The Sun.
London, England, 1806-12-10 00:00:00

of Llii7 its authority ; and a Court of
Equity,in'such cases, has a concurrent ~urisdidio i."

. .
The torn CHANGF.LLOR.—" What the Courts
at Comiton Law can do, that I may do; but
cases apply in support ofthe present motion ?" ,
Mr. iirtaT replied, that there was one in .c.! At-
kins, 46i). In this Reporter it wasanonymottS; tith
he believed it was given in Dickins, under the 'lathe
of John Roach and another ; the contest was be..
twcen Champion ani the 'Conduetors oea NewS-
paper, and his Lordship might recolleet, that,
andGoi'don were parties to it.
_ _

The Learned Counsel here entered into a de-
tailed examination' of the case ; in the squel re-
chilli the ()pinion of Lord flardwlcke given on,
that 'occasion ; from all which he deduced these
two positions, first, that scandalizing the Court is
a contempt ; secondly, that abusing the parties is
the same offence ; 'and under both these the pre-
sent case obviously devolved. Mr. HAL' was con-
vinced, that no man would treat with more indif-
ference than his Lords,liip, sitting in a judicial ca-
pacity, any abuse, public or private, against him-
self; but his Lordship presided in the Most just,
and, generally speaking, in the most useful Court
in the Country, and the dtity imposed upon him
was not for his own prote&ion, but as the appoint-
ed Guardian of this venerable institution. The
Learned Counsel. next 'adverted-)to the second part
of his argument—whether the offence were so
bronght hoMe to the parties; that it would autho-
rize the intervention of the Court in this exercise
of its acknowledged jurisdiction ? He hereexamin-
ed the various circumstances as they appeared on the
face ofthe affidavits ; imd concluded with asserting-,
that the parties were implicated, and that the objet
of this motion should he granted.
'Mr. THOMPSON, on the part, of Mr. Macnaninra
and Mr. Farquharson, replied at considmible
length. He Said it was one of the most extraor-
dinary proceedings instituted in that Court within
his recolle6tion and the only material question
was, whether there had been any such contempt
of the Court as had been pretended-? The terms
" libelling the justice of the Court" he could not
at all understand ; he knew what it was to libel
individnak, and what was the remedy by damages
given in' the Courts of Law in such cases. He
had said it was an extraordinary proceeding, be-
cause there was not a single case in the books
plicable to the present motion. The particulars
related from Atkins were not at all referable to it :

the only point of semblance was' in the obje& or
result proposed—Which was to commit the parties.
The SOI,ICITOR-GENERAL had admitted the value
of the right of the subject to publish such reports :
it was, indeed, a great and inestimable right, be-
cauSe it was one of the strongest securities for 'the
pure and. equal administration of justice. His
Lordship wetdd recolle& the case -of Currie-and
Walter, in which the speech of a Counsel had
been stated in The. Times. The cause was tried
before Lord Chief Baron Evre, who held that the
publication being correa, the a&ion could not be
supported._ '

_ .
The ;Learned Counsel here entered into an ela-
borate review of the opinion quoted under the an-
thon of Lord Hardwleke, and not iced.as a material
distioaion in the present case, that the obje&ion
to the report there Was, that the cause was yet
undecided.

--The LORD CHANCELLOR.--" That was pendente
lite." • .

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL:14 Atlel SO is this,
my Lord 3 and the more material part is yet to be
decided. lam sorry to use a Larsh expression, but
I conceive this publication to 6e a threat to tlw.
Court."
Mr. THOMPSON.—
ClO you u,:e it ?"

." If it give you concern, why

TheSOLICITOR GENTAIAL.---6" I use it with re-
gret, as I often discharge painful duties with re-
luaance ; I distinEtly assert that, it is. both a menace
to the parties and to the CoUrr, and I contend, my
Lord; that this is a serious aggravation of the of-
fence."
Mr. THOMPSOI.7.-1` I had no doubt but that the
Soucerea-GENiitAt. would insist upon whatever he
-had once affirthed. Wyatt, in referring to this case,
notices the particular injury sustained by certain,
parties to the. cause, in consequence of the pre-
judgment before it was determined. Suppose a
private or public, lettei• in the• newspapers were
written to influence a witness;, this would be a con-
tempt. There was an example of a peison adver-
tising for witnesses.to prove a marriage; would this
be a contempt."
The LORD CuANctrAox..—" That might depend
upon how, the advertise.netit Was worded."
TiiOINON said, stint it was .a general in-
vitation, and offered ,a. reward for the deposi-
tion. The Learned Counsel had great difficulty
in dealing with these charges. Sometimes particu-
lar wissa,;es.were 'ebjeeled to, at others the whole
was tbe siabjeCt of general censure, as if not a
single circumstance, not even the most indiffer-
ent, wore correct. The Court, however, would
not be satisfied with this lumping accusation, al-
though the SOLICITOR-GENERAL, and Mr. ADAM,
in his affidavit, dealt with the report in the same
way, and called it all a gross and malicious fabrica-
tion. His Lordship would require that passages
should be distineily and separately stated, and that.
their falsehood should be established.

The LORD CHANCELLOR.-.-" ThAt is the point
to which. Mr. Adam's Affidavit goes: he first says,
that the report is npt corred, and then he proceeds
to chew in what the inaccuracy consists."
After some further remarks on the testimony of
Mr. Adam,

Mr. THOMPSON expressed his astonishment at the
reliance of the Counsel on the other side, on the
constru6.lion they put on certain civil things his
Lordship was pleased to say respe&ing his acquaint-
ance with Mr. Macnamara.

The LORD CHANCELLOR.—a That I suppose is
no subjea of complaint. When I said that I had
known Mr. Macnamara all my life, I did not mean
that these expressions should in any way impeach.
the judgment which was given. It was my duty
to look at the cOnduel of the' Defendant in the case
before, not at his, history unconnected with
these transa6tions; and by that particular conduct
my decision kif a S to be guided. Supposing the af-
fidavits were to impute any contempt to Farquhar-
son, it is enough that he denies it. Here is no Trial
by ,fury I can proceed only on, his admissions."

The SOLICITOR GENERAL.--." Here the Court
.requires the 'party tQ answer upon Affidavitsi, and