The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1822-12-03 00:00:00

Mr. ARCHBOLD followed on the same side.

The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE was of opinion that
in point of law, if the Sheriff forebore to sell within
a reasonable time, an action would lie. It was for
the Jury to say whether there was any malice, or
whether the properly had been deteriorated by the
delay. His Lordship did not thirs, therefore, that
he ought to stop the cause.
Mr. COOPER then addressed the Jury. He said
he had the honour to appear on the part of Mr.
Parkins. soma time since Sheriff of London. He
followed the example set by his Learned Friend
Mr. Scarlet!, though, perhaps, irrelevant to the case,
in deprecating the idea of mixing up the Counsel
with the client ; he alio adopted his opinion of the
indefinite nature of libel ; but still as the law had
said publications of a certain nature were libellous,
every one was bound to obey it, whatever his private
opinion crept be, and the Jury were to judge of the
conduct of the Sheriff by the law of the land.—
The Learned Counsel then proceeded to argue that
the Plaintiff's case had not barn made out. He
had not shewn there was any connesion between
those who tossed the writ and the Defeudatit. Ou
the contrary. be should be able to prove that Mr.
Parkins, so far from having appointed Mr. Coiling-
ridge the Secondary, had protested against his
acting fur him.
Tfr CUM ANTICS said he did not think, after
th which had been made, purporting to he
the return of both the Sheriffs, that that topic
could be urged. If the return was false, a motion
should have been made to have it taken off the file
of the Court.

Mr. Cooraa resumed.—There Wls not the
slightest reason fur imputing malice to the Sheriff,
he should therefore on that ground be entitled to
the verdict of the Jury. It was the latter end of
Michaelmas Term that Cathie went to prison, mod
it would naturally be asked, why he had taken no
steps to 'meditate the sale by the Sheriff. The
reason was, that the great object of the Plaintiff was
to pay his fine from some other source, sod not to
have the works sold in the mass, but to reserve
them for a pri,fitable retail sale. When the She-
riffs entered they found a number of works, but
all in great coofusion. It was notorious that many
of the works were libellous. Was it. therefore, lie
would ask, malicious, or only A prudent desire not
to violate the law, which had induced the course
which had been followed ? Notwsthstanding the
jeopardy in which he placed himself by it, lie must
dissent from the doctriue of his Learned Friend,
Mr. Scarlett, that the sale by the Sheriff was not
such a publication as would subject lam to ■
prosecution. In a recent case it was prped
that the publication had taken place in the ab-
arnee of the Defendant, and init:Aout his tutor.
ledge, yet it was held that he was answera-
ble for it as having first put it in motion.—
His Lemma Friend had supposed the Sheriffs were
so ignorant as, from the title, to mistake the nature
of the Bishop of Llandaffs work ; but if they had
mistaken it, so had his late Majesty, for. on sceong
the title, he exclaimed, " Apology for the Bible !
The Bible wants no apology." If the Sheriffs had
taken the lime to separate the itinocluot pall of the
work from the other, it would have occupied till
this time to effect it. Mr. Cooper again urged the
negligence of the Plaintiff in taking no steps to
compeloa ale ; and argued by analogy, that a men
who looked on without complaining, whilst another
rected buildings on his laud, the inference of

••••.r.-...,An.m..•l•M•dMiga_