The Sun.
London, England, 1822-07-29 00:00:00

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

YORK, JULY 25.
THE KING V. BROOK AND OTHERS.—LIBEL.
This was an indictment preferred against Mr. John Brook,
solicitor, of the city of York, and seven other defendants, as
proprietors and acting managers of a weekly newspaper, called
the Yorkshire Gazette, published in that city, for a libel upon
Mr. W. Hargrove, the Editor of the York Herald. The Under-
sheriff being one of the defendants, the panel for the Jury was
returned by the High Sheriff in person. Ten Special Jurors
were in attendance, and the two gentlemen to complete the Jury
were returned from the Grand Jury. The libel which formed
the subject of this prosecution was published so long ago as
the 19th of October, 1819 ; and the indictment was preferred
at the July Sessions, for the City of York, 1821. This prose-
cution would probably never have been instituted, had not an
indictment been preferred against Mr. Hargrove, for a libel
upon some of the present defendants, of which he was convict-
ed, and fined 5/.
Mr. BROUGHAM addressed the Jury in support of the pro-
secution, in a very able speech, the object of which was to esta-
blish the principle, that the editor of a newspaper was entitled
to the same protection for his character, and the same redress
when it was traduced, as any other individual ; and the Learned
Counsel strongly insisted that the refusal of this protection
would have the effect of degrading the press, and of ultimately
throwing it entirely into the hands of base and unprincipled men.
The libel in question was contained in a letter addressed to the
Editor of the Yorkshire Gazette, and consisted of strictures on
an article which had appeared the preceding week in the York
Herald upon the proceedingsat Manchester, in which the Editor
of the Herald contended that the public had a right to form and
express their opinion upon that procedure on the 16th of Aug.
without waiting until it had been investigated in a court of
justice. The letter charged as libellous contained a quotation
of considerable length from the paragraph which formed the
I subject of its animadversions, but which our limits will not
permit us to transcribe. The following is the passage which
formed the subject of the prosecution :—" Combating the
opinion that the Magistrates at Manchester should not be
condemned until their case has been regularly heard, the man
of York, in his last week's vehicle of falsehood and fac-
tion, thus soon at that hitherto boasted bulwark of our liberty,
the trial by .lury." The whole of the letter, including the quo-
tation from the York Herald, was read by the Clerk of the
Court. The necessary proof having been given that the defend-
ants were proprietors of the Yorkshire Gazette, evidence was
given to prove the inuendoes, as they are called, that the " man
of York" and " the insolent demagogue" meant Mr. William
Hargrove, the editor of the York Herald."
SCARLETT addressed the Jury on behalf of the defend-
ants. The serious part of his argument was this—that the
strictures which had been made upon Mr. Hargrove, in his
editorial capacity, were not calculated to injure his character;
that it was a species of phraseology adopted by Newspaper
writers ; and that the expressions " treasonable" and " factious,"
when used by them, meant no more, if applied by a Ministerial
writer to one of opposite sentiments, than that he was an oppo-
sition man. And if Newspaper writers, instead of writing
against each other, as was generally the present commendable
practice, were to indict each other for libels, the whole time of
Courts of Justice would be occupied with their quarrels.
The following are the names of- the defendants :—Messrs.
John Brook, Jona. Grey, Daniel Tuke, J. D. Tweedy, Wm.
Askwith, Hewley Graham, James Russell, and John Wolsten-
holme.
The CHIEF JUSTICE, in charging thi Jury, said it was un-
doubtedly true that the Editor of a Newspaper had the same
right to have his character protected by the law as any other
individual ; but he observed, that when a person published his
sentiments on any subject, lie laid himself open to reasonable
and moderate criticism ; and it would be for the Jury to
determine whether in the present case the publication com-
plained of went beyond it. If a writer attacks another by
slander and calumny, he is amenable to the law, which will
not tolerate it. If the Jury should be of opinion that the pub-
lication in question was confined within the bounds of reason-
able and fair animadversion, they would find a verdict for the
defendants : if they were of opinion that it was slanderous
and calumnious, they ought to return a verdict of guilty under
this indictment. His Lordship stated, that the evidence did
not apply to either Mr. Tweedy, Mr. Askwith, or Mr. Gra-
ham, who must at all events be acquitted. The Jury retired
for about half an hour, and on their return into Court found all
the defendants Not Guilty.'

COUNTRY MARKETS AND FAIRS,

DURING TILE LAST WEEK.

LIVERPOOL CORN EXCHANGE, July 23.
Wheat, English,Old
New
Ditto sound 5s Od a 85 03
Scotch, Old Bs 3d a 8s 9d
Foreign• (in bond) Os Od a Os Od
Irish, Old ...
New ss 0(1 a 5s 6d
Barley, English, 913
New
Irish, Old
New
Scotch, Old Zs Od a 3s 4d
New
Oats, Potatoe, Old
New 2s 103 a 3s Od
Limerick, 01d...... 25 10d a 3s Od
New
Welsh, Potato, Old 2s 10d a 3s Od
Malt, Fine ..
Ditto, middling ifs od a 6s 6d
Beaus, Old
New 3os Od a 32s Od
Superfine Flour, Old
New 3lis 03 a 38s Od
Oatmeal, 01d...
New
American Flour, sweet, (in bond), 28s Oda 30s 03 per Barre

of 1981bs. net.—Sour, (out of bond), 86s a 38s.
Import of Grain for the Week ending July 22.
Wheat I Barley 1 Oats Flour I ticks Irish
Bsb. 701bs. Bsh. 601bs. Bsh. 451bs. Am Brls. per 2401bs
2,244 --912 600 809
CHESTER, July 20.
Wheat, per quarter, Winchester measure, 35s 3d—Barley
—s Okl—Oats, —s Od.