The Sun.
London, England, 1822-02-19 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, FEB. 18,
LIBEL ON MAJOR CAItTWRIGHT.

MAJOR CARTWRIGHT V. WRIGHT.

Mr. HILL opened the declaration in this case. It was an
action for a libel, published by the Defendant, of and con-
cerning the Plaintiff, and the damages were laid at 10001.—
The Defendant had pleaded the general issue.
Mr. DENMAN addressed the Jury on the present occasion.—
He said he had the honour to be the advocate of one of the
most respectable men in his Majesty's dominions, who feiit it
his duty to lay before aJury of his country his just complaint
against the Defendant, for having in the most injurious manner
brought him to the notice of the public. In order to understand
the nature of the libel, it was proper to state that the present
Defendant appeared to have been engaged in a quarrel with
a person who was pretty well known, he meant Mr. William
Cobbett; and with a view to conduct the controversy with
as much personality as possible, he had thought proper to
publish a work entitled " The Book of Wonders." This
work contained a great variety of extracts and passages
highly reflecting on the character of Mr. Cobbett, and
which were alleged to have been drawn from the productions
of his fruitful pen. If these were real extracts, and if they
did authentically state the sentiments of Mr. Cobbett, he
could only say that they exhibited a degree of unprincipled
audacity, and of profligate and unfeeling depravity, such as
no man had ever betrayed before. The question, however,
between Mr. Wright and Mr. Cobbett, should have been
conducted without dragging into the controversy one of the
most honourable, and one of the most zealous men wbo had
ever manifested an interest in the public welfare. The book
in question was dedicated to her late Majesty, and consisted
principally of extracts from the writings of Mr. Cobbett, Mr.
Cobbett was there stated to have avowed himself, on one oc-
casion, to be a swindler, who would not pay his just debts,
under the false and contemptible pretext that his creditors
had upheld that Government of which he (Cobbett) had per-
sonally a right to complain. Mr. Cobbett was here also re-
presented to hare told the people of England that the assassi-
nation of Mr. Perceval was a subject of universal joy, and to
have spoken with something like exultation of the death of
Sir Samuel Romilly, and then proceeded to detail other traits
of his political sentiments, which were to he found in his
publications. Having been forced to abandon his country,
according to this book, and to have taken refuge in time wilds
of America, he is there stated to have made a project of de-
stroying the Bank of England, by inducing persons to com-
mit the crime of forgery, and to have had the meanness to
enter into the details of the manner in which these forgeries
wet eto be carried into effect. He was represented also to
have spoken with exultation of the destruction which he was
thus to effect, and of the delight which lie should feel when
an American sixpence would be worth more than a 101. Bank
of England note, and when the ruin and desolation of his
country should be universal. He (Mr. D.) would read the
extract in which he pointed out the mode of committing the
Capital crime of forgery. it was this :—" Suppose me to be
capable of forging notes—why need I expose myself, or any
body else, in the uttering of them. What have I to do, but to
forge a parcel, place them in the street; tell my brother where
they will be; he finds them, and takes care to have sonic one
with him wirer' he finds them: hethen passes them; and if traced
back to him, proves that he found them. The making of large
quantities of notes, and throwing thew in the streets by night,
is, however, the most efficient of all the modes of attack."
He only stated these things for the purpose of showing to the
Jury the character of the man with whom Mr. Wright had
thought proper to associate the name of Major Cartwright,—
a Gentleman whose char‘acter and principles were above all
panegyric. In the course of this book Mr. Cobbett was stated
to have described " Major Cal twright's creed as the criterion
of excellence." It would seem that Mr. Cobbett had had a
strong desire to be introduced to the Parliament of England,
and with that view had proposed that 5,0001. should be raised,
by subscriptions of two-.pence each, among the artizans of his
country. On another occasion, he proposed that Sir Francis
Burdett, whom he had previously vilified, should advance the
sum in question to purchase a seat for him in what, in a diffe-
rent part of the work, he was represented to have-called "a
den of corruption ;" and it was itk the passage containing
this proposition, that Mr. Wright had thought proper to
fasten the name of Major Cartwright, than whom there
could not be a more decided enemy to the traffic for seats
in the House of Commons, as the whole tenor of his long
and honourable life had forcibly evinced. The note in
which the libel against the plaintiff was contained, was placed
after the following extract, stated to be taken front Mr. Cob-
hetes Register of December, 1819 Dec. 4, 1819. Ifam
ready to tender my hand to Sir F. Burdett, and to tender my
whole heart and mind, to be exerted, in co-operation with
him, for the purpose of endeavouring to rescue our country
from the fangs of its oppressors; I am ready to bury all private
considerations in oblivion. I have seen, all through the coun-
try, proofs of a most at dent desire that an union should take
place ; and lam resolved that no private feelings of mine
shall obstruct that union.—Wm. Coobett. I told the gentle-
man, that I would have nothing to do in the shape of co-opera-
tion with the Baronet, except as one of a public meeting, per-
haps, unless he would immediately, and out of his own purse,
furnish the means of facilitating the entrance of Mr. Hunt
and myself into the House of Commons! On the 9th, I re-
ceived the following note from the gentleman From a
conversation I have just had with Sir F. Burdett, I am per-
suaded tie inclosed cannot he rendered available. This
causes me regret ; but I have thought it best to return it you,
with my assurance that it has not been used or seen.' 'lbis
was the whole that took place."' v. 35, p. 496, (December,
1819.)
[tt• Many well-intentioned persons have expressed their
surprise that the "Enlightener" should have been willing to
accept of a seat in Corruption's den, purchased with the bank
notes of a man whose " incapacity and baseness" he had so
powerfully exposed. To convince such persons, that this lime
of conduct was strictly patriotic, we have only to assure them,
that in so doing, he was walking in the footsteps of that
" Venerable Veteran" whose " Creed is the Criterion of
Excellence" (see Nv. 195.), and who, in an article of that
Creed, has laid it down as a maxim, that " we must, in fight.
ing the enemy, not reject the use of the arms of even despi-
cable and detestable men."—Cobbett, v. 32, p. 82.]
, Mr. Desmao, in continuation, proceeded to state that his
client had never laid down any such doctrine, and put it to
the Jury to say, whether they could do otherwise than feel
that he bad every reason to complain of being thus held up
to the abhorrence of all tuantriod, and of being dragged from
his fire-side to vindicate hischaracter from aspersions utterly
at variance with every act of his life. His object, on time pre-
sent occasion, was not vindictive damages, but ;le thought he
had a right to obtain such a verdict against Mr. Wright as
would tend to prevent the recurrence of similar unfounded
and gross attacks in future.

Captain Robert Williamson was then called, and proved
his having waited on Mr. Wright, and that Gentleman hav-
ing acknowledged himself to be the sole author of " The
Book of WOnders.'!

The libel was then put in, and with it the passage in which
it was referred to. These were both read.

Mr. SCARLETT then submitted, that he had' right to have
the whole of the passages preceding the libel also read.
The CHIEF JUSTICE agreed to this suggestion, and several
extracts were then read from an article headed "Sir Francis
Burdel," in which the opinions of Mr. Cobbett, respecting
that Hun. Baronet, given at different periods, were set forth ;
the favourable opinions being placed under the title of " hot,"
and those of a contrary character under the title of "
These opinions, it is hardly necessary to observe, were as op-
posite as light from darkness.
The CHIEF JusncE now suggested his avish that there
should be an accommodation between the parties.
Mr. SCA KLETT said, that after what bad passed, and Mr.
Wright having distinctly shown Major Cartwright that the
libel imputed to him were the preuse words of Mr. Cobbett,
he could not consent.

Mr. SCARLETT then addressed thy Jury for the Defendant,
in an ingenions speech, and submitted that. Major Cartwright
had entirely misconceived, the object of Mr. Wright in this
publication, which was not to reflect on the character of the
worthy Major, contrasting the opinions given by Mr.
Cohbett at different.pericAs of his life, to spew how little re-
liance could be placed on his consistency, his honour, or his
morality. To chew, in fact, that there was nothihg, how-
ever base, or however virtuous, that at one period or other of
his singular life he had not applauded or condemned, and
thus to disabuselhose classes of society upon which his name,
and not his character, seemed to have had such influence.—
The Learned Counsel was then proceeding to contend that
words Set out in the declaration were not libellous, when
The CureF JUSTIdE, Uri. reference to the'declaration, found
that although the words of the alleged libel were set forth,
yet that the references to the places from whence they had
been quoted were not—and on this valiance the Plaintiff was
Nonsuited.