The Sun.
London, England, 1808-07-29 00:00:00

ing the letter, was not the publication of a malicious
slander, but was the a& of a person discharging a
public duty, and he instanced several cases where
one-man has charged another with the most serious
offences, but belt); charge "brought forward for tie
purpose of 'a neceiary inquiry into the conluet of
the person accused, by a • competent tribon-al, the
policy of the law would not' allow an action of
slander to. be maintained thereupon--that in the
present‘case it appeared that the letter w titter) by
the Defendant to Lieut. Col. M`Leni was nothing
more than an official document, coming 'front the
Defendant, as Comtirander of his Disiria, report-
ing the conduct officer under his command,
and calling for an investigation of it by the proper
jurlSdiCtion—that - rise Defendant, would have 'been
deficient in his duty if he had omitted to make such
report, and that from the cross-examination of
Captain Lane, it appeared that the Defendant had
very sufficient grounds for doing so=that sitould
it be at all thought .necessary, he waS prepared to
go fully into evidence to prove the' justification
pleaded by the Defendant, bta that he conceived
the Plaintiff had not made out any case to support
his aCtion, there being no other ground f,;r it than
the official letter of the Defendatit—ili-at the he-
.nourable testimony given by Plaintiff's own Witness,
Lieut.-Col. M‘Lean, of the purity -of the Defend-
ant's motives, put it beyond a doubt that the De-
fendant acted without -any malicious intention to-
wards the •Plaintiff, and that the present adtion
could not be maintained without the utter subver-
sion of all military discipline. ' • •
Mr. BURROUGHS, Counsel for the Plaintiff, re-
plied at length to the arguments of the Solicitor-
General, and insisted that the Plaintiff ought not
to be non-suitedto which the Lord Chief Justice
assented.
• The Counsel for the Defendant were then asked
by the Court if they meant to give any evidence?
They said that they were prepared with a great .nurn-
ber of witnesses to prove every- part of the jtistin-
cation- pleaded by the Defendant ; but as doing so
would only lead to great, and as they conceived,
unnecessary length of examination, by which an:
adjournment of the trialdo the follawing day, from
the number of witnesses, would be-die consequence
—they preferred leaving the case to the Court and
Jury, upon the' evidence adduced by the Plaintiff
himself.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE 'then addressed the
Jury, and, after recapitulating the evidence, told
them, that if a superior officer had received infor.
mation of the miscondutt of any officer Under hit
command, it would be a breach of his duty, and
for which he would be liable to punishment himself,
if he had not reported it to 'the General Officer to
whom it belonged to inquire into such miscondua;
that no man having a command in the army could
exercise any authority; if an action of this sort were
to lie; it would tend to the 'dissolution of every.
thing in the militai'y establishment of the country
he adverted to the evidence, of Lientetiane-Colonel
M*Lean, 'who said that the letter Was received by
him id the ordinary course of an 9ffiCial communi-
cation ; and that, as such, he- transmitted it to Gen..
Manly; and the same witness,' hji hiss: knOvledge,
of the general charaCter and good condi-tat of the,
Defendant, rebutted any -pteiunption
.of a
dolts motive existing in the mind of the Defendant.
His Lordship also remarked on the evidence of Cap-
tain Lane, and told the Jury, that
,11 they believed
the letter in question 'was not. an' official report,
but merely written to injure and 'defame the Plain-
Jiff, and not 'with a view to put_ the matter com-
plained of in a regular course of military investiga-
tion, they 'ought to find for theTiaintiff; but if
they believed -the letter to be merely an ofiical
communication, then, in point of law, Defendant
had not written a malicions. whether' the
charges in that libel were let* or faiSe;, and, there-
fore; if the opinion of the Jury was that the letter
was of that description,' they must find for the De-
fendant on the general issue ; and' it was quite im-
material to inquire into the truth or falsehood of the
charges which were subject to the second plea put j
in :).y the. Defendant.

The Jury retired, and in about twenty minutes
brought in a verdi& for the-Defendant, with 6d.
costs.

The Earl of
.Harringtop, the Commander of the
Forces in Ireland, sat on the Bench during the
whole trial.

Counsel for the Plaintiff— Serjeant Ball, Peter Burroughs,
'John Parsons, Charies Ball, Wrn. Norcott, and Rich. Eaton,
Esqrs.—Agent, Philip Despard.
Counsel for Defendant—Mr. SolicitOr-General, Henty D.
Grady, john White, and Wth. Waggett, Esqrs.—Agent,
()slits Dunn. •