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

mud bills to the amount of 6001. I went into the countingAnuse
and Joseph Fry vied to me, " Benjamin, thee hadst better not impair
the estate by paying these bills.' I said I had provided for then ,
and 1 should now leave it is them. I left the cash and bills, and
they were carried to my account. I carried the letter to my soli-
citor that etening, who told me not to shew it to any ate. it was
seen by Terry. who took a copy of it.
Crews-examined by the ATTORNEY-GENT:RAEMy son's let-
ter I committed to the hands of Win. Fry. I did not expect
during that day to make any arrangement of my son's affairs. I
left the cash and bills to be placed to my private account, by the
advice of Fry anti Chapman, who told ire I ought not to ineuni-
ber my estate with my eon's debts.
Ile-examined by Air. SCARLETT—I understood my money
would he placed to my account; I interred so from what was said
by Fry and Chapman, that it was better to let it be kept for my
own use, and let my eon's estate answer for itself.
William Terry, a relation of the defendant's, stated that he vent
with the defendant, about half-past five o'clock in the afternoon of
the 2dl of June, to Mr. Summerfield, pen., where they saw young
Mr. Summertield's letter to his father, of which the defendant took
a
opy c.
Mr. Boyle, clerk to Alr. Summertield, proved that he received
the deed of assignment from young Suninierlield, together with a
letter reguesting lads to keep the deed till he (witness) received
another letter that should desire hint to deliver it to Mr. Summer-
! field the elder. _ _

This was the defendant's case.
The ATTOR 1: Y-( it: VA t. replied, and contended that there
was neither misrepresentation our concealment on the part of Messrs.
-Fry and Chapman, of the facts which had come to their knowledge
respecting the circumstances of young Summerfleld. • Mr. Fry
told hint distinctly that young Stimmerlield had left the country ;
but notwithstanding this, the defendant wrote and signed the docu-
ment upon which this action is founded. But Mr. ticarlett had
interposed die observation, that the defendant wished to consult his
attornee. and that Mr. Fry told him there would boson time to do
so. This was the fact, for the Jury were aware that all bills
presented at the clearing house in the morning were considered to
be paid by the clerk who took them away, unless they were re.
tumed before five o'clock. It hat was the fact then here? It was
within ten minute to five o'clock when Mr. Terry expressed his
wish to see his Attorney, and Mr. Fry very properly observed,
that if he delayed in osier to see his attorney, their
object would be defeated, anti the consequence was the defendant
wrote the agreement as hail been described. What would have
been the situation of Frand Chapman if Mr. Terry had gone to
consult his attorney? Why, they would have made every one of
the bills their own. What was it to them whether the bills were
returned nr not ? They intended to return the bills, and it was in
consequence of Mr. Terry's executing this instrument that they
consented to withhold them. They had no ,interest in doing so,
and he thought that when the Jury came tosdeliberate upon. the
evidence, they would be of opinion that no answer had been given
to the plaintiff's ease.
The Loan CHITS JUSTICE observed that the question was,
whether Mr. Terry was led to sign this per either by the *Mate-
meson:at ;on of sr., matters to him by Messrs. Fry and Chapman,
or by the concealing of any fact in their knowledge which It
was important to his interest that lie should have known,
and wlm-h it he had known would have induced him not to
sign that instrument. As to the misrepresentation of any
fact, it appeared to him that the evidence did not war-
rant the conclusion that there was any such ; but as to con-
cealing matters which might and ought to have been disclosed,
there was evidence which, in his judgment, became fit for the con-
sideration of the Jury. The bills in question all became due on
the 22t1 June, and were presented in the course of the morning by
the clerk of Fry and Chapman, at the clearing house, and they
had the power to return them at five o'clock. It was due to those
gentlemen to observe, that they did not appear to have had any
personal interest in all that they had done with respect to these bills.
It appeared to him to have been perfectly indiffermit to them
whether they paid the bills or returned them. Therefore not
being able to see any personal interest that they had, he was
somewhat at a loot to account for their subsequent pro-
ceeding*. The acceptances of young Summerliteld became
payable en the twenty-second of June, and in the course of that
morning Mr. Summertield the elder went to Fry and Chapman,
and carried a letter he had received from his son ; and gated it to
them and they read it. It was a distinct communication that he
(young tiummerfield), had left London, meaning to leave the
country ; and moreover, that he had executed a deed to his father,
for the purpose of conveying all his effects to him. There were
some eipressions in the letter whith were not very intel.
ligible. Whether the rattle!' and son lied any joint interest in the
business did not appear, but there were expressions that seemed to
spew thin the interest of the father was deeply concerned in the in-
terest of the ann. The passages of for both the interests," and
" the general interest," and tt• your cmicema," which occur in the
letter, had not been exPained. Anether any effect. could be rea-
sonably attributed to these expressions he did not limn*. After the
conversatioo had taken place between Fry and Chapman and Sum-
merfield, item, Mr. Terry called on them, and Mr. Fry distinctly
sold him that young Surnmerfichl had left the country, but he did
not communicate to him the contents of the letter which the father
received, nor that young Sutemerlield had conveyed his property to
his father ; neither did Mr. Fry tell him that the father.had left cash
to cover the bills, end that he (Fry) had advised him not to apply
ft to that use. The Jury were to judge whether the Importance of
there two facts were such as to lead them to the conclusion that, it'
they had been communicated to Mr. Terry, he would not have
signed the agreement.
The Jury consulted together for a few miantes, and returned a
verdict fur the defendant.

REWSTON V. PROCTOR.
This was an action brought by the plaintiff, who is a Dissenting
Preacher, residing at Eghain, for compensation in damages for the
injury his character has sustained iu consequence of a-fAlse and
malicious libel published of and concerning him by the defendant.
-The damages were laid at SOW. Th.: defendant pleaded the gene-
ral issue, and also a jisstitication, averring -that thertUeged libel was
true. _ .

Air. Bitumens onened the pleadings. - •
Mr. SCAREETT stated the case to the Jury, bet from the man.
ner in which the trial terminated. we do not feel justified in-giving
the whole of the ebaervatiotis and statements made by the Learned
Cowrie'. It appeared from the Learned Gentleman's opening that
the plaintiff had formerly been the gusto of * charity school at Is-
lington, and that he used to preach to the congregation of Inde-
pendent Calvinists at the Union Chapel there. The detendent was
a gentleman of the name religious persuasion, but a person whom
the plaintiff had reason to believe was his determined enemy. By
the zeal and ability displayed by the plaintiff he had been appointed
Secretary to the Home Missionary Society; but the appointment
not being agreeable to the feelings of the defendant he bad caused
an opposition to be raised against it, and certain charges were made
injurious to the character of the plaintiff. Those accusatims were
met and inquired into, and the result was an honourable acquittal,
and the confirmation of the appointment. It was, however, one
thing (Mid tile. Scaled) to be acquitted, and another to retain
your situation. Such was the continual :marks made upon the cha-
racter of the plaintiff that his credit was destroyed, and he was com-
pelled to resign the situations he held, mid was finAly obliged
to take the benefit of the Insolvent Debtora' Act. Hearing of a
situation in the town of Egham, he applied tier and obtained it.
There he established a school, had 24 scholar', and a respectable
lodger, who. paid him at the rate of '.:431. a year. At that
fine a project was act on foot foe building a chapel there, at which
the plaintiff was to be the preacher, and the sanction of his Ma-
jesty's Treasury was obtained for the purchase of a plot of ground
on which the chapel was to be erected. Whilst this arrangement
was in operation, a gentleman, whom he ehoeld call as a a tines,
received an anouynious letter, wkich lie ihould be able to prove was
in the handwriting of the defendant. It was in the fullowing
tarns:—

" Sept. 15, 182 t

- _
Si n—l understand you arecountensnring a person, with whom 1
expect you am nut sufficiently acquainted ; and 1 recommend you
to inquire as to his aluiracter at Islington. where bt was master of
a chati, school and pwaehed et the Union Chapel, arid where be
'swell known. consider an unsuitable person for a preacher.
I have nu ill sill agaimt him, but feeling tor the cause, I consider
lihn an improper person. Tours in the best of bonds,
••• A Fantail X TUE 60SPLL Or CHRIST.
.
" TO Mr. Oodfrey, St. Anne's hill, Egham."

I have read (said the Learned Counsel) that Gospel, and do not
find that any man is directed to write, or commended or excused
foe writing, an enonymetis letter that shall destroy the character,
and nun the family of another. I know many maxims to the
contrary. If thin pretended friend fit the Gospel had consulted
that sacred book of wltich he speaks, he would have found maxims
of charity—candour—kindness—gond-will—benevolence; but I
will tidy hint, or even any enemy of the Gospel (for he as-
BMOCS to be its friend;, to find one single precept that justi-
fies anonymous slander. I make this remark with the more
earnestness in this cause, beernise I will offer it to you
as a fair outline cf whet the defendant's case will be, upon his
plea of justification. The man who is capable of writing an anony-
ntnas slander to attack the character of another, is also capable of
working up a deftnee which has no proof or foundation. The
Learned Counsel to tinned to comment, with much severity, upon
the conduct of the anonymous slanderer, who, he said, was respon-
sible for all the consequences that might follow the communication
of the slander by the m non to whom it was first addressed. In the
present case the consequences had been most ruinous; for no
swam was this letter, and others of a similar kind, received, than
the plaintifi"s school was broken up, the project of erecting a
chapel abandoned, and hit !loose vacated by his lodger. After
making some remarks on the nature of the justification which had
been pleaded by the defendant, and on the evidence to be offered,
the Learnt-41 Counsel concluded by leaving to the Jury, as men of
honwir .nil integrity, and true friwnils of the Gospel, to say what
damages were due to the plaintiff for the injury he had sustained.
Mr. John Godfrey—l live at St. Ann's 11111 near Egham. I
know Mr. Francis Newston, who lived in our neighbourhood in
September 11144. • Ile carded on his business as a schoolmaster and
a teacher of the (Impel. Ile taught in my house as an Independ-
ent Calvinist which is a dissenting congregation.
Mr. (Inn v interposed, and sold, that to make it a legal eon.
greotlon there most be a certifimte of registration.
The Loan Cater J tc N—The declaration states that he is
a preacher, but it does not say a licensed preacher.
111 Guestse—dllut it must be in a place certified anti registered,
either at the Quarter Sessiona or in the Ecclesiastical Court.
The Loan CHM? JUSTICE—WeII, the evidence may go on
for a moment.
Witness—Mr. Newston came there between the 25th Marzh and
Ist April, 1824. In September his school was going on in a very
11-Jurishing manner. Ile had perhaps from 21) to 24 'etiolate.