The Sun.
London, England, 1837-06-14 00:00:00

that newspaper. The plaintiff was a gentleman who had
received his education at Trinity College, Dublin. He
subsequently devoted himself to literature, and was a very
extensive contributor to that very able periodical known by
the title of Fraser's Magazine. He need hardly tell
them that a contributor to such a magazine must be a
person of ability, for monthly magazines were very different
now from what they were twenty or thirty years ago. Pre-
vious to that period the monthly magazines were highly
respectable certainly ; but they were dry and vapid affairs,
in which men of genius and intellect declined to display their
abilities. Now, however, the thing was different—the pe-
riodicals exercised considerable influence on society from the
valuable matter which they contained ; anal a person to be
capable of contributing to them must be possessed of consi-
derable literary qualifications. Mr. Cox was the printer of the
Metropolitan Conservative Journal—a newspaper that made
its appeal to a great and influential party in the State ; and
he believed that it exercised a considerable influence upon
that party. He was not astonished at this, for it made its
appeal with great talent and considerable power, if he
might judge from the several articles that had come under
his notipe occasionally. Dr. Maginn was a gentleman
whose political opinions were in accordance with those
advocated by the journal in question ; and therefore no
feeling of political strife could be pleaded in extenuation
of the attack made upon his client. The nature of the at-
tack would appear from the libels themselves. A drama,
entitled the Student of Padua, became the subject of re-
mark in n aser's Magazine, and it was supposed, but most
erroneously so, that these remarks were from the pen of
Dr. Maginn. He defied his Learned Friend to prove that
Dr. Magian had said anything whatever in Fraser's. reflect-
ing on the Student if Padua. The Learned Gentleman
then proceeded to call the attention of the jury to the libels
complained of, which were contained in a letter inserted in
the Metropolitan Conservative Journal of the 2d of April,
1837, signed " the author of the Student of Padua," and
in an article under the head of " Literature and Science."
The letter contained the following passages :
" The writer of the attack on The Student of Padua' is
incensed with its author, because I know this anonymous re-
viewer to be a coward, who has skulked from the field of
honour—a poltroon who has eaten,his own calumnies—and a
dastard who seeks revenge by his pen when he dare not take
it with his hand." But let me quote the passage :
" As to who the two gentlemen connected with Mr. Fraser's
Magazine may be, I know not—one of the gentlemen is Dr.
Maginn, and this gentleman, as he has the effrontery to style
himself, is the author of the brilliant calumny on me, simply
because I happened to be privy to a little ()pir in which the
Doctor dropped a white feather, and proved himself as great
a coward as he is a malicious libeller."
The article had the following passage :
" None but a convicted coward, a slanderer, a backbiter,
and a dastardly calumniator by profession could have been
guilty of such a ruffianly arid insolent article. He must be
one of those bribed assassins of literature so common in Lon-
don, who live in garrets, and are only admitted into the com-
pany of the swell-mob, and the courtesans of the Haymarket,
or Drury-lane.
" And let us ask, who is this miserable pauper-scribe in
Fraser,' that lie dare come forward in such an offensive man-
ner, on so trivial an occasion ? Is /:c the author of any one
known work ? Is lie moral, and virtuous, and sober, and
thoughtful ? Is he a man whose toleration in society, whose
eminence in literature, whose courage, and whose position al-
low him to be gratuitously insolent ?"
The Learned Gentleman having commented upon the
libels as he read them, said it could not be urged in exte-
nuation that the letter had been inserted owing to seine
carelessness, for the slanderous attack contained in the Later
was repeated in another form in the same Journal, and on
the same (lay, and evidently by some person having a con-
trol in time editorial department. Dr. Maginn felt it neces-
sary, as an individual who depended upon his literary
labours for his existence as a gentleman, moving in a re-
spectable station in society, to meet this most uncalled-for
and slanderous attack upon him. The Jury would per-
ceive that this action was brought against the printer of
the Newspaper, so that lie might, if he pleased, put the
riter of the libels into the witness-box, and justify his
assertions. defendant, however, declined to put a
justification on the record, and had, in fact, allowed the
action to go by default ; and Dr. Maginn now appeared
before the Jury to ask of them to give such compensation
as a man so deeply wounded deserved. The Learned
Gentleman called the attention of the Jury to the circum-
stance of this libel upon Dr. Maginn coming from a quarter
where lie did not expect it. Was it not cruel that his
client was denounced as a person unworthy the confidence
of the gentleman to whom he looked for subsistence ; and
was it not a bitter aggravation of this attack that the wife
and children of Dr. were told that the husband of the
one and the father of the other was only the fit associate of
the swell mob or the degraded courtesan ? He hoped the
day would never come when such slanders as these would
be allowed to go unpunished.
Mr. Jones, a clerk in the firm of Dawes and Frazer,
solicitors, purchased the Metropolitan Conservative Journal,
which contained the libels complained or, at the office, in
Wellington-street, Strand.
Cross-examined by Mr. THESSIGER.—Never heard from
Dr. Maginn that an article had been inserted in the Metro-
politan Conservative Journal as an apology for the libel
complained of.
A witness named Rawshow accompanied Mr. Frazer,
the solicitor, to the house of the defendant. On the 21st
of April a letter was given to the defendant, who said he
was the printer of the Metropolitan Conservative Journal
—that he printed the number of the newspaper containing
the libel, that he expected to be proceeded against, and, be
added, that if the parties did not hold him harmless, he
would call on Mr. Frazer at five o'clock, and let him know
all about the matter. He said he knew nothing of Mr.
Milton.
Cross-examined—Believed that the letter was demanding
the name of the proprietors of the newspaper. Could
not say how it was that Mr. Frazer asked the defendant if
Mr. Milton was the author of the article in question.
Had seen and spoken to Dr. Magian ; but did not know
where he resided.
Mr. TIIESSIGER on the part of the defendant, was asto-
nished at the course which his Learned Friend had taken
in this case. He had, with his usual eloquence, drawn a
flattering picture of Dr. Maginn. He had described his
early life. He spoke of his connection with Trinity Col-
lege, Dublin, and pointed to him as a gentleman of high
literary attainments, moving in the better circles of society,
and in every way entitled to the character and rank of a
gentleman. It appeared to him as if his Learned Friend
intended to call evidence in support of this flaming and
flattering character ; but what was iris surprise when he
found that his Learned Friend, instead of producing evi-
dence to support his statement, called upon the Jury to
take the estimate of Dr. Maginn's character from himself.
The defendant was the printer of the Metropolitan Con-
servative Journal, and it was hardly necessary to say that
he bad no more to do with the libel complained of than
any of the gentlemen forming the Jury. If his Learned
Friend had shown that an application had been made
to the defendant for the name of the author, and that
a refusal had been given to that application, then, indeed,
his Learned Friend might - have some ground for jus-
lifying this action being brought against the printer. His
Learned Friend was bound to show that every information
respecting the author of the libels was withheld. But was
this the case ? Was information refused ? But his Learned
Friend, with great ingenuity suggested, that by bringing
the action in this way the defendant had an opportunity of
placing the author in the witness box, and justifying the
statement made with respect to the plaintiff. But this was
a mistake. The defendant had no wish to place himself
between the contending parties. He had nothing to do
either with the letter or the article complained of. He
knew that he was responsible in point of law, and the only
thing that he could do under the circumstances was, not to
aggravate the offence with which he was charged by putting
a plea of justification on the record. It was said that Dr.
Maginn was not the author of the criticism on the " Student
of Padua ;" but this was the first time that such a state-
ment had been made. Had it obtained publicity earlier
the probability was the cause for this action would not have
arisen.
Mr. ButtcHELL summed up the evidence, and the jury
returned a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages, 1501.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, JinvE 13.
Michael Barry Macarthy, comedian, late of Covent-
garden
Theatre, applied on his petition, and was declared
entitled to his immediate discharge.
Edward Kelly, whose case had been before the Court
on several occasions and reported, to-day again came up.
The insolvent had kept a clubhouse ►n Clifford-street,
Bond-street, which was for the purpose of gambling, and
had been fitted up accordingly. From the opposing credi-
tors the insolvent obtained a marble billiard-table, the value
of which was 1251., and the fitting up came to 251. more,
of which 701. had been paid, and the company were now
creditors for the residue. The whole property on the pre-
mises had been sold under a warrant of attorney, given to
a person named Levi. The debts contracted by the insol-
vent amounted to a considerable sum, and there was no
tangible property for the creditors. The insolvent, on his
former hearing, stated that he had compounded the balance
of a gambling debt of 3,0001. with a Nobleman for 1,5001.
The name of the Nobleman was required, which the insol-
vent refused to disclose, and the case was adjourned. The
name was now mentioned, but it did not come out in the
evidence, neither was it mentioned by the Counsel. The
insolvent bad, it appeared, received about 6001. of the
1,500/., which sum he had expended, keeping out of the
way for fear of an arrest.
The insolvent was adjudged, from the date of filing his
petition, to an imprisonment of ten calendar months for
making away with his property.
MONDAY, JUNE 12.
HlVliam Fletcher, the attendant on Lord Byron for
twenty years, applied on his petition to be discharged under

the Act, and was unopposed by his creditors. Fletcher l
had, it appeared from his schedule, been struggling for
some years with poverty ; his debts, from 1529, amounted
to 4491. 1 ls. 10d., and his credits to 2311. 15s. His in-
solvency was ascribed to outstanding debts, and to the
failure of payment, by the Hon. Mrs. Leigh, of the allow-
ance she made him for some time subsequently to the death
of Lord Byron, of 701. a year ; that Lady Byron's be-
loved
sister had assisted him with donations, but the pay-
ment of the allowance being irregular, had involved him
and his family in difficulties. He has been a lodging-house
keeper, and the keeper of an Italian warehouse, in Charles-
, street, Berkeley:square. Fletcher stated that he was in
custody for the rent of the fixtures of his house.
Mr. COOKE informed the Learned Commissioner that
the applicant was the person in whose arms his Lordship
died at Missolonghi.
Fletcher said the allowance made by Mrs. Leigh would
have been paid, but for difficulties.
The COURT ordered his immediate discharge.
Mrs. Leigh kindly undertook to pay the costs of the ap-
plication to the Court.