The Express.
London, England, 1859-03-25 00:00:00

A&9IZB INTELLIGENCE.

HOME CIRCUIT.—LEwz,, MAscu 24.
Cmi 810L—(Bafore Baron Martin and a Special Jury.

COLE V. SMITH AND WIPE.
This was an motion to recover damage* for a libel. The
beforisata pleaded "not guilty."
Mr. Edwin James, Q.C., end Mr. Denman were fur the
plaintiff; Mr. Monts/pi Chambets, QC., and Mr. Hooey-
:Dim were eettned for the defendants.
Mr. Janus opened the eats for the plaintiff.
Nisi Lonna Graham deposed that she was the sister of
the female defendant. In Tannery last she was residing with
her father and the family at No. 40, Brunswick-terrace,
Brighton, and on the 16th of that month she received a
letter in her sister's handwriting. (The letter, which con-
Weed the alleged libel, was here handed to the witness, and
she identified it as being in the haistierinnir of the wife of
the defendant.) She said she showed the litter to several
members of the family, and it was ultimately alumna to the
plaintiff The witness then stated that her niece, Mies Mary
Anne Smith, was entitled to a good deal ofeicty, and
co
about Christmas last, in nsequence of som that w-
ound, it was considered advimble, by EOM mem re of the
family, that Mr. Cole should be retained to act in his pro-
fessional capacity on her behalf. Miss Smith had come of
see in the previous month of November. The defendant,
Mr. Hogh Smith married one of her eiders, and Mr. Cole,
the plaintiff, married another.
Croes-examined—Witat es was always on kind and affec-
tionate terms with herrister, Mee. Smith, and they frequently
mirreeponded. Very soon afer she received the letter In
question from her, she sent an exteact from it to Mrs. Cole,
intending, of course, that her husband, the plaintiff, should
see it.
Mr. Cole deposed that he was the plaintiff In the action,
and had been is practice for twenty-eeven years ss • solicitor. ,
He married one of the Miss Grahams, and the defendant,
Mr. Smith, married another, and they had been ac-
quainted since the year 1848 ; but, during the last
eie or eight months they had not been so intimate EP pre-
viously. The letter containing the libel was first shown
to him by his wile. His niece, Wee Mary Anne Smith,
Immediately upon her eoming of age, was entitled absolutely
to the sum of 1,0001. She melded with her father and mother,
and in consequence of something that wenn ed witness re-
oohed a retainer from her in reference to her affair' and her
property. He took this retainer at the request of several
members of the family, and ho interfered in the matter
solely at their request, and should not have done so of his
own accord. He knew Mr. Graham Smith, and he believed
that upon his coming of age he was entitled to 100,0001. The
witness them negatived in the meet positive manner the alle-
gations contained in the letter, and declared that be had
never watched the proceedings of Mr. Graham Smith, or
lest him money, or offered to do so, at lees interest than he
would have to pay the Jews, and he also said that the young
gentleman had never borrowed a farthing from hire, and ho
not ham been • party tu any such treneact ion. The
caretainer to which he alluded was oonntertuanded on the 14th
of January.
Cross-mamined—Witnees made no application for au
'eulogy to either of the defendant*, neither did he ask for
any esplenatien, but a writ was at once Maned against them.
He had emmked en eminent barrister upon the subject, who
advised what coarse should to taken, and he left the matter
entirely in the hands of his attorney. No communication
whatever was made to any memter of the family before the
action was brought. Miss Smith came to hie house after he
had MD the letter containing the alerted libel, and her
mother cues in the emus day, and be shook hands with her,
but did not all her that her daughter had given him a re-
tainer to act tether behalf in reference to some Chancery pro-
ceedings that were goieg on In reference to her property. He
did not know whet had since become of the I,oooe, but he
suggested In the tint instance that it should be invested in
tho names of herself and her sister Augusta. Mr. Graham
Smith was now about 23 male of age. He had known bim
from boyhood. He had beard and believed that he beanie
possessed of 100,0001. on his comfig ofd age, sad be certainly
thought It was • very dangerous thing so young • man to
come bite possession of molt a large sum of money. He
never, however, said • weed to him about being careful not
to get into the hands of the Jews. Mr. (Wain Smith hat
fora a short time in the Life Onanis, but he bad now left that

17;tt:.
Merlin here Interposed, and Add it waa qtdte tine
the leiter had been written under an entire miscoaelpeks et
tka facts, sad that there wee no foundation for sapid the
atiotts contained in it, end it appeared to him that as
salicient had been d.me to show that this was the ewe, the
matter ought not to be farther proceeded with.
Mr. James said that all his client desired was le vindicate
his character, sad he was teedyto accede on his behalf Many
course that would have that effect. t.p to this time no
apology bad bees offered.
Mr. Chambers said that:no application had been made

---
Mr. James said ha could only repeat what he bad Wore
stated, that all the plaintiff detired was that It should be
understood that there were no gmunda for the charges cos-
tained in the letter. and that a sufficient apology should be
made for its publication.
Mr. Chambers then submitted that the present action
could not be sustained, en the round that the letter in
question was a privileged comentinicatioat.
Mr. James baying born heard en the other tido, Baron
Martin @aid that although be should not stop the cue be hed
very groat doubts whether the letter did not come within the
rule of law applying to privileged omateunicationt. It had
been the course of late years to extend the rule relating to
teeth communicational. sod sot to narrow it ; and he thought
it exceeding ly doubtful whether this tett. r would not be con-
sidered a privileged communication. It appeared to him,
however, that It was quite unnecereary to proceed any
further. Mr. Cole was quite right in bringing the action, as
it had given him an opportunity of disproving every etre of
the allegations that had been made against him. and be (the
learned judge) and everyone else who heard his evidence
must be saddled that he had done so.
Mr. Chambers said that he had always been ready to ex-
peen regret on the part of Mn,. Smith that she should have
written the letter in question ; but he was at the same time
bound to state that she declared that the alone had written
it, and that her husband had not in any manner controlled
her in the matter.
Mr. Jamie having conernted. on the part of Mr. Cole. to
accept this apology, the parties agreed, the jury beteg with-
drawn ; and that each should pay him own meta.

NORTHERN cißcurr.—DvEßrooL, MARCH 24.
WM MAROS 07 MOILDEZ AOAINST ItiOINZEHA 01.
7111 07RANZA 10007 A.
Tbe grandlary returned atm bill eget:Machu Buchanan
sad Archibald Mitchell, first sad second engineers of the
Pecific Company's steamer Bogota, for murder.
Mr. Owens, me of the coensel for the prosecuti, mid
that the primers were out on bail, sad raked the court to
call upon them to eurrender.
Aepinell (counsel f - Buchanan) °burred that it was
stated la the calendar that the cue would not be called
befOTO the grand jury until Friday, that the prisoners were
with their friends at Glaegnw, ant that there was some
reason be their nott-sppearance to-day without preindiat to
their intuitions
His lordship said the law must take ite course, sad after •
true bill had bean flied seined them they must be called open
to surrender at mos. (The eaves of the prisoners and their
believe were then formally cried out thrift.) His lordship,
however, mid that after Mr. Aepicull's esplanioloa the ewe
of the prieontre would not be prejudioed should It appear
that they had been under a wrong impression es to the time
whoa they ought to surrender.