The Express.
London, England, 1867-05-03 00:00:00

SECOND COURT.

Sittings at Nisi Prins at Westminster.—(Before Mr.
Baron Channell and a Common Jury.)
HVYI4O • CHAPS( %N.
'

This was an action for libel against the Standani.
The defendant pleaded not guilty.
Mr. Serjeant T. Atkinson and Mr. Bromley were counsel
for the plaintiff ; Mr. Gifford, Q.C., and Mr. Bernard for
the defendant.

The plaintiff is a solicitor, and the defendant is the
registered printer and publisher of the Standard news-
paper, and the action complained of was • report of
certain proceedings which took place before Mr. d'Eyn-
court, at the Clerkenwell Police-court, and which
were reported in the Standard of Saturday, the Ist of
December last. The plaintiff, Mr. John Daniel Pinero,
solicitor, of 39, Great James-street, Bedford-row, was
summoned with intent to defraud, and by means of false
pretences, fraudulently induce a person named Charles
Fletcher to write his name upon a piece of paper in order
that the same might be afterwards dealt with as a valuable
security, contrary to the statute. It appeared that about
30 years since the plaintiff was brought into contact with
Fletcher, who had been in the East India military service,
but was at that time an annuitant of the company at
the rate of 701., in consequence of his having
become imbecile in the service. The money was
paid through the plaintiff on the certificate of a me-
dical man. Fletcher, who had 17/. or 181. in the savings
bank, applied to the plaintiff to draw it out for him, and
he accordingly signed • paper to that effect in the pre-
sence of the person in whose house Fletcher lodged. The
plaintiff accordingly drew out the money, and handed
over Fletcher • part of the money, when, to his surprise,
shortly after, he received a sumnions to appear at
Clerkenwell to answer a charge of having ob-
tained Fletcher's money under false pretences. The
summons was heard, and it was adjourned, the plain-
tiff being held to bail in his own recognisance of 1001. The
case came on for hearing on the last clay of November,
and there appeared in the Standard of the Ist of Dee.
the following report, which was the libel complained
of, and for which special damages were claimed :
" ClerkenwelL —The late serious charge against a
solicitor.—John Daniel Pinero, solicitor, of 39, St.
James's-street, Bedford-row, was summoned before
Mr. d'Eyncourt by Mr. Charles Fletcher, as
follows :—' For that you, on or about the 18th day of
August, 1866, in the parish of St. Pancras, did unlawfully,
with intent to defraud, and by means of false pretences,
fraudulently induce the add Charles Fletcher to
write his name upon a certain paper in order
that the same might be afterwards dealt with
as a valuable security, contrary to the statute.'
The facts of the ease were reported on Saturday last.
Mr. Straight, barrister, who attended for the prosecution,
stated that acting under the suggestion of the magistrate
the defendant bad paid the whole of the money in dispute,
and, therefore, the summon, would now be withdrawn.
Mr. d'Eyncourt allowed that course to be adopted,
and the summons was discharged." The magistrate,
it appeared, adjourned the case on the first bearing to
allow • settlement of the case. The plaintiff did not com-
plain of the tint report,but only the second, on the ground
that the summons which was set out in extern* in the first
report formed no part of the proceedings on the second
part, and that as it was libellous the report was not pri-
vileged.
The libel having been put in read,
The plaintiff, who was very deaf, was called, and stated
that he had Fletcher examined, and that he afterwards
proceeded to cross-examine him, but he was stopped in
his cross-examination by the magistrate, and the case was
adjourned. Before the case was stopped he had made •
tender of money in court to Fletcher, but less than what
he claimed. He did not complain of the first report.
Mr. Baron Channell—lf there is anything in it the
second report has taken it out.
Plaintiff said he afterwards paid the sum he tendered,
but less than the amount claimed by Fletcher.
In cross-examination, Mr. Pinero said the summons was
read on the first hearing, but not on the second occasion.
His business had greatly suffered since the report ap-
, he presumed from people being suspicious of him.
rhaer;:dhad withdrawn money from him. He had had no
new clients since. Mr. d'Eynciourt on the first hearing
said no prosecution would stand, but that he (plaintiff)
was bound in honour to pay the money, and that he re-
oommended him to settle with Fletcher. Plain-
tiff, who said be was very deaf, would not
undertake to say what Mr. d'E'ynceort said or whether
he said anything. He bowed his head to what Mr. Straight
said. He had not been considerably embarrassed for some
time. He gave a bill of sale in September, and an assign-
ment for the benefit of creditors the same month. He bad
paid money under the assignment. His debts were very

This was the plaintiff's case.
Mr. Serjeant Atkinson addressed the jury, urging that
it was a case deserving of damages.
Mr. diffard submitted that the publication was privi-
leged, but the learned judge declined to stop the case. The
learned counsel contended that as the report was subetan-
tially correct, the plaintiff having failed to impugn it, that
it was privileged. The newspaper had only discharged its
duty in publishing a fair and accurate report of the pro-
ceedings. If the charge was unfounded, the newspaper
had nothing to do with that, but the plaintiff's remedy
was against Fletcher for malicious prosecution, but that he
had not ventured to do.

Mr. Baron Channel, in summing up, observed that the
question for the jury to consider was whether this was a
foie and accurate report, and if so, it need not be ver-
batim. If it was a fair and accurate report then the
publication would be privileged. The summons set out
in the report complained of was recd on the first hearing
and the second hearing had reference to it.
dant.The jury ultimately returned a verdict for the defen-

COURT OF PROBATE.
(Before the Judge Ordinary.)
8111111 AND SMITH T. SEBBIT! AND OTHANA.-IN7OBTANT

CAME.
Sir R. Palmer, Q.C., Serjeant Ballantine, Dr. Spinks,
Q.C., and Dr. Swabey, for the plaintiff. ; the Queen's
Advocate, Mr. Edward James, Q.C., and Dr. Triatram for
Mrs. Tebbitt, the principal defeadant • the Solicitor.
General, Mr. Coleridge, Q.C., and Mr.Searle for the others.
This morning Mr. ebbitt Abbott, nephew of Mrs. Tcb-
bitt's husband, deposed that when he visited the testatrix
in 1535, she said to him, " Bob, do you know that
I am the Holy Ghost? lam the Thiel Person of the Tri-
nity, and Dr. Smith is one of us. I have been all over crea-
tion. It was through me that the cholera came. My Father
said to me, ' My dear, turn on the screw', and the cholera
came. After that he said, Turn it off,' and it disap-
peared. The Tebbitt family, lam sorry to say, are all
doomed to everlasting perdition." Told her she was talking
nonsense, but she said witness was not in a frame of mind
to hear her.

Cross-examined—He was a youth of IS or 19 when this
took place. Had afterwards suggested that there should
be • commission of lunacy.
Mr. Clark, au upholsterer in Berkeley-street, was
formerly foreman to Messrs. Gillow, in Oxford-14meg,
who worked for Mn.s Thwaytes from 1845 till 1860. They
fitted up her house in Hyde-park-gardens at an unusual
expense. She gave witness a cheque for Joi. or 35/., and
afterwards an annuity of 501. She talked to this witness
in the same meaner as described by the last.
She told witness that she had bought • life
governorship in • school, but the trustees little
thought what • bargain they had made ; for as she should
die she should have the right of making peesenta-
tio•s for ever. She said th►t she bad fitted up the dining
and drawing-room of her house expressly for the habitation
of her Saviour. She said she had paid Seddons 25,000 f. for
what they bad done to her room. bends what she had paid

witness's employers. She said that Christ was being cru•
cified in every planet they saw.
Cross-examined—Considered her mad, but that did not
prevent him from taking his money from her, for he was
then a working man and wanted it exceedingly. The
annuity was paid him till 1851. Considered that he had
given consideration for it, as be had had to go to the
house very frequently. Would not take the job now for
the price.
Mrs. Sarah Ann Cooke, eldest child of Mr. Tebbitt, said
that her aunt had told her that she had often drawn her
husband by his own groom electricity through the moon and
the dark volcanoes of the earth, and that he now reigned
King of the Devils. She had frequently told witness that
she had paid debts for Mr. Samuel Smith to the amount
of :10,1)0U/. In 1838 she quarrelled with Mr. Samuel Smith,
and she left the house for ten days or a fortnight, Testa-
trix told witness that she had taken hint back at the inter-
cession of Dr. Smith. She said that Dr. Smith was God
the Father ; Mr. Fisher, an attorney, God the Son ; and
herself God the Holy Ghost, and that they could not do
anything without their mutual knowledge and con-

The whole morning was occupied with evidence of a
similar character.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.
(Before Mr. Commissioner Holroyd.)
. IN RE 11ZYJAMIN HARRIR. _

The bankrupt, a publican, of Newington, applied for his
order of discharge. Debts about 800/.
Mr. Brough opposed for Miss Annie Kemp, • creditor
for 218/. in an action for breach of promise of mar-
riage. The case was represented as a very aggra-
vated one. Just before the verdict was given
against the bankrupt he had disposed of the
lease of his public-house for the large sum of 2,5501., and
the fixtures for 507/. He had paid away the whole of this
money, and had come to the court on his own petition with
assets of only 12/. The proper way to deal with such •
°sae was to adjourn the bankrupt until be made •
satisfactory offer to his creditors. It was remarkable that
the bankrupt bad had more than one action brought against
him for bleach of promise of marriage.
Mr. Reed appeared for the bankrupt.
His Honour said it had been held by the court of appeal
that the court had no power to adjourn a ease like this,
unless there were grounds to believe that the bankrupt
had the means of making an offer to his creditors. There
was only one other mode in which be could be reached, if
it could shown that he had contracted debts. aftergetting
rid of his property, without probable means of payment ;
but this did not appear to be the case here.
The order of discharge was accordingly granted, Mr.
Brough observing that the case disclosed an extraordinary
state of the law.

fore Mr. Burcham, charged with being drunk at the
Borough-road station of the London, Chatham, and Dover
Railway, refusing to leave when requested, and assaulting
Mr. Francis Smith, the station-master.
The latter gentleman said that between nine and ten
o'clock on the previous night he was on duty at the plat-
form of the Borough-road-station when a train stopped on
its way from Ludgate-hill and the prisoner got out of a
third-class carriage and commenced abusing the pon-
sengers. Witness went up to him and asked him
for his ticket, and after feeling all his pockets
he maid that he could not find it and made
use of very bad language. Wanes' demanded his fare
from him, and on his refusal to give it him, be asked his
name and address, which he declined giving, and endea-
voured to force his way from the station. In preventing
his doing so, the prisoner struck at him several times,
and would have injured him severely had not a constable
come to his assistance and taken him into custody.
Mr. Burcham asked him if the prisoner struck him
Witness replied in the negative. He struck at witness
eight or nine times, but ho kept him off. The prisoner
was very much under the influence of liquor, and he had
been informed that it was not the first time he bad tills-
conducted himself in similar manner.
In answer to the charge the defendant said that a friend
of his took the ticket from him at Ludgate-hill, and gave
it him as soon as he got in the carriage, but he forgot in
what pocket be put it. He had, however, since found
it, and was ready to give it up.
Mr. Burcham tined him 10s. or ten days' imprisonment.