The Sun.
London, England, 1836-11-09 00:00:00

PRICE sd.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, Nor. 8.

THE KING V. THE rEOPRIE'TbRS Or THE SATIRIST.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL was instructed to apply to
the Court on behalf o. Mr. Digby for a rule to show cause
why a criminal information should not be filed against the
proprietors of the Satirist newspaper, for the publication of
a libel on that gentleman. Mr. Digby was a man of old
family and of irreproachable character, and he now com-
plained of being subjected to unexampled hardship by the
proceedings of the defendants, who had held him up in
their paper as a gambler of the worst sort, as a person
wholly destitute of honour. He had had the misfortune
to incur the displeasure of the proprietors of .the Satirist,
for he had brought an action against them, and had reco-
vered damages. It was for this reason that he was harassed
by them. On the 20th of May, 1836, there appeared
the Satirist a libel, imputing to tile complainant
cheated at cards. The libel stated that Sim- -gt Ile had
generally known as " King Digby," fn-
Digby, more
the king at the game of Ecarte. • nis skill in palming
joyed an unenviable notori,- , and who had long en-
living in humble retire- -'.y
tended the last E- among the Legs, was now
..eient in Devonshire, but had at-
town,esom Races, and had been recently in
sharply&eking out for flats. Mr. Digby applied
the prl
to this C
-ourt for a rule for a criminal information for
tie
...efration of that libel; and founded his applica-
`on an affidavit strongly and directly denying the
!.'*euth of the imputation thus cast upon him. Cause ,was
shown against that rule on the 11th of June, and on that
occasion there was produced. the affidavit of a Mr. Thos.
Shepherd, static)g that lie and Mr. Digby had been about
four-yew% -befoL. that-time-introduced to each other at
Brighton, when Slaephezd lent some money to Digby. That
soon after the iritioduction,Dighy called at Shepherd's re-
sidence at Pimlico, and dino with him. That after din-
ner Digby proposed to have a game at cards, saying that
he would give Shepherd his revenge for the few pounds
which Digby had won of him at Brighton. That they
played together, and Digby won a large sum of money
from him. That Shepherd suspected it was not won fairly.
That he seized Digby's hand • and found that he had
palmed the king, and that on being thus detected, Digby
became very much alarmed, confessed what he had done,
and returned the money. This affidavit purported to he
made by a person who described himself in it as Mr.
Thomas Shepherd, of Frederick-street, Hampstead-road,
and upon the allegations contained in it the court thought
there was sufficient to discharge the rule. Mr. Digby was
perfectly conscious of being innocent of all the circum-
stances stated in the affidavit. From inquiries he found
that Shepherd was to be examined in a suit in Doctors'
Commons on the 16th of .lime, and accordingly he attended
at the office of Mr. Tebbs, in Great Knight Rider-street,,
desirous of proving in a decisive manner that Shepherd
knew nothing'of him. After standing for some time on the
steps of Mr. Tebbs' office, Shepherd came up. Mr. Digby then
said," Perhaps, Sir, you will do me the favour to tell me what
your name is." Shepherd said, " What do you want to know
it for ?" Mr. Digby answered, " Because I thought I had
been in your company before." Shepherd replied, " No,
never." He did not show the least knowledge whatever of
Mr. Digby. Shepherd was then examined in the suit at
Doctors' Commons, and to try his credit, questions were
put to him as to the affidavit he had made in Mr. Digby's
case in the Court of King's Bench. Shepherd then swore
that he had never before seen the person who had accosted
him in the entrance to Mr. 'Tebbs' office ; that he had ne,it
occupied lodgings in Frederick-street, Hampstead-road., nor
in Shaftsbury-place, Pimlico, and that be knew us-idling
whatever of the affidavit made on the subject of Mr. Dig-
by's application to the Court of King's Bench ; tF,at he had
no knowledge whatever of Mr. Digby. Upr,n this Mr.
Digby went before the grand jury, and prefr.,rred a bill of
indictment against Shepherd for forgery, committed on the
affidavit filed in the Court. The grant]_ jury returned the
indictment a true bill, and a warrant was thereupon issued
for the apprehension of Shepherd. The warrant was at
once put into the hands of an active Bow-street officer,
who found that Shepherd had, upon hearing of the pro-
ceedings, absconded, and left the country. The Earl of
Digby, Viscount Gage, Colonel Shaw, Mr. Winstanley, and
Mr. Grant Allan, and other gentlemen of rank and' charac-
ter, who had known Mr. Digby early in life, now caine for-
ward to state that he was a man of high honour and cha-
racter. One important matter he must now add. The
person who had made this afnclavit at Doctors' Commons
was fully identified as the person who had made the affidavit
in this Court.

Lord DENmAN--Then •Nhat you want is to be remitted
to the situation. in which you stood before.
The AT;•ORNEY-GENERAL answered that such.was his
olvet.--Rule granted.