The Express.
London, England, 1849-12-06 00:00:00

matter. The report of the meeting appeared in the Nautical
Standard of the 23rd Oct., 1847. The two papers cintaining
the libels were put in, and several other cipies of tlie defend-
ant's newepapsr, Ls showing malice, and of an anterior date,
were also } ut in re.dence.
Idr. Sergeant She*, for the defence, contended that the
defendant had not been guilty of publishing libels against
the defendant. The giving a summary of objectionable
letters could not be MI so injurious to the plaintiff as set-
ting them out in full, which Hise Hoare said ought to have
been done. With regard to the emend libel, which had refer-
ence to tie meeting of the members of the Royal Natal
Benevolent Society, the statement* wbiCh had then hell:
made with regard to Mies Hoare had been made bona fide.
The learned serjeant then called two reporters to prove that
ihe visors of the ease of Hoare v. Dickson was a correct one.
Mr. Carter replied upon the whole case in a speech of up-
wards of two hours' duration.
The Lord Chief Justice then briefly lammed up, and the
jury returned a verdict for the defendant.

MIDDLESEX SESSIONS.—YasTERDAY.
Sam Ma. SEIJWIT ADAMS, ANISSWer JUDOS.
TRICXB OP DOG STILALZRD.
H. Cole, a dog fancier, pleaded guilty to an indictment. in
which he was cliarged, under the Gth section of the D 4
Stealing Act, with a misdemeanor, in having wilfully and
corruptly taken three sovereigns from Lieut. Montague
James White, upon pretence of restoring a very valuable
bloodhound which had been stolen from him.
Mr. Parry and Mr. Mellor appeared for the prosecution,
and, addressing the court, Mr. Mellor (in the absenw of Mr.
Parry) said that such a profecutien as this must be looked
upon as one of some importance, as the circumstances under
which the offence charged against the prisoner was com-
mitted would demonstrate. About the 10th of November,
the deg in question, which was an exceedingly fine and
valuable animal, was stolen from the residence of Colonel
White, Lieut. White's father, in Gloucester-gardens, and
on the 24th the prisoner went to Lieut. White's servantt
and raid he knew where the dog was, and could re-
store it to the owner, but unless he were paid
31. to bring it back, it would be poisoned by himself and a
person named Taylor, in whose custody be represented the
dog then was. At an interview that subsequently took place
between the prisoner and Lieut. White the man Taylor was
introduced by the prisoner, but, although there was a police
officer in attendants, unknown to the prisoner and his friend
of coarse, they were not apprehended; and the prisoner
having repeated the threat that unless money was given
the dog would be pdsoned, Lieut. White, really fearing that
the threat would be carried into effect, gave him three
sovereigns, and that lame evening the dog was returned.
The prisoner complained that he had nut rtceivtd sufficient
recompense for the trouble he had had ; and Lieut. White
told him that if he would cell on the following morning he
would give him mere money. Accordingly on the ensuing
day the prisoner called upon Lieut. White, who gave him
two marked half-crowns ; and an officer having witnessed
this transaction, the prisoner was taken into custody. The
learned gentleman stated that the Dog Stealing Act bad had
the effect of putting an end, in a very great measure, to a
very extensive system of dog stealing that had prevailed;
valuable and favourite deft were stolen, aid large sums of
money demanded for their restoration, and the passing of
the act making such pro, eedings punishable offences, was
mainly attributable to the indefatigable exertions of Mr.
Bishop, the gunsmith, of New Bond-street.
Mr. Parry, who had entered the court, hoped the court
would take seriously into consideration the diabolical threat
of the prisoner, that unless the money were given the dog
would be poisoned.
The prisoner had nothing to ray for himself.
The court sentenced him to tour months' imprisonment
in the House of Correction, and to pay a fined le.