The Sun.
London, England, 1838-02-14 00:00:00

Francis, and Geary; to speak to the contract, and they were all parties
who were deeply interested in its being set up. Why was it that they
had not had some reporters called who were not connected with the caie,
in order to prove the alleged custom ? There were enough of News-
papers in London ; there were enough of reporters about, and
surely it would have been very easy for them to have called
one gentleman connected with the public Press, in order
to prove the supposed or pretended custom. They relied upon them.
selves alone, because his Learned Friend was well aware that if he had
called any such witness he would have entirely failed in his object. Mr.
Sinnet was the only gentleman who was called unconnected with the
arty, and he told them most distinctly that when he was engaged by Mr.
11. the terms were reduced to writing. Was it possible that they could be.
heve that Mr. EL—a man of experience, a man of business—could they
believe that he would allow Mr. Knox to make any engagement that he
~leased. Was it possible that he would allow hiss to make enga:tementS
with one party for the whole session, and with another party for a few
weeks? If to, Mr. Knox might have engaged a corps for five years ;
for, as the evidence stood, he was merely desired to engage a corps of
reporters. Could they, for a moment, suppose that he, a man of great
experience, would enter into a contract which was to be binding only
on one party ? Mr. H. made out thecontract which had Leen produced that
day, with such a flourish, before any of the parties had put pen
to paper for the True Sins. He saw Mr. Geary, and, as a man of busi.
ness, he told him he did n't want to have any dispute hereafter, and
accordingly he prepares a paper which he hands to that gentleman,
which he rays he rejected. Ills con uct, however, was not very con.
sisteot with that rejection. If one of the. Jury were to propose to
himself to bind a servant of his by writing, if that servant did not ap-
prove of the terms, could they for a moment suppose that the servant
would early away the writing In his pocket. If Mr. Geary
did not agree to it, why did he carry it away ? He took it away—
he kept it—he is in a collusion with Mr. Byrne, and hands it over
to that gentleman's attorney, who would not produce it from hit
bag until he was forced, and then his Learned Friend the At-
torney-General, in his usuel flourishing manner, produces it, saying he
had not the slightest objection to its b in;; before the Court. lsut lie
had strong objections to the production of it, end unless his Learned
Friend had been mecli pressed he t,evt.r would have produced it, es be
was aaaid that it would make much against his own case. His Leaned
Friend said that the blanks in that agreement were to be filled up with
the names of Geary and Knox. Yet at the same time he admitted,
that it was to be for the protection of Mr. Harvey. What pr;'sec-
tion on earth would it have been to Mr. Harvey if the blanks
had been filled up with their names, and all power was to rernain
in their hands, in spite of Mr. Harvey. Had any one of them (ttie Jury)
ever heard of any agreement under which notice to Put an end to it by
one party alone—would any of them allow a servant to ej, in his employ-
ment upon an agreement under which that ssrvaeA might give a month's
notice to leave, yet he, the master, should have power to do any-
thing of the kind ? It was perfl-ctly ci•::ar that the blanks in the docu.
went were to be filled up on the ont, hand with the mime of!qr. flare r. , and on the other by one of the parties for the wholes or
the whole names. Was it fair dealing with Mr. Harvey to
receive 3/. 3s. weekly, and at the same time not to signify to, 'tents the
rejection of the document. Did not Mr. H.'s conduct she:w that when
he gave the notice he has! an idea he had a perfect right to do so ? His
conduct, from the beginning to the end, showed that he all along
thought that the parties opposed to him were entirely wrong. They
took away the paper—they never returned it—they never saw ano-
ther, and thereMre Mr. H. concludes that the document is in
full force. Were the Jury, then, to suppose that they had entered
into another bargain than that which was stipulated for ? If so Mr.
Byrne was entitled to the full price of his services, and no more. As the
case stood, it was incumbent on the plaintino make out the contract. He
had not done so, then defendant was entitled to a verdict. His Learned
Friend had anticipated a defence which he said that Mr. Harvey light
rely upon. He said that Mr. Harvey would rely on the Statue of
Frauds—so hero was the proof of that ? Mr. Harvey would disdain such
a defence; his word was his bond; then why had his Learned
Friend come forward now to insult Mr. Harvey in the manner
he hal done? It was because of the weakness of hia case;
if a man had a good and fair case—if lie had justice on his side--
if he could show that the contract was fairly entered into he would
not use invective nor insult. Mr. Harvey came there as an honest man,
indignant at such an insult. He knew that he had never entered into
the contract. Mr. Byrne himself knew it. How did the document come
into his possession? He knew of the agreement, and it was not until Mr.
Harvey acted upon it by dismissing him that became to deny it. The cafe
was then before them, and it was for them to say whether, on the evi-
dence of interested witnesses, they would give a verdiet against the
defendant.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE then summed up the case. He said the
action was brought by Mr. Byrne, a Reporter, against the late Proprietor
of the True Sun, and he thought that the case was very fairly met, be-
cause the defendant did not deny the efficiency or capability of the plain-
tiff. At first he had thought the question would turn upon Cie expected
length of the session, but it appeared that both sides agreed that
that should not be the point in dispute. The only question for the jury
was, whether there wan a contract for the whole of the present session,
and for that purpose it was necessary to look carefully at the whole of
the e. idence in the case.
His LORDSHIP then proceeded to recapitulate the evidence of the first
witness, Mr. Knox, the letter of Mr. Davis, and the witness's replY--,
that was a strong assertion on his part, that that was not the spirit of
the bargain made with the defendant, No doubt the evidence of a
witness, who also had taken proceedings against the defendan!,
must be looked at as having a strong bias, and it would be their
duty to attend to the evidence given with all the vigilance
which should be applied to a witness having a strong feeling
on the subject. The portion of the evidence of the next witness (Fran-
cis) seemed to throw a great deal of light upon the power which Mr.
Knox had received from the defendant, as he states that Knox had au•
thority extending to Sessional engagements. After recapitulating the
evidence of the other witnesses, and commenting upon those
parts of it which bore more particularly upon the coif'
his Lordship then referred to the agreement proposed by Mr. Har-
vey, and proceeded to recapitulate the evidence of Mr. Geary, and
ob-
served served that he thought from the terms of the memorandum that there
were no persons from whom directions could be supposed to be taken,
except Mr. Knox and Mr. Geary. If those were the two persons pro-
posed, then the Jury would say whether it at all made out that Mr.
Harvey was to have on his part the power, at his pleasure, of dismissing
any of those parties. Sloth Mr. Knox and Mr. Geary stated they never
knew of the memorandum till after the engagement was actually
made. If that were so it certainly could not control them ; if, on the
other hand, Mr: Knox and Mr. Geary consented to t..k,
1; from Mr. Harvey, as limiting the engagement they were to en ter
into with the reporters, it would be evidence to show that the:), had
not the power, at least, to make the engagement for the whole s'assion in
the first instance. His Lordship, after refering to the evid'enee of Mr.
Sinnett, sail the Jury would take these matters into thei's serious consi.
deration, and say whether Mr. Harvey either gave
Mr. Knox express
power to engage the plaintiff during ths whole session, or whether he
left Mr. Knox the power to make such engarenents as he might deem
'
expedient; and whether he, Mr. Knox, did make that bargain with the
plaintiff. They. would therefore have to say whether Mr. Knox did en-
gage the plaintiff with the defendant's authority, either general or aPe'
c al, for the entire session—that was, for the session now current. It the
Jury wereofopinion that the defendan, did make that engagement with
the plaintiff; t:.en it was clear end admitted that the
defendant had
iiismissed him without authority in sending him away on the Ifith of
December, 1837, and therefore they would have to say,
if they took
that view of tine case, to what damages the plaintiff' oval en-
titled by reason of that dismissal, Then with regard
to thec
damages. The plaintiff' was engaged at three
guineas a.weei
during the time Parliament sat, and two guineas a week dur-
ing the time it did not, and the Jury would have to make the best
e„
calculation they could as to the time the sessions would last, that oeigl4.
of course, at this time a matter of uncertainty. He, the Learned
Judge, did not conceive that, supposing they thought the defendant
liable, they were to give the plaintiff three guineas a week for the who.e
s
time they might believe the session would last, because the plaintiff
a gentleman of talent and capacity, and his services would be of some
value to him, during the perioe h might have been employed in Mr.
Ilarvey's service. Athough it did not appear the plaintiff had made any
ngagement, or that there was the least certainty of his niAkin any engagement at any time for the remainder of the Session ; yet his
Lordship could not conceive that his time would fall entirely valueless
on his hands, and that would, therefore, be a reasonable calculation for
the Jury to make in their estimate of what migi t boo slue to the Plaintiff:
As there was some authority for saying the party was bound to pay for
the whole of the time the contract might cover, theplaintiff could, pro-
vided they found fir him, move the Court to increase the damages. The
proper course for them to take would be to take into consideration the
length of time there was a probability of the Session lasting, and to give
the plaintiff the amount of what he might lose by being deprived of
three guineas a-week for that time, dedueting what might be a reason-
able estimate of the value of hit time to himself during that period-
If they thought the defendant had broken the contract they would say
what amount of damages the plaintiff was entitled to, but before they
came to any conclusion on that subject they would have to say whether
the plaintiff had proved the contract he had laid, via., whether he had
proved he was engaged by the defendant for the whole session. If the
plaintiff did nut prove that the defendant would be entitled to a
verdict. They would e aislder the case on the evidence he had
read, anti the whole of the circumstances taken together; and they
would find their verdict for the plaintiff or defendant, according to
the view they might take of the fair import of what took place between
Mr. Harvey, Mr. Knox, and the pleintiff.
The Jury then consulted together for a few l m
—flutes, and returned
a verdict for plaintiff, damages Forty Guineas.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL then applied for leave to move the Court.
Lord DENSIAN—Do you think you are entitled to three guineas a week
for the whole time?
Mr. PLATT—Upon what ground is the verdict found ?
The Foreman of the Jury—We have estimated that the Session
would last twenty weeks, and we have given the plaintiff two guineas
per week for the twenty weeks,
The Arroarsire-GuevitaL—Then on an estimate the Session will only
last twenty weeks, I hope you are right, gentlemen.—(Laughter.)
The Foreman of the Jury—And we have also taken into consideration
that for the remainder of the Session the plaintiff's services will not be
required by the defendant.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL—Does your Lordship give us leave to
move ?
Lord DENMAN—If you think there is anything in it. I think
it is clear there is no right to recover for the whole term.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL—I think the same, my Lord.
Lord DENMAN—Then we had better say no mare about it,
although
there is a case in which it has been held otherwise.

PLATE SUITED FOR PRESENTATION.
Elegant or Splendid Silver Inkstands—Silver Waiters of every.size
—Silver Cups, New and Second-hand—Fifty varieties of Silver
Tea and Coffee Services—Gold Snuff Boxes—Silver Table Snuff`
Boxes—Silver Epergnes—Silver Bread Basket. And many other
articles of Plate adapted for Presentation as Testimonials, &c, maY
be selected from, in the Show Rooms at
T. COX SAVORY'S,
Working Silversmith, Goldsmith, and Watchmaker, 47, Cornhill,
London (Seven Doors from Gracechurch•street).

B/RTHS.
On the 30th ult., at Cilgwyu, Carmarthenshire, the lady of
Major Gwynne Half,,rd, of a daughter.
On the Ist inst., at Eaton-place, the lady of Robert Biddulph,
Esq., of a daughter.
On the 31st ult., at Knowle Hall, Somersetshire. the lady of
John Edward Venables Vernon, Esq., of Clontarf Castle, Irelan4,
of a son and heir.

11 ,
On the 31st ult., at. St. Mary's Paddington, John Millar, Esq.!
barrister-at-law, to Rosa, only daughter of A. 'F. Follett. EN., °I
the Manor House, Paddington.

• On the 10th inst., aged 44, Elizabeth Ann, wife of Mr. J. T.
Burgon, of Ilucklersbury.
On the 9th iust., in Fludyer-street, Westminster, Sarah Maria,
wife of J. Huttner, Esq., of the Foreign-office, aged 6S.
On the 9th inst., aged 49, Sarah, wife of W. Myers, Esq., of
Uxbridge, and Great May's-buildings, St. Martin's-lane.
rn
On the 4th ins., Jues Priest, Esq., late of tl.e parish of St.
Marylebone, aged OS,
On the ith inst., the wife of Mr. Thos. Jones, of Islington, to
her 64th year.
wi(Oiotliv tohfe.sr. J. Pringle, 9th i nst.,.inNorton-street, at an advanced age, Janet,
gl e,formerly W
many years of ardour-street,
upholder. m

London: Printed and Published by MURDO YOUNG, of I"'
112, Strand, at The Suit Office, No. 11", Strand,in the oetuitl
f I%licldleM,,—Wednesday, February 14, 183 S.