The National Register.
London, England, 1809-11-12 00:00:00

NOV. 12.

THE NATIONAL REGISTER,

Lord en orougof e c rcuinstance thePlaintiffs' *
__
-. • • • , -
in-
suring the goods liioked Mitre like hiti than sale, and I made
that observation to the Jury.
Mr. Serjettnt Rest continued : the jewels were insured in the
name of Clarke, and the furniture in that of Farquhar. The
Learned Serieant concluded with hoping that the Court would
grant hint the rule upon any terms.
Lord Ellesaborough was afraid of violating the rules of the
Court, where a party had full opportunity to prove at his trial
what was now stated by affidavits. At the same time, circum-
stances were now adduced which fixed Mrs. Clarke with the
Plaintiff iu a connection more, from the beginning to the end of
the husiuess, than appeared ut' the time of the trial, and it
might, therefore, be as well to grant the rule nisi.—Rule
granted.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.

fIN TEE CASE OP THE EARL. OF LEICESTER V. WALTER AND

OTHERS, PROPRIETORS OF THE MORNING HERALD.

Mr. Serjeant Manley, on the part of the Defendants, moved
for a rule to slew cause why the verdict in this case should not
be set aside, and a new trial granted. The Learned Serjeant
observed, that the verdict against his clients was for one thou-
sand pounds-11 verdict, which, he believed, under all the cir-
cumstances of the case, and the evidence adduced, was totally
without precedent. Never was so strong a case of justification
adduced by any Defendant; nor could he conceive how it was
possible fora Jury of rational men upon their oaths to find such
verdict fur the Noble Plaintiff; fur although they might con-
sider themselves bound to find a verdict against his Client,
one shilling was the utmost that could have been expected at
their hands. From the evidence of his Lordship's own Soli-
citor, and the testimony given by several persons who well knew
the Noble Lord, it was impossible his character could have
been injured by the paragraph on VI, bleb the action was founded ;
for the Solicitor acknowledged, upon repeated interrogation,
that it was the general report of his Lordship's character which
induced him to believe the paragraph in question alluded to
Lord Leicester.

Sir James Massfiekl admitted the force of the arguments
urged by the Learned Sedeant, and said, that from what he
recollected of the circumstances of the trial, no inconsiderable
degree of surprise had been excited in the Court, at the high
quantum of damages awarded by the .1 ury. In his own opinion,
it was scarcely possible any case could have been more palpably
rebutted; and if he might venture to suggest a line of conduct
for the Noble Lord and his friends, he should think the wiser
course for them to take would be to avoid, if possible, any fur-
ther exposure of this case in a public Court, and to remit the
damages; for he should extremely regret the necessity imposed
on him, in case of a new trial, of recapitulating the evidence in
the case.

Mr. Serjeant Manley urged a further ground for his motion,
of which he was not aware at the time of trial, or he should
have then taken notice of it ; namely, that one of the Jury was
sworn by a wrong name. He meant no imputation on either the
Juryman, or the Officer of the Court; but the fact of itself was
sufficient ground for a new trial.
Mr. Justice Lawrence observed, that his Learned Brother
was mistaken. Indeed, such objections were sometimes allowed
in crimi►►al cases, but in none other.
Mr. Serjeant Best said, if there was a new trial, he should
entertain no doubt of obtaining for his Noble Client a verdict for
20,0001.
Sir James Mansfield said he recollected the evidence for the
Plaintiff. and especially that of Mr. Mills, his Attorney, who
had fenced a good ; but at last admitted, that the prevalent
reports of his Lo►rl;ltip's character induced him to believe the
paragraph alluded to his Lordship. Under such circumstances,
he could not see what damages the character of the Noble Lord
could sustain. "He should be extremely glad however to hear
no more of the matter ; but lest his advice should be rejected,
lie should grant the rule.-

OLD 13✓11LEY.

Anne Bolton, agirl of 14 years old, was indicted for steal-
lug half a bushel of bailey, the property of William Batt,
farmer, in the parish of West Drayton on the 7th of Sepietn-
ber. The prisoner, as it appeared from evidence, hail been
with a number of -other persons gleaning in the prosecutor's
fields, and he saw her stop at a cock of the gathered barley,
break oaf n number of ears from the straw, and put them into

may •••••••• ...41111.11111111011. •••••••• OW, -* N0..~
a, ► •

.. 4,010_ •

.Ni 4- op 0ce.404.4

• ,