The Sun.
London, England, 1836-05-31 00:00:00

VICE-CITANCER V-MONDAY.

The VICi-CIIANCELLOR was occupied the whole morning
with exceptions and further directions, none of which pos.
sc;scd any points of interest.

KING'S BENCH-MONDAY.

NON-ATTENDANCK OF GRAND JURORS.

The Grand Juries were sworn in this day before Mr. Jus-
tice LITTLEDALE. There were only seventeen gentlemen of
the Middlesex Grand Jury in attendance, and nineteen others,
who were summoned, and did not answer to their names,
were fined JO/. each, and directions were given to the sum-
moning officer to levy the fine, and summon them for the en-
suing Michaelmas Term.
TUE " SATIRIST NEWSPAPER—LIBEL.

The ATTORNEY-GERERAL had been instructed on behalf of ,
George More, Esq., a gentlenien of fortune residing in Leices-
tershire, to move for a rule to show cause why a criminal in-
formation should net be filed against the proprietors of the Sa-
tirist newspaper, for a libel imputing to him the murder of his
late wife. The affidavits upon which he moved disclosed .very
melancholy details which he should briefly relate to their Lord-
ships. Mr. More inherited a large estate at Appleby Hall, in
Leicestershire, and came of age in the year 1833. Four miles
from Appleby Hall was the estate of the Jogs, a most ancient -
and respectable family, with whom Mr. More was intimate,
and on coming of age, he had made proposals for Susan, one
of Mr. legs' -daughters, which were accepted, and the mar-
riage took place in the presence and with the approbation of
the family. Mr. and Mrs. More lived happily together; but
their domestic happiness was only disturbed by this—that she
had no living child. She had several miscarriages • and in
1834 she was delivered of a dead child. She resided with
her husband at Appleby Hall, and was in frcq sent intercourse
with her father's family. In the last year she was again preg-
nant, but her constitution suffered considerably, and she had
the advice of Dr. Lowcock, of London ; Mr. Taylor, a me-
dical man at Appleby; Mr. Hodgson, of Birmingham, who was
the medical attendant of the Inge family ; and -Dr. Ken-
nedy, of Leicester. In short, every attention was shown her
and the different members of her own family were in the
habit of frequene: visiting and seeing her alone at Appleby
Hall. No eoini;haint was ever whispered that the conduct of
Mr. More could be in the slightest degree disapproved of, nor
had Mrs. More intimated the slightest complaint to any one of
her faMily, up to February) 0, 1'336. It unfortunately hap-
petted that, on the eeth of December, 1835, she was again
erematurely delivered of a dead child, and that made a great
impression on her mind ; but she so far recovered as to be able
to take an airing in her carriage occasionally,. and her sister
came to attend- her, and became an inmate of Mr. More's
house. Her father was also there frequently, and expressed
his entire approbation of the manner in which she was
treated. So things continued until the 13th of Fe-
bruary ; and about twelve o'clock on that day, Mr. More
was going out to shoot in the plantations, near the house,
and went into his wife's apartment, to mention the circum-
stance to her, saying, " If he was wanted, she could send a
messenger for him, and he would immediately return." He
then kissed her, and retired ; and that was the last time he
saw her. About half-past one o'clock that day Mr. Ines' -car-
riage came to 'Appleby Hall, and conveyed Mrs. More to
Thorpe, the family seat ; and although Mr. More made fre-
quent attempts personally, and by friends, to see her, or to
have the matter referred to mutual friends, he was refused. It
was stated, as the .reason for her femeval, that Mrs.„More had
made certain complaints of having been cruelly treated by her
husband. All attemptsett arranging the matter having failed,
Mr. More instituted a suit in the Ecclesiastical Court for the
restitution of conjugal rights and soon after that, on the
13th of March, Mrs. More died. • Mr. More made no impu-
tation against the family of the Ings, for whom he entertained
respect and 'affection ; but it would appear that Mrs. More
was in a state of great eecitement ; and, under some
delusion,
,made some statements, abut the 10th of Fe-
bruary, to which her family hal unfortunately given
credit. To slim that these statements were entirely un-
fowled, he (the Attorney-General) had not only the affidavit
of Mr. More himself, bet of his mother, his sister, Mr. pchilas
his tutor, the clergyman of the perish, the medical men who
had attese.led her, and all the servants svho had been in his em-
ployment from the time of the marriage until her death. The
Learned Counsel here read several extracts from the affidavits
of various circumstances that had occurred up to within a day
or two of Mrs. More leaving Appleby Hall, to show that Mr.
More's conduct had been uniformly kind and attentive, and that
Mrs. More was herself of that opinion. The article of which
Mr. More complained was published in the Satirist, and was
headed " The Late Mysterious Death," and purported to give a
correct statement of the facts. Mrs. More was described as
daughter of Lady E. logs, of Thorpe Hall, in Staffordshire, and
sister of the Earl of Galloway and the Duchess of Marlborough,
and the article stated that her husband had beaten, kicked, and
trampled on her, and thrust her out of doors at night ; that one
of the medical men had communicated the fact of her having
red the night lin the balcony to her family, when she was
passed -ssa
taken home and died of the combined effects of a broken heart,
the result of long suffering, and the ill-treatment to which
she had been exposed. The article expressed surprise that no
inquest had been held, and described Mr. More as a rude, un-
cultivated, unfeeling, fox-hunter, fitter for the field than the
boudoir, and fitter for Bedlam than either. The affidavits
contained a specific denial of every one of these statements.
Lord DE ;NIAN—Docs it deny tile statement of the medical
man having mode such a communication ?
The ATTORNEY-Geeseeee—Oh, yes, my Lord.
Lord Deeetee—You may take a rule.
DENTON V. I'EPPERCORN..

This was an action to recover damages for false imprison-
ment and malicious prosecution, on a charge of felony, of
which the plaintiff had been honourably acquitted. The
cause was tried at Westminster, before Lord Denman, *hen
it appeared that, the plaintiff had taken forcible possession of
some landed property which he claimed in the country, and
that the defendant charged him with a riot, and he was after-
wards committed on the charge of stealing the straw in the
yard and the corn in the bigrn. The Jury returned a verdict
for the plaintiff, damages 3001. A rule had since been ob-
tained to set aside this verdict and have a new trial, on the
ground of excessive damages.
Sir F. Pot.t.oCK showed cause against the rule.
On the qu stion of damages, the case must undergo a fresh
investigation.