The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1824-02-13 00:00:00

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, TntriteDAT, Fxs.l2.

CRIMINAL INFORMATION.
Mr. SCARLET? said be wished to apply to their Lordships to
enlarge a rule to shew cause. which was obtained by the Attorney-
General, why a criminal information should not issue out of this
Court against the printer and publisher of the British Press news-
paper, for a libel on the character of GeregeChetwynd. Esq. Mem.
her for the borough of StoWord, and a Magistrate. He moved to
enlarge the rule till next Term. on the ground that notice of the
granting of the rule had been serrod only on Friday evening last,
and that time might be girrn :o prepare affidavits, on which the de.
Pendants meant to oppose the rule.
Lunn Cuter JuST I c r —You move to enlarge the rule till next
Term, there being no opposition.
The Attorney-General was silent.

Mr. It, or irsm—There is another criminal information against
another Paper, the British Tti,zsrlier, for copying the same arti-
cle. and on which a rule nisi has 41:41 Bien granted. The news-
paper to which I allude is published by a person of the name of
John Stokes. Your Lordships will permit me to notice, that the
same obserratioos apply to this paper.
Rule enlarged till next TWO.
THE VINO, ON THE I.IIOSECIITION ON JOSHUA COHEN V.

A•RON SOLOMON.

—.„.— .—..--.
This defendant was brought up to receive the judgment of the
Court, for an assault upon Joshua Cohen. The prosecutor and
defendant were members of a Benefit Society &led " The Friendly
Brothers." The Society had an annual dinner and ball at the
White Conduit Tavern in August lust. The defendant was one of
the stewards. The prosecutor, on entering the ball.room„ found
strangers admitted ; he remonstrated with the defendant, who, in
return, struck him a blow on the mouth. This was the assault, to
which the defendant pleaded guilty.
Judgment--a fine of Gs. lid., and security for one year, himself
in 201., and one sufficient surety in 101.
STAFFORD PEERAGE.
Whilst their Lordships were deliberating on the above, Mr.
Csstrunt.r. said he wished to mention the application to change
the ;vase from Shrewsbury to Middlesex. Ills client, Baron Strif.
font, was sitting by him, and wished to impress their Lordships
with the importance of this application.
Baron Stafford—lndeed, my Lords, if your Lordships don't per.
mit the trial to take place in London, there are so many Jurymen
under the influence of Sir George Jerninghann, besides holding
those very estates which 1 claim, we apprehend it is impossible we
can have a fair trial.

The Co u RT here called " Silence,"—you interrupt the proceed.
ings of the Court—we have now other business before us.
Mr C.vmenut.t. requested his client not to proceed, and the
question wax dropped ; but the Court subsequently changed the
venue to Gloucestershire.
OBSTRITTION IN THE TYNE.
THE KING r. RUSSELL, ESQ.

SCAILI.ETT showed CROW against a rule obtained for re-
moving the venal- in this case, from Northumberland to York-
shire. The obstruction was teeny en abridgement of labour, by
facilitating thc landing of coals; but, under prelim:eel' °btu-tic-
' deft lathe navigation, an indicsaseat was brought foe a nuisance.'
The county of Northumberland contained gentlemen, numerous
enough and intelligent, to afford an impartial and special jury.
dlr. BROUGHAM contended that to make the trial more satis-
factory. the rarer must be clanged.
The Loan Cn tar JMITICE.—The change of venue implies
no Imputation against the gentlemen of the county.
Rule made abaohrte.

VIAON OF JUDGMENT.
Mr. ADOLPHUS, being called on in his ceder, said if John
Hunt was in Court he wished him to appear. He had mentioned
the case yesterday.
The LORD CHIEr JusTsca.—Yes, and I told you it would
be impossible for the Court to take it.
Mr. ADOLPRI' s.—Yes ; but you were pleased to say that he
rbould become bound not to publish any thing respecting the Asso-
ciation.

Mr. SCANT.ETT.-4 have cotivetsed with Mr. Hunt on the
subject. He hes a feeling respecting the Association, whether
right or wrong this is not the time to discuss. Rut if your Lord-
ships, on your own authority, order Mr. Rom not to publish any
thing respecting them, I become bound that he willottend to your
order.

The LORD elms' JUSTICE—That is quite satisfactory.
Mr. ADOLPHUS submitted he ought to enter into record.

The LORD Cnrer Justrcr.—Bfr. Scarlett% pledge may be
more effectual even than that.

Mr. Z'CAR LETT.-1 know Air. Hunt's honour, and I can pledge
my word for him.
The Loan t'orrr Jrrettt —Vre have no dcnibt of it.

Mr. ADOLPHUS uttered something which we did not hear.
The LORD CHIEF Jurrlcr.—Tf he publish any thing like
what you apprehend, you am:bring it forwent when judgment
mines robe given.
Mr. SCAR LI:TT—A-CI, to be jugs, my Lord.

IX TIE MATTER OF tlir IflncrllAX LOAN.
The role f'r vcating the babsea q( this ken in Exe.hequet
Wile we made absolute.
--------

.TILE EMT. V. a:a xpt.to..

In this ease sn affidavit wan put TO and rend on the part of the
defendant. and the Court deferred its judgment till next term.
This being the last day of tannohe Court sat till a late hour.

In the King's Bench on Irclinesday. the King a. Sir Charles
NVotaeley, Mr. Russell moved for a rule calling on Sir Charles
Wolgeley to show cause why c. criminal information should not be
evhibited against him for it libel on Mr. ('hetwynd, chairman of
the Stafrord Sessions, in a letter published in the British Press.
The libel was, in substance, the same with that fur which Mr.
Chetwyad moved before, but with this aggravation—that Sir Charles
had caused the letter to be copied into the Lichfield Mercury, a
paper circulated in the neighbourhood of Mr.Chetwynd's resldettat.
There were similar affidavits of denial of the chamm. Mr. Justice
Bayley asked hew the publication was brought home to Sir
Char*? Mr. Rawl' replied, that it was sworn that he sent a
rimy of the Reirislerryir toe FAiWe of the Lichfield paper,
saying—." course-7mi insert my letter."—The Court
granted a rule to show cause.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS. TUCEIDAY, FEII. 12.

JUDO3IENTS.
CARMEN v. NtE•BI711:.

This was a question of award arising out of an action brought to
recover the value of • quantity of indigo shipped cm board a ves-
sel lost in the Mauritius. A verdict was given for the plaintiff
generallr. The question now was, whether the arbitrator, in as-
sessing damages, had taken a sound view of the case.
The COURT decided he bad done so, and confirmed the award.