The National Register.
London, England, 1822-07-15 00:00:00

TFICItaDAY, JULY

CURT V. WILLAN.
rein wan an action by Mr. tort against Mr. Willem who is
the proprietor of the Bull and Mouth inn, and very extensively
concerned in public conveyances throughout the kingdom, fur
elprcsdions reflecting on his character.
life Solicitor-General stated, that the ulaintili had been for
three years, previous to the offensive language, a clerk ifi the
employ of the defendant, in which situation he bad conducted
himself with integrity and honour. lie was also secretary to
the committee of London carriers, and was about to make a
highly advantageous arran„ement with Mr ssrs. Brown and W al-
liogham, Ihr the conveyance of specie !rum Manchester to
1 London. One day in November in the last year, Mr. Mr illam
without provocation, ordered Lim to quit his service, and
chargedLim
Tom Swiiiiti thl ail baying
iwill ".
Innibeclaniseedif u'enuocneey which he received
for i fu frlt tdoen,
1
Messrs. Brown and Wallifigton, though convinced of its false-
hood, kit that they should out be justified in permittiug Lisa loa

:~~

-
exercise a great public trust, and he was compelled to seek
from the verdict of a Jury the complete siudication of his good
fame.
Mr. French, a clerk of Mr. Willan, proved that the defendant
came, apparently irritated, to the otlice on the day in question,
and charged the plaintiff with embezzling money. But it ap-
peered from the testimony of the witness, that Mr. W illan, now
in Ilia 77th year, after a life of very active exertion, had suffered
that decay in his faculties which might be expected from his pro-
tracted exertions ; that those about him knew that lie was
sometimes afflicted with misconceptions which it wan bard to
dissipate ; and that there was no malice exhibited iu his gene-
ral conduct to the plaintiff. On the contrary, he had, by Isis
influence as Chairman of the Committee of London carriers,
procured him the situation of secretary. The witness was
quite sure there was nothing in the conduct of the plaintiff on
which a charge of dishonesty could be grounded.
Mr. Scarlett, who appeared for the defendant, rose and begged
to state that there was not the smallest ground for the charge
conveyed io the expressions, not the least imputation uu the
plaintiff's character.
The Lord Chief Justice suggested the propriety of not pro.
ceeding further in a cause, the real end of which was attaiued
by the avowal now made on the part of the defendant.
After some discussion between the counsel, this suggestion
was acceded to, and a juror withdrawn, on the distinct under-
standing that there was no suspicion resting on 31r. Curt, aid
on payment of costs by the defendant, as between attorney and

~:

client.
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.
THURSDAY, .11 LY 11.
HALLIWALL U. LODGE.
Mr. Sergeant Bosaoquet stated, hat this was an action hrmrvl•t
against the defendant, for having spoke slanderous words of the
plaintiff. The object of the latter was not to obtain damages,
but to clear his character from the unjust imputations which had
been cast upon it by the deendent. Offers had been made front
the very first on the part of the plaintiff to stop all proceedings,
on condition that the aspersions should be retracted as publicly
as they had been spoken ; but to these offers the defendant lied
never thought fit to accede. The only plea put on the record
was the general issue, anal the defendant had not thereffire
availed himself of the opportunity of justification which had
been offered him. The plaintiff, however, even now, was wil-
ling to deal with him as indulgently as possible, and therefore
offered, in the most liberal manner, that if the defendant world
i disavow, by his Counsel, the slanderous imputations, he (the
plaintiff) would be content to lake a verd:ct for such sum oat,
as should pay him the expence of appealing to a Court ofJuettee.
The Lord Chief Justice Dallas recommended the party to
consider the oiler thus liberally made.
Mr. Sergeant Vaughan consulted for some time with his
client, but at length turned round, observing," I am afraid you
must go on."
Mr. Sergeant Bosanqnet then proceeded to lay the case hi f re
the Jury. The plaintiff was an oil and colourman, residing at
Whilechapel, and some time sincepad the misfortune to bare
his house burin, and the destruction was completed by the ex-
plosion of sonic gunpowder then on the premises. Notice of the
accident was immediately given to the office at which the
plain-
tiff was iusuied, and, after the usual examination, the Company
were perfectly satisfied that every thing had been fair and ho •
nourable ou the part of the plaintiff, and accordingly, without
further hesitation, tiny paid the amount of his iesurance. Vi ith
these facts the defendant was acquainted, and vet he had, from
what motive it is impessible to sac, openly asserted that tile
plaintiff had set fire to his own house, These words bad nut
been used carelessly or lightly by the defendant ; for having
asked the reason of saying so, he replied, " I dealt with him
him till lie robbed me, and I would rather deal w ith a Jew than
a robber." But even the plaintiff did not institute legal pro-
ceedings ; he ordered his nttnrney to write to him, offering him
a meeting, to prove what he had asserted, or requiring him to
retract what be had asserted. Both were refused ; and the
present action was therefore instituted.
Mr. Sergeant Vaughan here interrupted the learned gentleman,
and requested a few minutes to be allowed his client, to tioni.tilt
out of Court whether lie would accept ►he plaintiff's ollbr.—
This was granted, and the defendant accordingly retired with
his attorney. On his return,
Mr. Sergeant k aughan again rose. 'and said, that the defen-
dant accepted the offer which had been made. Ile had intended
to defend himself on the ground of never having used the es-
presiotis imputed ; and lie now authorized his counsel to dis-
claim dam, in the most direct and positive manner.
Lord Chief Justice Dallas thought that the defendant had
acted most discreetly in accepting the liberal oiler of the plain
(a. A verdict fur the plaiutiff•—Dainages 4011. was then taken
by consent.
eemiew.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, DUBLIN.
MOND‘V, JUIN b.
cat N. CON.
0. G. NOW LAW. PLAINTIFF, V. THZ RIGHT HON. LORD
VISCOUNT GLENTWORTH, DEPENDANT.
Tits was an action brought by tne plaintiff to recover
danhqes of the defendant, for criminal conversation wi
theth
his wife. The damages were laid at 10,0001. and
defendant pleaded the general issue.
Sir H. Nieretlith, Bart. stated the plaintiff's case.—
Tite plaintiff was about three years a ;intoner in the EOM
Coons Nlarshalsea, where the noble defendant was also
confined for debt; the plaintiff's wife resided for some
time in the prison with her husband; hcr husband had
been there fur five mouths before an intimacy com-
menced between hint and the defendant, who, about
August, le2o, knocked ut Mr. Nowlun's door in the
prison, to inquire for a Mr. Andrews, who was sitting
with the plaintiff and his wife; lie conducted himself, on
being asked to sit, with great respect and politeness; he
did say tnat he was a married man, and the lather of a
family, his wife a residentof this city ; an intimacy Arew
out of this introduction ; the results as the 'canted coun
sel stated, were most fatal to his client's peace. Lora
Gleirtwotth had been connected with the family of
Hutsey ; he, therefore represented himself,
(said Sir H.
M.) as connected with the plaintiff by this ninon ; int
introduced his own daughter, called lady Perry, to a
datight:•rof the plaintiff's. 'fins action was commenced
in November, 18'21 ; to that declaration the delcitdant
pleaded not guilty.
The Rev. J. Walsh, a Roman Catholic Priest priced
the marnaiv of Mr. and Mrs. Nowlin]. in 1817. Mr.
Nowlin Was about ($O, and Mrs. Nowlati 28.
Captain Luke Haugariv, brother to l'llll. %V
n-
aS
next examined by Mr. WihnerCe•..—lie was, he said, i
timate with them for sortie yeais alter tile marriage;
- up to July, 1821, they had lived together oil tolerably
. iiood term. ; her conduct was good during that tone;

.

Mrs. Nowlin is a well-looking woman, now about 30.
(Seventeen notes were handed up to the witness by Mr.
O'Connell, and were by him admitted to be the hand-
writing of the plaintiff:) The latter had been six or
eight months in the county of Langford at one time away
hunt his wife ; witness, at the request of the plaintiff,
went to his sister to her lodging in Thomas-street, to
effect a reconciliation between her and her husband, who
said he wished to see the child Mrs. Nolan lay in of;
wimess did not notice the child; cannot tell whether or
not he was like his father; Mrs. N. went to the prison,
hut did not take the child ; witness dined with them,
and his sister returned to her lodgings before he (witnesss)
retired from the prison : on Mrs. Nolan's departure that
evening witness remembers her husband kissed her, and
saw her to the door.
Mary Anne Dodd, examined by Mr. Wallace—swore
she was Lord Gleinworth's servant, and that she saw
Mrs. Now:an in Lora Glentworth's apai totems for three
motith's and a fortnight • they ate and drank together.
and slept in tile same bed together. IVititess was first
employed by Lord Glentworth about the 2elth of October
Past; left Mrs. Nolan behind her at Lord Glentworth's
whim she left his Lordship's service.
Several other witnesses deposed to a criminal connec-
tion between the parties.
Mr. Blackburn stated the defendant's case, in sup-',
port of which he introduced several letters. The first
letter was from Mr. Nowlin to Mrs. Nowlin, 110,
Titoroas.street. It was as follows:
" 1 am extremely sorry you are acting as you should
not do ; it's on yourself it will fall, any improper act;
though you say the child is nut mine, you 'twilid bring
h,lll to IlltrOdUCC 111111 to me, and when you do 1 will
give him a pound note, though I have got but two this
moment. 1 Mar you will come to-tnoi row; at all events
let me see the child that is not mine, as you say in your
note; tell me who is the fattier of hint, 'till 1 wish hint
joy. When will you have a fourth boy, as you have lost
the second I Believe hie you are not acting right, tkc.
"0. G. NoLstr."
Evidence was produced to skew that the plaintitt con•
nived at ins own dishonour.
The Jury retired (or about 15 minutes, and returned a
verdict-405. damages, and 6d. costs.