The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1822-11-08 00:00:00

LAW itytkLLiGtiva.
Eimer OP CHANCERT, Ltsteis Isito
TaustaDAv, Pldvingaga 7.

THE PORTSMOUTH CASE.
The Court was crowded before ten etleek, at
which hour his Lordship came into Court.
The ATTORNEY•GENECAL stated, this was Ow
Petition of Arthur W. Fellow's, Esq. the son of
the Non. Newton FeHowes, dnd tits oehhew of the
Earl or Portsmouth, alleging that the Noble EArl
was of unsound mind and weak uncirratandiag,
and praying that a commission of lunacy might
usne against him.
The Attorney-General's opening speech lasted
three hour..

Mr. WETHERELL followed on the stale side, and
had toot room:lode-4 *lmo the Court roar.
Mr. Huang a►ked hos Lordship if he would t .ke
this rose Ogilillosi tooootoorrow ii

The LORD CHA scei.Loa—" I have no doubt if
the fu►ther bearing of this cast goes on to-morrow.
that it will interfere with the interests of the other
suitors; but it as a case of such greet importance,
that I think it ought to permed to-morrow. I put
it to the consideration of those persons who ■re In
the habit of publishing these cases. whetl'er they
ought not to *listen' from publishing this case until
it is concluded."

Om of retpert to his Lordship's soggestion, we
refrain from imbh.liiiopthe este uutif it is coo.
eludrd.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, IVINTIONSTM
1 H uitscsav, Novamsza 7.

THE KING v. MESMER.
The Defendant in this case was an Ai torney of greet
respeciandity residing •t Procne, in Suinersetahire,,
and was fausid guilty at the last Assizes of suborna-
tion of perjury in a cause in which Sir T. Champ-
nem, Bart. was Plaintiff, and himself was the De-
fendant.

Mr. Scaimarr now applied to the Court for •
rule to ihew cause why a new trial should not be
had, or the judgment arrested. The indictment
alleged that at the preceding Assizes for Somerset-
shire, in an issue joined between Sir T. Champneys,
Barr. end the Defendant, he. the Defendant, intend-
ing to pervert the course of justice, did then and
there solicit and endeavour to persuade divers per-
sons to appear as witnemes for him the raid George
Measlier. and to swear falsely touching and alleging
the premises that Sir Thomas Champneys did at-
tempt to commit some unnatural offence. Mr.
&mien contended that this allegation was insuffi-
cient, inasmuch as it did not specify the materiality
of the evidence to the issue joined between the
parties. The original action of Sir I'. Champneys
agenda the Defendant, was for words spoken, and ;t
was laid down by the Judge, that witnesses could
Dot be produced by the Defendant to swear to the
truth of the words, but they might be permitted
to swear to the existence of reports, and on reference
to the evidence of the only witness (Cane, a carpets-
ter) examined to that point, it would appear that
the Defendant, on applying to him, never asked
him to swear to the facts themselves, but merely to
the report being in existence, The words of the wit-
ness were these :—Defendant said to him, that he
came " not altogether about a bill of 151. which I
owed, bat about a dirty report or dirty action of
Champneys : and he said, if I would come forward
and swear against Champneys, he would not only
forgive me that 151. hut would make • Gentleman
of me." Ou the cross-exemitiatiou of this wit-
ness, he admitted that he knew what the Defend-
ant meant by " dirty report or dirty action," us
he had heard reports. Their Lordships would per-
ceive that the indictment charged that the De-
fendant solicited witnesses to swear to the action
itself ; whereas he could not have been admitted
to examine to it, and, in point of fact, the witness
was not examined to it—and according to his evi-
dence, the Defendant did not ask him to come to
swear to any fact which he did not believe; indeed
he (Mr. Scarlet) had the authority of the De-
fendant's affidavit to say that he never did make
any such solicitiitions.
The LORD CHIEF' JUSTICE—is You may take
a rule to sheer cause."