The Sun.
London, England, 1839-12-05 00:00:00

PIVEN. TNrer .EMVON.

contained in the Brisiol Mc/ cary, of %ilich paper he
was proprietor, upon the plaintiff.
Mr. KELLY (with him Mr. Alexander) stated the
case to the Jury. He said the plaintiff was a most re-
spectable attorney in Bristol, who was forced to
come before a Jury for the purpose of clearing
his character from some of the most foul
aspersions Oa t bad ev,:t !,,An 4' r .wn out against 111,'
character of a prokissional. After the general election
of 1837 a prosecution for perjury was instituted against
Sarah Verrier, for evidence given by her before a Com-
mittee of the House of Commons appointed to try the
merits of the petition against the return of Mr.
Berkeley, and the plaintiff acted in that prosecution
as attorney. Soon attwr that trial, at which Mr.
Berkeley was a witness, the plaintiff saw the report
of a speech purporting to have been delivered
by Mr. Berkeley at Bristol, in which he was
grossly calumniated. At the trial Mr. Thesiger was
Counsel for Sarah Verrier, and speaking of him the libel
said, " He knew not the extent of hlackguardism to
which a Counsel might go, hut. Thessieer went to its
very extreme, and if he was so ii dined, he had an able
assistant in Mr. Attorney Illrmer. It was not to a re-
spectable house like Osborne and Walker's that such a
business was left, but to Mr. Harmer, who is
known to the public through police reports--
a Gentleman—l beg pardon—a man who gains
his livelihood by defending the villany and har-
lotry of Bristol, &c." He was not counsel for his
Learned Friend, Mr. Thesiger ; his high character
was too well established for such slanders to have the
least effect upon it, but the case was very different
with an attorney residing in Bristol, where he depended
for his subsistence on the character which he main"
t ained. The plaintiff bad been a Solicitor in
good practice in Bristol since 1823—he was em-
ployed in the regular manner to defend Sarah Verrier
as an attorney. He did so. He prepared the evidence,
and instructed the counsel in the regular manner as a"
attorney. He did no more than his duty. Was it not,
then, likely do to him much harm? Would such libels not
tend to hurt his business in Bristol, if such libels were
allowed to pass unnoticed ? If the plaintiff had sat
down under such imputations, would any one have con-
fidence in him, and entrust him with their business? 11°
had found it necessary to appeal to a Jury, in order, if
there was any truth in the charges, the defendant might
have an opportunity of proving it. He had avoided the
challenge, and had contented himself with
merely
denying the publication, thereby admitting the falsehood
of. the charges. For such foul, unwarrantable, and
scandalous charges, he trustad the Jury would give such
damages as would set the plaintiff right with the people
of Bristol and the public.
The publication was admitted, and the libel put in
and read.

Mr. CitowDza then addressed the Jury for the de-
fendant. How was it, if the plaintiff had any charac
ter in Bristol, that he summoned a Jury at the distatioe
of 120 miles to vindicate it? What did one of the
Jury know of the plaintiff or his character ? Why Is
d
he so libelled the merchants and traders of Bristol by.
bringing the trial before a Middlesex Jury ? had
a right to assume that the plaintiff dared not bring
his action in Bristol, where he was known---net be;
cause it was a political case, because it was rergt.
city ; and surely if he had been a respectable
have
torney since 1823, he could not fear to hd"
a fair and impartial trial amongst his frien sa.
He had a right then to assume that the plaintiff's ch"
racter was so well known in Bristol that he feared 'CO
appeal to a jury there. His Learned Friend bad not
_
told the Jury that that was not the first or the second
time, but the third time which the case bad engaged.a
the
d
attention; of a jury. Not very hang had
been the case
been submitted in that Court to a common jury, and
although they had heard all the eloquence of his
Learned Friend, they would not be persuaded to give
even a farthing damages, and let him call their attention
to the fact, that that even was all that the plaint _
wanted—give him a farthing, and they would put 1001
in the shape of costs into his pocket. He would lik e
to know whether he had not already pocketed costs,
for the same words, against another newspaper. If the
Jury found against the defendant on the present occa-
sion, newspaper editors had better shut up their presses.
Here was a great public meeting, upon a great public
occasion, the proceedings of whi,:ll were looked for with
anxiety by the public, and it vas the duty of Mr. So'
merton, is the fair discharge of his duty, to give a fair
and impartial account of the proceedings—it, in doing
so, he had committed a crime, for which he was to be
mulcted in damages and costs, he had better, and must
put down his paper. He went through the libel, Para"
graph by paragraph, and turned it into ridicule ; he
concluded by calling upon the jury to protect the de-•
felidant in the fair and impartial discharge: of
and disappoint the defendant in his nefarious attempt.
The Learned JUDGE summed up. Be said it lead
been urged that the defendant had made this publica-
tion ,
in the discharge of a duty. But in his opinion if "r
was good for a journalist to publish the proceedings '3'
a meeting, he must take care that he slanders no wee'
A manwhen
coiol in thehe ref
ofarainf
meetingrom m 4 t
D the saymuch
Newspaper has time to see what go,.rs through his pregg,
e).
and must be answerable for it—it i:f no part of his duty
to slander any one. lEditorhu °s hd tu
o

The Jury consulted a few minutes, and then returned
a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages, One Farthing.
His LORDSHIP refused to certify either; that it was a
case for a Special Jury, or to deprive the plaintiff of hla
costs.

EXCHEQUER IN EQUITY.
(THIS DAY.)

(Before Mr. Baron ALDERSON, 'at Sergeants' Inn.)
TOWNSEND V. CHAMPURNOWNE.
On this case, which occupied the Court the whole of
yesterday, being again called on this morning,
Mr. SWANSTON said he believed it was nc.w under
compromise.
Mr. Baton ALDERSON—Perhaps it had batter stand
over.

111 r. SWANSTON—If it stand over until the 17th, per—
haps the Court will have no further trouble with it.
Mr. Baron ALDERSON—That is the day the Solidi-
tor-General is to come here.
Sir W. FOLLETT—We have made a proposition
which we understood was accepted, but_.
Mr. Baron ALDERSON—Perhaps I. little -more consi-
deration will settle it. It is exactly a prop er case for
a compromise for the interests of all parties.
After a short consultation batwe:en the p artier,
Sir W. FOLLETT said he was happy t 0 inform big
Lordship that they had arranged the case it last.
Mr. SWANSTON said they would take a decree, the
minute of which would be prepared.