The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1825-07-14 00:00:00

summoned to serve on the Grand Inquest fur the county were called
over, and the following gentlemen were sworn :
The Right Hon. Lord Viscount Larighain Christie, Esq.
Althorp, Turman Francis Dickens, Esq.
lion. Fred. Spencer Jahn Kipling, Esq.
Sir Justinian Islam, But. Thee. Philip Mansell, Esq.
:tie James loinghz.m, Batt. John Nethercote, Esq.
Sir George Robinson, Bart. I.angitam Retokby, Esq.
Sir Rich. Brook de Cepa Brook, John Capel rose, Esq.
Bart. Thom. S. W. Saniwell, Fsq.
Robert Andrew,S:sq. Tito,. R. Thornton, EA+
John Armitage. Esq. Wm. Znuch L. Ward, Lsq.
Edward Mamie, Insq. Wrn. Ward, Esq.
Win. Ralph Cartwright, Esq. John Harvey Thornton,
John Plutuitter Clarke, Esq.
r. u.:ice Vaal: then delivered his charge. His Lordship ob.
served that, upon inquiry, he was happy to find the.: the calendar,
tren the whole, was comparatively twitter than usual for this.
county at this time of the year. , In saying this, IrJweeer, he had
not the power oe' congratulating them on the light nature of the of.
tenets ; for, although there were nu more than 111 prisoners to re-
ceive their trial, he was extremely sorry to observe that in SO small
a number there should be so many serious and heavy mimes.
There appeared to be no less titaa three charges of sheep-stealing—
an (4...nee, the capital nature of which the gentlemen of,,the Jury
were, from their situations, tally capable ()Nudging. Ts.; of theeh
persona, it seemed, had been carrying on a wholesale traffic in this'
wicked practice ; for. by the depoWoons, it appeared that they had
stolen no ksa than 40 sheep, and had gone about, from fair to fair,
to dispose of than. There was also another very serious offence to
'which his Lordship begged to ail their attention—he meant the
ofti nee of horse-stealing. There were three charges of this descrip-
tion in the calendar. This was a crime that was becoming daily
more contmon. In every county in which he l.ad been for the tale
111 msoths, in his Judicial capacity, there were enormous numbers
of offenders of this kind. Ile need not tell the (hand Jury (for the
records of the country had 'already informed them, that of late it
had been thought necessary to make some awful examples of per.
sons guilty of this crime). Them was a case in the calendar which
his Lordship only mentioned that he might make an observation on
tlie nature of the depositions which had been handed to him—he
meant the case for forgery which had (Keened in this town. The
person was cornmitted for forging a bill of exchange, and there
would no doubt be counts In the indictment for the forgery ; but he
need not inform theM that the crime of tattering a hill, knowing it
to be forged, was a capital offence; and, upon looking at the evi.
dence. his Lordship draught that would he a case for their consi-
, deration, as it did cot appear by the depmhions who wan the signer
of the bill. The Grand Jury, therefore, would have Only to inquire
as to the uttering the bill, knoiring it to be furged. There was a
ere in the calendar which fell under what was commonly called
Lord Ellenborough's Act, which made those persons who should
cut or stab, with intent to murder or do any miter bodily harm,
liable to capital punishment. In order to convict upon this Act it
'woes necessary, that if death had ensued, the person inflicting the
blow should be deemed guilty of murder. If the Ju age should be
'of opinion that the offence would not have amounted to murder in
ease death had ensued, it was his duty to acquit the prisoner. As
far as the depositions went, there certainly appeared to be some
doubt as to who give the blow ; and, as the punishment was very
capital, they ought to take care nut to put a man's life in jeopardy
but upon the very clearest evidence. As neither himself nor any
other of the Judges would have the opportunity to meet the gentle.
into u host lie was then addressing before next spring, and as there
was an Act of Parliament just passed, which would begin to operate
before that time, he felt it nut improper to direct their attention to
it, not as jurymen only, but as country gentlemen. Before the last
session there were no less than !h) Acts of Parliament respecting
the regulating and summoning of Juries. All these Acts were now
consolidated into one Act. Ile need not mention to thentthat there
had always been great complaints, when special jurynitli were re.
united, of their not-attendance. By a clause in this Act, if any
man who having been summoned on any kind of Jury, should not
attend, or, attar attending, sholald absent himself without the leave
of the Cmar, then the Court should set such fine upon him as it
should deem proper, unless some reasonable excuse should be made
upon oath. llitherto Judges had been in the habit of receiving ex-
cuses without onth. The Act went on to say, that if the Jury were
required in a case of view the Judge should havens discretion, but
the Court wan authorised and required to tine such person not at.
reeding to the amoent cf IW. at least, and as much more les the
Judge ehOuld think the case required. Ilis Lordship mentioned
this to them in order that they might communicate it to their
friends; and he hoped they would dense his having done so, it not
being exactly the Cause upon which they were then summoned.
The (hand Jury then retired, and soon after returned a true bill
against Edward Smith, for sheep-stealing.
Edward .tiritills was indicted fur stealipg, on the 26th of Mach
last, one sheep, belonging to the Most Ilonourable Charles Mar-
quis of Northampton. Another count charged hint with killing
and skinning a sheep, with intent to steal the carcass thereof.
Robert Morris, shepherd of Lord Northampton, examined.—On
the 2tith of May I missed a sheep. I had folded them on the even-
ing of the 2:0). I missed it as early as sit o'clock in the morning.
Stain after I observed a carcass of • sheep in the fold ; it was
skinned all but a little down one side of the cheek. The skin was
taken away. On the Sunday following I saw the skin at Olney ; I
saw it at Thomas RiVis's. I took the carcass down to the dog-
kennel of my Lmd Northampton, and compared it with the head
of the sheep on the Monday, and it clearly belonged to the saute
sheep. The sheep was marked with the letter N With pitch on the
left aide, and the skin which I saw at Itiris's had that mark on it.
On his cross-examination witness stated that Itssis wait a dealer
in skins. Ile did not know one John Nicholas, nor any person in
the neighbOurhood who dealt in skins, but hC knew the skin which
be saw to belong to Lold Northiantuon, by the dew else. being
'.eft on. Ile had pared the hoots of the sheep a few days potviously
to its being stolen, and found the hoofs on the akin had been re-
cently pared.
William Walton, bailiff to Lord Northampton, stated that he
saw the carcass of the sheep in the fold on the t:fith. Ile dentine('
it, and found that there was some flesh gone front the brisket, and
MU much mangled there. He also noticed that the dew claws were
gone. Ile went to Rivis's, at Olney, where he saw a skin which
had a little meat sticking to It to the brisket part, and he
'-er a it. He tell the

- -
belonging ,
also observed th!t the dew claws were barging to e left tt
skin with Mr. Rtvi. Mr. Longstaff was a keeper of the Marquis,
he and witness went to Denton, and found the prisoner at his house
there. They ' him with the but he at first denied

. ,
'in. There is our own private banking marl put on them, being
N 0.93131. It was put on in my presence -by Mr. Roger
Smith. The mark, in red ink, of • 27th February," means the
day the bill became dye. This was written by the same clerk who
entered it in the day-book. On the 201. bill it has the Nentlittk) on
it, and the " 11th March," in red ink. When the pridintr gave
me then two bills, he asked me to place them to his credit, saying
he should nut want any thing upon them until they were honoured;
and that in the course of ten days, or a fortnielite he shnuld haven
remittance of about 2,0001. He then endorsed the bale in the
to me of •• James Dixon," and asked for a paes.neok. I gave le}M
one. having previously written his name on the outside o:Fitt- E.
made an entry of the bills in It. He then' appeared to at going'
away,but turned round and said, " As I have been here s*: time,
it is probable that I shall want a little money to pay my t Aix with,:
you may therefore as well me give 301., or say IV., and that will
enable me to pay every thing until the next remittance conies." I
phid him 331. three tens and three ones, Northampton Town and
County Bank. I made an entry of it in his book, and in our own,
and he then went away.
cross-examined by 31r. klotneet—That was the first time .1
hen ever seen the prisoner. There were the other clerks is the dike
at the time. I did not consult with any of the other clerks.
Be his Lonnante-1 did that which I am accustomed to do as
managing clerk, and which my employers authorise me to do with
!their customers.
Roger Smith, clerk in the banking house, and won of one of
the partners, stated, that the red ink marks were made by him
on. the bills, on the 7th of February, immediately after the
pritoner left the Bank.
Mr. John Orintehaw, landlord of the Crown mid Anch&r,.of
Belie town, examined—The prisoner came to my house about the
middle of January, and stayed about a month. Ile paid me on
the Monday, as he left on the Tuesday following; about a week
before I was examined before the magistrates, but I cannot etate
the day. The peisoner contracted ashill of 221. and some odd
shilliegs, lle paid me with threelen pound. Town and County of
Northempten notes. I had not change, but V'ronilied to glee it
to him in the morning, and he said that would do: ti hi and
Mrs. Dixon intended to start on the next morning. 'lbis was be-
tween 4 and G in the evening. Ile told me ha was a man of property
and had 6001. a-year to live upon, that a good, deal of his money,
lay itt the house of Ladbroke and Co. banners, of London ; and
that he had ?tome' property near Gretna-green. After being at my
house a fortnight, I sent him in his bill, of which he took no
notice. On the Saturday, previous to the Monday on which lie
paid me, I sent ley sister to him for money, and he came to me
afterwatds, and said lie hoped it would dot be of any consequence,
but he cou1•1 net pay me that night ; he, however, assured me that
I should be certain of being paid on the Monday morning. 1 said
it was inconrenient, Ind I must wait. Ott the Monday morning,
I saw the prisoner, ho told me had been to the Bank, but they
had nor yet opened their letters ; they had, however, no doubt that
all would be right, and that I should hien my money. In the
afternoon, when the Chick struck four, I said to the prisoner, " If
fou have any busineu to do with the Bank. you must go soon,
or they shut at 5." Ile said, " I am going," and he went Mime.
diately. lle returned soon after 5 o'clock, and then paid me the
three 101. notes. About a fortniv;ht before the prisoner left my
house, lie asked me, as usual, to dine with him. On that day, he
said, the had got the rheumatics in hie hand si .bad dist he could
not 1 write, and as his bankers had mislaid a bill for 493/. and
which was soon lactfoining due, he must send another for accept.
duce; lie then showed tee, on a plain bit of paper,..a copy of what
he wanted me to write for him. Ile wished me first to. do it on
unstanined paper, to ascertain whether I could do iesaVafactorily.
I did so, and he said, that would do, anti then protiuced a Ga
stamp, on which I wrote the bill. It was dated the 2iilibeceinber.
The bill now produced was written by me. I gave the bill to
him. The names of the acceptors and drawers have been put to it
since.
Cross-examined by Mr. Itovntec—T did not write any other
names, except thole in the direction to Messrs. Latlbrote and Co.
persons on whom it was drawn. The prisoner had his *wife living
with him. He left my house about II o'clock the next morning,
'on tout. I undelitood, lie was going to send the bill to Man.
chester.
Ite-examlned—The prisoner said he was going to Brixworth, to
a Mr. Wartonbury, an attorney, about some busineu, which is
quite a contrary way to Cambridgeshire.
W. Gramm, lietr. one of the partners of Ladbroke and Cc. ex.
amined by Mr. Beane etnc —We have no such person as T.
Gillman in our house. No such person as T. Gillman is authetesed
to give acceptances for us. The acceptance now sluiwn to use Is
not in the hand-writing of any of my partners.
Mr. II OL DEC k here said, as the acceptor would be liable, i° ihe
bill should get into the hands of any of the other endorsers, who
had not released, he should, therefore, object to this witness's
evidence, although the present holders had released the acceptance.
Mr. Beerceenc said the release altogether annihilated the
bill. It had been so held by Mr. Justice Iloboyd in a recent
case.
The COURT thought the release would prevent the bill from
getting into the hands of the other endorsers; at all events, it weld
be wholly irregular, it it were to do so. He would, however,
take a notice of the objection ; but he should not prevent the
evidence of the witness being taken.
The examination continued—We have no such customers fa!
Holt and Son, of Blanchester, nor any customer of the nem of
James Dixon or Jatues Dobson Dixon.
George Gillman, nephew of the last witness, and clerk in the
house of Ladbroke and Co. stated, that the acceptance was not
in his ',snit-writing, nor in that of any other pereon belonging to
the house. It was always a partner who accepted their bills; do
other person was ever authorised td do so.
W. Henry Gamer, clerk in the house of Gunfire Brooks, and
Co. of Manchester, stated, that he knew the hand-writing of all
their partners, and that the acceptance on the bill now produced
was not the hand-writing of either of them.
Joseph Ball, a constable of Northampton, stated, that he was
emph td to apprehend the prisoner. lie traced and found him at
Howe (louse, to Cambridgeshire, on the 224 February. It was
eleven o'clock at night, and the prisoner was in bed. Witness ex-
amined his trunk, and coned n basket's pass book In it. Witness
then said, " You are my prisoiler, and I must take you to North.
for defrauding the bank there." • prisonerisaid, it was

They charged
haring committed it; he boweyer afterwards c6nfesred that lie had
killed the sheep and skinned it, and hoped they would be as merci-
ful as they could.
John hongst4 keeper of Lord Northampton, stated that hsi
went to Olney on the Sundny with the last witness, and afterwa-da,
on the same day, they went together to the prisoner's, isho was Id'
that time In bed. The prisoner first denied the offence. but after.'
wards said lie was the a.m. that he was intoMeated at the time be
did it, and he hoped for mercy.
Thomas Rinis, a fellmonger, stated that he knew the prisoner at
the br.r, who hail brought sheep skins to him repeatedly. Wittig*
remembered his bringing one on the 26th of May, fur which be
gave 7s. 6d.. which was a fair price. This witness stated the man-
ner in which the skin appettred, as represented by the other wit-
nes.sts. It was not usual for skins to be left in such a state. Wit-
ness had washed the brand oftwithout noticing what the mark was.
It was usual for him to do so. Ile remembered the two last wit-
nesses calling on a Sunday, to whom he showed the ikin.
(in his cross-examination lie stated that when bongstaff and
• of the - and could not be

ampton, The ,
not him, and asked how long it was ago. Witness told hill; it WAS
rather better than a fortnight' when the prisoner said he had not
been at Northampton for eight years. The book was now in the

suppose, Sir, you would be very much offended if I were to ails
You whether you are the servant of Mr. Hill!
Witness—No, Sir, indeed I should not.
Mr. CLARKE—You are his servant, then?
Witness—l am.
Isle. C —Wlizt sort of a servant do you describe yourself ?
Witness—His land agent.
Mr. CLausz submitted that a land 'gent was not .a servant
within the meaning of the Act.
The Court overruled the objection.
Mr. CLARKE then took several minor objections, but wlsich
'were overruled, and the Jury teturned a verdict for toe plaintiff:—
Damages la/.

LAW INTF:I.LIGENCE.

ante state as when the witness found it.
Mi. Law recalled, and Raid, the book produced by the last wit:
ness was that which he had himself given to the prisoner. The
leaves were now torn out of the book where the entry was made.
Mr. Grimshaw was re-examined, who said that the prisoner en-
tered his house on the sth of January, and left it on the ual of Fe-
bruary. The day after he paid him the three 10/. notes.
Mr. Sergeant ADasts—Tbat is the case, my Lord, for the pro.
secution.
His Lontsnip asked the prisoner whether he had anything to
say.
The prisoner said he had nothing particular to say, only that it
was a regular transaction. The last endorser had regular toalue
from him.
Ills LonDSltte—ls that person here?
Prisoner—No, my Lord.
The following witnesses were then called by the prisoner's
Counsel.
Henry Ilughm, coal dealer, of Liverpool, stated that he had
known the prisoner Ectween 40 and 50 year'. The - had

COURT .CS' YESTEIIDAY.

MOSS v. LORD ORMOND.
Mr. HORNE geld he had an application to make to the Court in
the shape of an appeal, connected with the appeal that was heard
lately in the House of Lords; and the question being with respect
to a charge upon estates, the trustees refused to juin in conveyance
until the decree of the Court could be obtained. The Learned
Counsel's present motion thretUre was, for leave to make his up.
pliention on an early day.
Hip Lout:tame said, as it tem connected with the cause that
had just been disposed of in the House of Lords, he could not
refuse to hear it noon.
Powtt.r. V. 1/.e...d.'IEITETT.
/dr. Mu tat said, Mr. Agar, on Tuesday applied to the Court
for the minutes in this cause; he had now to state that those
minutes would be just good for nothing at all, as there was no next
of kin before the Court.
tiits LORDSUIP did not deliver them out.
GEORGES V. GEORGES. •
Mr. Wire oft stated, that in this cause a West Indian estate
had been ordered to have been sold some time ago, but which,
from variotuk reasons, had been put off from time to time, and to.
day was again the day on which it was to be disposed of in the
Master's office. It had been referred to the Mas;:ir to Inqiiire
whether it would be for the benefit of the infant that the estate
should.all be sold in one lot; the draught of the report was prepared,
from which. it appeared the Master's opinion was, it would not be
for the benefit of the infant in the cause that It should be sold in
one lot. As the report, however, had not been made, Mr. Clayton
coneellfed that the sale could not be allowed to go on.
Mr. HEALD said, they hid now been arguing for the last four or
five years at the bar whether ;his estate should be sold or not. The
day on which it had been ordered finally to be sold had now
arrived, and just upon the very eve of the sale being made, an ap-
plittation *as made to the Court to postpone it. alr. Clayton had
been labouring under a mistake when he stated it had been referred
to the Master to inquire whether it would he for the benefit of the
infant that thermic should be made in one lot. The fact was, that
the Court had oreered it to be sold in one lot, and now theta were
planters and agents of planters in town in the expectation of attend-
ing the sale, which if f! were to be put off it might be put off to all
eternity; because the pi:enters would leave the country, and, the sale
in ell probability could net.er be made to the advantage to which it
might note be made.
Mr. CI. AY t 0 x produc'ed the order of reference, and It distinctly
was referring it to the Master, as he had stated.
Mr. IlEatin aCkDOWietited he had been misinstructed.
His Lonnsitte then said, as the Master had not yet made his
report, it was impossible the sale could go on. If the estate were
mold before the report was both made and confirmed, it would all
have to go fur nothing, •
Lena) CADOOAN V. DATES.
_

Dlr. Rotrist made an aplication, that a petition which stood in
his Lordship's paper, should be hearl on an early day.
His Lo RDSHIP-1 shall do no such thing as grant the prayer of
this application.
31r. Horaw—My Lord, I should not have taken the lihery
of making it, if it had not bein under peculiarly pressing circum.
stances.

His Lonnswits—l can't help that ; every case before the Court
is of a pressing nature ; and in advancing cases I cahnot justify
myself to the suitors in the cases that stand before the cases that
are applied for to be advanced. You may try that the other Court
will do for you.
Mr. ItoLpii—The application has been made to the Court be•
low, my Lord, and eminent Counsel at the bar have recommended
the application to be made to your Lordship.
His Lonnsitir —lf you will send me the petition, I'll rend it at
home, and then tell you what I think of it ; but I shan't hear it till
its regular turn.
Mr. Itokrtt—My Lord, that will be quite satisfactory.

ne ne*ccotn V. 111101)ES.

Counsel proceeded with this motion, and it was agreed at the bar,
that his Lordship should finally and absejutely dispose of the case.
upon the evidence before the Court, just as if the Court wee called
upon to make a decree in the cause.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, GUILDHALL, YESTZT:DIT
LIBEL ill THE QUARTERLY REVIEW.
BUC/CINGIIAat v. MURRAY.
This cause, in which J. S. Buckingham, Esq. late editor if the
Calcutta Journal, and author of Travels in Palestine, was plaintiff,
and Mr. hlurray the highly respectable publisher, of Albemarle-
' street, was defendant, was heard this day before the Lord Chief
Justice and a Special Jury.
There were several literary men and booksellers in the Court.
Two Special Jurors only !Ting in attendance, after a consultation
with *fr. Broughad: and Al r. Hill, a tales was prayed for by Mr.
Scarlett, and the :Jury win completed front the Common Jury
list.
Mr. HILL °pencd the pleadings. The declaration alleged, that
the defendant bad published certain libels of and against the plain.
tiff in the nd number of the Quarterly Review. To this declara-
tion the defendant pleadtnl, first, that he had not published a libel ;
and, secondly, lie justified the alleged libel us true. 111 r. Hill then
read the following extracts front the 52,1 number of the Quarterly
Heeler published in the month of January 1022, in winch Fas.,
the alleged libel was contained. The first was the index to the

critique in question :
•• Buckingham (J. S.) Trawl:tin Palestine—novice of an egregi.
us blimder in the title-7 - of this work—remarks on the blund,rs

in me title-page _
in the preface—geographical blunders respecting , the cite of Its-
malt and Boor—specimens of his ignorance and latiokmaking—pro-
fane and infidel allusions to the Scr.ptures—h is account of the lake
of Tiberias, false—blundering account of tho ruins of esesarea—ig-
norance of Arabic--incorrect account of the convent of Jerusalem—
illiberal disparagement of Nathaniel Pearce--dishonourable conduct
of Mr. Buckingham towards his employers. and Mr. Bankes's note
--arrival of the latter gentleman and of Mr. Buckingham at what
the latter calls the ruins of GetAza, which mast probably are
those of Pella—blunders cdmmitted by Mr. Buckingham in his ac-
count of the antiquities actually discovered they:--his plan of then',
and transcriptx of inscriptions th
.pilfered from Mr. Bankes—furer
specimens of Mi. Buckingham's blunders—the kiting of Oomkais,
which he gives for ;hose of Gamala, proved to be the ruins of Gn,
darn—temarke upon the ignorance dh in his plates, which
are pilfered Iron) those of former travellers."
The other extracts from the body of the critique Were as fol-
lows:
" The charge of 'low origin and ignorance' (with however' odd
a grace it may come from such a quarter) is not restricted to Nath.

44 4 •
I and say, that I am greatly embarrassed to tin: which side dad
complicated commence:, should be commenc, 11'9 my eh', while I eu.
Ideavour to make It clear, to avoid wrong unnebessarily the time of
hb Lordship and yourselves; . 1 feel, however, that I ehoidd Oct
be doing justice to either piety 'if I merely stated the facts upoa
the tecord, and left them to themselves, it 11 thereformoecersary for
me to go into the case at seine length. Tilt plttuttu, Me. Buck.
linkharn, Lae passed stevetal years of his life s 9 ladle, and during
Isis residence there, lie being a min qf untineationed talmo
and information, he was induced to propose the piablicativi
of • work entitled " Travels in Pali:Stine throtigh the countries of
Buhan and Gilead, cart of the river Jordan ; including a disk to
the Cities of Geran and Gamala, in the Decafelis." Mr. Bucking.
ham having visited countries which very few Petrens hal Odin:
before him, this plan naturally excited a degree of interest, and id
his judgment, as well as in that of many of his friends, It was cal-
culated to give him no inconsiderable portion of literary farne. Ile
and his friend's were !minified that he would add to his reptgatioa
and emoluments by the publication of the volume. The complaint
Buckingham now makes against the defendant is, that 10 the
Qtottle: If.Tirw, a work published by him—a work of great cis.
culation arid pgpularity—has stepped out of the just line Of crid.
eism, and has ooebeen content with cavilling at his work and the
mistakes that occarredithere, and with passing those obse:itians
which arose from a fair and undid perusal of it. Ile complains
that the defemiant has madeilse 9f the powerful instrument wielded
by him for the purpose of enacting his private character, to ht' -
him up to the odium of mankind apd to the detestation of hie
men. It is in consequence ci this that 111 n. Buckingham
the present appeal to aJury. lam instructed by my client
that if the publication in gitestion had confined huh' to its pt.
office—to that literary criticism which rands ao wcat a latitude
the expression of opinions—if it had arsce`xtl his book in t
most severe language—if It had stated 11:m to be a man unacquai
el with those languages, and as not hayirig that knowledge of
sciences which would render him tit to pubilall such a work,
shobld have thought that lie ought to have been one of the
persons to complain, because lie considered the Reviewer v
have been only exercising the fair right of efticilm. and ,he
haveappealed to the testimony of other Reviewerz, end
!fifthc at large, for his answer and his satisfaction, aral he
never have brought this case before a Jury. But when he
the suttee; of a Review making that went: the vehicle of !
malice and of slander—when he found that so powerful an
was employed to crush him as a man, and not to attack him
candidate for literary faille—y.llm he found it was directed
to attcinpt to min his character in a moral point of view, ..
Buckingham had surely just cause of complaint. It has happen,
to few mart of Mr. Buckingham's age to hate trite-died to
without eneorintering some men who differed from him,
others whose erinity had been created against him. Such iet
is what every man most expect, bet every man had arzo a right
expect thins no such adversary would vent his malice thiough
medium of an anonymous publication. Surely the author of
tical review has latitude enoirgh if he confine himself to his 1_
mate duty. It is an old obsereation that " the task of criticism
a much easier one itjan that of execution." And I believe it
uncommon thing for a reviewetio sit down to review a Work
subject of which he has no more knowledge than what he has ga
by the volirme before him. Ile then pretends to know More t
the author, and notAinfrequentlo saciffies his readers that he i
man of profound experience and judgment, 'while Aie author is
man of complete ignorance, and totally enanivainted with the sit
ject about %hick wines ; while in reality the case Is completely
the other way. I have beim-id:nee observed also a want of good
faith in these criticisms, because as the critic is aware that the gm
natality of mankind are quite unable to pentse the work lie reviews,
he knows that his observations, however false they may be, the.
falsehood will remain unnoticed except by the ungr unate
and the trienls to whom lie may point them out. It is not on
grounds as those, however, that Mr. Buckingham builds
complaint. It now becomes necessary for tie to give
a sheet outline of the travels of Mr. Buckingham.
pears that lie passel from India to Egypt, and from
to Alexandria. While at Alexandria a treaty was entered
into between him and some merchants of that place, the e`
ject of which was to establish a mercantile connexion ben,
Egypt and Bombay, and it became necessary that the memhiells
Bombay should be made aware that the Pachrt of Egypt gave
sanction to the intercourse, as well at that I sufficient credit cab
at Alexandrffi to induce the Bointay mercliants to trade by s
way. The object also was, that Mr. Buckingham should reside
Suez, and receive the merchandize there ; and it was proposed
se he understood Arabic, and could set without an interpreter,
should be the bearer of the treaty to Bombay. lie accordingly v
eat, and took with him two copies of the Treaty, eldi elsoduplieate
letters, in order to mike the chance of eenffing tliem in different
ways, if lie were enctled to rend those duplicates by quicker r-
veyance than he himself might have. In January, 1116, lit
out with an intention of making the best of his way to Aleppo,,.
theft? tel Bombay. But I understand the navigation on thou
cows is extremely diffienk, and it often happens that for ,
together there is no possibility of prosecuting a journey.
Buckingnam was, in consegnenee of this and other circumstances,
delayed much longer than he had anticipated, but fie sent forum(
by a native, whose difficulties in travelling would be much less ti”
hetes copy. of the treaty and the duplicates bf the letters.
per..oh arrived in Bombay in the spring of 1316, some time b_ _
Mr. Buckingham was aide to effect the journey. Subsegneedv,
at Jerusalem, Mr. Buckingham had the good fortune to it:lea *O4
Mr. Banker, a gentleman of considerable informatiomand "'
ber of Parlianieft for the L'ilivyrtity of, Cambridge. He pas-
s week with him, and as their route lay in the same ditemion,
theygesolyed to proceed together: but the ill health of elr.
°Owed him to return, and take •a different route to Damascus.
Damascus, he again Met Mr.Bankes; and they afterwards agar..
met together at Aleppo. At the close of the year, Mr. Bucking-
ham arrived et Bombay, when he found that the mission -
which he was despatched from Alexandria had failed. !n cot
quence of this failure, a gentle.nan the partner Of a house
I Alexandria, who had supplied Mr. Buckingham with thp '-
to defray the expenses of his journey, applied ti' have if. h.
returned, and half the sum was accordingly repaid. This frtibrina.
tion is necessary, Gentlemen of the Jury, In order that j'ou may
perfectly understand the nature of the libel. Mr. Buckingham
having tumefied from Bombay to Aleppo, and having shown

_onz t.
notes he hid made on that ,ourney Co several eminent petsors.
amonpt others, to the late &,.hopof Calcutta, was reoßmtneuded
to publish them. He, intrhsted the mi,s. tc a

• consequent,' .
wiih directions that they slicula be presented to Mr. Murray
also, with a pmposal of the terms on which the MSS. were t
disposed of. Mr. Murray accordingly had the MSS. and offered to
Mr. Buckingham ternts highly advantageous 0 that gentlemar.•
lle afterwards, howeVer, refused to publish them, but did not assign
any reason for co dojo-;. I abstain frorti making any comments
on this extraordinary circumstance, as it does not form any peat
of my case. The friend of Mr. Buckingham was then author
to present the MSS. to another bookseller, who subiequentlY -
halted them; and almost every literiry Beviewerin the country k..
the volume unqualified praise. It was reserved for the Quarterly
RevieWer to amid: it, which attack, if it had been merely co-trilled
to its literary merits or demerits, would never have forma the
ground of the present action. I do not mean to say that I ra-
prove the fact, whether one bookseller feele hortiNty towardsa
published by another, or whether a bookseller sometimes tnaket
of his review to praise his oen pu hi:cations and to abuse those of o thers
Literary men are the men best acquainted with tilos: matters. •'
belong to a profession ihich it has been the fashion to conceve
opposed to all literary pursuits ; but, nevertheless, I Bite'

Walton called the nitric was oat ... ...- sein, ...__ ___________ __. ---- __ e prisoner ii..._ am ;that
h hider , . ,_
discerned. The prisoner offered the skin for sale about ten o'clock lived with and Holding at Liverptiol, and had always main- Pearce: two respectable Herntans, who seem to have committed I have known inctances in which very bad novels hate been penises/
in the day time. tained a very hottest character. no other offence than that of having been assisted by Mr. Bankes, in reviews, and in return for which a sum of tea guirfeha bra
Mr. BURTOrr. Counsel for the defendant, submitted that there ThOs. Hoinhisher, a farmer near Liverpool, stated, that he had in the very same manner as the writer himself v:a3 almost im- sent to the pit olisher. I have also known instanetif in rthich I
was no proof of the stealing the sheep. known the prisoner for 30 years, and had always known him at an . mediately afterwards, are described as ' young men, who were sellers have' allowed prsons to attack theft enemies throe/
His LOIIDSUIP said, that as to that count the prisoner must be honest man. Witness had not seen him for this tWelveinonth, nor I evidently persons of low origin and confined education, and their same medittin. These are acts which the Miblisheia -of r
acquitted. did he know that the prisoner was ever married. manners were decidedly vulgar." Although travelling (he in. sometimes mime ; and by such means the authors cf thoie
Mr. BuirroN also submitted, that as the second count was laid, His LOunstllP, in gumming up, obsessed to the Jury, we are dignantly adds) without any professed object beyond their own are safe, while the persons attacked arm doubly galled. because
charging the prisoner with killing the sheep with intent to steal the here trying for forgery, but it is equally a capital offence to utter a pleasure, they were both so poor and destitute as to nutter Mr. are beaten by an unseen enemy; While the public of course
carcass, this count must also fail, as it ought to have been with in- bill of exchange, knowing it to be forged, or disposing of or putting Bankes to pay their expenses.' It is to be hoped that Mr. Buck- not expect to receive fair and candid information. I ern'
tent to steal the akin, as the evidence only showed that he had stolen it away, knowing it to be forged. As there is no evidence of the ingliam hoes not intend to upbraid them, in this place, with a de- you du idea of the mode in which the Quarterly Reviewer
the skin. prisoner having put his hand to this paper, your attention had bet- gree of sufferance, which lie soon found it convenient to imitate, to attack Mr. Buckle:ha:am—not that I make this the founth‘n
Ills LOROSittr asires.l3lr. Bcauclerc whether he tould remove ter be directed entirely to the tither counts, which charge hint with' more especially as we have the Vast assurances, that these young the action, but lam desirous to poi.,t out to you ns moti
this last objection. uttering the bill as true, knowing it to be forged. There arc three men neither violated the confidence of any employers to whom they order to show you that his object was not candour and tom
Mr. Be:trent n c thought there was evidence sufficient to go to points esaentlal to be proved, before you can fund the priauner guilty were responsible,!nor abused the indulgence of their benefactor, by calumny and detraction. I will refer yoia to the 3d page.
the Jury as to the int at of the prisoner in steal the carcass. on the present indictment. The first is, that there is a forgery ; promising
,tracinga from his papers, in order aftet wards to turn Buckingham's volume, in which lie•stntes thaf a certain ve,
His Lonristtir, in 'mining tip, observed, that by a statute o for if there is no forgery., the cas e altogether falls to the ground. them to account." which he embarked was of such and such a nature, and that i
(Rome 11. it was made a capital offence to remove or drive away .1 he second point to be Inquired into is, whether such forged bill " Mr. Buckingham had undertaken to carry letters fbr a mercan. rigged and fitted out in eiiich anti such a manner. A note act
I another person's sheep. The Ist count charged the prisoner with had been uttered or disposed of ; and the third question, and which tile hobse to India, overland, by the most direct and expeditious panics this passage referring to • vignette of this reisel t and if.
having done this, and the question was, whether he had so tar re- is the meat essential of all, is whether, at the time the prisoner route, and with all attention to economy, the firm agreeing, on look at this vignette you wdl find that it exactly corresponds Sr.
moved this sheep, with intent to steal it, as would sustain this part uttered this bill (it' he did utter it), he did so knowing it to be a their part, to bear his expenses. From the first moment, however, the descrittion given, as clearly as language could ,deseribe •
of the indictment ? There were no marks of blood in any other forgers ? The Learned Judge then recapitulated the evidence, of his netting foot in Asia, we find him meting as if both his time Now look at the candour of the reviewer. I confess, that ,until i
pin of the toed except where the sheep was killed. Killing the dwelling on such parts of it as went to sustain either of the points and funds were his own. How he may have:Mice aranged matters was phiced in my hands in consequence of this cense, I never
sheep. without taking it away, was no felony. The first thing he had just mentioned
. . and particularly noticing the circumstance with his tried and well-loved friends at Alexandria, we know not ; read Mr. Buckingham's book. I had read the ReSieer. ta .a
which required their attention, therefore, Was, whether this sheep of the pass book being found in the possession of the prisoner, with but this we do know, that so soon as his conduct reached their matter of course. Now this reviewer wonldlead his readers to sup.,
had been token front any one part of the fold to the other by the the leaves inns out, that book being the only receipt given by cars, Mr. Barker, the British Consul at Aleppo, was authorised to pose, that the vignettes in the volume were not M. titielthithane.a
prisoner ? As to the neat count, he would state to them that the Messrs. Smith and Co. for the several bills paid into their bank by take from him the despatches, and to dismiss him ; and that he own, but were borrowed ; end for the most pail were taken traude,
words cf the 4ct were—" If any person or persons shall kill rim. being now already on his way to Bagilat, a Tartar was sent ex- lently from Ite Bruyn and other sei.rcesi. But if this reviewer had,
any sheep, dith the felonious totent. of stealing the carcass." The Jury consulted together, and immediately. found the Otis pressly after him for his recal, but died accidentally upon the read the preface to Mr. Buckingham's work, he would be.vet
1 The evidence in support of this was, then there was a part of the seiner Guilty of uttering the bill es true, knowing it to be forged. road I So that it is to the timely death of this Tartar' that the found that Mr. Buckingham says--" Although several of '
' flesh left on the skin when taken away; but whether this would His Loncisum directed the prisoner to be removed from the Asiatic Societies at Calcutta, and Literaty Societies tit Madras and vignettes nee front drawings taken nn the spot, others have I
prove the intent to steal the whole carcass seas, to say the least of bar, observing. that it was a most senlous offence. Ile should give Bombay,' nre indebted for their distinguished member." taken from other sources, and those have chiefly_ t' lithium
i it, a very doubtful question. There were strong indicia, which no it his best consideration, but weld(' not have the prisoner to enter. ~ ilia transactions r. ith Mr. Bankes seem to have been an epi- costumes." So that Mr. Buckingham does not pretend that .'
person could doubt, that this skin did belong to the alieep of the tain any false hopes of escaping the highest penalty which the law sale in his plan. We hare not only the statement of that gentle- vignettes were all his own, but candidly achtteledges that b-
Marquis of Northampton. The points then which they had to 'Mimed on crimes of such a nattite as he had been convicted of. .' man with respect to them, but' have seen also the deposition on taken them from other sources. This is another Maumee
consider were, first, whether there was any evidence of an arparta. i The Court rase a little before Eve o'clock till nine to-morrow oath of his servants (the same who are spoken of in this Work), candour of the Reviewer. Mr. Bucking:Ain, in company with
nit. It' they were not satisfied of that, then the next question was, morning. that Mr. Buckingliant bore no part whatever in the dispositions Bankes, had visited the town (+craze, called by the Moans
whether the prisoner's intention was to steal the carcass ? If they CIVIL SIDE. or the expenses of the journey beyond Jordan, &c.; thnt he never rash. The Reviewer, in noticing this circumstance, takes esenalsion
should be of opinion that his intention was not to steal the Carcass, I.Refitre Mr. Justice lloanovn.l made i Single sketch during this tune, nor had materials for doing to observe, that Mr. Buckingham had " missed Gibbet." Wilt`te
but only the skin, then it would be their duty to acquit him, how. Mu. v. Flit HUNDRED OF ItIGITAM•FERIIAtiO. so, and has, mcreover, been heard to lament his inability ; that the authority would have been usefel in setting him tie. Now 111 r,
ever morally guilty he might le. This was an action brought under the 9th Geo. I, commonly plan, which is the ground-work of that here given of Deerash, was BuckinghaM, so far from having missed Gibbon\ In a note to fin
The Jury found the prisoner Nat Guilty of thetintent to steal called the Black Act, to recover the sum of 2001. in compensation made by Mr: Ranker, and traced. by his permission, at a window book, comments on the very passage in Gibbon which the Review,
lb. carcass. for injuries sustained by the plaintiff in consequence of his barns of the convent of Nazareth, by Mr. naekinghani, upon a direct had alluded to, and cites thu it very author in pisllf that he had gie
se
His bordahlp ordered the prisoner to be remanded, with liberty and farm-houses having been burnt by some incendiaries. Py the promise that it should Oct be pulaisthed.,, this town of Geraza its righi name. This ta another proof
,ef '
10 the prosecutor to indict him for the larceny of taking the skin. evidence, it appeared that the premises which hail been destroyed The original article then confined ink follows : candottr of the Reviewer, who endeavours to ducribe :dr. Peck;
The witness Rivis was then rolled up, anti. his LOIRDSHIP se- were detached front any dwelling-house, and that on the tills of' i. On entering upon the journey beyond Jordan, to which tee ham its ignorant of the only authority thnt existed on the te'
war* reposed him fur the conduct he had been guilty of in poi. February, 104, the person who was employed to thrash in the have more than once referred, it may not he amiss to premise, that There is another passage in the work of sir. Ilitekingham -_ _
&Wog the skin of the sheep under such pregnant circumstances barn quitted his work about halt-past fire in the afternoon, fasten- the term roc, which, up to this place, mutt he Shistell between the the Ileefewer proceedeto comment. nir. Buckingham r:sitcd
of suspition. log the doors and taking away the key. There had been no fire or writer.this muleteer, and an old man from Tocat,henceibeward sig. ruins of Otinikais, which he points ore as the ruins of a t7wn er
FORGERY. candle on the premises during that der ; but about two the next nifles himself and Mr. Bankes, he having generous) allowed that Gamete, and in title belief he agrees with a late wetter, whose
James Dixon, alias James DASOIi Aron, was indicted for hay. morning the watchman of Wellingborough discovered the property gentleman to become the associate of his labours. II e acquit him, was published, and published by Mr. Murray hit self, since
Mg, on the 7th of February last, forged an acceptance to s certain to be in flames, and notwithstanding every means were used to et- however, of deriving any material benefit from such assistance, publication of the -volume of Mr. Buckingham; this authority
bill of exchange for 49i 1. with the intent to defraud Blesses. Smith, tinguhsh it, the whole of the premises were destroyed. The origin since whatever he may have drawn from that source, he has made no leas than Id:. Btiekhardt. 111 r. Itnekinghart shows the -
Osborne, Hoses, Smith, and (Osborne, bankers, of Northampton. of the fire hadcircumstance
never been discovered, and this ln. his own, by such a felinity of misapprehension, and overlaid with why he believes those ruins to be the ruins of Gunala. -
There was another count charging the prisoner with having uttered dared a suspicion that it was not the effect of accident, which was such a eunibtous drapery of fustain and commoa-place ,citation, mark what the Reviewer asys—
the said bill of exchange as true, knowing the same to be forged, submitted to the consideration of the Jury, it being on the part of that we believe it wotfla be very hied for his companion. to recog. "We now reach the consummuien of Mr.olle tnektngbam
with a similar intent ~ and, as there were a great many endorse- the plaintiff insisted that the only inference to be drawn was, that nine nitath of his own, excepting the ground works of chat he has den. The ruins of Oomkais he gives us
him
to
no
tuch ofs
s.
menu on, the bill, there were as ninny counts chsrging the pri. the fire was the net a some incendiary. The loss sustained by the given as his plans, which have alai) undergone their full share of ‘l'hat oblitmity of intellect could have led
AO
'once with having forged them with the intent to defraud those per- plaintiff was tstim atm! at 1184 t. 12• but as the Act of Geo. I. limited embellishment for effect."
sons whose names he had used. the damage to he paid by the parish (which was in the nature Mr. SCARLETT tom and addiessed the Court. In conarquenee sitinins'itawileoanailb)rte.Se‘eetTaietot re, . lie cites a i:ie
ran
considered
dill oikelfy,tormeil
'm 1 The diett
Mr. W. Law, clerk to Messrs. Smith and Co. bankers, examined of a penalty) to 2001. the plaintiff sought only to recoeu that sum. of the justification that has bete put in, the present question has hand nasragea, and they every one' make ngainnt 1. .
of i
by Mr. Sergeant An .00—I know the prisoner ;he came to the Mr. Cl.anKE, for the defence, objected first, that the notice of become one of very rare occurrence, at least oohadnieoaltroesdi given the place.,
mitsborrig:ft,nooonei
before this tribunal. is so cl'ene, that it is hardly worth
nstaiimng the gnarl: t t a at,
bankininhoutte on the 7th February, about ten minutes before five the fire, and secondly. the depositions regarding it, had been made I am therefore somewhat at a loss to know hew to proceed ; but
o'clock in the evening. lie said, " I wish to open an account witb and served upon the Hundred by the land agent of the phtintiff, when such occurrences fall under your eonsideratior, Gentlemen e
tool
hs,
d
you, my name is Dixon ; I am the person who has taken the who was out of the country when the fire happened; whereas time the Jury, you are bound to deal with them to the best of yfnirf
house that Mr. Walton now lives in at Kingsthorpe ; f ass a corn. Act respired that the deposition should be made, and the notice judgment, for the purpose of administering justice to both parties. , bnaiPt:tnesfleeer:site:lesnw(leeorePf7i:.n:gl"7-:t'slihsocose oehf.c4:llslelibr'lleraoehr iiPtts"wierrss:tolia2lored by Pompey She
dealer." I replied, " Very well." Prisoner then said. " I will given by the servant of the owner. Mr. Clarke then called
deal candidly • DAMS to answer all these condition* mere etactly tbli
leave those bilb with you." He then produced the bill I now put J. 11. Hodson, land agent to the plaintiff, and examined him...." 111,
gDraturitnagronmyetloynofg einxperionenhoeveelbncvevlejrorinemedem;
trod
alcoaujusein which, so , Great in honour of his freedmen. It is not possible foraleT4

I
I

Of crin•
-11 •
and the
ei I
)Irphtilla
t wielded
, to hold
its fellow
m makes
it to say, ,
e proper
Anode to
lc in the
icquaint-
ire of the
work, be
the laa h•
re would 4
he would
id so the
to would
he found •
private
en engine • 1
tim as a
ed so as
Lew, .Ir.'
happen&
to much
liat, are
s resuir
right to
1
ough the
of a cri-
tic legiti.
iticism ii
e it is no
ork on 3
as gained
lore than
at he is a 1 :
ithor is a
the sub.
impletele
of good
it the D.
reviews,
be, their
to authsr
on sue:* r •
gilds his
;ire you
It ap.
Egypt
entered
the ohe
betweett
chatty et 3
gore Itii
it existed
le by that
mettle de
toned ta;st
prefer,
Singly set
1,; •
duplicate
different
ickcr cur.. --
16, lie set
eppo, and
on those
or months
icy. 111 r.
instineee,
it forward
less than
73. Thin
ate before
;egnentiy,
utert Wits
and Alem.
le passed
if Air. It.
taws. aft,i
e,
arts agar..
Bucking-
ission on
!n ennse.t ' 1-
house in
hp money
it In part
•
frithrytut-
j'ou may
ckingharu ii
ihown the
t persons,
mine:ldea •
a friend,
ray; and,
iere to Cr
offered rn t a
entlemar.'
lot assign
comments
any pats
itithor,wel
intlY pub.
tntey gave
Quarterly /-
y coafinetl
nm id the
that I can
rets•a book
I r•ii •
makes use
ieofothers.
letters.
onceive ti
shtathat
ten praised
brs beer%
hich book-
hrough the
of tevienn
oie attacka
realise they
7oune con.
I will five
veer :neer
Indiittop of
riscitivei; in
ninth; but
we if .111.*.
n vessel 1.4
that it we;
to ree-irn.
and ' you; •
,onds rirtt
eacribe ±t,
at ,until It
I heyet
.a
ens to sap.
kinthhafet
en traude.
tewer had
mid liavn
sl cf 4lite
have b 'en
Illnatrata
d that th 4
hat he baff,
ace of he
r with lir.
varns lie:
es en. eeksio
_ Wilt`3C
Now tilr„, Ipi
note ti his
le Reviewer
e had givers
roof ef thf 6 .
Mick ittg.
he sdbleet,
r
n cn which
visited the
town cancel
chose wcrk
since thr
horiry
the reazonts
But now
am's blue
esonalti:
e concha:
fight nwerte4
or Feeorta
The else
of it a 4
tt, and tr%
I secoorlitn
ty to mtlit4
'ompey fife
tot ae n'
. .
, ,