The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1826-07-06 00:00:00

OXFORD CIRCUIT.

ABINGDON, Juts 4, 1828.
SLANDER.
WEST V. SIR ,011 N ”ASIIWOOD RING. BART.
This was an action brought by a C.4“UMW% carrier and small far-
mcr, of the county of Bucks, eglinst Str John Dashwood King,
BAWL ALP , and a Magistrate of that county. The declaration
was a curiosity among pleaders. It contained eighteen counts,
alleging n 1 less than three distinct causes of action. The first six
charged the defendant with having maliciously prosecuted the
plaintiff, under the Ist Geo. 11'., commonly called " the Trespass
Act." The second six charged the defendant with having slander.
ously said, of and concerning the plaintiff, " I could have hung
West long ago, if I had chosen to appear against him personally.
I had him in Aylesbury gaol long ago, and the man who was in-
dicted with him Was transported. The last six coats were is
wooer, for LAM trees in a certain wood called " Phillips Hill
11'ood," belonging to the defendant, which were alleged to have
been purchased by the plaintiff: The defendant pleaded Not
Guilty
to all the declarations, save and except the utterance of the
words," I had him in Aylesbury gaol long ago, and the man who
was indicted with him was transporttd." These were justified by
the defendant as true, and the plaintiff has demurred to the justi-
fication. The venue, atter having been originally laid in Landon,
was moved last Term, at the instance i,f the plaintiff. from Huck-
inghamshire (where the supposed causes of action arose) to this
county, as one of those next adjoining. fate damages were laid
at 2,04/0/.

M. JERVIS (with whom was Mr. TALFOURD) stated the
plaintiff's case.
Gerelemen of the Jury—Upon the present occasion I have to
make an appeal to your justice for a very large amount of damages.
against the defendant. The plaintiff, Mr. John West, is a small
farmer living at Ilaslemere, in the county of Rucks. The des
fendant is a gentleman of very large fortune, a Magistrate of .bat
county, and Member of Parliament for Wycombe. This action
is brought against him by the plaintiff for a series of oppressive
conduct, such as I scarcely ever met with M the course of my pm-
fessionid experience. I shall state this case with very great mode-
ration, because I am quite sure that when the facts of it are estab-
lished, which I have no doubt thy will be to your as infection. no
amount of damages within the 2000/. charged in the declaration
will be deemed by you immoderate. I ientlemen, on the 18th lk-
eember, 1823. Sir John Dashwood King, the defendant, had
occ.ion to sell, and did sell, by an auctioneer named Scull, a
considerable portion of his timber and underworld. Upon that
occasion, a person named Nicholls, who was an upholsterer,
in Hunter-street, Brunswick-square, became a purchaser of 1199
trees, at the price of 384/. He was probably inexperienced in the
commodity he was buying, and met with much opposition in his
biddings. It was one of the conditions of sale under which he
purchased, that he should pay twenty per cent. deposit, and within
ten days give security for the payment of the residue, at dates of
three and six months. Mr. Nicholls, according to the conditions
of sale, immediately gave a check on his bankers for the deposit
of twenty percent., which was duly paid. Afterwards, though not
within the ten days, he gave to the auctioneer his own bills, pay-
able at three and six months. Having become the purchaser of
five lots of trees, he was introduced to the plaintiff who is a small
farmeri.and a convener of tituber ; and -Mr. Nicholls employed
him as his agent. to see the timber cut down, converted into faggots,
and otherwise disposed of as was necessary. The amount of the
demand that became due to llr. West, the plaintiff, for his labour
and trouble, was 120/., and Mr. Welt not being in a situation of
life to give long credit, he applied for some payntent. Mr.Nicholls
found he had made an improvident bargain, and perhaps he was
in no condition to nay this further demand of alr.West's. Aceori
dingly, on Jan. 4, 1823, lie proposed to sell Meal'. the timber lie had
pureltaot lat 3344 fur 2594 Though there appears to be so Coll4i-
deldbit • difference between the two aunts, you will find the latter
was the intrinsic value of the thither. That will appear by the ac-
tual sale, which has been made by the agents of the defendant,
who thought proper to seize the whole of this timber under the cir-
cumstancre I shall shortly state to you, Gentlemen, Mr. Nicholls
became a bankrupt on the 16th of January, just twelve days after
his agreement to sell to Mr. Weer, and teat leads me to con-
side! the circumstances under which the purchase was made by
Nicholls, and also the circumstances under which the sub-
tequent purchase was made by West, the plaintiff, from Ni.
cholls. Now, in point of law, there can be no doubt that
Nicholls bad a right to convert the timber to his own use after
he had purchased it, and to carry it away. It is impossible to sur-
mise that he purchased it with any view to his bankruptcy. He
paid the deposit accordirg to the terms of the sale, which it was
clear lie would not have done it• at that time he had any idea that
lie should so shirr ly become a hankrnpt. It is manifest, also, that
if any fraud bad been contemplated between those parties, nothing
could have been easier• thin for the plaintiff to have removed
the whole of this timber before Nieholls's bankruptcy took
place. Now, with regard to the sale by Nicholls to my client, 1
have a person here who will prove to you that was a bona
fide transaction. I have already stated to you that the money
West was to give was as much as ever the timber was
worth. Upon this purchase I shall prove to you that he paid
the partner of Nicholls 1254; and that, I should think, will clearly
establish his title. Gentlemen, I stated to you that originally
Mr. West appeared es the agent of Mr. Nicholls. After this pur-
chase was concluded, he went openly and publicly with his work-
men to complete the work he had commenced in behalf of Mr.
Nicholls. After having paid for the timber, as I said before, he
went on the 10th of February to carry away part of it. It seems
that those who were employed on the pert of the defendant on eltesai
occasion thought fit to take my client into custody. I don't com-
pile of this feet as one impugning the defendant ; butt it is a fact
in the case, and therefore I intrnduce it, though you will not take
it into your consideration in awarding damages on the present occa-
sion. He was, in point of fact, falsely imprisoned, and for that
Imprisonment he brought bisection against a constable of the name
of Hitchcock. and recovered 32/. in damages. Upon that (xi -mien,
as I shall prove, the defendant, Si: John Dashwood King, thought
fit to state that which he has not ventured to justify upon this re.
cord ; and 1 shall prove to you by a most unwilling witness, that
he then stated be could have hung %Vest long ago, if he had
chosen to appear against him personally. The defendant has not
ventured to justify that expression ; but he has justified another ;
for he went on to say," 1 had hint in Aylesbury gaol, and the mien
who was indicted with hint was transported." That part has been
justified by the defendant, and my client, under the alvice he re-
ceived in London, demurred to that justification. On other occa-
sions, Gentlemen, die defendant has thought fit to give utterance to
the same slander; and I submit to you most confidently. that when
a man of large pos anion, and liberal education thinks fit to assail
the character of a poorer man, and to charge him with some offence
for which his life might be forfeited to the laws of his country,
you, by your verdict, ought to avenge the wrong, and render re-
tribution, as far as the exercise of the proud principle you now
have in your hands will allow you. The Learned Counsel went on
to state that the defendant had sold to other persons the timber
which the plaintiff had bought of Nicholls, and submitted that,
under the counts in trovcr, the plaintiff was entitled to the value of
the timber.

Mr. Charles Scull was called, and on getting into the
wit-
nest.box, submitted to the Court that he ought to have his expenses
before he gave any evidence.
Mr. Justice IIuMYOCG.It asktd him how much lie had received
and whence he had come?

Mr. Charles Scull replied that he had only received two pounds,
and he had travelled thirty-two miles.
His Lordship instantly ordered him two pounds more, which
were handed over to him.

31r. JERVIS—Now, 31r. Scull, give us a good four pounds'
worth, will you. (Itaughtcr.)
Ur. TALFOU•D then examined the witness, after he had been
sworn, and he deposed to this effect, in substance. lam an auc-
tioneer, living at Wycombe. In December, 1824, I was employed
by Sir John Ihuthwoed K,ng to sell some timber of his standing in
Phillips Hill Wood, in the county of Bucks. The sale took plan
on the 13th of December 1834. I produce one of the catalogues in
obedience to my sigbrams duces learnt. At that sale a person of the
name of Nicholls W• 1.4 a bidder, and beetrue a purchaser. He'
bought five lots. Ile bought upwards of eleven hundred
trees altogether, and the sum total lie was to give was
384 f. Iths He gave me a check for the deposit, amount-
ing to 771. 10a., which was duly paid. He never gave me
any bills for the remainder of the purchase money. There were
two bills produced by him to me, which are now destroyed. They
were destroyed by me because they were no securities. They were
drawn by my son, not in nay behalf, nor by my direction. Nicholl's
put his name to them, hot 1 would not accept of them, as I consi-
dered they were not a valid security, and 1 destroyed them with
File. Nicholls' co.:tent. Then they were given to me, I considered
them no more than blank paper. They were laid on the table, and I
took them up, but that was all. I received notice to produce them,
but they were destroyed long ago. I never saw the timber in
question in the progress of bring cut down by the plaintiff: I never
knew it was cut down, until, I think, about the 24th of January.
I never saw any men of the plaintiff's cutting the timber down.
According to the conditions of the sale, as you will see, the deposit
money would be forfeited if the purchase money was not made
good within the time specified and 1 sold the same timber subse-
quently by the direction of Sir John. I did not see the plaintiff
taken into custody at the wood. I don't recollect bearing Sir John
Dashwood King say any thiog abcut
Mr. Tarrouan—Come, Sir, attend a little; did you ever hear
Sir John Dashwotml King say that he could hang or transport West
if lie chose P—l don't recollect. _

_ .. ...
111 r. TaLrottwn—Did Jou ever hear him say he would prose-
cute him, if it coat him 10 H)1. ?—I don't recollect.

Mr. 'l'scrotiers--Ditl you ever hear him pay any thing about
his determination to prosecute him ?-1 don't recollect.
Mr. JERVIS—Why, this fellow is a regular Non mi recordo.
(Laughter.)
Mr. TaLrocuo—Will your Lordship allow me to put the
words to him

Mr. Justice BulltOUGH—No t I cannot do that.
Cross-examined by Mr. TAUNTON—Nicholls hasnever paid the
money for the timber. Ile to:d toe he lived in Hunter-street,
Brunswick-square, London, but I never could find him there,
After I rejected the bills, Nicholls was to bring me ready money or
good security, and be brought me neither. As he brought iteither,
I tore up the bills, My banker made inquiries about the respond.
bility of Nicholls, and the answer was not satisfactory. Beyond
the amount of the deposit-money, a single farthing has not beat
paid. According to the conditions of sale, good and satisfactory
security was to he found for the purchase-looney. but Nicholls
could produce nobody but West, th., plaintiff, and I would not
take his name. On the 24th of January I saw a part of lot 27,
which I understood hail been cut down by West's order. There
wore three oak trees cut down amen the r:st. January is not the

THE BRITISH PRESS.

proper time of the year to cutoak. If it was cut in May, the bark
would be worth as much as the timber ; bat if cut, ao this was, in
January, the bark would be vorth nothing After West had been
tutting some timber, I gave orders to Biggs, Sir John's wondi
bailiff, to stop him from cutting down any more. After that Wcst
called on nie. and said, " it Is a bad job about stopping me out
of the wood." I said, " I can't help it, West ; Ntcholl, you
know, has become a bankrupt." He answered, " I think not. I
saw him to-Jay." I think he said in Whitecross-strect or Red-
crosa-street prison ; but he said, " 1 think it will be settled. I
think the money will be paid for the wood bow." I slid I should
not let any more wcod go without the money. West said, bet
me go into the wood and have a little more." I said, " What have
you done with that you have had already out of the wood ?" He
said, " I have sold it." I said, "In whose name ?" Ile snits,
" In my own name ;" and 1. then said, " I think you are suffi-
ciently paid for your labour." He told me he had expended a great
deal of money in the felling for Nicholls, and it was a hard case
upon him. He said if I would give him twenty pounds he would
trouble me no more about it. At this time be urged no claim to
this timber. He said he wished tb purchase it, but it was not in
his power. I suppose he meant he had not the money. After this
I recollect receiving a note from the wood-bailiff respecting the
wood, and on going to the spot I found a quantity of the timber
I that had never been paid for, felled and moved out of the wood
through a gap into a lane.
Hustings Illoore was next called, and stated that he had been
partner with Nicholls as a cabinet-maker. and shared the pretended
purchase of Sir John's timber with Nicholls. Witness paid to
Nicholls half the deposit, and gave hint credit fur half the amount
of tne purchase money.
Mr. TaUNTOK now objected to this witness, as Interested in
establishing Nicholls's wrongful title to the timber under I,:e pre-'
tended sale, and therefore submitted that he was incompetent.
Mr. Justice Dunaouno overruled the objection, but said that
no title whatever to the timber ever vested in Nicholls. It was one
of the express conditions of sale, that after deposit was paid, the
purchaser should, within ten days, provide good sod valid security
for the purchase money, and If he failed so to do the deposit was to
be forfeited. As Nicholls had not complied with the conditions In
this respect, it was impossible to say that he ever owned the timber,
Of could sell it to West. " There ea an end of your (rover," added
his Lordship, " and you =sago on to your malicious prosecution
sod the slander."
Mr. James Weight call and examined by Mr. TALFOURD.—
I ant clerk to Aleuts. c and Murray. They are attor-
neys in London-street, Fent:bomb-street. In June. 1825, I was
clerk to Mr. Orchard.who was at that time employed as 31r.West'a
attorney. In that month I served the witness Scull with a notice.
In the evening of the same day I waited on Sir John Dashwood
King, and served him personally with a notice.
A copy of the notice was here put in and read. It was signed by
rile. Orchard as attorney for {'eat. and in a very formal manner
demanded of Sir John Dashwood King the peaceable possession of
the timber, which Wein alleged he had purchased of Nicholls.
Witness in continuation.-1 told Sir John Dashwood King that
I called on him in respect of some timber, and that the notice was
contained in a letter which I delivered to him. He answered by
'keying that lie did not know what I was alludihg to. I stated that
I had seen 31r. Scull the auctioneer; that he hell told me he had
sold the timber to Nicholls, ono that Nicholls had paid twenty per
cent. deposit. He answered by saying that he had not received his
accounts from Mr. Scull. He went on to say, '• Then,if I must
speak out, Sir, the man for whom you are interceding I could have
hung several years ago, if I had chosen personally to have ap-
peared against him. I had him in Aylesbury Gaol, and the man
who was indicted with him was transported." or " ordered to be
transported," lam not sure which. I said I had nothing to do
with that case; I wanted an answer to the letter, and he said his
attorney should answer the letter.
Cross-examined by Mr. Sergeant PlAKE—Orchard was the at-
torney of Mr. West. He is not his wormy now, but 31r. Jones
is. I was clerk to Mr. Orchard, who lived in Cray's-Inn-square
at that time. I have been acquainted with Mr. West several
years, and I took his case into Mr. Orchard's office. He came
there certainly by my Introducing him. I have known West about
six years. 1 was formerly clerk to 31r. Harmer, of Hatton-garden,
and %Vest was a client of his. He was indicted by Sir John Dash-
%einem! King, and he was tried and acquitted. That was the occa-
sion on which I became acquainted with him. I went down to
Aylesbury, as Mr. Ilarmer'a clerk, to defend him. There was no
one present when Sir John Dashwood made use of these words to
me. There was a little boy went with me to chew me the way, but
I don't think he was near enough to hear the expressions. The
prosecution against West,at Aylesbury, was stopped by the Court,
I think.

Mr. Jones, the attorney, here produced copies of two indict-
ments, one against West and a man named Plumridge. for a con-
spiracy to defraud Sir John Dashwood King of a certain quantity
of timber, and the other against West only, for a felony. Both
indictments it appeared were presented true bills by the Grand
Jury, but West's was indorsed as acquitted.
The cross-examination of the witness Wright resumed.—l don't
know that the acquittal of West took place because the timber was
described as the property of Sir John Dashwond King, instead of
the Dean and Canons of Windsor, under whom he was lessee, but I
believe there was something of that kind ; and I know the case was
stopped by the Court.
one witness swore he saw West in the wood, with a candle and
lantern, late at night.
Mr. James May, the conductor of the Burks and AylcsLury
zate, was next called, and he asked for his expenses.
slr. JERVIS-Ma.. 1,47115. on do not want your expenses.
dgetieljpirulase been taking- e of this case.
Mr. Blay was proceeding to answer this remark, when he was
ordered his expenses by the Court. fie was then closely examined
at some lhngth, with a view to prove that Sir John Dashwood King
had made use of the words stated in the declaration to him ; but the
witness recollected nothing of the sort.
Mr. Edward Latham, a dirk to the clerk of the MaListrates, in
the parish of Chalfont, Bucks, was then called to prove the exami-
nation and complaint of Sir John Dashwood King against the plain-
tiff, %Vest, in order to establish the averment of malicious prosecu-
tion ; but this part of the case also failed, on account or a variance
between the warrant against West and the manner in which it was
set out in the declaration.

Mr TAUNTON addressed the Jury for Sir John D shw,od
King.—Gentlemen of the Jury, it appears to me that though this
case has been introduced to you by my Learned Friend in a con.
plicated speech, and though it has been diversified by no less than
three distinct ciuses of action, it has now resolved itself into the
most trifling action that I ever saw brought into a Court of Justice.
First of all, my Learned Friend opened it to you that it was an
action ter words. That, to be sure, does not sound very majestic,
not even when brought against • Baronet, a Member of Perlis.
meet, anti a Buckinghamshire Magistrate. Next, lie told you it
was an action for a nialicioua prosecution ; and thirdly, and lastly,
by some strange sort of wedding, you are informed that it is an
action of trover, These strange and incongruous averments are all
crammed into this little bit of parchment. (Here the Learned
Counsel, amid much laughter, held up the record, which was
nearly large enough to cover the table of the Court.) Here are no
less than eighteen counts, and, after all, the whole case is re.
duced to this short arid simple question :—Did or did not
Sir John Dashwood King make use of the words imputed to
him by this attorney's clerk, who went to serve him with this
impudent notice ? As to the counts in trover for this timber, I say
a more impudent cause of action was never set up is any court of
justice; for, without going out of the case to throw reflections upon
the plaintiff, I say it appears manifest that this Nicholls did his
utmost to cheat poor Sir John Dashwood King out of the value of
this timber ; and notwithstanding what Mr. Jervis has said, I sub-
mit to you thst at the time Nicholls bid fur these nine lots, lie must
have been conscious of his insolvency. Afterwards he made a sort
of allow of giving something by way of security, but Mr. Scull tells
you he reiteted the bills because they were worth nothing, anti he
rejected the security of West also, because he did not consider him
a sufficiently responsible person. Then, Gentlemen, you have it
front my friend Mr. Jervis, that this is not the only action that Mr.
West has brought, arising out of this transaction ; so that what
with the damages be has got in his other actions, and the shilling
that you may, perhaps, give him by and bye, he, will have rea-
son to congratulate himself on the manner in which he gets
off. But now, Gentlemen, let us consider for a moment ,1
how this case cornea before you. It was first attempted to
be tried in London, and then it is brought here by the plaintiff,
instead of being tried in Bitc(ingliainshire, where the supposed
cause of action arose. It is acknowledged, then, is it, that in the
county where this respectable geatiernata,SirJohn Dashwood King,
is known, nobody would believe that he is the karat, tyrannical,
and oppressive man, that this declaration would make him out ?
I wish to say nothing niore favourable of Sir John Dashwood
King than that the story the plaintiff tells here to-day would not
be credited where he is best known. Then, gentlemen, let us in-
quire what cause of action really exists. If these words were ut.
tered at all, recollect that they are only sworn to by an attorney's I
clerk, who says they were used on the occasion of his serving the
defendant with ibis most impudent notice, which was enough to irri-
tate the feelings of any man. But recollect, gentlemen, that a
part of the words imputed to Sir John are justified by him, and
justified because true ; and the plaintiff, instead of denying their
truth, thinks fit to demur to the defendant's plea, because he knows
they are true. Under all these circumstances, I submit to you
most confidently that your verdict ought to he for niy client ; but if
you should think that the words imputed to Sir John King were
uttered by him, one shilling is die utmost amount_ that you would
be warranted in giving.
Mr. Justice Ilusteotinit then briefly charged the Jury, and
stated that if they
_believed that the defendant uttered the words ,
sworn to by the witness Wright, he was clearly of opinion that 1
they were actionable, and the verdict must be for the plaintiff: but
then the Jury, in awarding damages, would take into considers.
tion the occasion on which they were uttered, and would make
some allowances fur a man who had been served with so irritating
and impudent a .notice as that served upon the defendant, at the
instance of the plaintiff:
The Jury found for the plaintiff—Damages one shilling.
CROWN SIDE.
The business on the Crown side terniinated at five o'clock, and
no case of any public importance was tried.
The Assizes on both sides concluded between four and five
o'clock.

Richardson, Goodluck. and Co. be; to call the attention
of their friends and the public to the last Lottery that will ever be
drawn in this kingdom. The Scheme contains Six Prizes of
130,000, with various other Capitals. the whole to be drawn in one
day, the 111th of this month. Tickets' and Share,,, in variety of
numbers, are on sale by Riehardsm, fioodluek, and Co., at their
old established tiflice, 104, Babk.Wildings,