The Sun.
London, England, 1814-03-05 00:00:00

LAW INTEI,LIGENCE.

• cocn•r OF KlNG's Mnacti 4.
SANDY'S V. NONEYPENNY AND RICHABY.

This was an action in which the plaintiff sought
to recover damages from the. defendants for two
libels ; the one contained in a letter to the Rev,
•Mr. Methole, and the other published in all the
newspapers of Newcastle-upon-Tyne. It appeared
that the plaintiff, who is stated to be an architect
of eminence, had been employed to build a new
jail at Worcester, at. Beceles, and at Durham.
which employment seemed to have excited the
angry feelings of the two defendaitts, who were
represented to be suryeyers, residing at the latter,
place. They did not approve of the plan on
which the new jail at .DorlEam had been con-
structed, and it was perhaps liable 'to objectioni
It happened, that in the month of May, 1812,
seven prisoners effected their , escape from Wor-
cester old jail, not from that which had been
designed by the plaintiff, and a paragraph stating
the fact was inserted in one of the Loudon Sunday
Newspapers. rhis publication met the eyes of
the defendants, who imagining that the prisogers
had broken 'oat from the new Jail, -and believing
that this transaction would turn out be a-signal
proof of the badness of the plaintiff's plan, they
re-published it in the four Newcastle. Papers, ad-
ding a paragraph, by which it was fixed upon the.
plaintiff, which stated that this jail from which the
prisoners
.had escaped " had been, contrived by
the sante person," under whose management the
county jail of Durham had been erected. This
libel (as'it was contended to be) was issued At the
joint request: of the defendants, and Richaby, it
was agreed, was to pay the expences. The de-
fendant, Moneypenny, also wrote a letter, under
the assumed name of Thomas 'Wilson, to the Rev.
Mr. Methole, one of the Magistrates of the county
of Worcester, in which the same statement was
made, and, in addition, it was said, that the plain-
tiff had been. dismissed by the Magistrates from
his employment, as builder of the jail at Beccles,
for " criminal incapacity." A Newcastle Paper,
containing the first-mentioned libel, bad -been
likewise sent, though it did not appear distinctly
by whoM, to the Chairman of the Worcester
Quarter Sessions. For these two libels, injurious
to the plaintiff's professional character, lie brought
the present action.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL having- stated the
case on the part of the plaintiff, the , witnesses
were called.

Mr. Andrews, the agent for newspapers at
Newcastle-upon-Tyne, proved that the defendant,
Moneypenny, ,had delivered the paragraph to him
to be printed, but that disliking its tendency, he
had altered the word" contrived"
,into built, and
the word " person" into. architect, in die first
libel. It was proved, that at t4e. top of the letter
to Mr. Methole, the second libel, the word private
was written ; but that Rev. Gentleman had deem-
ed it his duty,. notwithstanding, to communi-
cate it.

Lord ELLBMBOROUGH charged the Jury, and
a verdict was found for the plaintiff, 1001.

BECKWITH, CLERK, V. HARDINGS.

This was an action of trespass, brought by the
Rector of St. Alban's, Wood-street, against the
Churchwardens, for putting up a marble slab in
the church ; for the right to set op which, and
the fees arising from such right, the plaintiff can-
tended. His Counsel insisted that the freehold -in
the church was in him ; but the Jury asserted the
freehold in all the churches in London to be in
the Churchwardens, who repaired both chancel
and church, by custom ; and a verdict for Is. was
taken for the plaintiff, subject to a case, in which
the question will he, whether the freehold in the
soil of the church is so necessarily in the Rector,
as that he cannot be ousted by evidence of
custom.

BOF.IIM AND TAYLOR 47.- WADDINGTON.

This was an action upon a policy of insurance
upon bullion, at two guineas, at and from London
by land carriage to Harwich, and thence to Got-
tenburg!l ; anti the bullion was lost in the stage
coach from London to Harwich. It was proved
that the bullion was safely packed in a casket, and
received by the carrier at his office, with an inti-
mation of its contents, and that the carrier took
.the charge of it for 6s. (id. paid.
Mr. SCARLET, for the defendant, offered to prove
that it was the custom either to convey bullion
overland, to be shipped under the care of a person
provided by the assured, or to pay the carrier a
premium for its insurance : but Lord ELLENBO-
ROUG II would not receive the evidence, and said
that it would he less safe in the chaise of a super-
cargo, who must quit it for corumon purposes ;
but the carrier took the complete charge of it, and
the underwriters had a replay against 1 iu3.—
Verdict for the plaintiff.