The National Register.
London, England, 1822-05-27 00:00:00

LAO INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH.
MONDAY, MAY 20.
THE JOHN BULL NEWSPAPER.

TDB XING v. WEAVER, SDACAELL. AND ARNOWAMITH.
As soon as the Judges had taken their seat*, these de-
fendants appeared on the flour of the Court to receive
judgment. Ms. Justice Bayley addressed them in nearly
the following terms
.1 You have been found guilty of publishing in a news-
paper called the John Bull, during the montlisof February,
Marcie, April, and Nlay, 1811, five libels on her late Ma-
jesty. Wheel y int were last before the Court, those libels
were ►tatedsutficiently tor the purposes of justice, and
they must he too fresh in the recollection ot all to need
repetition at present. No one can &Mit that in point of
law they are earsit and every one of them a it el, as they
greatly exceed the tilting bounds of newspaper discussion.
A newspaper is the proper vehicle fur intelligence; its
pages may also be open to tiobcr, calm, ' passioned
disquisition, but it niust never ho the medium of private
or tit political calumny. At the time %ben you were last
before the Court, you said nothing to aggravate your of-
fence, 'lite Court observe that you are now in custody
for another libel, not unconnected with the subject of the
present charge, but that none of these passages were pub-
lished since the former sentene a was pronounced on you.
Had you, after the warning you then received, offended
in the same way, in defiance of the Conti, it would have
been a high aggravation of your present clime. One of
you, Thomas Arrow►mitb, has made an affidavit, confit toed
by a medical gentleman, stating that lie labours under an
indisposition which additional imp:imminent would in-
crease, and whit h taay thus endanger his life ; that is nut
the object of the Court, who ate always desirous of listen-
ing to every thing which can be urged in mitigatiuu of
puni►hment, 11 forbearance shall be exercised towards
this defendant, iu consideration of his infirmity, 1 it list
that it will have it* tine influence on his mtud, and induce
hint t.• make a suitable room fur the mercy ►hown him,
by refra• ' g from similar publications in Wine, The
Cern t, taking all the circumstance* of the ca►e into its
consideration, do order and adjudge, that yon Thomas
rowsmitli do pay a flue of dlldh. to the King; and that
you Robert Thomas Weaver, nod you *liackell,
Le severally imprisoned its the King's tlencli prison fur
three months, and do each of you pay to the King a tine of
Rm. end that you do all give security ter your good
behaviour fur fire )ears, youiselves iu 5...01. and twu sure-
ties in 2501. each, and that you be itopri►uue4 till ►uch
fines be paid, 4114 such teCßEltirk;
The detrinlants bow ed, and left the Court in custody,

Tile a V. TIIR rt•Mltcts OV rt•trefslllnli,
Mr. acailett showed cense eguiett.t a rule calling on die
Jotters of the county of Flint to ►hew cause why 4 Cer-
tiorari should out isboc directed to them, to lenitive into
this cow t an order made by them, or 11Q1110 of mew, ea It
generst qua' irr se►sion of the peace, holden at Aluld, on
the !Zulu of July last, for levying VIM. ss. lid, and empow-
oriel; the county 111.70111er le 'apply It in 114111/211PCIlt of
the vlaitits ul dleurs. Saulay loaruca wapiti easti:d,

that al the Easter quarter sessions of the peace, in 1812,
an older had been made authorizing the county treasurer,
who was since dead, to borrow 1,0001. towards candying
on the county works then in progress. This sum he bor.
rowed of the house of Messrs. Sankey, at Duly% ell, mad
deposited with them the order, by way of security lOr the
loan, and also borrowed further slims fur the comity pur-
poses, making in the whole • debt of 10321. 15s. 4d.
Theo sams were certainly repaid by November, 1514;
Ant subsequently to that time lie had borrowed other suns
from them to the 11111011111 of 1,6411. ss. 10d. which, in No-
vember, 1819, was reduced, try various payments, to the
of 4471. 1151.6 d. Dining all this time the original
order remained as a steamily for advances to be merle, as
it was never intended that the whole 1,11001. should be ad-
vanced at once, but only when required by the exigencies
of the county. 'lire partners in the firm, except one, had
in the meals time been changed ; and the new partners
had continued to advance Homey on tire Will of the ori.
ginal order until the balance of +7l. 15s. 6d. was left due
to them. In October, 1820, Messrs. Sankey applied to the
quarter sessions for payment of this balance, amid air order
was made to pay theta the whole, but they forbore then to
press fur payment, at the request of the magistrates, br
consequence of local ciictimstances; and on their repeat-
ing the application, Ilse order to pay the 11901. ss. (id. now
complained of, was made. It bail been suggested that
these soon were advanced to the late treasurer in leis psi.
vale capacity, mud hail been applied by litur to his private
purposes; but the fact was quite otherwise; for the pan-
ties had been at the trouble of tracing how all she monies
had been disposed of, and they lied tumid that all wera
duly applied to the legitimate purposes of the county.
The Lord Chief J urn ice.—Let us hear the order.

Mr. Pao k read the order, which was professedly to levy
the emu of 2001. s*. 6d. by a late, to be paid over to
Sankey.
'Floe Lord Chief Justice.—l cannot think this rate good
on the face of it. It is a rate peofesseilly to reimburse,
which I 111111 k the magistrates cannot order; the applica-
tion of the y raised is a very different thing.
Mr. Seat lett said, the magistrates were authuriged to
borrow by statute.
The Lord Chief Justiee.—Then they should have !w-
-etted the course prescribed iu the statute. The certierar
must issue ; but probably all parties will be satisfied by
the understanding that the practice shall cease iu the
connty.—Rule for the certiorari absolute,
TILE KING U. If ESTI. ACOTT ANS) OTIIEN2.
Mr. Common Sergentit showed cause agnitist the rule ob.
mined by Mr. TUFIOII, for a criminal Information agairnt
the editor and publishers of the Gasette of Fashion, fur a
libel, which, professing to be part of an expositor of the
gambliii4 houses in the metroipolos, imputed to Mr. Fielder,
not only than he was concerned in several, but that he hood
caused Melds to be platen within the teach of his brother,
who was insane, Midi whieli he shot himself. and that na
forged this brother's will. The teamed counsel said that,
unless the prosecutor were conscious taut lie was implichted
in gambling transactions. lie could scarcely have had en-
derstoorl that the paingrapli nut applicable to himself.
lie was called " Field Manilla! J 0111), L;olarbillidel"---
Mr. Justice Bayley imptited if the prosecutor had not
been convicted of keeping a gambling-house in that can ,
beeriest. lie - remembered his suo prise that a perinni of teat
name had not been brought up for judgment.
Mr. Common Sergeant.—lt is the same, any Lord r he is
a very opulent pers.....
Mr. Tutton.—l did not know dint money could divert
theorem, of justice. The imputations complaiiied of are
quite of :mother deur ipt ion.
Mr. COMMIIII Sergeant replied, that they were uudnubt.
edly other impel:ohms wish h he did not mean li' Justify,
But there were also mots of the la-tides, charging Mr.
Fielder with bents propoietor of ganileong-houses, mid a lilt
having been convicted in that court, winch he had not sees
lured to deny. Naw, he appreheuded, that a part) made
out no 011ie for a cresol's:it ilatirillalitio 11111c63 he denied the
whole charge. If a person had been accused of murder stud
burglary. a,nuld tile Court interfere to looted him when he
only eta ore that lie nab imroceist of the litat 1 Here also the
principul deleoduoit had cleared himself, in a great nurture,
lay encoring, that he did nut know the Whin of the
taut lie had never situ it before it was printed, that he OM.
celled the sheet tie boom as be perceived it. and .rat to offer
Mr. Fielder any separu- inn w hieh lie might di she. Ceder
three cirrunotainers, tie submitted, them was na reason' why
Mr. Fielder should claim the extracirdiuur) interference of
the Omit tor his protection.
Mr. C. Phillyb, on the same side, contended, that the
prosecutor, neatest whom toeless than seven indictment* fur
aurtults or heeds had been preferred, ought to he left to
seek redress fr the ordinary tribunal*. Ile noonld be well
consenanot with the modes of pi oceedisigs in all of them ; of
seal to the erssiuns, there he had bean before I if brought
into this Court, he ..as stall at home. It was (Ming only
the mercy tit the prosecutor that he was not now standing
on that flour to receive the judginent of their landships.
Mr. „Insilco! Itest.-1. believe you are gib isle the prose,
cum credit far a motive to which he is not at all entitled.
Mr. Tut-lint, in eply, admitted, that if his client had
made the iminotortimi of rambling the grimed of his com-
plaint. he must have deified it on oath ; but here he coins
phoned of cintrgie of initialer an./ 1.411 ry, fur which ihro
was not the stiglite.t foundation. tiruolinll, fer the sake
of allotment, that lie had kept gambling I ~ we. Val:
any reset/II ally of/epees should be imputed to him which
Writild affect lilt life? Because in !SIT be lied been cum
victed of keeping a gaming house, was lit in 1e;22 to 03
accused ct citifies of the deerest dye ? 11l the coe al
prßolte of very exalted rank, the Court
although they bail been guilty of Ike troy offence oe
which the libel was founded, And surely Is was nut far
the interests of the public peace that Noy tudividoll
would be thus libelled as illoant ionmelliate redress,
cutild that be tempted to eel-tatty for himself ,illslices
The L,oird Chief J C.- -I liupe it will out be iirlder,.
• stood that the court mean to hold out that seeli libels may
be published with impunity. This case can be a reels,
dent to very few, b cause I hope will hare hitt few
parallels. We think the rule must be discharged, and the
party left to his or distal y teinedies.
60tiows 44r Term et (Auld:tall I.eihro the Ford Ciel

wfuNealP4Y, *AT
mAsou I), MOLINE AND OTP:Iti,
Tlll4 RetiOD MoS brought by the plaintiff, a bresrer's 4g:9t.
against the Mendota, assignees of !Stoker aki
carried on the besiuess of biewers, at Stratford, to recover
"lallegsalioa of one and a liall per cent. which he claimed to.
agency and procuring, a purchaser for the Stratford brewer!.
tt Lich the aastgneea sold for the benefit of the creditors.
Mt. Marotta stated tho Gate. It appeared, that is lAqi.
iliSc4il,4 of orecliturk staler insdvisoN4 40'4 Ow

...

~....'

purpose of seeing whether the hop ground brewery at Stratford
could not be disposed of for the benefit of the creditors.
Liberty was given to the assignees to sell the property, and
lne of the creditors recommended Mr. Mason to the assignees
as a man every way able to dispose of the brewery. The
plaintiff was accordingly employed, and several persons, whom
he procured as purchasers, went down to see the premises,
and at last was the means of introducing • Mr. Smith, who
purchased the brewery for the sum of WWI. The assignees
were satisfied with the bargain, and executed a conveyance
of the property to Mr. Smith. Several witne►ses proved the
above statement. _ .

Mr. Scarlett, on the part of the assignees, called Mr. Francis
Hudson, formerly a partner in the brewery, who stated that be
was employed by the assignees to carry on the bu►iness. He
saw Mr. Mason on the subject of getting q partner, and he told
hint the affairs and state of the brewery. The witness ulti-
mately abandoned the intention of getting a partner, and Mr.
Mason was employed in getting a purchaser.
Cross-examined by Mr. Marryatt.—He said Mr. Mason
came down to the brewery with several persons, who wished to
become partners, and among others with Mr. Smith, who finally
closed a hargain with the assignees. This was after the wit-
ness had abandoned the intention of getting a partner.
The Jury, without hearing ■ reply from M. Marryatt, found
a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages, 281. 10s.

THOMPSON S. SHORT.

Mr. Campbell stated the substance of the declaration, which
art forth that the plaintitf employed the defendant as a broker to
purchase for him ten shares in the Gas-light Company, and that
having purchased them for 2821. he represented that he could not
obtain them for leas than 3821., by which he defrauded the
plaintiff of 1001. There were other counts, not imputing fraud,
but negligence in the discharge of the duty of agent, ■nd not
buying at the lowest price which would have been taken.
The Jury found a verdict for the plaintiff--damages 1001.
The Lord Chief Justice said, that the defendant might be
ignorant of the fraud, but be ought to have protected the in-
terests of his principal with greater diligence.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.
WEDNESDAY, MAY 22.
SOOT r. DUNCAN AND KADON.

This was as action brought by the plaintiff to recover da-
mages fur an aasetalt, alleged to have been committed by the
defendants.

Sergeant Vaughan conducted the case for the plaintiff; and,
from his statement, it appeared that the whole of the parties are
persons of a respectable station in life, and reside in the hamlet
of Mile-end New Town. The plaintiff is a gentleman retired
from business. The defendant, Mr. Duncan, bad been a captain
in the navy, and is a retired ship-holder, and Mr. Endo°, the
other defendant, is • ship builder. The two defendants had
been concerned in • snit at law, in which, from the temper
subsequently manifested, it did not appear that they were sac-
cessfuL On that trial Mr. Boot, the plaintiff, was 'Optioned
as a witness, but not examined; sad this appeared to have es-
cited great ill-will towards him in the mind of Capt. Duncan,
and that his friend, Mr. Eldon, strongly participated in this
feeling, which both maintained until the oppor unity arrived oa
which they coivinitted the assault complained of, and which
was afterwards detailed by the wit in evidence.
Mr. George Bowyer, • wine-merchant, of Stepney, was
the first witness called. Ile stated that be was acquainted
with the parties, and saw them all at a parish meeting
held for the purpose of electing trustees, and Mr. Kaden
was one of the candidates, and strongly supported by Capt.
Duncan. The plaintiff came up to the table, whether in sup-
port of the other candidate or not the witness did not know, but
he recollected that Mr. Eado• accosted him with you (else-
swearing scoaadrel, or villai•, you forswore yourself," which
he repeated, and tapped on the alai:Hader of Mr. Duncan, who
also assailed the plaintiff, and the witeess saw him spit in the
face of the latter before the whole assembly, and a cry of shame
was raised, when some persons interposed, and the parties
were separated. Mr. Duncan was a very tall and stoat man,
but the plaintiff short and diminutive.
Mr. Pettit, and two other witnesses, corroborated the &Wa-
imea of Mr. Bowyer.
Wit were called on behalf of the defendant. but they
failed is altering the complexion of the facts of the cue proved
against the defendant.

The Jury deliberated fora minute, and returned a verdict for
the plaintiff.—Damages 1501.

SELL! V. HOARE AND CO.

la this case it appeared that the plaintiff was a publican,
renting the Coach and Horses,• public house in St. John-street-
road, from the defendants, who were brewers. They wishing
to get the house into their possession, proposed th-t the plaintiff
should give it op, to which the plaintiff consented, provided a
person named Fancy was substituted in his place. An agree-
ment was made between the parties, that the plaintiff should re-
ceive the value of the fixtures and furniture; and also that be
should be allowed the expenses of the repairs whisk had been
made on the premises. The sem agreed upon for the above
items was 4201. by a valuation made by a Mr. Powell; and 111.
17s. for the repairs. A valuation was afterwards made of the
furniture and fixtures, by a man named White, a broker, who
bad formerly been employed as a valuator by the defendants,
which amounted to 2521. In consequence the defendants re-
fu.ed to pay any more than the latter sum, as also the expenses
of the repairs. The plaintiff then brought his action for the
difference between the two valuations, amounting to 1601. and
the repairs, amounting to 431. 17s. when the Jury found a
►erdict for the plaintiff for 1021.
Mr. Sergeant Vaughan, in the early part of last Term, ob-
tained a rule to show cause why this verdict should not be set
act le, and a new trial granted, on the ground of the verdict being
against evidence; and the cause was now shewo by Mr. Ser-
geant ['ell, who coutesded that there could be so grounds for
this application,

The Lord Chief Justice Dallas declined giving any opinion
with regard to the case, as he had tried it.
Sir. Justice Park and Mr. Justice Richardson, stated it to his
their opinion, that a new trial should he granted ; not upon the
merits of the case ; hut as there had been some imputation
thrown on the defendants of improper conduct, it was proper
they should have an opportunity of clearing themselves.
Mr. Justice Burrough was of opinion that a new trial should
not be granted.
Rule made absolute, with coats.
FRIDAY, MAY 24.
sroterion.—GWYNNE e. tang' vs.
Mr. Sergeant Lens stated, that this wan an action brought by
the plaintiff, a widow, against Um iefendsnt, a aurgeon, to reco-
♦er whatever compensation damages could afford her for the
seduction of her daughter. The plaintiff had been left a widow
with three children, two daughters and one son, and in order to
maintain them had established a small public house at Mehlrells,
■ear Cambridge, where they all resided. If any thing could add
to the guilt of seduction, it was when the defendant po ed,
as in the present ease, by mean's( his peculiar situation, &dus-

~...

-.•