The Sun.
London, England, 1836-07-11 00:00:00

•
:="ometimes went there at four. for asl 'period, ant I then
d not return until eight or nine ; but he, on those occa-
sii n left a supply of copy out to go on with until he got
hi'Ck. Never left until he knew that the whole of Ale
matter of the paper was standing... He Was not able .to
judge of Mr. Powell's punctliality. Mr. Blank, spoke of
the state in which Mr. Powell appeared. • Ile said to him:.
".You are drunk." Mr. Powell denied it, and &laved
that he would make him prove his worth.
Cross-examined by Mr. CROWDER—On thO night that
Mr. Powell was said to be drunk, he offered to Mr. Black
to write as article- on any subject that he would propose
to him. Mr. Powell went on in the performance ; and Mr.
Black made an apology afterwards for having accused him
wrongfully. • He never saw Mr. Powell intoxicated in the
Morning Chronicle office during the whole nerital ef his
(witness's) knowledge of him. Mr. Mack was hithself much
excited, but from no other cause than anger. Mr. Powell
had been dining at Blackheath, and had lost the coach.
Every coach was full.
Henry Thomas Watson, printer of the Evening Chroni-
cic, examined by Sergeant TALFOURD—The paper was at
first edited by the plaintiff and Mr. Hogartla jointly. The
copy should have been given by half-past ten in the mottl-
ing. and the " leader," and the " contemporary press" not
later than twelve, but on one occasion it was past two
o'clock, and he was consequently much retarded.
Cross-examined by Mr. ERLE—Did not know Mr. Fraser
was sub-editor of the Evening Chronicle, bat has heard .
Mr. Fraser say he 'did not know what to do till he appealed
to plaintiff. Great inconvenience was experienced by his
undertaking to cut down columns of leaders, and being ab-
sent instead of doing it in time.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE remarked that the witness
made the plaintiff a most formidable person in cutting down
leaders in whole columns.—(A laugh.)
The following letter from the proprietors of the Morning •
Chronicle to the Plaintiff, giving him his dismissal, was put
in and read by the Clerk of the Court :
" The proprietors of the Morniny Chronicle have been for
some time dissatisfied with the sub-editor's department op that
paper, as well as with the editing of the Evening Chronicle,
and they have, at length, deemed it neves.sary to make alte-
rations—one of which is to he the terming; ion of Mr. Powell's
engagement. They, therefore, request-him to take notice that
his functions as sub-editor will' cease from-and after the 10th
day of October, and -that. if his health or convenience
-
should induce him to. leave tow, they will dispense with his
future services, red-he may receive his salary in the meantime."
" Chronicle, Office, Wednesday,
f4!h Sciitenaher, 35."
Mr. Eana.rose to reply to the evidence for the defence.
He said that a more disgraceful defence was never promul-
gated in a court of justice than that now put forward. On
the 9th of last December they had not uttered one word
against the plaintiff's character. At the time of his dis-
missal they said only that they were dissatisfied with their
arrangements. He was going on quietly and tranquilly
with the buiiness of the paper ; and to-day, for the first
time, they say they have grave cause of complaint against
his character, yet bad not proved one moral dereliction.
They charged him with being away from his business. A
sub-editor's business may lead him to meetings,' to the
Houses of Parliament, and, other places where information
of a nature more valuable than could be procured by his -
presence was obtained, as they had been informed by gen-
tlemen holding that situation. They had not given any eai-
dence impugning his moral conduct, or convicting him of
the vice of drunkenness. If a man could cone at mid-
night into the heated gas-burnt atmosphere of that office,
and write articles that could pass the cool calculating judg-
ment of these Scotch editors and proprietors, and find it
inserted the next morning, he could not he accused of ine-
briety. The Learned eounsel then commented in severe •
terms upon the evidence which the two printers had given.
iVere printers to be judges. of how an editor performed
his duty, when every gentleman who had been called had told
them that it was necessary to restrain and keep printers
without copy purposely to prevent over setting matter ? Mr.
Erie then proceeded to remark in terms of strong censure
on the evidence of Mr. Mackay, whom the plaintiff had
trained up there, and called on the jury to say, when they
considered the nature and thrrinconsistency of his evidence—
his inability to remember a date or an event on a single
occasion—his great anxiety to prove the case of his em-
ployers against the man he atteinptd to supplant, an an•
xiety so cordial as to lead him to prove fin- too much—
could they attach one word of credence to what that. boy,
who set himself up against the whole press, had the auda-
city to assert ? Then there was Mr. Fraser, whose de-
mure countenance and great gravity would induce you to
believe that he had never had the roof of a :watch-house
over his 'made he said that Mr. Black apologized for bar-
ing accused plaintiff of being drunk, and acknowledged he
was in error. And even . Mr. Fraser himself admits that
he never saw plaintiff intoxicated in his life, and that he
was at the office early in the morning on three days of the
week ; and admitted what the treasurer, Metcalf, did not
know, that the paper had increased three-fold through
Mr. PMlell's means. And the proprietors are to discharge -
him for eating oysters ! If their feelings of delicacy were
offended by thiS act, tell him of it. No, they would not do
so ; but, iletin'is as they thought they could do according
to law, they discharged him as they would have done a
menial servant, without ever, from the beginning to the
end of the transaction, warned him of their displeasure
at his asserted miscondent.
The Lour) CHIEF JUSTICE summed up the evidenee.
He said the first point for their consideration was, whether
the engagement were an annual engagement or not ; there •
was nothing in the wording of it that gave evidence of its
duration, and they must, therefore, consider what is the
nature of similar contracts. These were shown by the
gentlemen who had been before them, who proved that the
practice is that these . engagement's are from year to year.
You may, therefore, Safely presume -it to he a yearly en-
gagement. The next point for yoti to consider will be,
whether the pleas of misconduct be made out. He then
recapitulated- the evidence touching the conduct of the
plaintiff, and said it was not the actual neglect of his duty
that would justify. the defendant in discharging him if it
occurred only once or twice. It must he the constant per-
severance in such ill conduct as would cause delay and in-
convenience to the paper by his constant neglect. The
.witnesses haVe only spoken generally, and not one has said
that the property has been injured by any neglect of his,
and they gave him a high character for zeal and ability ;
and his procuring a situation immediately after his discharge
proves he was thought to be a meritorious young man.
The Jury retired, and in a few moments returned a ver- •
diet for the plaintiff—Damages, 1471.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.

MANSION-HO USE.
An application was made on Saturday to the LORD
MAYor, upon the part Of several waterm„ en of Gravesend,
against the proprietors of the Diamond Steamy e.sel Com-
pany, to compel them to remove from the termination of the
Old Pier an additional barge, which, in contravention of the
Act or Parliament, was placed there, and obstructed the
navigation of the river, to the serious injury of the com-
plainants. The ofroadingparties had, it was stated, applied
to the Navi!rution Committee and to Parliament for per-
mission to place the second barge in the position alluded
to, but had fiiled in both applications, whereupon some of
the proprietors, being the municipal authorities of the
town, thought proper to take the power into their own
lauds,accordingly, for the purpose of having two
steam-vessels : lat atm
e to discharge their enormous
cargoes of human heinfrs, located the second barge in
such a mannerf, as to enable them to carry that object into
efTect. ins way of serving the proprietors was attended
with great disadvantage to the watermen by making some
s,erious impediments in the river, and with great danger to
the public by the collision of the steam-vessels which arrived
at the same time at the old pier. On Wednesday the GC•ni
and the City (Nf Canterbury steam-vessels fell foul of each
other at the barges. The Gem carried away her head, and
the City (j. Canterbury sustained great
.damage also ; and
the Dolphin piles were carried away. On the preceding
day the City of Canterbury steam-vessel came iu collision
with the Diamond, and if any of the passengers had been
art of the latter, the shock was such that they might have
been knocked out of her.

The Lord MAYOR directed that the City Solicitor should
take the evidence of the witnes3es, and advise the most
proper course to be adopted for the protection of the public
and the watermen.