The Sun.
London, England, 1830-11-17 00:00:00

EX-ItAItTE FANO, ESQ.

The ATTORNEY•GUNERAL moved for a rule ta
show cause why a criminal information should not
be tiled against Charles'Ady, Gent. for a libel. lie
matte the application' he said, on behalf of John
Pane, Esq., one of the members for the ',minty of
Oxford. Upon Mr. Pane's tadaviti and that of
several other persons i; appeared thar, during the
contested eleepart for the county of Oxford, a fear
months ago, the city of Oxford was placarded with
publications of a very offensive nature, reaming on
the character and conduct of one of the candidates.
No name was mantioned, but it had been ascer-.
mined that Mr. Pane was the party alluded to. The
Learned Counsel would now state the circumstance;
which were detailed in the affidavits, to Chow that
Mr. Pane was the subject of tiktto idaeards, mid
that the party against wiaom this application was
directed was Oa eatUor of them. Mr. Pana's
davit elated, that he and a gentleman of the tame
oi Edward Jothlrell bed married two tiAiaa. Mr.
Fano had a daughter, who some years ago was mar.
tied to a gentleman Etf tko Isar, who died in the
coupe of the last year. The lady was highly ac•
emoßltahed, and until the publicciona to which the
affidavits referred, no imputation had evet twts made
upon her chastity. The object of 4,ciao pubiteationt
appeared to be to attack hest hallow, end wound the
feelings of her fa4,11,;i:. The affidavit of Mr. Pane
stated, th;t after the death of the lady's husband,
paragraph appeared itt The Sun newspaper:, stating
that the recent death of a gettitemea uounicted with
the family of one of 04 Mote less for the county of
Oxford critic, t sly to bring to light avmucurions
c4444.taliejli rehinve to the conduct a a tnarkiA gen•
detrain nearly connected with the ecoatay member.
Mr. Pane should not have had the leant idea that
this paragraph was iotanded to allude to any part of
his familyi but that the t.ewspaper containing it
sew to law. This, their Lordships ex.re aware,
was a eery coin:nett mode of proceeding when
any. !Attack 'open an individual was inserted in a
newspuper:.
fiord TIiNTLaISEN csatiliao-0 yes, that is very
common.

The AVTORNRY.GIOVIAty efter retaditig the

paragraph, said that shortly.' after this, in April last,
Mr. Fane received an anonymous let*, signet!
"An Oxfordshire Freeholder," stating that it hail
been publicly announced that he was uequatuted with
the disgrace inflicted on his family. The Learned
Counsel read an extract , from the lezter, which
stated that Mr. Vane 'had been charged with having
continued his intimuey with Mr. Edwurd Juddrell
after he knew that that gentleman had ;retied on a
criminal intercourse with his (Mr. Pane's) daeghter.
Mr. Edivard Joddrell was spoken ol'as the third
son of a gentleman whose large estetes (a eotemis.
sion of bankrupt having been taken out ega;nit him)
he had the entire controul of; and Me. Pane way
challenged to make inquiries on the sititFer, unti to
deny publicly the truth of the charges made against
him. Mr. Fane being naturally very desirous on
the receipt of such a letter of discovering the name
of the author, inserted an advertisement in one of
the Morning Papal, stating that if the anonymous
writer would come forward and give the necessary
information, the charge which had been made shank!
he investigated. No notice was taken of this,
except that Mr. Pane received another et»nymotts.
letter, treating the advertisetnent as an uncondi-
annul pledge on the part of Mr. Pane to institute
an inquiry into the facia before referred to. The
Learned Counsel read some extracts front this letter,
arid said that the allidevits with which he teal been
furnished deni,d, in the most distinct terms, every
thing imputed both in the Newspaper paregrorph and
the anonymous letters. Them could be no doubt,
the Learned Counsel said, that the paragraph in
The Sun Newspaper, the uttonymous letters, and
the placards, likti all emanated frzim one and the
mite patty, mid as a proof of it he would mention
that the word " cowerdice" occurred both in the
letters and the placards. NVith respect to the pleeerds,
the publication of them by the platy aganist whom
he moved was clearly male out by the affidavits.
The man who had been employed to circulate the
placards stated that his emplo)er was Nlr. Charles
Arty. Application bud been made at, the printer's
in London. The printer was not in town at the
time; but his foreman had stated that he wait ern-
ployed by Mr. My ; and that when the proof
sheets had been worked off, an opinion hurl been
expressed that the terms; employed were top strong,
end it intimated that the bills could not be printed,
unless die language was softened, upon which Mr.
Aily gave an indemnity, and then they were printed.
Lord TENTERDEN—Tkike a title to show

PREROGATIVE COURT, Nov. Ili,
WARD V. SMYTH.

This was a question as to the will of Mrs. Eliza.
both Allen, widow, who died in November last,
aged 74 or 75, leaving an only sister, and five nieces,
the daughters of a deceased brother. The will in
question was unexecuted, having been drawn up by
her confidential solicitor some time before her death,
delivered into her custody, and found, not amongq
her papers of moment, but wrapped up in u flannel
dress, in a dravi.er or wardrobe. The alternative
was he establishment of this will, or an intestacy.
The property, wh'ch was personal, amounted to be»
t ween 30,000/. and 40004
Sir JOHN Ntenota. pronounced for the validity of
the will. Costs to be paid out of the came.
TYRRELL v. LiNGliAln.
This was a suit tor try the validity of the will of
Mr. Richard Hopley, who died in April last, a
bachelor, leavinz a nephew and nieces. His per-
sonal property was between 25,000/. and 30,000/.
Sir JOHN Ntettom was of opinion that the alle-
gation propounding the will was fully proved. The
Court, however, nottlelio order as to the costs.