The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1825-01-29 00:00:00

THE BRITISH PRESS.

Haydn had abandoned the lofty path of politics to pen historic anec-
dotes of tittles past—that there was a comparison between Lori
Wharton and Lord NVellesley, and the contrast was striking, and
could not be mistaken. Here the Attomey.General went over the
various partages of the libel. and applied himself to prove, that in
the latter part of it Lord Wellesley was distinctly mentioned. In
allndicg to the former part of the libel, he said it came within the
case of the King v. Eaton, in which the late Monarch was com it
-
pared to the tyrant Cook, and to the cue of Lord Wharton, the
son of the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, who was described as
Verres. They, in the progr.:ss of the case, would resort to eel-
dence charade, and sustain the indictment by the contest, and by
other publications subsequent. In the Air at the lllth March,
the company at the Levee were compared to the `' riff raft'." It
was satd that the wife of a cheesemonger was present, and this was
made a subject of ridicule by the buffoon, Mr. Haydn. It will be
proved that a list of the company on this occasion was sent to the
Slur Office, and that Haydn spoliated it, and altered it. It was
true that the Irish Court was not as crowded, or as elegant as it
was wont to be before the Union, but this was not owing to Lord
Wellesley, who maintained a liberal and splendid hospitality
here, unequalled by any thing he (3lr. Plunkett) remembered since
the time of the Duke of Bedford. Notwithstanding, this wretch
has emu forward to brand hitn—and, like • purchased villain, to
proclaim what lie knows to be false. The Right Honourable
Gentleman said, it was painful to him to be obliged to come for-
ward thus, but as a public officer he had endeavoured to do his
duty, for which he had the best attestation—the disapprobation of
the violent of all parties.
A discussion now arose about the withdrawing of the witnesses
from Court, in which Mr. O'Connell, the Attorney and holicitor
Generals, and 31r. Sealy Townsend, took a part.
Much merriment was excited at this stage, by Mr. Bourneville
announcing that the witnesses were to remain out of bearing, and
to come when called.
The Bench very heartily enjoyed this bull.
Witnesses were then called and examined. The examination of
Mr. White led to the following legal discussion :-
1 Rody White. examined by the ATTORNEY-GENERAL—Is an
Attorney : was it schoolfellow of Haydn's, and was intimate with
him for the last two years. Haydn consulted witness on several
occasions and subjects. 'Witness considers that all communications
betweeehienself and Haydn were strictly confidential and pro-
! fusionist..

Ina you recollect having been applied to by Haydn in the month
of February, respecting a manuscript ?
I have no wish, 3lr. Attoroey-Geaeral, to evade the truth of any
question put to me. but I must decline answering that question, a
4ty communication between Mr. Haydn and myself about plant'_
scripts was professional. Witness was concerned for Haydn about
that time in law proceedings.
Ton question, whether those proceedings were connected with the
present presecution, the witness declined answering, as it was a
communication. _ _

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said, the Court must first know
the circumstances of the communication, in order to decide whether
it was a privileged one.
Mr. NORTE( submitted, that privileged communications were
not limited to cases where suits were pending, but to any subject
which required professional advice.
The Axxolisixy-Gtxxnat. said, he did not ask u to the
nature of the nraqnscript, but as too manuscript.
The Court thought the witness might answer the question re-
specting a manuscript.
The examination was then resumed—witness was consulted
about the beginning of February, respecting a manuscript.
The AT T ORNE Y•CiENZ AL—Wrill there any suit in which Mr.
Haydn um plaintiff or defendant about the month of February,
and in which you were concerned for him ?.—I don't recollect that
there was. _ _

ATTOR NET-GENERAL—NOT any suit for property depending,
relative to a manuscript ?—M Haydn, as Editor of a paper, might
consider there was some property in the manuscript.
ATTORN EY.GENER•L —This is a matter of law—it is an in.
discreet answer; and Ido not want to avail myself of it. But
were there any proceedings, civil or criminal, against Mr. Haydn
at that time?—There were not.
Not with reference to any right or privilege then depending, in
which Mr. Haydn was concerned ?—I believe not.
Was there any crime committed at that time, for which Mr.
Haydn was liable to be prosecuted ?
Mr. NORTH objected to this question.
The Oster Jc ST ice—Mr. Attorney-General, we don't think
yon can ask that question.
ATTORNET-OENERAL—The distinction I wish to make, is
with the view of having it decided how far the witness is within
the limits of his professional privilege. If Haydn consulted the
witness, for the purpose of knowing how he could safely violate the
law, that communication is not privileged. But if he committed
an ffence, and consuhed his attorney, as to how he could defend
him, then I concede that I have no right to ask him.
Judge 111.711 TON.—That is, perhaps, rather anticipating what
should come front the other side.
The ATToa W/Y.GE PIE artz—l think so, my Lord; I will now
come to the contents of that manuscript, and ask the witness what
they were.
dir. NORTH objected.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL—The question then is.—whether
a party, having no legal right depending, civil or criminal, consults
a professional gentleman, with respect to an act which he in-
tends to do; and if that act being done, is detrimental to the
laws of society and interests of the public, has that profes-
sional person a right to protect himself from a disclosure of
those fiefs in a Court sf Justice? If it is discretionary with a
professional man to consult his feelings as to what he shall con-
sider a privilege-it communication, how is the law to be drawn
between the most trivial and the most serious offences? If a
man consult his attorney, mating his intention to commit mur-
der or treason, and requiring to be advised as to how he can
do either with impunity--and if, after the commission of the
crime, the attorney should be asked as to the fact of his having
been consulted, should he have the option of deciding whether
he should screen the offender from justice, under his proles.
sional pririlege ? The law knows no such officer as an adviser
how to come.:t crime safely, nor consents to tell what is or
what is not cr:ttie--though it recognizes an adviser to instruct an
offender how to defend himself when prosecuted.
Mr. Towsratnn contended that the privilege was not that of
the attorney, but that of his diens. If Mr. Haydn handed a libel
to 111 r. White, his attorney, and handing it would be publithiug
it, could it be maintained that Mr. White, the only compe-
tent witness to prove the publication, could shelter himself
under his professional privilege from giving evidence of the
fact ? Could the libeller, by his own fraud, purchase his in-
demnity ?
The CRIET JuITICE—Do you urge it then as &publication If
blr. TOWNSEND—I do, my Lord, so far as that--for there is
no privilege for publishing a libel.
111 r. O'CONNELL, for Mr. Haydn, said--It was quite familiar
to every lawyer that there were miny modes of distributing pub-
lications that were libellous, and yet privileged publications. It
was notorious that newspaper printers are obliged to inform the
public of many occurrences, the publication of which may be li-
bellous, but die suppression of which would be an abandonment
of their public duty ; and if such a printer should consult Coun-
sel as to the safest terms or form of publishing it, shall it be
said that the attorney who may convey or submit the case to
Counsel, shall be brought into Court, and made declare what
passages were omitted ? It was but the other day an article
appeared in a newspaper, and there was attached to it the opinion
of Counsel, that " this case, as it now stands, is not libellous:"
and was a printer, anxious to avoid offending the law, to be denied
the right of taking the precautionary measures of obtaining pro.
fessioncl advice how he could best do so?

The SOLICITOII-GENEYAL submitted, that the professional
privilege now sought for could not exist consistently with the laws
of the land, for no man was privileged to advise how to commit
crime ; and an attorney or any man would beguilty of a misprision
of treason, it' he were consulted upon a treasonable project and did
not make it known. The attorney has no privilege but that which
originated in the absolute neemaity for men, in some transactions
in life' to consult those who necessarily are persons of better judg-
ment than themselves ; but it never was intended that such a ne-
cessity was to be the foundation for counselling the commission of
crime. The tight of every man to consult confidentially his legal
advisers, was not denied, nor attempted to be infringed upon, by
the examination now contended for, because the rule did not go to
&fleet those who consulted Counsel for some useful purpose.
The Con IT consulted for some time, and deferred their deci.
elan titan) the point.
After the examination Of two other-e Assesses, she Court adjourned
to this day at ten o'clock.
General Sir Wm. Parker Carroll was near the Bench ; and on
the other side we observed Mts. Kemmis, Mrs. North, Miss
Bushe, and two of the young Mr. Plunketts ; at the table sat the
Reverend Mr. Keogh, and nest him was placed the Reverend C.
Bardin.
We never remember to have sees so crowded a bar since the er.
officio trial.
Mr. O'Connell sat within the bar, next the King's Counsel, and
exactly opposite hint was Mr. Brownlow, 111. P. for Armagh. The
lion. George Knox, with a party of Ladies, and several Dragoon
Officers, were also present.

ACCIDENT to LADY MOSTYN.—A serious accident be-
fel Lady Mostvn on Tuesday evening, as her Ladyship
was returning from Spring Bank, about eight o'clock; one
of the wheels of the carriage slipped into a water-shoot,
and the shock precipitated the coachman from the box,
who immediately ran to the heads of the horses, but was
knocked down, and the wheels going over him, he was se-
verely injured. The horses proceeded at a smart trot about
200 yards, when unfortunately Lady Mostyn attempted to
leap out of the carriage, and it is supposed that her clothes
entangled in the wheel, by which she was thrown down,
and her head and face dreadfully bruised; she was taken
up quite insensible, and conveyed to Spring Bank. Several
medical gentlemen were immediately lint for, and an ex-
press despatched to Sir E. Mostyn, at Leicester. The
horses proceeded to the Barbourne turnpike, where the
keeper, as usual, threw open the gate, with which the car-
riage came in contact, and the splinter-bar was broken.
The footman leaped from the carriage at the first, and at-
tempted to stop the horses, but was unsuccessful—Fire
o'clurk.—We regret to add, that we have just received in-
formation. that Lady Mostyn's case is exasidered quite
hopelcsa.—Keceecr Journal. . *