The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1825-01-24 00:00:00

solutely stergers beneath copies of writs served upon them by the
quacks. There has been an eternal going in and going out of at-
torneys and their adjutants for the last fortnight, at 24 Paternos-
ter-row, and all about our `Annals of Quackery !' We shall
not be far astray if we prophecy, that these proceedings, like the
tenor of the quacks' calling, are mere puff We are not to be
frightened by threats in the cause we advocate, nor do we dread
men the formidable arena of a court of law, confident as we are
that outraged justice would spurn the reptiles upon which we have
so effectually trodden, should they creep in beneath the judgment-
seat to insult it with their mockery. The }catty Doss is to be the
first to dare the experintent ; and, as we hate no doubt that the
numerous sutferers from this braneb of quackery will feel happy in
its defeat, we request they will forward to us all the information its
their power which may tend to annihilate this nest of roguery.
The Kent-road quack has, we are informed, given up his inten-
tion of prosecuting us; but we are yet threatened by Friedeberg,
his father, the Jordan', and Dr. De Brockton."
The beamed Sergeant proceedeci—U'hat would the Jury say to
that ? The reptiles upon which they had so effectually trodden !
The avowed object of the libel was to drive the plaintiff out of so-
ciety—he stands before his accuses" with front erect, and challeges
them to prove a stain on his character. The libel proceeds witb a
beautiful apostrophe—" Shades of Esculapitis and Haien, protect
us from this battery of poisonous pills." And then soother epos-
trophe, still more exquisite, to the spirits—not of the dead—but of
I the bright star of the age, one of wham was then present to their
prayer—" Spirits of Copley, Scarlet, Brougham, and Phillips,
grant us our brief prayer—deliver us, we beseech you, from our
enemies, the quacks !! !" Here, then, is one of their great deli.
verers, though last, not least, in love. But does the writer sup-
pose that all the spirits he invoked could shield him from the con-
sequences of the libel he had published ? They had the gift of
tongues, but they should have the power of working miracles to
shield him trout the justice of the law. Some had die power "to
make the worse appear the better season," and he strongly sus-
pected his Learned Friend, by whom the Jury would be addressed,
was one of them ; but no force of eloquence could change the facts,
which applied equally to the head and the heart, and he was confi-
dent would receive their just consideration from the Jury. Did
the defendants think they were inaccessible to the law because an
eloquent speech would be made for them to the Jury ? Eloquence
could do nothinu, in the case without facts, and it' they did not call
Mr. Titterton, who mtsst be able to prove the facts, if they existed,
the plaintiff's case was invulnerable. The writer prooeedea to say,
ar.d he prayed the Jury to mark the nickednessof what followed :
" Lollypop is outrageous, because we commented upon his prac-
tice in such a manner as we felt it our duty. Vie have before no
now seven cat's, which, had he seen, lie would think us charita-
ble, and thank ass for not speaking more fully. The case of open-
ing the child's head, in chick the prudent advice of Dr. Bartlett
had a timely effect, is in our possession; but we refrain from pub-
fishing it, and the other cases, for a week or two."
Was not this ilaißlitholoo ? ll'as it not to say, " I'll put a pistol
to his had to prevent his proceeding ? We have seven other cases,
which, if he dares to proceed with his action, we'll publish." In
the same number was published a letter, slatted " Pill Box," in
which the writer says—
" I have read an article in your 27th Number, headed, ' The
Lollypop Surircon,• wherein a surgeon of Hatton-garden is said to
have deserted a woman in labour, because, forsooth, his fee was
not forthcoming. Now, if this is correct, I think lie richly deserves
exposure and its coasequencee, and would have done so, had his
medical education been ever an regular ; but had the recital of this
outrage 03 every feeling mind been given without any allusion to
Iris former station in life, It would have appeared rather that you
had been actuated by a sense of public duty as a Journalist, than
prit ate invective."
The letter admits, that if all imputed to the plaintiff was true,
it would lank less like invective, it they had abstained from allu-
sion to hie former situation in life. They could have no better
comment on that part of the libellous conduct. There was no
defence to the libel. The party had, no clouts:, tried what could
be dune in the way of a justification, and failed ; and they only
came before the Jury to try what could be done in the way of miti-
gation. But that should be done, not by a speech, but by facts.
If they did not call Titterton to prove the facts, a blacker case
never came into a Court of Justice. Jr they did not call him, it
would prose that the libel was a falsehood that aimed at the life-
blood of the plaintiff's character. It was a case that called for
severe thin:urea, and the Jury could not do a greater service to
the press than by lopping off those excrescences by which it was
disfigured, and showing those who publish statements injurious
to the characters of others, that they must be prepared to prove the
facto Ile was certain they would hear his Learned Friend with !
great pleasure—his eloquence was fascinating; but the Jury, lie
was satisfied, would not allow themselves, to be intluenced by elo-
quence without facts.
Thomas Corani proved that he was clerk to Mr. Walker, the
plaintiff's attorney. On the 224 of June, he purchased from Mr.
Knight, at the defendant's shop, The .Ifedical Adviser, No. 27,
which contained the libel. After the purchnse, he sake) .31r.
Knight where Dr. Burnett, the editor, lived ? Knight said he
rood not give his address, but a letter left there would find him ;
and asked the object of the inquiry ? Witness pointed out the
libel to him, and asked, would be give up the name of the
author? Knight read the libel, and laughed; and said he would
not give up the name of the author, but Doctor Burnett was re-
sponsible. A copy of a writ was served op the defendants the
,next day.
The libel was read. _ _ . .

Daniel Jackson proved that be knew the plaintiff twenty-eight
H; he was then assistant to Mr. Evans, an apothecary on
Holborn-hill, and won aftcr commenced business for himself in
Saffron-hill ; he also practised midwifery. lie had been wit-
ness's spoilteary ever since, and had attended his wife in several
confinements, the first fourteen years ago ; he was recommended
by Doctor Squires, under whom he bad studied, and was in good
practice.
On his cross-examination the witness said, he was a white-
smith ; when the plaintiff first set up in saft'ron.hill, he had
but half a shop—a grocer had the other half. Plaintiff had nothing
to do with the grocer's business ; there were no loUypops sold in
the shop.
Doctor Blegborough stated, that he knew the plaintiff, living in
Hatton Garden, and practising midwifery, about 15 years. He
always thought him a man of great humanity, and saw him at-
tend the 'poor with great assiduity. His practice is considerable ;
witness had assisted him in about a dozen difficult cases, in all of
which it would be prudent of any practitioner to call assistance. He
keeps a carriage, which witness is sure he would not do if his busi-
ness did not require and afford it.
Mr Charles Taylor stated, that the plaintiff attended his wife in
her confinements tor eight years. and had extensive practice.
Another witness proved that Mr. Titterton was present in Court.
This was the plaintiff's case.
Mr. Coastal:a Poutt PS addressed the Jury for the defendants,
who were, he said, respectable young men, who had commenced
business two years since, with bat little capital, and had corn.
menced the publication of The Medical Adviser in the confi-
dence that the information it contained would be correct, and that
it would put down the quacks, whose TAM.% they all saw chalked
on walls, by whom the ignorant were deluded out of their money,
their health, and their lives. It was not prete-ided that the libel
was written by the defendants, and they would observe that Tit-
terton's name and address were given. Ile would now state that
Titterton was the person from whom they received the libel for
publication, and they now offered the plaintiff' to prove that fact
for him, and furnish him with the means of suing Titterton. Mr.
Knight, when applied to to give up Titterton, refused, because he
supposed the facts were true ; but as it is now evident they cannot
lie proved, they are willing to give him up, that he may answer
for his conduct.

Mr. Sergeant VAUGRAN said it was too late now.
Mr. Puirhirs said that was all the defendants could do; they
made the offer as soon as they knew the facts could not be proved.
It would be hard to call on them for damages they were unable to
hay ; the coots alone would bear heavy on them. Tile plaintiff
ad suffered no real injury. Ile (Mr. Phillips). should not wonder
it' his practice and his honours were greatly increased by it—if,
in due tinie,he became a Knight, like a brother midwife in Ireland,
who was knighted by the Duke of Rutland when he was Lord
Lieutenant of that country, who was it the habit, when drunk, of
knighting every one that struck his fancy. The Irish midwife
even thought himself entitled to higher honours, as appeared by
some ”tses he composed on the occasion, which the Jury should
now bear—
" Ills Grace has made of me a Knight—
I should have been a Lord by right ;
And then the Ladies' cry would be,
()Lord ! dear Lord ! deliver me."—(A laugh.)
He hoped the Jury would take all the circumstances in favour of
the defendants into their consideration, and in the midst of judg.
meet remember mercy.

The SECONDARY charged the Jury, that the libel complained
of was one calculated to do the plaintiff a very serious injury—it
was not attempted to be justified, and the offer of the difendants to
give up the author by which they might have saved themselves
from the consequences of the publication, now came too late. The
Jury would judge of the amount of damages.
The Jury, after a short consultation, assessed the d..mages at
Fifty Pounds.

At Lancaster Sessions, on Monday week, there was one
appeal, one felon, one witness, and one misdemeanor, and
in suendance several Barristen.

Amongst the many new inventions on the tapis, we
should not lose sittht of thou which come immediately within our
daily, and indeed almost hourly, wants ; the articles now alluded
to are those of Cocoa Paste and Prepared Chocolate Powder—that
is, the Cocoa and Chocolate Nut, manufactured by an entire new
and superior process, each of winch are so expeditiously preparinl
for use, that less than one minute of time only is required to make
them into a most agreeable beverne. The great o'stacle to the
traore frequent use of both Cocoa and Chocolate has arisen from
the difficulty of preparing them for table, antifamlil, have pre-
ferred the daily use of ter, more from the simplicity of the .nethod
of making it than from choice on accoinst of its virtues. The method
of making the .Chocolate Paste n itt Chocolate Powder ready for
use is Mill ISIOte simple than tea, for It is merely required to put
a spoonti:l in your elm, pour the boiling water thereon, and it is
immediately ready for us^, adrift -Jr sitg4r and milk, to pint palate.'
Thelpublic are indebted to the house, of Deacon and Ce.; of :Le
Coffee Marts Skinner-street, London, :or the Improvements it, the'
mode of manufacturing Cocoa Paste and Prepared Cho-rotate Pow
der, which, by their plan, will keep free from mould or turning
musty for any length 'el' time. This is a very desirable Invention.
and we hear meets with great encouragement from the Army and
Navy, Public Scb‘ols, Colleges. and the Inns of Coot, through
out the Kingdom ; we wish them su MOH in the uodettpking. ,