The Sun.
London, England, 1849-06-16 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, June 15.
(Sittings at Nisi Prius, before Mr. Justice EaLE.)
POLLETT V. EXLEY.

This was an action for libel brought against Mr. Riley,
the clerk of the Whitechapel County Court, for a libel
contained in a letter written by him to the editor of the
County Cowls' Chronicle, and published in that paper.
Deleadent pleaded not guilty, and a justification._
. .

Mr. O'MiLLEY, with whom Ras Mr. Clark,
appeared for plaintiff, and stated that Mr.
Pollett was a very poor man, more than fifty
years of age, with a large family, who had for some
time employed himself in collecting moniee, on which he
received commissions. In 1846 he had some transactions
with a Mr. Riddiegton, who recovered a small sum of
money from him in the Whitechapel County Court. An
order was made by the judge of that court, Mr. Sergeant
Manning, and the money, which was it. 19s. Bd., not
having been raid, the result was the committal of Pollctt
to the Clerkeewell ifouse of Correction for five days.
On his liberation he published a pamphlet entitled " An
Appeal to the Public," with a view to obtain assistance
by way of contributions from parties. This pamphlet
set forth the treatment which Mr. Pollett had received
M the House of Correction, and which he represented
as very harsh, having, as he said, been treated as a
convicted prisoner. Some time after Mr. Riley wrote
a letter to the County Courts' Chronicle, in which
he spoke of the trust reposed in him by his employer
having been wilfully abused by him (Mr. Pollett), which,
together with some other expressions which the letter
contained, induced plaintiff to bring this action.
Mr. Clark, the attorney for plaintiff, Mr. Cocks, the
editor of the County Courts' Chronic:e, and Mr. Stt phen-
son, the attorney of Mr. Riley, were then called to prove
the principal facts stated by the Learned Counsel.
Mr. WATsom, Q.C., who, with Mr. Mannesty, ap-
peared for the defence, then addressed the jury, con•
tending that none of the statements contained in de-
fendant's letter to the County Courts' Chronicle were
libellous.

No witnesses were called [or the defence.
Mr. Justice ERLE then summ3d up. He said that ho
:bought the last letter clearly came within the defini-
tion of a libel, and therefore the only question would be
:be amount of damages.
The jury returned a verdict for plaintiff, damages 20s,

WHITEHALL, JUNE 6, 1849.—The Queen has been
pleased to grant unto Sir Charles Rushout Cockerel!, of
Sezincot, in the county of Gloucester, Bart., only sen
and heir of Sir Charles Cockerel!, of Sezincot aforesaid,
Bart., deceased,
some time representative in Parliament
for Evesham, in the county of Worcester, by Harriet
his wife, second daughter of John Rushout, first Baron
Northwick, also deceased, her royal licens4 and autho-
rity that ho and his issue may, in compliance with a
clause contained in a codicil to the last will and testa:
meat of his maternal aunt, the llonourablo Anne Rush
out, formerly of Northwick Park, in the county of
Worcester, and late of
%Vanstead Grove, in the
use the
of Essex, spinster, deceased, take and henceforth
it
and
surname of Rushout, instead of that of Cockere ;
bear the arms of Rushout,nr quarterly
firstterl)iduly exemplified
withhis and the r
own family arms; such m
according to the laws ef arms, and recorded in the
Herald's Office, wherwise the said royal license and per-
mission to be void and of none effect. And also to com-
mand that the said royal concession and declaration be
registered in her Majesty's College of Arms.—London
Gazette.
THE LATE QUEEN CAROLINE.—The work an-
nounced under the title of " Adventures of a Greek
11 Lady" is the production, we understand, of a Greek lady 1
of noble birth, a native of the island of Scio, who was
received into the household of the late Queen Caroline,
in the character of an adopted daughter, and who re-
mained with her during the greater portion of that pe-
riod embraced in the celebrated trial before the louse of
Lords. The work, we understand, takes the form of an
autobiography, and contains many new and highly inte-
resting personal details relative to the private life and
habits of the Queen, during her travels and adventures
in various countries, previous to her fatal return to Eng-
land, to claim a throne, but to compass a pi etnature
grave. As the fair Schte can have none of the preju-
dices or predilections of an Englishwoman, her evidence
may claim to be received with more credit than almost
any that has yet been offered on this strangely. exciting
topic.—Court Journal.