The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1826-10-12 00:00:00

L-1 IV NOTICES.

COURT OF KING'S RENT
THIS DAT.—TO NIT AT 11 kLV-PAS
London Common Junes.
Edward* t. rat*Wl4
Wilkes v..lonvs
simmons V. Roche
Crafts v. Nogent

Phillips v. notlron
.hoboes v. Kentish
harrlngto. v. Dawson
.Veoluil v. Pend

Ammonds v. Parkin-
eon

flo.tock v. Cockburn
Woo•! •. Clark

Martindale v. Saxon
:lemrnt• v. Kin;
glad:borne v. Prior
%namable v. Oracle

l'hornam •. Creurtone

ri dalle V. Southall

Alder v. Tilley
ihotter v Wvight
Da.h v. Gough
turner v. Boardman
Noble v. Grey
Noble v. Dunham

Haldwin v. Watson

!fall • 11hrtiel

',outhcole V. Wellesley

Dick{mon v. Moves
Shearing,' v. Brooks
/dunk v. Vu.ter
Lloyd r. Wright

Keeling v. Lawson
v. Merrell
ffelyer v. Re:id
Oldtteld v. Mitchell

mute

dint v. Lack

Hewlett v. 'Aycock
hemline v. Sheppard
rayle v. Bird
Cmtar v. Talbot
Peat v. Hanham
Harvey v. Callaway

Hartke; v!ll!rrey

Tennent a. Lktl•

Parting V. Wilk,

CH.
IT

Perring v.
Same v. Novelllt
Phillips v. Parish
HeeMbotharri v.
' Wheel
Walker v. Morling
Lowe v. Sharp
Gray v. Branigan
Staff v. Reed
lituvray v. Sutton
Reynold., v. Drake
Watton v. Gower
Phdlpe v. Corder
Lora. v. Green
Crake v. Rolfe
Mama v. Ruuctield
Willi:um v. Broad-
hurst
13auvell e.Tbomparan
nieney v. Hortehimion
!homer v. rieuth
Crick v. Lee.

LAID INFPM.IGF; SCE.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, Otirt.nsestv,
WEDNESDAY, OCT. U.
fientauct Sittings before the Loan Cn tar JUITICT awl egnsion
Juries.
SLA N DElt.
3owrs' CT ERA. V. hat:motif, Est!.
This was an action for slander.
Air. STAll1:11.: opened the pleadings. The declaration averred
that the plaintiff was a clergyman, in priests orders, and a 'allow
of St. John's (;allege. Cambridge, by the statutes of which college,
any Fellow being guilty of rotoriotie fornication wits liable ta be
expelled and deprived of his office; anti the defendant well lamm-
ing the premises. said of and concerning the plaintiff, the a;reatret
of all Mr. Payne's misfortunes was his having Mr. Jones (ths
plaintiff) as his tutor, for lie was a most debnuched and profligate
character, anti kept a woman. To this the detentlent pleaded the
general issue, Not Guilty.
The COMMON SEIIGEANT stated the case to the Jury. The
plaintiff came this day into a Curt of Jdltice, for the purpose of
clearing his character from a slain put uptin it by the defendant
and he mine in his character as a clergyman of the Church of Eng.
land, because, when persons held that high and sacred (Ace, and
their characters were attacked, it became loan more particularly to
I come before the public, end to give the slanderer an opportunity, if
ibe were able, of praying the imputations he had cast. The plaintiff
WAR a member or the Pnlversity of Cambridge, at which lie had
taken his degrees, and he was also a Fellow of St. John's College,
In the same University. Pre-shins to this advancement he had been
what is called "Travelling Bachelor," and enjoyed the emoluments
of that situation ; SO.I it would appear that such imputations as the
defendant hail thought fit to throw upon his character were calcu-
lated mist materially to obstruct his prospects in the Church. After
lie had left (loiter. Its was recommended into the family of a Mrs.
Payne. a widow Lily of rank and fartune who had two sons ap-
proaching niantwod. To the elder of dime the Reverend Mr.
Jones was approdeal as private travelling tutor, and in that
capacity he ere-elle:I with the family in Fr..nce and Italy, giving
Mrs. Payne at much satisfaction, that he repeatedly received
from her the strongest assurances of regard and gratitude for
the manner is which he discharged his duties. After the eldest
son was colipleteit, Mr. Jones had the second son also con-
fided to ha care; but it so happened, en his leaving the
family, dirt there was a considerable artery due to him; and in
1824, afte' repeated applications, it became necessary to take some
steps for the recovery ot the money due to him, which, in his situ-
ation, he could ill cfl'ord to spare; and it happened that Mr. Han.
bury, tie defendant, who is a Colonel in the Guards, came up to
town, and paid that money, as the agent of Mrs. Payne. It would
seem :hat same impression had been made upon this gentleman's
mind, from his emir ion with Mrs. Payne, that induced hint to
commit the extraordinary and unprovoked outrage now complained
of. In the month of February. 11125, and a few days after the
above settlement, Colonel Banbury went in a stage coach to North-
ampton. In the course of the conversation which naturally takes
place in a stage coach, something was said about the losses that
young Mr. Payne hail recently sustained on the Turf. It was re-
ported that Mr. Payne had lost something considerable at Doncas-
ter; and this being mentioned is a stage coach, where there were
three p rsons present, no one of wham Colonel Banbury knew, he
rashly, impratlernly, and unguardedly, nettle use of the words
stated in the declaration, to which he could only have been induced
by some prejudice his mind had imbibed while acting as Mn.
Payne's agent. He thought pro,-r, in the presence of these
strangers, and ih the presence of the whtde world, it might be
fairly said (for there could not be amore public place than a stage-
coach), to say, " Why, as for Mr. Payne, the greatest of all his
misfortunes is, that he should ever have 1114 Mr. Jones as his
tutor." One gentleman said, " I have not the honour of Mr.
l'ayne's acquaintance, bat ido know his tutor." "Well," said
Colonel Hanbury, " there is no misfortune has befallen Mr. Payne
equal to the inittforfune of his having had 3lr. Jones for his tutor."
Some surprise was expressed, and some silence ensued, the hearers
thinking this was U most extraordinary thing to be said in a public
stage-coach, particular!y, as one gentleman said lie knew Mr. Jones.
The Colonel proceeded to say, " Ile is a most debauched and pro-
11,gate character; he kept a woman." • The Learned Gourmet pre-
sainted it was unnecessary for him to explain the obvious impart of
such worth. Title conversation, of course, went abroad, and ess
lenon as Mr. Jones heard what had been said of him, lie thought it
necessary to call upon Colonel Banbury for en explanation. If,
then, the slighte•t retraction bad been offered—if Colonel Banbury
had thought fit to say that what had fallen from him had escaped
hint rashly or thonghtlessly, and could not he from malicious mo-
tives tORAT:I.I a per-on unknown to him—Mr. Jones would have
been perfectly satisfied ; hot this was refused, and the present ac-
tion was brought. If, therefore, Colonel Banbury, instead of
making come sort of atonement or giving up his authors, thought
fit to take upon himself this most injurious and unfounded slander
(for false the Learned Counsel had a right to call it, as it was not
justified), he must abide the consequence*. Notwithstanding all
that had passed, however. even at this hour, if any retraction or
apology proceeded from Colonel Banbury, the brained Counsel
was autliorizsd to say the action should stop here, Mr. Jones sus-
taining no hats, because it would be highly improper that any per-
son unjustly vilified should he subject to lutes from the misconduct
of others. This offer, he feared, would not be accepted now, as it
had been rejected before ; but Mr. Jones had no wish to avail him-
self of the advantage Whch Colonel Banbury's conduct gave him.
He had Ito desire to obtain vindictive damages. All he wished
teas that which the Learned Counsel was sure he would obtain,
namely, such a verdict as would set him right in the eyes of the
world.
The Cit [Er' Jcsvict —Mr. Brougham, you hear what is of-
fered. What have you to say to it ?
Mr. BROUGITAM-511y Lord, this gentleman 'knows nothing
whatever of Mr. Jones, and he does not know that he has said any
thing against him.
Tile COMMON SERCEANT —lf it is doubtful to him whether
lie ever said any thing of the sort, surely he cannot hesitate in dis-
avowing the imputation.
The Cuter J tosr c E—Well, if you. gentlemen, cannot settle
it between you, the case must go on. 1 hate no wish upon the sub-
ject. If he did not know the gentleman, one would think he could
not hesitate to say he has no reason new to know that what he has
said is true. If a man takes upon himself to state facts of a man
of whom he says he knows nothing, he ought to say now he has no
reason to believe them. That, in my opinion, is what one man
ought to do towards another under such circunist owes.
Mr. linorGirast—l have no objection to add, that he neither
knew then, nor does he know now, any thing against this 'gentle-
man. I think that is going far enough. Vow' Lordship sees this
gentleman is placed in a very difficult situation.
The Cutter JUSTICE-1 think he ought to go further. It you
ask my opinion, as a private gentleman. what ought to be done
between one gentleman and another, I think he ought to say, that
he has no reason to believe what he said then si.iS otherwise found-
ed than in mistake. I thine he can go that length without com-
promising his feelings.
The suggestion or his Lordship was rejected, and the Me pm-
The Rev. George Blick, Fellow and Bursar of St. John's Col-
lege, Cambridge, proved that the Rev. Mr. Jones, the plaintiff,
was a Fellow of that College. The witness also read and trans-
lated extracts from the Latin Statutes of the College, whereby it
was enacted, that any members guilty of notorious fornication were
liable to expulsion.
The Rev. Jelin Daniel stated, that he knew the Rev. Mr. Jones.
of St. John'a College. Ile was the officiating assistant minister to
the Bedford Chapel, in the lowish of St. George, Bloomsbury, from
October 1824 to Christmas 1d25, at a salary. Bedford Chapel is a
licensed chapel, and Mr. Jones resigned that situation at Christ-
mas in%
Mr. Charles Sinclair stated that he hail a slight knowledge of the
Rev. Mr. Jones, the plaintiff, On the 20th of February, 1825, the-
witness travelled from London to Northampton in the mail coach.
Colonel Banbury, the defendant, and Mr. George Talbot, were
the other passengers in that coach. In the course of the journey, a
conversation took place respecting Mr. Payne. Colonel Banbury
asked Mr. Talbot if he knew Mr. Payne? To which Mr. Talbnt
replied, that he did not know Mr. Payne. but he knew something
of Mr-Jones, his tutor. Witness was a friend of Mr. Talbot's,
but was only a slight acquaintance of Mr. Jones. Colonel Han-
bury remarked. that the greatest possible misfortune which could
have befallen Hr. Payne was, that Mr. Jones had been his tra-
velling tutor, for he (Jones) was a meat debauched and profligate
character, and a most improper person to have travelled with Mr.
Payne. The conversation then dropped.
Croat-examined by Mr. Bnotionam—l do not know at what
part of the journey this conversation took place. This is not the
first time I have been examined as a witness. I was examined
once by the gentleman before you (Mt. Common Sergeant). Mr.
Tally)t got into the coach at Charing-cross. I will not undertake
to say how long we were in the coach together before the conver-
sation took place. I took no part in it whatever. Mr. Talbot did
not address his conversation to me. lie merely said that he knew
Mr. Jones, lie is an intimate sequatutance of Mr. Jones, I be-
lieve.
Mr. Tinotooram—Dld not Mr. Talbot ear that Mr. Payne was
a dissipated young man, of loose habits, and was ruining himself
by horse-racing at Doncaster ? Witness—l recollect nmhiog of
the kind. Some remark might have been made-respecting Mt.
IMy:;e's expenditures. Two or three days after this conversation,

I made a memorandum of the precise words which Colonel Ban-
bury used. I way living in London at that time.
Alr. BrtoulnlAM—ln what part of London? Witness—l don't
know in what pan of London.
Mr. TIROITOITAM—I hi which bank of the river Thames? Wit-
neon—.On the right bent.
Mr. BROUGIIA —Perim'', it was in the Rules? Witness--
Pet hap, it might have been. I think it might.
al r. BROUGHAM—And into whit county were you going at this
time, when you were id the Rules ? Witness—lnot Staffordshile.
The Clisztr JusTILE here interfered fur the protection of the
witness.
Mr. Baornit ASS ohaerval that he did not with to eriminste the
witness, and cautioned him not to answer any question which might
afect himself.
The witness then continued—Be had been in Courts of Justice
before, in different parts, in Scotland an well as in Engl
Ale Ban tictiast —Not in that part of the Court usually allotted
to the witnesses, I believe ?
Witness--Probnbly you allude to some political transactions in
which I have been engmed.
Mr. B110(,611A31—( -;10.
Witness—The fact is, I %netske indicted with other parties, but
I wan not furtheeproceeded zgaiont. The others were further pro-
ceeded saainst. If you, Sir (to Mr. Brougham), mean to insinuate
that the others were convicted by my agency, you calumniate me
most grossly. I was.nnt proceeded against for the hest reason pos-
sible, because i could not have. been convicted. Mr. Geialti, one
of the defendants, was convicted.
Mr. George Talbot stated, that on the 20 h of February he was
a passenger in the Northampton Mail, with Colonel Ilanbory and
Mr. Sinekir, the last witness. The conversation respestiog 31r.
Payne took place about fatty miles from London, (ellen n'tr his
property. In consequence of that conversation, Mr. Jones was
mentioned first by me to Colonel Banbury. lae only observa-
tion I made concerning Mr. Payne was, that I underotond he had
spent nearly half his fortune. Colonel- flonimry partially egrets]
with me, antionid be believed he had. After some further remarks,
Mr. Jones'a name was mentioned as Mr. Payne's tutor, who had
travelled with him. Cdottel Banbury observed, that " the great-
cot misfortune which had happened to alr. Payne wits, that %lr.
Jones had been his tutor, for he was a mo.'s: debauched
and profligate character, and kept a woman." I knew Mr. Jones
intimately before this, and said, at the commencement of the con-
versation, that I was acquainted with him.
Cross.enamined by air. BROUGHAM.—I am very intimate with
kr. Jones, and hove been no for some time. Ido not know Air.
Palette. I did not !Lay Mr. Payne had font a great deal of money
at Doncaster. I said lie had spent it, but I slid no atateany means
by which he had lost it. I did not speak of him its a dissipete
v .ung men, nor in any manner calculated to calumniate him.
Colonel Banbury made use of the expression that it was Mr.
Payne's greatest misfortune that Mr. Jones had been his tutor. I
did not take the worth down until I hail spoken to Mr. Sinclair
about it. I have mentioned it to other person.. Colonel Banbury
got out at Northampton. The conversation dropped when it etas
getting late. I did not express any astonishment to Col. Banbury
that he should speak of Mr. Jones in that way. I told blr. Js nen
of this conversation without any idea that he would prosecute.
Neither I nor ale Jones knew that the person who had used this
language was Colonel Banbury. Hail 1 krown that fact, it would
have been a greater intlncement to be to communicate it to him
At first I hod not the least idea Mr. Jolt, would proceed against
Colonel Banbury, and I told it to him Air merriment and fun. I
am of no profession, and I live on toy own moperty. I was an
officer in the 19th Regiment of Lancers for three yearn, both in this
country and ix France. I never took the benefit of the Insrlvent
Debtors Act. 'With indignation) I was never in the Rules of the
Bench in my life.
Mr. Bnouott.SM here apologized to the Sennett'', stating that the
examination lie was putting was intended for another person, but
wan put to him by an ermr in his instructions.
(irons-examination resumed.—l have known Mr. Jonesboth in
this country and in France. When I knew him in France he was
not with Mrs. Payne's family. I never heard any thing said about
the " :orkiog parson."
Bc-examined.-1 mentioned this conversation to Mr. Jones in

fun and merriment—first, because, as it drt in a stage coach, _
thought it untehstantiated ; and next, because I did not know the
person who :used these words. When I found they were used by a
gentleman of Colonel Ilanbury's rank, I thought very differently of
them.
Mt. Charles Carus Wilson, Solicitor for the plaintiff, proved that
in February, 11...2.5, ke made a demand upon Mrs. Payne, at the
instance of his client, for some arrears due to him, and that de-
mand *as paid by Colonel flanbury as the agent of Mrs. Payne.
Ala SRncan,►st then addressed the Jury for the defendant. lie
obsereal, that sts to the manner in which Mr. Jones, the platntilf,
hail conducted himself in the family of Mrs. Payne, and as to the
!supposed satisfaction expressed by that lady at his conduct, no
' earthly evidence had been given. except the speech of his Learned
Friend, who was thus instructed to blazon the excellence of his
client's character in terms of praise. It was clear, however, that
upon his services being discontinued, he thought fit to institute
proceedings against Mrs. Payne to recover some demand, in the
settlement of which Colonel Hanbury had acted as the friend and
agent of this lady. and in some degree as the guardian of ymong
Mr. Payne; and being hitally ignorant of Mr. Jones, it was utterly
impossible that he should be supposed capable of maliciously say-
Mg any thing to the aisparagernent of that individual, 'mks. he
had been informed of something in his conduct not quite so satis-
factory as had been stated by Mr. Common Sergeant. It was evi-
dent also, from the testimony of Mr. Talbot, that Colonel Hanbury
had not first introduced the name of Mr. Jones; but, perhaps.
waking ota of a confused sleep in a stage coach, and hearing the
name of tlihs Jo: a mentioned, he might state something that had
reached his ears, not very favourable to Mr. Jones's character; but
the Learned Counsel submitted to the Jury that it was utterly im-
possible Colonel lianbury could ever have said that " Mr. Jones
kept a woman," because Mr. Sinclair, who made a memorandum of
the conversation, altruist inimed:ately afterwards, never recollected
such an expression to have been made use of; and even tile. Tal-
bot, who swore to it, though an intimate friend Of:ilr. Jones, never
made the slightest remonstrance upon this insinuation against his
comrade's character, hut actually told him of it for fun and merri.
meat the first time he saw him. It had been observed, however,
that Colonel Hanbury had not given rip his authority for any ex-
pressions he had made use of. The Learned Counsel would have
, exceedingly regretted any such stet', if Colonel Hanbury had even
felt disposed to adopt it ; because if he had consented this day to
cast an imputation on the credit of• his friend, or if he had debased
himself by betraying others to escape Himself•, he was sure the Jury
would be of opinion he would leave this Court without a fragment
of the high and honourable character be had universally maintained.
The Jury would act with mmlantion, the Learned Counsel was
' convinced, and, whatever their decision might be, Iris client was
; content.
The Loan CHIEF JrsTICE, in charging the Jury, observe.]
that Colonel Hanbury, arta man of honour, could not be expected
to give up Iris authors for any thing he might have unforsunately
said respecting the plaintiff; but when he adopted that course in a
Court ofJustice, he must necessarily abide the consequences which
the law imposed. His Lordship then went over the evidence, and
told the Jury if they were of opinion that the words in question
were uttered by the defendant, they ought to give the plaintiff a
verdict for such fair and reasonable damages as the cue called fir
The Jury deliberated a few minutes, and then found for the
plaintiff—Damages 100/.