The Sun.
London, England, 1852-06-25 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGEA

ROUSE OF LORDS, June 24.
DIMES V. GRAND JUNCTION CANAL COMPANY.
This app,al, which was opened yesterday, was con-
cluded to-clay. Two separate questions were put to
the judges, and timo allowed for consideration.

VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT, June 24.
(Before Sir JAMES PARKER.)
LUMLEY v. WAGNER AND OTHERS.
Mr. 13ethell .(with whom were Mr. Malins and Mr.
Martindale) addressed his Honour in the course of the
afternoon, and stated that in the case of Lumley v. Wag-
ner, of which his Honour had unfortunately heard so
much, he was instructed by the defendants to apply to
the Court. A submission had been made on the part of
the defendants to the full extent of the prayer of the
bill which Mr. Lumley had filed against them, and they
cow offered to pay all the costs of the suit, and consented
to the injunction being made perpetual against them,
and to he bound by the order. (It must be understood
by unproiessional readers that the term perpetual," as
applied to an injunction, is not to be taken literally, but
as contradistinguished from ex parte, "common,' and
temporary injunctions; the restraint imposed by the
writ of injunction'in this case would not extend beyond
the period during which Mdlle. Wagner had bound her-
self not to sing at any other theatre than that of Mr.
Lumley.)

Tbe- VICE-CHA,NcELLon—There is no objection to
that, I suppose.
Mr. Bacon and Mr. Hislop Clarke appeared for
Air. Lumley, and said that the defendants proposed to
submit to a decree for an injunction restraining them as
prayeo by the bill, and off.3ring to pay the costs. If the
Court approved of this it would make the order, but
with the distinct understanding that it must be taken
without any consent of Mr. Lumley. The present state
of the proceedings was this—the bill had been filed, and
the answers had been put in, but no other proceeding had
been taken in the case, which was ripe for hearing.
The VICE-CHANCELLOR—It is the course of the Court
to allow the defendant to come at any time, and I have
always understood that, according to the practice of the
Court, it is an honourable proceeding on the part of a
defendant to come and submit to the plaintiff's demand.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, June 24.
(Sittings at Nisi Prius at Westminster, before Lord
CAMPBELL and a Special Jury.)
THE QUEEN (ON THE PROSECUTION OF ACHILLI) V.

NEWMAN..-CRIMINAL INFORMATION.
(Continued fioni cur Afternoon Edition.)

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said—Gentlemen 'of the

Jury, my Uitined Friend, M one of the most eloquent
antis impassioned addresses that I have ever heard de-
livered in this hall, after urging every topic which was
Calculated to excite your feelings, has exhorted you to
calmness, and has spoken of the great advantage which
Dr. Achilli possesses on the present occasion, from the
course of this investigation, But I must beg to remind
you that this is the first time that his counsel had been
heard on the matters of accusation which are alleged.
MY Learned Friend *fled the case upon the various
charges
upon which you are ultimately to decide in a
speech, if not equally forcible with the one which he has
now addressed to you, yet in one of a very powerful
and impressive description. Evidence has been heard,
and my Learned Friend hers had the opportunity of corn-
mcntiog upon it and pressing the different parts of it
against Dr. Achilli, before the voice of his counsel has
been heard
th tttmutter of evidence. All that
all upon e
the bitterest hatred, the most unwearied industry, un-
bounded resources, and unlimited influence can combine
to necomplieh the destruction of ono man, who is
a most formidable adversary, have been accumu-
lated together upon the present occasion; and it will be
for you to say whether the Mass and body of the evi-
dence which has been produced is of such weight as to
crush the prosecutor
to the
ground, or whether it will
crumble into the dust at the touch of calm and impar-
tial investigation. I suppose that there never was an
invence in en English court of justice in which a trial
took place under circumstances similar to these. My
Lc.arucd Friend has properly told you that, although
this is a complaint against Dr. Newman for having pub-
lished a libel against Dr. Achilli, it resolves itself into
charges in which Dr. Achilli is the accused, and that he
is standing before 3ou upon his trial to answer those
charges. Now in every court of justice in this kingdom
there is a privilege which is allowed to the meanest cri-
minal, and which has. been studiously and deliberately
tuken from Dr, Achill'. You may remember that at
an early period of this inquiry my Learned Friends on
the other side desired that all the witnesses should leave
the court. The necessary consequence of their demand
was that Dr. Achilli was removed from the court, and
was prevented from having an opportunity of confronting
the witnesses, and of giving instructions to his counsel for
their examination as the case proceeded. My Learned
Friend has endeavoured to divert your judgment and alarm
your minds, by suggesting that this is a subject of re-
ligious controversy. He has regretted, in very strong
and eloquent language, that the flames of religious
bigotry should be again rekindled in this country; he
has stated, more than once, that two champions of the
antagonistic faiths are before you, and has taken that
opportunity of endeavouring to gain a very considerable
advantage by suggesting that possibly you may be ex-
cited by some prejudice, and by warning you in very
strong language against it. He has supposed that I
shout appeal to your religious feelings and hopes, and
should call upon you to decide this question from any
motives of that description. I should be perfectly
ashamed if I were to endeevour to excite the slightest
prejudice in your minds upon such grounds, or upon
any grounds whatever. This is not, however, in the
slightest degree, a question of religious controversy. If
it hod been you would never have been troubled with
the inquiry; but Dr. Achilli says, "In the conflict
between us you, Dr. Newman, have chosen to make
Me the butt of poisoned arrows; you have assailed
my character ; if you can establish the truth
of your charges the law will protect you ;
bat if you are unable to do so, you must be convicted as
a malignant slanderer." Bat my Learned Friend has
said, these are matters which have been published long
ago; that fifteen months before Dr. Newman delivered
this lecture, those particular charges were brought for-
ward in an. artiale in the Dublin Review, which Dr.
Achilli, in his work, had attributed to the renowned
Cardinal Wiseman, Archbishop
of Westminster by the
Phiospine'saskeraenatdioanv.owTideiyhna
,ihtaeit h
d the author
Wiseman
of h
an thrown
articlewnoff
in the Dublin Review, Dr. Achilli would have been quite
ready to have entered tho kits with him at the earliest
opportunity. But,Dr. Wiseman preserved his incognito,
and it was not unjij he saw a lecture published, under
a name which was one respected, that of Dr. Newman
one of the priests of St. Philip Neri—that he found he
had a chance of meeting an adversary who was visible,
and reedy to come forward in the face of day, and with
whom he might test that important question whether
tiles!) slanders, so long circulated against him, had any
foundation or not. Dr. Achilli then proceeded
,against
the publishers of that lecture, and Dr. Newman,
having very fairly avowed its authorship, . was per-
refitted to be substituted as a defendant, This was
the first opportunity Dr. Achilli had of challenging
his Oppoll,4lltS into a court of justice, and under
these circumstances they •are here before you,
Dr. Newman undertaking to establish to, your otitis-