The Sun.
London, England, 1830-05-21 00:00:00

LAW INTELLICANCE.-(THIS DAY.)

COURT OF KING'S BENCH.
CRIMINAL' INFORMXTION.-TIIF. KING V. WZSTMACOTT

AND WHIRS.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL having obtained a rule or
former day, c.dling upon the Proprietors of the Age
newspaper to chew cause why a criminal information
should not be filed against them for a libel published in that
paper on the 28th of March last, reflecting upon the cha-
racter of Win. Holmes; Esq. M.P., this day moved b.
Make the rule absolute.

Mr. C. F. WILLIAMS said he appeared on behalf of Ann
Durham and Mr. Westmacott, to shew cause aga;nst the
rule. The article which formed the ground of ar
application for a criminal information was published
in the Age on the 28th of March, in consequence
of one that appeared a few days previously in tie
Courier. The latter paper said they had the best
authority for believing that Prince Leopold would
not guarantee the payment of the Greek Loan. The
effect of this article was that Greek Stock immediately
fell seven or eight per cent. Now, this statement was
false from beginning to end as stated by the Aye news-
paper, Whose intent was not to injure the feelings of Mr.
Holmes, but to impute falsehood to the Courier. The
article itself was not written by any person connected
with the Age office, and he (Mr. Williams) hoped
he should be able to convince the Court that it
was merely a political squib, levelled against the
Courier, and not to hurt the feelings of Mr. Holme,,
and therefore they would discharge the rule. On the 18th
of March the Age, after quoting a paragraph from the
Courier, to which he had alluded, said, " very good au-
thority, indeed ; for no doubt your article war written at
the office, and by the identical Billy Holmes, the whipper-
in of the House of Commons."—(A laugh.)—Now, per-
haps it was not generally known the duties of this office.
(Laughter.)—lt was a very important one, and its duties
usually performed by a gentleman of influence.—(Laugh-
ter.)—lf his scent was not good he would be unfit for
the situation. The whipper--in was a person actually
necesssary for young and• old, for when any important
motion was to be brought forward the young members,
perhaps, were running wild, and the old onus hanging
back.—(Laughter.)—Such an office therefore was cer-
tainly undeniable. Perhaps the manner in which the
observations were applied were not altogether justifiable;
they were, however, put forth in that jocular and good
humoured manner, that they could not have the tendency
of wounding Mr. Holmes's feelings. The Attorney-
General, when he obtained the rule, expressed some
doubt whether he should be able to prove Westmacott
proprietor of the paper. He should be able to convince
his Learned Friend that he was nut.

Lord Tzwrzanax—You must convince us of that, Mr.
Williams.

Mr. Williams hoped to be able to do so. When it was
pointed out to the defendants that the article was likely to
hurt the feelings of Mr. Holmes, they immediately ex.
pressed their regret, and published a contradiction, accom-
panied by a full, fair, and candid apology.
Lord Tzsmarmsr—ls it a daily paper ?—Mr.Williams
—No, my Lord ; a Sunday one. On the 231 of Novem-
ber last Ann Durham was the sole proprietor ; since
which another person had purchased a share of it.—
The Attorney-General never sould have been in-
structed that an ample apology had been made,
or from his high character Fe would not have withheld
that circumstance from the Court. The apology stated,
that the defendants believed that Mr. Holmes was inca•-
p tble of doing what had been attributed to him, and
twelve papers containing this apology were sent to Mr.
H., accompanied by a letter expressing the sincerest re-
gret. He had an affidavit to show that the wife of Mr.
Holmes had read that letter in fashionable company, and
expressed herself satisfied with it. This too was a fact
which the Attorney-General had omitted to notice,
his high character was such, that bad be not been
deceived, lie would have disdained not to have men-
tioned it. No person holding the high office of
Attorney-General would omit wilfully noticing the state-
ment that had been made. The defendants, however do
more than this, they find the article was not sent by the
author from sinister motives, and the attorney of Mr.
Westmaeott, in consequence, called on Messrs. Rowley and
Co., Mr. Holmes's solicitors, and put those gentlemen in
possession of his name and address; Mr. Bettie Ambrose
was the author. The proprietors of the paper did not
take this step from intimidation, but they found they had
been imposed upon, and they therefore felt it their duty to
do all in their power to satisfy Mr. Holmes. Yet under
these mitigatory circumstances, were their Lordships called
upon specially to interpose their high authority.

1,0111 TENTERDEN-You have not read Mr. Westma-
cott's contradiction of any knowledge of the article before
it was published.
Mr. WILLIAMS thought the contradiction of the offen-
sive article sufficient. It slid—We have been informed
on the best authority that we were in error in what we
stated last Sunday. Mr. Holmes never wrote a line re-
specting Greek bonds for that poor degraded hack, the
courier. He had also the affidavit of a gentleman mov-
ing in the first circles.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL.—Name him.

Mr. WlLLiams.—lt was Sir Thomas Champneys. Hs
felt certain, that after the full and ample apology that had
been made, and the regret expressed by the defendants,
there was some other motive for this proceeding besides
a vindication of character. Sir Thomas Champneys
in his affidavit stated that Lady Hohnes had expressed her-
self quite satisfied with the apology, but that Mr. Holmes,
from some cause or other, was not so, and on being ap-
pealed to for his opinion, he (Sir Thomas) said, "as a man,
a gentleman, and a Magistrate, I think the apology is suf-
ficient. Such an atonement would sufficiently satisfy me."
If the Attorney-General could deny this statement, he
would sit down and give him an opportunity of doing so.
But he could not. His high character was an example of
imitation to the bar. Having said thus much, he would then
allude to the affidavit of Ann Durham. She stated
that she was proprietor and publisher of the Aye news-
paper. She expressed the greatest regret for what had
appeared, and her readiness to give the other side every
opportunity of obtaining legal redress. An affidavit had
been put iu, stating that she lived with Westmacott in an
improper way. Now, if this was the case, it could only
have been mentioned for the purpose of raising an impro-
per prejudice against the parties, But the Court would
never punish them for any such immorality in a proceed-
ing like the present. Ann Durham's affidavit went on
to state, that she became possessed of considerable pro-
perty under the will of her maternal uncle, with part of
which she purchased the Age newspaper.
Lord TENTERDEN-She was not the original proprietor
then ? Mr. Williams—No, my Lord ; but she remained
sole proprietor until the 23d of November last, when she
sold a part to a very respectable genteman named Baylis,
who was now a joint proprietor with her. Mr. West-
macott was one of four editors, at a weekly salary,
and had nothing eb;e whatever to do with the paper.—
Westmacott had stated this fact to Mr. Holmes's
attorney, and likewise that be was not the author
of the article complained of, or in any other way
connected with it. But if they would release Ann Dur-
ham, and leave her out of the information, he (Westma-
cott) would make no defence, and take all the consequences
upon himself. Sir Thomas Champneys was also told by
Westmacott, that if a more public plan could be adopted
for giving a contradiction to the statement, he was ready
to comply with it. Ann Durham said she was
the party, and was sorry for what had taken place.—
He did therefore hope, when the parties had acted
in this manner, the Court would not interpose its
special authority, When the application was made the
Attorney-General had studiously abstained from mention-
ing these facts. He trusted now, however, they would have
their proper effect. He felt confident that his Learned
Friend would wish so also, for he had his recorded
expressions in the case of " the King v. Bell,"
when he said that the object of the parties was only to
get at the author. This had been done, and he was as
responsible a man as any of the parties they now sought
to punish. At least he must be so, for Mr. Holmes
had lately written a letter to Lord Lowther, to
ask for a place for him, which he would not have
done bad he not been respectable. Since the
23,1 of November, Mr. Westmacott had neither been pm-
prietor nor publisher .f the paper. Before that time be
was agent, and conducted it for Ann Durham; but
since then he bad no controul. The affidavit of Mr.
Westmacott then stated that in 1823, his circum-
stances were so bad that he was obliged to apply
to the Insolvent Debtors' Court. For a length of time
afterwards his salary was so small, that lie had not been
able to satisfy his creditors, but lately his debts only
amounted to between 4 and 500/. He had called
those together to whom he was indebted, and paid
them thirteen shillings'in the pound, an example, said Mr.
Williams, worthy of being followed. If it was thought
sufficient satisfaction had not been given, the defendants
were quite willing to give it in any way even the Attor-
ney-General might point out. The Court would
recollect the facts on which the rule was granted.
It arose out of a conversation with Mr. John Scan-
lan, a gentleman connected with the Courier news-
paper. This gentleman met Mr. Westmacott at Drury-
lane Theatre, when he said, " Well, Westmacott, I sup-
pose you will have sointliing good about the Courier in next
Sunday's paper respecting stock jobbing anti Billy Hawes ?"