The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1818-12-19 00:00:00

or bad. They also stated whom they were, and
offered to give satisfactory referetices. It huppenrd
that a Bank-note Inspector, stained Fish, resided
bear Hackney, and to loin Merry took the notes,
for his examination. Fish stated, that they were
genuine notes—and he wrote his moue on them.
Merry, on his return, reported what Fi-h had ►.Uri.
but oh:erred, " that he was an old fellow, and
always drunk—and, fur hi. own part, he would nut
pay iattelition to what he said." The parties then
proceeded to make the Plaintiff and his friend strip,
ill order to search them. In coniclthioo, they were
hand-cuffed together, and, in that situation, 'were
marched, clueing a heavy shower of rain, from
Hackney to Worship-street Office, Girver heading
the party, and flourishing a large *bee. They ar-
rived at Worship-street Office, about eight o'clock
in the.evening, but there was no Alagistrete sit-
ting. The Clerk at the Office advised them to libe-
rate the Plaintiff and his friend, whirl' was done
about nine o'clock, Ginter still declining that he
believed the notes to be forged.
To prove this statement, the Learned Counsel
balled Mr. Anstey, ainl several other witoteses,
who fully substantiated the facts,
Mr. SCARLET?, for the Defendant, Gee, sub.
mitten, that it verdict could not be recorded against
him, 104%111114:i) as he did nothing, of himself, hut
acted under the direction of the constables. Merry
had been called in by another person, without his
knowledge, and he, essisted by Girver, had tekets
the parties into custody, and detained them, his
chew never having given them in charge. Ile
would prove further, that Gee remonstrated against
searching, or detaiiiing them, slier the Inspector's
opitdoo was obtemed—mud that lie most particu-
larly objected to their being hand-cuffed.
The Learned Gentleman called a witness of the
name of Jones, a soldier, who was quartered in
'a house, who stated that he went for the con-
stables without tiny direction from Gee, on hearing
the conversa relative to forged notes. He also
deposed that Gee remonstrated against Mr. Staigitt
or his friend hen% timid-cuffed.
Mr. GURNEY, for the Defentlmnt, Girver, sub-
mitted, that there must be ti verdict in favour or
has risen,, founded ou the statute of James I. By
that statute it was enacted, that in any proceeding
attain-t the constable, the vertu should be kid in
the county where the cause of action lima,. In the
present case the cause of action arose iu Middlesex,
sod the ream was laid in Loudon.

The CHIEF JOSTICE held that thiaobjectien Ras
good, an.l, wider his Lordship's direction, a verdict
was returned for the Defendant. Girver. _

The Learned JUDGE then summed up. briefly.
w►th respect to Gee. It was, he observed, for the
Jury to consider how far the evidence in the ease
bore on this Defendant. If they were of opinion
that he was Rehm; as a principal in the arrest of the
Plaintiff, they would find a verdict against
awirding such damages as they thought is fair re.
muneratirn► for what Plamiiir had suffered. They
would, in doing this, take into their consideration
the evidence of the *‘itiicss, Jones, from which it
appeared, that Gee expressed 1 ' eelfagaitist search-
ing or lunitlctiffiii,g the Plaint►ff sad his friend.
The Jury found a verdict fur the Plaintiff—
damages sOl.—cost* 40v.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, GveI:VHALL,
FRIDAY, DEMMER 18.

Sittings after Term. before C'hirt Justice DALLA*
and Special Juries.

LI li F.L.
WALDEGRAVE V. IHGNOLD.

This was au action to recover damages for a false,
scandalous, and malicious publication by the Dc-
fendant against the Plaintiff.
Mr. CAMPBELL ()polled the pleadings.
Mr. Serjeant LENS stated the case to the Jury.
His client had brought the present action to obtain
such comperwatioa us tl►e Jury might deer► ade-
quate, for a foul and wicked attack on his charac-
ter. It was known to them, that he was unfortu-
nate in trade ; he once. however, had property,
and lie had hopes of having it spit), hut before his
industry could be successful, it was indispensably
necessary he should be restored to that fiir fame
which he had never lost till the cruel attempt of the
Defendant. The libel con►plaiued of consisted iis
a most flagrant misrepresentation of what took
place iu a Court of Justice. Mr. Walilegrave had
iosisred his premises situ furniture with the Norwich
UlllOll Society, of which the Defendant was Secre-
tary. The premises were afterwards accidentally
consumed by fire. The property lost and damaged
was estimated, and the value demanded of Mr. Big-
Hold lie refused to it,y, an action was brought by
Mr. Wablegrave's assignees against him, and tried
in that Court, and damages recovered for the full
sum claimed. Mr. Bignold afterwards thought pro-
per to compose and publish the account of the trial
that formed the subject of the action then before the
Court. He was far frosts objecting to the publcation
of fair and impartial reports of judicial proceedings :
to many they were au amusement, to a larger class
of utility, and it was desirable that they should be
communicated to the public, if it was only to prove
the truth of au Englishman's I it boast, that jos-
tice was administered on a (outing of equality to the
highest and th►e lowest. But assuredly the parties
should be the lust in the world to publish a history
of their own case ; and it was singularly imprudent
and rash in Mr. }lipoid tit sit down to such a
task while his mind was heated by passion and pre-
judice. It would be more tolerable too if he had
confined himself to the trite charge against Juries,
of findireg a verdict contrary to evidence. But
after having already asserted that the damages
claimed were five times the actual loss, and when
the verdict of the Jury had *hewn that they were
not in the smallest degree exaggerated, and the
whole had been recovered, he slti►uki have abstained
from repeating such au imputation. He had not
stopped, however, there, but in almost direct
terms alleged that Mr. Wahlegrave had Ititiself
set fire to his preini.es. " All sespicini►s tires
happen on a Saturday si'ght„ or is Sunday—oho
happened on a Sato's* night, and the cause of it
was never ascertained." The Learned Counsel
then adverted to. and commented on, the roller
parts of the !Owl
.(the purport of which will appear
more fully in the evidence), :tinl inferred that the
most ocepttcol could net doubt but Mr. litgiould