The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1826-10-21 00:00:00

VHE bititisn paEgg.

• . -
borough-street, and assist each 'the. The letter could net obtain
circulation by any other mans that he is aware of. Witness was
also in the habit of writing foe the M Advertiser and Afore-
Mg Post. Ife swears distinctly that Mr. C onant, the Magistrate,
authorized him to take- a copy of the letter. \nen Mr. Spilsbury
came into the office to give the letter to the Magistrate, he was at
first unwilling to havo it published, upon which Mr. Conant said to
him that it would he very creditable to him to have it published ;
and that if he did not, he (Mr. Conant) would see that copies were
obtained and made public. Does not knee that Mr. Kurke obtained
the letter from Mr. Crowder back again. Did not tell Mr. Crowder
to say that he (winless) was the author. Does not know that Mr.
Bourke got the nianoicripf away.
Mr. Joseph bunion, eitantined by Mr. ditturtY—lle is
printer and publisher of the Times newspaper. Mr. Bourke Ls re-
porter 6.r the Time.

Cross-examined by Mr. SCARLICTT—Mr. Bourke, and others
who furnish police reports, are paid by the line, after the rate of
three-half:unix a line. Mr. Bourke still reports for the Times.
Thomas Blank, Chief Constable of Marlborough-street, examined
by Mr. PLATT—III August, 18211, Charles Burton Lane attended
at this office, and laid an Information there before Mr. Conant. Wit-
ness took the information, and it was sworn la Mr. Conant's pre-
sence, at his house. Mr. Conant is the resident Magistrate.
(The information was here produced, charging some person un-
known with an Indecent attempt on the boy Lane.l
Mr. Plank's examination continued—Mr. kfuirfiead was brought
before the Magistrate next morning, and Lane identified him as the
person charged in the information. He was apprehended on the
Sunday, as the information was taken late on the Saturday evening,
and he was brought before the. Magistrates on the Monday
morning.
Mr. ,odder, Govern, of Tothill-fields Bridewell, produced the
warrant under which h ivcd Muirhead iato his custody, which
was read.

Mr. Spilabury's recognizances for the opeassince of Charles
Burton Lana at the Simkins were here put in lad reed.
Robert Spilabury exattined by Mr. PLATT—Received the latter
in question in September, 182.5; had at that time entered Into re-
cognizances for the appearance of Lane. The witness was in the
country at the time the hit,, arrived, but on his coming to town he
received it, and then carried it to the Magistrates at Marlborough-
street Police-orfice.

The letter was here put in and read ; and, u our readers will
observe, it stated that Mr.Spilsbury mien, with perfect "propriety
and gaiety." In the declaration, the words "and safety" ware omit.
ted, and Mr. SCARLETT took an objection that this variant*
was fatal.

Mr. F. Potioce followed on the same side, urging that this
variance made the letter set forth, and the letter averred in the de-
claration, two different letters.

The Loan Cuter JUSTICE was of opinion that there was no.
thing in the objection, and over-ruled it.
The letter was put in and read, In which it was stated that Mr.
Spilsbury might," with perfect propriety and safety," interfere in
the way proposed ; upon which
Mr. SCARLETT rose to take an objection, inasmuch as the let-
ter, as now read, differed from the letter set orth in the declaration,
the words " and safety" being there omitted. As the declaration
purported to set forth the words and matter of the latter, any varia-
tion from the letter now produced would be fatal.
Mr. (,c RYE] said that this variation did not alter the meaning
in the least.

The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE—It does not, Mr. Gurney.
After some further arguramt on both sides,
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE said—The letter on which this
quettion arises is not the libel for which this action is brought.
The declaration does not pmfess to give the tenor ; but all it says
is, that " the letter contains the words and matter following :" the
letter certainly does contain them, and perhaps a little more. The
variation between the declaration and the letter I consider to be
immaterial.

Air. Spilsbury re-examined by Mr. GURNEY—The letter had
been some days at witness's house, in consequence of his haying
been out of town; he took it, immediately on his return, to
Marlborough street police-otliee.
Mr. Aldridge, from the Record Office, proved that Mr. Harnett
was an Attorney of the Court of King's Bench.
Mr. Mallinson, of the Stamp Office, produced the Courier of
the 2fith of September, 11123, and of the l3:11 and 14th of August
preceding.
Mr. ABBOTT here read from the Courier of the 2fith September
the conversaton that passed between Mr. Harnett and Mr. Conant,
relative to the letter which was addressed to Mr. Spilsbury.
Mr. Plank, re-examined by Mr. GURNEY—On the 13th of Oc-
tober Mr. Edmonds handed him a letter to give to the Magistrates.
Mr. Edmonds reports the proceedings of that office for the Moe-sing
Chronicle. Witness refused Mr. Edmonds admission, in conse-
quence of an order from the Magistrates, which they made without
assigning any cause.
Tue le ter 0!',31r. Edmonds was here put in and read. It in sub-
stance called on the 31agistr des to give him an opportunity of show-
ing that he was not tile author of the letter in question, requested
the Magistrates to issue a warrant against the rioter' reporter, and
summonses to certain witnesses. and to appoint a certain day for
hearing the matter, in order tbat he might have the means of prov-
ing his innocence.
By Mr. SCAULETT—I gave 3fr. Spilabury's letter to Mr. Power
to take a copy of it. 1 did so hp the authority of 3lr. Conant. 1
did not understand Mr. Power to be the reporter for the Times. I
, was present whets Mr. Harnett came to the office. The Magistrate
desired him to write the first two or three lines of the letter, to show
that his writing was not like that of the letter. He did so, and on
handing them to the Magistrate said, " I despise the suspicion.
Mr. Harnett went back, and brought a person of the name of
Evans, the only person of that name who resided in Northumber-
land-street. Cannot say whether Mr. Bourke was present all
the time this was taking place. Harnett did not take a copy of
the letter.

AIL Roe examined by Mr. GURNEY—I am one of the Magi.-
tratesof Itfarlborough-erect Police•ofice. 1 received thin letter of

Mr. Edmonds. I t7iraa not read publicly in the office did not
permit any copies of it to be taken. I believe this libel to refer to
Mr. Bourke.
Cross-examined by Mr. SCARLETT—Edmonds had been dis-
missed from the office for a very different cause than being supposed
to have written the letter to Mr. Spilsbury, apparently combs& from
Hamett's house. I cannot tell what impression these stars in
the paper would have made on my mind, if I had not known all
the circumstances. I snout say whether I should have supposed
ft meant Mr. Bourke; but, knowing all the circumstances, I have
no doubt it refers to him. Legally speaking, Ido not know that
Mr Bourke is a reporter to the Tinirr.
Mr. Purse, a silversmith in the Strand, was next called, and
stated that he believed the libel in question referred to Mr. Bourke.
Mr. Roe recalled by Mr. SPAILETT—Edmonds applied to the
Magistrates for the purpose of getting a public expression of their
opinion, that he was not the author of the letter to Spilsbury. Mr,
Harnett, when he came to the office, compared the letter written to
Spilsbury with some letters in his possession.
The libels were here read as follow :
MARLDOHOUGH.IITIVEET.OO Saturday, Mr. riernett, the
S'licitor, Northumberland-streett Strand, came before Mr.
Conant, Sir George Farrant, and Mr. Roe, the sitting Magistrates,
and complained of a letter which had appeared that day in the I
Morning- Chronicle, which he held in his hand. This letter W 45 I
annexed to a report from this office, of the committal of John Bur-
ton Lane, the apprentice of mt. Spilsbury, the chief witness
against Aluirhead, for having imitated fora soldier.
" Mr. Conant asked him of whet part of the statement he edm.
plained.—M r. Harnett : I myopia°, Sir, of the letter which is ad.
dressed front 29, Northumberland-etreet, Strand, which is my mei-
&nee ; I have lived eight years in that house, in respectability;
have a family of children ; I have no lodges, in my hott:til
have I any client named Joseph Evans; and noth!ng *aid
my surprise and indignation. on receiving a letter from a of
mine, Captain Cooper, with the lifornint Chronick of this d0,;48.
forming me of the publication of that abominable productive,. I
never knew Muirhead, or saw him in my life *d I facet he be
my duty to come forward, and disavow all knewkedgo of the pro
duction which I taw in the newspaper. I theta* moo* that
the Magistrates will allow me to see the letrygi So oath iivakttocie
the author, for I base strong *made M %Roo that dorelMor
of the bow Is a woo gennected with the public**,
at this AI., Woo I Übe sued fa a debt —TM ll.dhlsw ex-
pressed any great impulse at the Marmot, said *eta +cry sig.
nificant glance at the zapartars
ai•IILIO6OII.7OH•STiIiST=I Fabricated Letter.— Yes.
terda Mr. Roe, the lbgloomea. Waved the following-letter from
Mr. ' :
" To *a Magistrate° Ida Pabilc Oaks, Great MarlbOrough.

street. -
" Gentlemen—ln applying at the 01Sat yettlerday, my object
was to obtain from ou an maquivocal de_lbradag that 1 was not
the author of the f gum of which Mr. Hansen complained.
You. Gentlemen, who are as mach bound to protect the innocent as
to bring the guilty to ppuuaiehmein. refined so de me an act of jut.
tics, and the only alarnative I now have Is to state that Mr.
is the moth accused by_ Mr. Harnett of having fabri-
cated the Letter whisk was seat to Mr. Spilebory. If the resift.
tion of that domino be an aims according to the Ulf of Eng-
land, and you thiok mew to ism a warrant wins' , and
summonses for dm stombotoof the witnesses, and appoint a time
for the inveatigages, I am prepared with elides.e to sustain the
charge. If yea do not WNW* im inquiry, you will eaten the
guilty, and apt,. Ms of as opportunity of publicly vind;cating
mpg( from a bommosim tes dieggimAd. • .
nwee dm mom that feedemso, your moat obed. servant,
" 3400E4 OM. IS, MOIL E. EDIIIOIIOII.
"mr. Am pima' oho Miter with moth am, red►stated
its mom dm Lethal Ogee. Phial, the officer, ,adshe
mesolea Aso Mg 800 so dem to M sea
Mr. I sea dimmed by the Mashoome to inbsen p
that he attrogivaprea.yoth Wier, ant tint kr ire[ *go
that he has no power so hum summonses dying tho perdu I sad
if any pow Ma been Waled by, the„Phhhellobo of the hew' , the
watt esenedy is by so sow at taw',
Mr. Ike then Messed thaury for the defendlnth TMe•
is not a quangos Warm Mr. Boothe and the psoriases 411 the
Courier :assellirrt hat it is a &guts bagmen ►the two shot ne.
Petters. , Mr. Blom ad Ma Smirk& I with to 'Ogee
case fairly out boy t old you OEM persiti the MINI quaai.
is not whether the sit 1111011malltalttot WWI ow pelt.
lished to lIIIMOOMSOMMIt Mr' 11111110.1 be.llll
sly raged so adios bib ommairoy bottom - loottoo, the
Mende Of mo wirapsver. and Mo. ailh:t, the gametes of
=asNeholiadilosuesseloaht but
ft. ,160 wrings by Mr.
to the of Matthearagthemost wee grime to
shad. Fran that Aloe • dedisathso *mho teas set the goihie of
the Iv"' ant to Mr. Spibbory, edit sot ow tostodloa to loom
upon!!.. Bourke, or any Wm t 0.., the eeMbiledap or that loam

This, however, is called a libel, and 1 undertake to satisfy you,
Gentlemen, that it is no more a libel than any other piece of paper
you ever saw in your lives. This is the complaint of a reporter,
that a newspaper publishes that which takes place at a public police
office. This is the complaint of a niati who publishes every thing
that takes place in that office ; and yet he is infinitely annoyed that
any thing should be pubiished which occurs there about him.
self. Is there to be one law for him, and another law for the rest
of mankind ? I say, No. Whatever may be the oldninn
of his Lordship in point of law, whatever may be the opinion of
lawyets,a disposition now exists on the part of this sort of persons
to bring every matter, public as well as private, before the tribunal
of public justice, ax it is called; and they make matters of private
history, private afflictions, and sometimes private sorrow, even sub.
jests of public ridicule and animadversion. Whatever you may
think of this practice, I say the last person who ought to complain
of auth a system is the reporter of a police office. He sets all law
at defiance. He says the judges of the land are wrong—the
lawyers are wrong—all sensible people are wrong; but he is
t; because these public expositions of proceedings at poll
are productive of the greatest benefit to society. Then, in
the same of God, administer to Mr. Bourke his own law as hr
would lay it down. But Mr. Bourke Rays " No; bold any one you
like up to scorn and ridicule, but don't touch a reporter. His holy
person is sacred; and if any other reporter dares to represent his
conduct in its true light, the vengeance of the law shall await him.'
You remember full well, gentlemen, the old story about the Pot and
the Kettle, wherein the one abused the other for being some-
what more black in a certain part of its body than the accuser.
It is rendered by common acceptance Into more homely tan.
image, which It is unnecessary to repeat; but I say—
" uip talent (interims de seuitione querentes.
lea est oquior ulla
Lse
noels artifices arse perire suit."
Let net Gnu nos himself complain of public tumults ; let the
hangman be hanged upon his own gibbet ; and let not dlr. Bourke
=whim be is publishing slanders at three half-pence a line
Other persons, who have unfortunately to appear in public
police offices, that his sacred person is exempt from animadversion,
when it Addy conies under observation. I wish sincerely the Edi-
tors of N would adopt some system by which their re-
rteesw not be paid by quantity, but by quality and merit ;
this system of luxuriance has so extended itself into all profes-
sions, that I wish, even in one branch of my own, the mane male
were to be observed. Good God ! what wasteful hours of labo-
rious reading should I be spared, if such a system were universally
adopted in all professions! (Laughter.) The Learned Counsel
concluded by insisting to the Jury that the present publication was
no libel, but merely a necessary vindication of Mr. Edmonds's own
diameter.
The LOAD Cum" JUSTICE, in charging the Jury, egpreued
his clear opinion that the publication in question was a libel of and
concerning some person, but whether it referred to the plaintiff, or
to any other person, was a question entirely for the Jury Mr. Roe
and bin. Puree declared that they believed the libel to be of and
concerning the plaintiff, but still the Jury were to decide that ques-
tion. His Leedsbip, therefore, left it to the Jury to decide, first,
whether this was a libel ; and, secondly, whether it was published
of and concerning the plaintiff: If the Jury entertained an opinion
In the affirmative, they would find • verdict, with moderate da-
Magee, for the plaintiff. If they entertained a contrary opinion,
thee would find for the defendant.
The Jury turned round in the box, and, without half a minute's
hesitation, found for the defendant.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE then asked Mr. Gurney If he would
try the next cause of Bourke against Clement ?
Mr. GuawleY said he certainly should; because, in the second
ease against the Morning Chreptack, there was an additional libel.
and &Justification was pleaded.

BOURKE v. WILLTAX INNELL CLEMENT, ESQ.
Theo wu an action brought by the plaintiff in the last case
against tha defendant, who is the Proprietor of the iilorning Ciro-
side, Bell's Life in London, and several other Newspapers, to re-
cover from him a compensation in damages for two libels, the one
published in the Morning Chronicle, and the other in Bell's Lift in
London.

_....__._. i
The defendant justified the libels.
Mr. Gurney and Mr. Platt were for the plaintiff, and Mr. Scar-
let, Mr. Common Sergeant, and Mr. Brougham, were for the de-
fendant.
Mr. GURNEY stated that, as he saw in the Jury-hoz some of
the same Gentlemen who had decided the hat case, and as he knew
that all the others were in Court during the evidence and discussion
of it, he felt it quite unnecessary to go again over the same details :
but, in this case, there was an additional libel, in which it would
appear that Mr. Edmonds made the columns of his employer's Pa.
per a channel for the gratification of his oar. revenge on Mi.llourke.
the defendant in this case, however, thought fit to plead a justifi-
cation, wherein he asserted that it was true Mr. Bourke wrote the
letter to Mr. Spilsbury, which swat apparently dated from Mr. Har-
nett's house. The Learned Counsel would therefore dare his
Learned Friend to the proof of that justification, and warned him
before-hand that he was prepared to prove who the real author was.
In this case, therefore, it would be impossible for the defendant to
prove his justification ; the present Jiiry could not come to a con-
clusion similar to that of the former Jury.
It was agreed on both sides that the evidence given in the hit
case should be taken, on his Lordship's notes, as having been given
la this case.
The additional publication in Bell's Lill: in London was then
read, and it,appeared in the following form:—
" THE MARLBOROUGH•sTREET MAGISTRATES.
" Ih one last we noticed that a Gentleman, a Reporter of The
Morning. Chronicle, had. been excluded from this office by Mr.
Conant, in consequence of his gi'ving i report, in which that Ma..
&trate appeared in rather an obnoxious point of view. The fol-
lowing is a brief history of this affair :
" A man named Jackson, and two soldiers, were brought from
St. George'i watch-house to Marlborough street Office; the for.
mer charged the soldiers with an attempt to extort money from
him, and the soldiers accused him of an indecent assault. As the
soldiers were dragging Jackson along the Park, several persona
intoned Sams, the gate-keeper, that the soldiers were ill-using a
gentlemen.; a respectable tradismin. named Alowlen, was one of
the persons, and Sams went to see what was the cause of the affray,
and tinaffy all the parties wentito the witch-house. Alowlen was
told that be had no weskits to attend next day, as there was suffi-
cient evidence without bilm. During the examination the followiug
day, Mr. Conant hazarded a most dreadful imputation, that Mow.
len was a companion of Jackson, because he had not come forward.
On a subsequent day Mowlen came to Marlborough-street Office,
end complained to Mr. Conant of his statement haring appeared
in some of the AleWspapers, which was is ahfounded as ft was cruel
and unjust. Mr. inant had the tee-.. rity to reiterate his former
assertion, and because the Reporter gave a faithful account of this
' . he was excluded from the Office; a private communi-
cation 1 diots to hi& chit be would not be admitted in future.
This Time Reperteksent to that Paper an account, stating that Mr.
Eddlinde had Men excluded from that Office, which was inserted,
widsreekany IMMO for his exclupion being assigned. About a week
prodetis to thii seder for Mr. Edmonds's exclusion, an account ap-
pearedin all the Nureppere, • that hlr. Harnett, an Attorney, of
eimberland-strest, Strand, had charged a Reporter at Marlbo.
migh.streetofficewith fabricating a letter which had been sent to Mr.
Spasinirf the master of a boy named Line, who was a witness
against Nubbin & offering Ali. Spilsbury iOOl. to suppress the
boy's evidence, Mr. Harnett openly stated in the office, that the
rewrite be- Peneed did not belong to the Morning Herald, New
=,tor Morning Chronicle newspapers; and in the private room
the Magistrates, he said the Timer reporter wns the person
he suspected of fabricating the letter. The reporter of the Times,
rimice an Meant tp that paper. of Mr. Harnett's complaint,
to sink that Mr. Harnett exonerated the reporter of the
akvike Chroalek, &c.; and when, a week afterwards, he gave
the repeat torkpines;. , that Air. Edmonds had been excluded
withodt 'assigning any
_reason, the readers of
ET:: 7 Piave suppoted that the caul of Mr.
*e te ed to the fabrication. Mr. Edmonds
M ,requesting him to state that the Cause of
net Wats to the fabricated letter; and Mr? Harnett
wee
at 'Moe, aid informed the editor of the person
Mai*
sebeee be •
_,; but the Tinto declined noticing either. Mr.
or Mr. Harnett's application. . Mr. Edmonds, on
went before the Magistrates tit Marlborough.street-
iSa., sited for summonses against the Vows reporter, and
MlN::who could give evidence to prove the guilt of the forma;
Magistrate (Mr. Roe) said he had no jurisdiction in such a
ease. The Tinto reporter, under the circumstances, will, probably,
feel the necessity df rellevipg himself from so serious ao imputa-
tion. The conduct of the Timer, on this occasion, affords a fresh
proof of the liberality of its principle.; and it is not a little singu-
lar that the sccosnt of the recent occurrences at Marlborough-street
have been studiously omitted on that Journal. M r. Edmonds is
still excluded from Ala:thorough-street, under the direction of Mr.
Conant, who cannot pardon the strictures in which the Morning
Chronicle hit indulged."
Air. Roe examined by Mr. SCARLETT—I remember the fact of
Edmonds being excluded from Alarlborough-street office, and I also
recollect his applying to me for the cause of his expulsion, sad I
declined giving it to him. 1 believe he represented to me that the
reporter of the Times had reported such expulsion in a manner
that insinuated that it had taken place in consequence of Edmonds
having written the letter to Mr. Spilsbury. Mn Harnett,. when he
tune to the office, publicly charged the reporter of the Times s ith
writing the letter to Spilsbury. and he exonerated all the other re-
porters from 'any participation in it.
Mr. Ottaststir objected to all tbis as not being imidennt,.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE thought it admissible In support
of the justification, and at all events admissible in mitigation of
downy&
Mx. SCAREETTANDI IdIIMUMI that one plea of justification
dread Bourke with being the author of the letter to Spilsbury,
low there were Mee yips which did not make such charge.
The Loved Caret JITsTicE now looked over all the pleas, but
found that this cheep trend! each of them.
Mt. iliciaLtior dull iddinsed the Jury for the defendant. He
'hoped they would seems than when he candidly natal that he could
. est discover where deers was any libel is the psgowt Ptaldisetiowe
amplained of. The aret publication was oesltined in tho jissotog
Cheswick, old *it was wily • fec skulk of the publioatios tem.
*toed of as gang * Courier, widgets hoist Jury had deemed
Wise no libel at all The some, or loom, was in astarieka,
• as In the Cosier, and no Winne*
.111 drown that it refined
1 to silo phlotilt As to the mead ps Loaned own*
silts.
saga of dasesst In what lisstkplet It tees Mr. Gomm
' le die tewsookoment of the easy professed y professed ass is,
know who illitieval author eglho, Its Mr. Spilsbury was, sod
1i:22: to endow Wage lasedship as to the fact. His
dr decided dist as deers Was Do justification in that
awe, he osoll sot nodes evidence wi prove that Mr. Boarke was
mit the sadist of Ilse letter supped to be imputed to him by the

publication complained of. Now, however, when a case WWI Ilk"
eented before the Jury in which a justification was pleaded, )Sr,
Gurney, who had screwed his courage to the sticking, paint, did
not venture to give any evidence as to litho the author was. If Air.
Bourke, as he pre'ended, had discovered this mighty matt, It
might as well be disclosed ; but Mr. Gurney, in his second case,
measured his gallant conduct in specific terms, and only velttimed
to say, th it if be (Mr. Scarlett) attempted to prove that.
Bourke was the Author of this fabricated letter to Mr. Spilsbury,
(Mr. Gurney) would endeavour to show who the real author was:
Mr. Gurney, in his experience, knew full well that die chnotei
were five hundred to one whether he (Mr. Searletti would qg any
evidence or not ; and. therefore, he might safely 4 ha:'.ard so etiolated
an offer. Toe Learned Counsel, however, insisted toe! this publication
'in Bars Life in London was no libel at all. It merely stated that
Mr. Harnett publicly stated his suspicions that the • Times As-
pone," was the author of the fabricated lettir, and Mr. We; the
hlngietrate, clearly proved that Harnett, made such a statement....
The denomination of " Times Reporter" was ton general to Al
tiny intention on the part of the defendant td attack the plaintiff,
and; at all events, this publication was no libel.
The CHIEF JUSTICE, in summing up. left it to the Jury teem.
Rider whether the contents of the publication in Bell's Lift in
Londms imputed to any one the fabrication of the letter sent to
Spilshury ; and if it did, whether it imputed that fabrication to the
plaintiff. If the Jury were of opikon that the fabrication Of the
letter was imputed to 11)r. B then dry ought to find a verdict in
his favour, with Ruch reasonable damages 111 they thought requisite.
If, on the contrary, they thought the publication did not impute
to 31r. Bourke the fabrication of the letter, they Might to find fin
the defendant.
The Jury consulted together for three minutes; and then found a
verdict for the defendant.

----
BEL—" THE ACE."
Titi REV. E. JAMES D.J. DOWLING RICHARD/I.
This was an action brought by the plaintiff; who is the Clemy
man of a congregation of Dissenters, in Birmingham, to rerover
from the defendant, whet is the proprietor, printer, and publisher
of the Age Sqnday newspaper, compensation in damages for injure
sustained by !Ice plaintiff, in consequence of the defendant having.
in the month of September, 1823, published in the said newspapec
a certain fake, scandalous, and malicious libel, of and aniherning
the plaintiff. The defendant pleaded Not Guilty.
The case for the plaintiff was conducted by" Mr. Searlett,
Gerry, and Mr. Brougham; Mr. Common Seigeaat conducted
the defence.
Mr. ScARLETT commenced DM statement of the plaintiff's case
in an almost inaudible tone. If there was any one among the
happy institutions of this country which he prized more then
another, it was that which he firmly believed would cause those
institations to flourish for a time long beyond those of other mull-
tries which, although they. might enjoy the same degree of
public liberty, yet did not enjoy that institution to which he al.
luded—he meant the institution which afforded him the oppor-
tunity of having the honour of addressing twelve honest men.
That was a amtiment not taken uti by him as a wild theory,
adopted without censiderailop, but it was the reedit of the
review of the institutions of this countr. When lie spoke of the
Trial by Jiry, he could not avoid quoting, upon that silbjeet,
words of one of the most distinguished Lawyers, and one of the
most ardent admirers of gentiiffe liberty—Mr. Justice Black.
stone, who said, in aeludingto i pungent Montesquieu, which
predicted the fall of this empire when the Legislative should have
become more corrupt than the Executive porloo of the Government,
that he (Montesquieu) was mistaken ; for .4 long as the English
Trial by Jury should last, it would bring all the institutions of the
country to bear one oh the other ; it would pgpetnate what was
good, and correct what was bad. To that very able observation the
humble individual who then had the honour of addressing the Jury
would add, that as long as the freedom of the ,press remain a
' under the wholesome control of the sound discretion of a Jute,
so long might it indulge thit freedom in safety, and with.
out any apereliension that it could operate tq the detri-
ment of public liberty ; bit when At cape same before • Jury
—a case of libel which no man e( hews/ er feeling *could W.
lently suffer under—if • Jury demild use exercise that dis-
ceetion in such a manner as treold.4lnonexample of the offender
aeon public grounds, and steed to the individual in.
jured—if a Jury should treat private ria.umny as matte of amuse-
ment, and fit to lie althea by slight dafaages—then the tyranny of
the press could be no longer endured, and sortie other measures must
be adopted. He appealed to than as men, tee her there was any
, property which they pessested, which they would not rather uteri-
flee than their moral character-rather than be considered a de-
ptided man by, those by whom they have hitherto been esteemed ?
What was • here, except the expectation of a reward in future life,
that furnished such a bailier to vice and immorality as the opinion
of society of a man's moral character? If ever the tithe should
strive, that of a RIME of honour, who had lived a long life with.
opt reproach, the malignity of the press should be permitted to
circulate, with impunity, throughout the country, the foulest
and the basest insinuations and as.pertions, then would be the
time for every man of honour to quit the cduntey, and to seek a,
milder Ind more genial land. What was meant by liberty ?—•
What was meant by the enjoyment of property, mind which the
law had thrown so many protections, that the hi est personage
in the land mold not infringe upon it? Wad any man tell
him that it meant nothing more than tangible property, which
could be the subject of a contract? No; he contended that, la
that general liberty, were included fame and character. He did
not complain of the liberty of the press in more extensive as-
optation, but he denied that it would be safe or politic to ad.
gait that the liberty of the press should be released from the
wholesome correction pf a British Jury. He had made those
Marks, because it sas often said. when e case of libel was
brought before a Jury, " True, it ii libel ; but then it is not such a
libel as calls for damages." The libel to Which he had to cell the
attention of the Jury appeared in a Sunday newspaper, called the
Age. What the circulation of that ;taper was, he knew not. It had
never happened to him to read that newspaper, except in the exer-
cise of his profession as a Barrister ; but of that peer he must say
this, that every page of it clearly demonstrated that it had been es.
tablishetl for the sole purpose of mire di gin slander. He should
like to know what passed in the office of teat paper. The history
of the office would show whether the paper had been set up for
public benefit, or for private slander and private emolument.
The plaintiff; Mr. James, was a Clergyman, and the Author of
some distinguished woiks.. in the way of his own profeseion.
He was the Minister of a congregation, at Birmingham,
whose doctrines differed, in some respects, from those of the
Church of England. In that body of Dissenters there were many
gentlemen of high character, integrity, and education, by all of
whom no man could be more respected than the plaintiff: In the
discharge of his 'leered calling, the plaintiff attended a Meeting, foe
the establishmern of an Infant School, at Birmingham. At that
Meeting, Lord Calthorpe took the Chair, and Mr. James proposed b
resolution. Whether. or not Mr. James made a speech, in proposing
that resolution, he (Mr. S.) did not know ; but of this he was ears.
fled, that Mr. James did not make arch a speech as wasrepotted
in the ilernaingliam Chronicle of the 2d of September, 1828,
which pretended to give a report of that Meeting. The pert
ems who had taken any part in the proceedings of that, and
dlbilar Meeting'', were singled out as fit objects of attack
hs the columns of the Age. It was strange that in any work,
having any pretensions to literarrszeheesierer, those persons, Time
almost exclusive study it was to the human mind, end to
bring a portion of learning within Nereb of the hounltleet teed.
dual, should he wade ere elledt. spina§ Niter wend Nan
because they hsessiskse sewn for elhammeara.
tern of the condition Ode liner.ssea. Yet so ft ens led
in the article o( whi npfr eimpkimed ass attach mode
upon his Lamed Friend (Nr. areeshens) fur his usetimarn
he (Mr. Scerelestdozight esp. ter -having been the odubsosse
of them hwat mind Infant Schools. Of his Loomed
Friend •he net avoid saying, that whatever might be
the shades of difflehme 4 spaded, *twine liht Want hint
and crany able, loareade and well vegan tide ism,
tion, his lame would"''p
t down to awe Ma
creased, for the part AMA be had WWI; Zesell=ein. The
article did not, howemeithighude any attack spew the tweed charac-
ter of hie banned who had therefore very windy treated
such attach* Irish She eenteenpt they merited. The snide, mita
speaking in an very inummered terms of a (NI% Fletcher)
of the Church of Seedend, who was probably w te some of the
Jury, thus intredneed obi name of the present plaintiff:—
,A man by the awe efJ whe dins a Rev. to his name, hat,
by a display Odle asset aseseence, so far
himself into the good opiates el else deeded people GriZaertedrn,
that they have built for his a mem splendid sesames. Be, a
man who preaches the aentendmemeef f3e4,and *urge* home
and breaks them, has the MIOSSIS7 M Jilasdefip, sailed
for the purpose of foneding Intlat abed' Nips detpdalipie ertint
College projected in the metropolis. Tie OW le Ns henikeed,
and such humbugging attempts to aimis shishas dye pill*
must and shall be exposed. We have not iies tit nee pieta&
ing to religion and morality, who have Isensied 4bo Sett
principles of both. He not Slip WNW air
but got them from the circorestemea of hle seem* awinbope
obtained on his part by a Agleam et Nog said ma
virtue; and which was hushed. by a Istrs petwebey damneto est
of his wife's jointure to his injured hires end yet web phyla
are suffered to talk much about religion, ntendarmad the bkoiNgs
of education."
Such Was the way in which the Age spiked a reesetable aid
well-educated clergyman. Mr. James weld ably
a two, At first
that •
Birtniniat;iffhe wie/
ths tee er the

way mum; mayJetioniA,
" J. D. 1UCH44114."
Such was the Impudent r• ply *kith this likpidloot istadiat

well-educated clergyman. Mr. Janis timid oily eaitiat at lush
conduct in two, ws-Allithtla that be Pei= bed 2
enemy in Bimini Waal 44* whims is esiousitee t sod
next wee, that the tot et* ilyre wenig. at a altiols
deflation, lend his paper to am, suirsdeat wits whh > lush
sclilimet
a mode of attach. Such wottani ao sea amid sew
der, and the plaintiff, wishing to meet the esimeery ill
of Waft. applied to tilt ilefeaket to glee asp • tho swam. dui
reply to the application, this most hapadust red insists
sent this veer, insoket (If possible) letter se the elibbee•
Mr. Willa : le ISM
. ,
" SIR—I undentimd by Your clerk that W heat
me Tweeting something whisk has larall ~,_ 44TT'adakillt
to gr. Jamrs's 'fait, I eas .voreorel4 il rreullessete Phi
dawn httirad I said Mr. iheriett t witithe haw his. A his
mama Sled at the Simakalles Mara that ha la iha sees gt
pekoe of that Wawa. pieleleilee) et ebe 4e. ill kketo
4 thew Jams a Impel( *Auk peeps to edema a kiwi era
me ea .
.spilajows=elledi elle% MI kt it be sersaiseades
whit as your steentese k osesect, it
e=
:Wee the upwassues of Oho Earar, maim tit •
*sea di hplisladr.• a obi* lio omplake. If MI
MINI eta act awes your opprobetise, I dui lake* yewelibirt
name of my solicitor. who wall receive a letter, sad' anus* is soy
way matters may remake.

thought Sit to make to the 'application of a gentleman resting
hear! the 010•1 foul calumnies. This reply amounted to nothing
tars
than this, " If you satisfy me that yoo have not trampled un-
der tom every social and moral virtue—if you satisfy me that im-
mediately after you preached the Commandments, you did not go
home and break them, why then I shall have no objection to say so
in the newspaper." The beamed Counsel concluded by stating,
that he considered this reply ttn aggravation or the otiginnl offence,
and he trusted the Jury, In order to mord their opinion of the con-
duct of the defendant, would give the damages (5001.) in the de-
:.taration.
Evidence was then given to show that the defendant was the sole
Proprietor of the Age newspaper ; that the plaintiff was the per-
- so-i named in the libel, nrd that he was married, and the officiating
clergyman of a congregation of Independents at Birmingham.
Me. Com ato x nu eatev sulttnitted that evidence ought to be
er,Cred, to show that the chapil in which the defendant officiated
was licensed.
Loaribitte having insperted the declaration, stated his
mioMion, that shaped as that action was, it was unnecessary to
give finch eviderce.
The RNA read by Mr. SCAR LETT was put In end read.
Tit- Com atow-Senor.ax T tit nied shdt the defendant had at all
times refused to make an apology, and he was now ready 'o make
toe most ample one, and to state in the paper that he was imposed
lipou. The Learned lientleman then, in a speech of considerable
length (an outline of which our limits will not allow us to give), con-
tended. that althoti Ali the libel was not one which he could justify,
did not operate so much to the injury of the plaintiff as to justify
his Learned Priced (Mr. Scarlett) in calling for heavy damages.
Th 2 LORD Clille:F JUST IC6, in summing up. said the only
question was the amount of I. amagrs, and the Jury would give such
(mimeo as might appear to them to be reasonable and just.
The Jury having consulted together toe a few minutes, found a
erdtct toe the plaintiff—Damages 30tH.
lllr,otJAtaY laddro.sing his Lordship)—l am instructed by my
elicit, my Lord, to gate, that he will not put a shilling of the da-
mages into his pocket.