probably very
reverely. If they were satisfied defendant used those
words, as applicable to plaintiff, and that they convey
that mese, then undoubtedly as against the defendant,
who bad only pleaded not guilty to the declaration,
there tout be • verdict for the plaintiff. It would be
for them in that ease to say what amount of damages
they thought the plaintiff ought to recover for the
Injury which he alleged had been done him per moan y.
He entirely agreed witb many of the remarks of the
emoted counsel who had last addressed them. As to
chromes the learned counsel for the paintiff had
adverted to teeters which might be supposed to be ex-
tremely taking with them. Some of them were
formers, and some perhaps in the class higher, as
peewit and gentlecem, and they might be mimosal to
be extremely hostile to any one taking the part of the
labourer..' end that so far they would be
dimposed to Ulm money out of the pocket of Dir.
Mitchell and put it into that of Mr. Ititegg on behalf
of .11 the persons they supposed were porsibly lejared
by the labourers' movement. But it would be COSI
lejestioe, and no min in that box if he considered for
amoral) moment, would think of giving damages to Mr.
Ruegg estop% in respect of what the jury might think
was the damage be had sustained personally by the
remarks male about him on that ocoadon. If they
went leiond that they were going heycied their duty.
It wan for them to say what damages they thought he
had sustrened. Mr. Ruegg, as it seemed to him (the
learned Jibe), very
_properly applied to Mr. Mitchell,
toying, "You have, I understand, Jaa4o use of certain
imputations against ; give me your •utbority." Is
reply • person in defendaut'" employ wrote to say his
remarks were directed to • pleated pose .1 the dry pre.
Vi.`ol in the nciobhourhood, that be shoell he sorry to
say anything against an editor, and that I.e Mould be
riled to revive information which would entea him to '
disc,,ver the author of the placard he spoke of. That
sall lb 'ugh hireely in • direct way, but in affeat,
" it was not intended to apply to your neeepaper,
bat to a placard circulated the day pteetou," An, ther
letter war iromedietely after written by the defendant,
saying he was afraid his eity man had not understood h.,
letter of the previous day, and that his remark" referred
to a placard stunk about Sherborme May 15—tint
would be a month before; end he again mks for icier-
oration respecting the author of the placard. But ely
should ho suppose Mr. Muerte knew the author of the
alleged placard ; and he 11111 bound to say that to for
as the evidence went there was no such placard what
ever. Mr. Rung replies Janke him he knows nothing
about • pleased, and eays—if you really don't mean
your remarks for me, the least you can do is to retract
the charge at once. And, said the learned judge,
I must say that doe, seem to me to be a
very fsir letter. Don't let us go beating about
the bush' if you don't mean to impute it to
me, why, say in a straightforward way I don't
mean to impute any such coodnot to you, and am
very lorry II any one should think go. On August ld
defendant forwarded mother letter to plaintiff,
enclosing • printed slip, raying he hoped that would
meet plaintiff's views. In the printed letter be
said t• as to your thieetened action I am not
alsoned "ka It would have been far better for defen-
dant to have said I did not mean to apply to you at all,
and an very perry if anybody supposes I should moues
you of anything Ro 'hooking as inciting people to com-
mit arson, he. The letter of defendant went on "I
have yet to be convinced who circulated the itilamma-
tory placard.' Why aboold Mr. Rugg know anythiog
about the inflammatory placard, even if it had been
proved there was any such paper? The printed letter
went on to recapitulate the state in wiroh defeedant
considered the labourers, referred to Lord Portman and
Major Paget, and ended with some verses wbiab defendant
thought would be a good sort of song for the labourers
to sing. How far that letter on the 18th August was
the retraction plaintiff looked errand had a right to look
for it was for them to °molder. But although the
remarks Mott Lord Portman and Major Paget
might be in exceediegly bed taste and wholly
untrue so far as they knew, yet Mr.
Rome could not recover damages for them. If they
were it jured they could vindicate therneelves,and when
they same before a jury if they were entitled hey
might get damages; but for them Wreaks Mr. Mitchell
pay the prime% plaintiff demagog for any improper
observation. on Lord Portman and Idej.o. Paget would
be the extreme of injustice, and it was paying them •
bad Compliment to supped* they would do it. The
question came back—where they satisfied the words
were published of and ootherning the plaintiff.
If they believed so be wes entitled to their
verdict and to have such fair and reason-
able damages a. they thought him entitled to
under the eircumaanosa Pecuniary demotes were
✓ecoverable for slander and for libel; but the latter was
considered by the taw the mere mewls spoolss of
slender than Spoken slander bemuse being printed it re-
mained and vas eirealeted everywhere- What was no
doubt estuazkable in this ease was the feat that plaintiff
publianed the slander be complained of; although while
he published the lane he also supplied the anti-
dote because he added "This is • fair specimen
of George'. regard for the truth." Tti• plotogny
was eotatied to Mover dinning" in reSPOIO of
tho lojery the slander would be likely to do to his
reputation Or to his business. He was not bound
to prove any particular SEOOOII4 of pounds, aeilomes,
sod pence demises, became • Person might never %RI
aide to do it. But the jury must be "atoned injury 1
tad been done to the amount of the emus". its, I
awarded—that the probability of the lojere done to
plaintiff's reputation Gould be only sompeneatalby
such amount. It was entirely a question for them.
After a short conference, the jury retuned • refract
for toe plaintiff, with 40.. damages.
The Judge said he would certify for all costa, sad the
special jury, and added, mphatioally—ln this cosi Me.
Mitchel ought to have made a straightforward apology,

TRIALS OF PRISONERS.
BOSBEIVZ BY • MUIVANT.
Await Trott, 14 a smartly-dressed unmet girl, was
charged with stealiog so umbrella, muff box, heir brusb,
aud other articles the property of Mr. J1111:13041 Diamond,
of Whitchureh Canonic/ovum She °conducted herself le
▪ TerY bold war% Mr. Woodford" prosecuted; prisoner
mso undefended.
Promoutor said prieoner bad been in his 'anise. She
left on the 13th Feb., sod soon after various articles
w•r• kat—those named aad 3 boys' collars marked
"Julian," a pies. of Indian lace, and a dome of
nihn'Pae. He identilled ea umbrella, the nanny and
• heir bruit.
Jobe White, journeyman baiter 'poke be parrying
a butvile mod utsbrella from Mrs. Whites 113th February
whLrh be tool to his muter's wife—Mrs. Gibbs.
Hornet '
„."tito said prisooer brought some of the
article.
to "" hon", and sold she mould give mites'',
little girl 3d. to take them sad aa umbrella to ifraOlbbe
that sight. She made them tato • beadle sad gave Chem
to the previous mitoses.
Emily Gibbs proved receiving the beadle, which abs
was to keep till o.lied for.
P.C. Short found the articles it Mrs. Gibb's ost
Fob. 271 h.

P.B. Bike on 28th F•b. !ovoid a box of private'''. si
Chard rallwoy btelloo, and apprilmeded bar. 811"
admitting taking the umbrella. In her box bit found
th. hair brush, nog box, ko. She mid there war
nothing there belonging to Mr. Diamond. Blia told him
she ova the champagne to the men who were thraidting
6 th.vir 440 r.
Mrs. Diamond laid sb• waver gave whose( say of
thisp in gsootios, sad nom to Um as kw ors.