The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1808-11-09 00:00:00

?UR kltiC C. 110.311BRTV.

Mr. GoCtiow rIJ ++l, that he was Aanew comae
against the Ride for ate inierwatioy. in this tdbe
It was an apidwatioo on the part e.•
to stop the in s!..licatinn of r . boo i taonewiniug
sages that were Isbenutiw The iiititint-sh, were a. ry
1014,, weed as they related ;u ,lisnut,s entire.) • 1 a
Guuolc isatoro, and he could not ea.stetati that stir.
lloglierty the t, lie haw-
ittg arrignet! atoooito fur it, Ise i:rit.tourrow) mold
not do good, but, on qv-conker:, town mom, uy
rob nog auto a titled or the IA bolt c.reusiistamete
that womd teed to jits.4 tbene.
'Lend F.r.r.rteeogo.,..o—.• f he pulaheatio.l be
not &dial; I lain afraid we aloseld he dotag tooth
florin hy going Into it wisod the iactlO/t ilteidsoom't
Mr. ( ; tali Mr. ile,prerty win laslaceil to
',oldish it inrdpiroto - . pie ii.vitig urea
denied ail assistance from titose of his Kristina* who
were opulent."
Mr. :MARRYATT, on the !Wale side, Mille that be
must *dont the inthlicatitin was certainly eery ha
bellow.. Many of the facts, howe.er, wore alit
clewed by Mr. Hooter, while he bad toriaied ether.;
wherens, if he had traversed the whole of the tints
stated iii this publication, the Rule must ones..
sarily have been rendered absolute, bet otleeresue
he thought it could not.
Mr. Duatereeniso, uu theoMlo side, observed,
dint the libel was in welt general terms. as to Al,:
lianter himself; hut it was publisbed under she
influence of feel', that were very sore; Mk:
limiter• was not toe cony ;Yer-ots of win. at Mr.
lloglierty complained, and inn-fore there were
other pelota's wiatme cotteloct winded esplaintwo.
The Arroarity-fiLagest., in sus.port el tie
rule, said, it would be a new sort of doctrine So
suppose the? because Mr. Hunter had not denied
all the ports of this libellous publication, a person
who could duct any thing io ;he hfe of some twit-
viduals deaerving of reprel.einnott, should thelva
fore be at lenerty to insert that in a pablicutaers
and add to it or wally fat.-hoods as he plelood feu,
ti.e to soother without that wan I iseii,g
power to come into a Court soitioat thus
lie modal Blot admit this doctrine, as it insailt
ariord the means by whmh a great deal of simmer
might be introduced unit impunity ; eind he Inf-
licted it was upon that, and that Mime. a grief
many of the liriellnrs of the preset day .r.-steri.
lie thentfore shuttle awl! way, tint it apt,eartd
quite inmossiblc the Court uetdv heotate as to thle
.propriety of this Rifle hcitt4;rwat..A. it it were
otherwise, lie should have 1111 01 to go into
the facts. Mr. Deigherty hail written dee letter.
while be etaa. in custnely, adoressett to Mr. lisotera
wherein lie hod di:rater-nil to publish this libel, u. •
less he liberated hon.
Lord ELLEWBON,JUGH thought that the pedelia
cat;on was highly callooninus lea its meteor. 'I he
only question, thererore, that re:l,oton', isms, nbt-
ther tllr. Hooter, from his tun having tiatc.nd
every part of the imputation, be rot fill 1.14•11 to the
special interposition of the Court? He could sot
help thioking„ that it • wood flu ad storing hut
scanty justice to refuse ao information to tin
iaedi-
viJual applying for it under such circurunaect a
Imeause he could not give a oxhide...tory answer its
to the allele of the facts detailed in the
This would he giving the ful!est protecton, to
slander that could possibly be devised. The little,
upon this point, was iir.t mentiotled in the case the
Ring v. Miles ; and it was no doubt a goad rule tai
abide by as tee Ideals ; but he. never hare the l'inart
say, that every word of a libel lutist be traversed.
Their discretion was oot to he nottail Jeewn by the
strict letter td rule, but to be governed by 1101111 d
rirtllW and rerion, apolicable to the ease is question:
lie thought they eeist.l sect refuse the Ride ; bat lie
commended the counsel 041 bolls rides for not
toiii:jug forward the tirLinn.lances of the libel
again.
Mr. Justice Verne united in th...s
Mr. Galanow sd led, that Ih. tnueveut Tklr. flows
herty, found this publication was coalpia,,,c,i of.
he applied to the book.ellers to atop the r.nle- of
it, and alrn to put .a atop to the advcroseinents.s--,
11.1.11 e absolute.
, .

_
. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Nov.*.
WRIGHT. 00 devise N.prTA4 E. II SALM aryl wire.
Thi.- was • runtimi for • role lo Atka enure, why
the %enlietplitaipsal by the Defendant*, should not
hat "et glide, not nu!), as u",ottimit ernleittlt. but tot
want of proof iu rapport 0, it.
The action ea% au egeetiornt, brouph! to try the
itnestiote of aili, or no will. under the
cirz-usostanees:—A the 1.5111. e of
Vamatty. had .het to toe year ottma exr•
cated a will SO fsr bark 04 the yew ;A. In which
Cie Irssee or the Phi.tituil was the onject of his
bounty.' The Defeadcit, beim( his heir at lan,
(iron aim decease search was made ligroin( his pa-
ItY a ttenzlematt of the iiaine of Gootlallr a
friend of :he I)efe.balnut*, who 8,4 tell, till Is- as
nnoroach to be found ; Itow.rer. ty;iarvel
, to aircretr *nine perm! in his pock t, it, the course
of the seirrh find, up. -I br:...• tio:: :4Ni on the
sol*ct, he shinned they weft* merely nee,
bounty, but nothing in toe snare of a will. to

this manner severalltears elapsed bAbre any trill
appeared ; but samisen having wen circulated, he
sr is again applied to; when he confessed there owns
1 Jill found—that he. had it not in his 1t0... Session,
bat would produce it ins month ; at the expiration
of that period, he Yetnaact to she* it, without the
consent of the Defendant, Mr. Beach, as being the
heir at law of the deceased.
Being asked it the will had been cancelled ? he
t "died it was; but that it was ant he whodid
lie did net riroduee the will till compelled thereto,
four years aftcrwaida, by the Spiritual Court; and
it * cont.mere.l, that. tram the fare of the I ustru -
mont; it must have le'en exiicelleit4y4 Modall him-
self, and not by the Testator in n paa.loa, a. bail
been attempted to lie proved OA the trial, iu the
Course of which several witnesses, on the part of the
Plamtitf, proved expressiims eitue,ts of
the deceased, in which he axprensly Anil,' to Ids
Will, met the disposal's,' tlierem made in favour of
the Plaintiff.• lu addition to these facts, it was ob.

tazrved by the tleurt. that Goodall !ski not lamb
produced bre* Defendant* on the licit trialit "ibe,
• catnie haling been twice tried b. fore ; and Mr.
elltifOßS .(Iferore whom it had been 'ion
it We 1. that he was very reluctantly brou;:lit
fo.vard cia that ttezitNion, after he had a,lted thew
whether the. Defetbia,tta ineseat to re,t their caw,
without pm:Wm:Mg hint.—Rule to new cause
granted.
roast: r. Timm. •

111. .Serjeant VAUGHAN &hewed .C:itriC flgliinfot n
rale tibt.usa4 by Mr. Serjeaut fbr set-
. too aNidnotne deed of utinuitv, nod thc• bond and
isd..:nient in ens Case. the Defendant bent 4
ititt•si to a revvsionary interest, is :1 large sum of
money, utisiug, out of nwent itteuritv, and
Lang in want of money, aliplied In Site. Plaitita
•to raise hiw 10001. upon a posPolpit bond, in
duality tae amount ; this was declined ; but the
• sant was afford wpm) the pun-chase of an ttttt ity,
to be secured peon his property in the fonds, at
the rate of elate,' and a half per esut. and insuring
his life ; seeordingly, in October 1d!)?, he hying
urgent for re.rly 'spin y, a Mr.00.1!:e.v..:1i procured
• is advance 6001. upon the joint bo::d of the (le-
feadant, anti a brother of the Plaintiff. as a seep-
' Ct!, until the necessary deed of annuity 'could be
perfected ; in the mouth of December followin7,
being in want of a further stun of 2001. he a draft
on Mr. Baustseid, f.A 1391. for winch a further an-

nuity teas to he .•mnted ; and accaril'aly, on the
44th of Ueeember, 1801, aideed. wes ufsecated, se-
curing to Mr. Cooke the 1%21117'0661. n-yee-, on the
foot of the former sow ; earl also en annuity of 261.
tbe latter t bet the latimi upon which judgment Iwd
• been entered, was not delivered op,-or
at the tinie, and it was any entail:Ned-to set these
• *winkles aside 60 two grountli.: Best was,
• Viet the Memorial of registry of the firstlattidity, in
reciting the hood to Cooke as the consideration, wits
erroneous, inasmuch as the eensidenitiost recited
should have been the 51101. advsnerti hy ratite, by
his draft on the bank of Messrs Contts and Co.
the bond itself hawing beets retained by • that gen-
tleman as a subsisting security, and so could tint
be coiled a couside:Rtioa for the annuity. The
second objection, and vide,' was principally relied
on, was that the note for f. not hawing been paid
off on the day it tell due, the ease nes brought within
the words of the • Statute, which renders annuities
voidable, in'esse/among other grounds) the consi-
deration should' consist, In the whole, or in part, of
notes, which should 'not be paid when due ; and
therefore it was contended that the failure here,
although it was admitted it was paid by the drawer
Vie moment he was apprised of 'helium-payment.
h I vitiated the entire detid, and that tOtaiiegnently
t two naiiiiities Fell to the ground.
The Court was imaniinously of opinion, that this
wes not such II fa dere of payment as wee in con-
templation of the L.:.gislature, when they made the
' Statute, which was Metaled to protect neeesaitotis
per.tois from h-iai defradded. But here the money
was bona fide paid by the purchaser of the annuity,
• Is smin as he had entice of the non-paymetit of the
note; they ecconlitigly discharged the rifle, but
without costs.