The Sun.
London, England, 1831-11-11 00:00:00

SHERIFF'S COURT, Nov. to.

WHITEHEAD V. EGERTON SMITH AND JOHN SMITH.
The plaintiff in this case ii an attorney of Liver-
pool. The defendants arc proprietors of the Liver-
pool Mercury. The question before the Under
Sheriff and the Jury was, the assessment of damages
in a case of libel, wherein the defendants had suffered
judgment to go by default.
Mr. FITZROY KELLY stated the cive, and put in a
series of paragraphs and articles, which had reference
to the personal and professional conduct of the plain-
lr. White-
head tiff, and had appeared in the Liverpool Mercury.
Of these, the first bore date in the month of
February,head hadinstituted
in nee p gsthe: Ecclesi' at3e.:
tical Courts against twe women, Elinor Yates and
Jane Marshall, a man named James Smith, anti
others, for certain slanderous expressions aflecting
proceedings
the character of his wife. The women did not at-
tend the summons of the Court, and they were com-
mitted to Lancaster Castle for contempt. In the Liver-
pool Mercury it was stated that these women did not
attend because the first named had four of her tie '-
children sick of the typhus fever, and because the
second had two children also very ill, one of whom
was yet at the breast, and died within the week.
The defendants in this paper moreover eccased the
plaintiff of oppression and cruelty in not having, pro-
ceeded against the women in the Courts of Common
Law, wee he would have had an opportunity et.
vindicating the character of his wife, if this really
were his object. To this Whitehead replied, in en
interview which he had With Mr. J. Smith, after
the publication, that he was unwilling to punish the
'husbands for a fault of which the wives alone were
guilty ; and it is, besides, to be considered, that the
offence of stating that a man is no! married to a
woman with whom he lives is not accountable at
Common Law.
A number of other paragraphs and articles relating
to this affair were published, and 'Whitehead pro-
eeeeled by action against the Smiths in the Court
if King's Bench, for libel. They pleaded t lie
general issue; but their leading Counsel, Mr.
Brougham, called no witnesses to establish the
truth of the allegations in these publications, and a
verdict, with damages of 301., was given against
them. After this trial, three articles appeared in
the defendants' paper, which were charged as libel-
lous, and which, re-asserting the truth of all the de-
fendants' former statements, attributed the verdict
against them entirely to the fact of Mr. Brougham's
tiOt having called their witnesses. The plaintiff
then proceeded against them once more by action,
including in his declaration not merely the Once
articles published since the trial, but the whole
-eries published during the interval between
h'ebruary, 1828, and the date of the last al-
leged libel, so that the defendants might have
he opportunity of proving, as they had stated
they could do, the truth of one and all the publica-
dons affecting the character of the plaintiff
But the defendants suffered judgment to go by de-
fault, and now appeared only before the Under
Sheriff in mitigation of damages.
Gaskell was called for the plaintiff. He de-
:msed that he had been clerk to the plaintiff,
who had a good common law business, and a
tolerably fair practice generally. lie stated that
luring the publication of the alleged libels
he plaintiff's business fell off daily, and de-
elared that upon an occasion when a paragraph re-
ving to his master had been published in the.
Hercury,he called on the defendant, Mr. J. Smith,
and requested him not to publish anything more re-
leecting Whitehead while he was out o. town ; to
which Smith replied, that Whitehead had no right
to expect favour from him, as he owed the establish-
ment 51. or 6/. for four or five years. The witneec
'tided that this was a disputed account, and theer
Mr. Smith Omitted it was so.
Mr. Plum, now clerk to Whitehead, was also
called, and deposed, that during the fifteen months
he had be-.n in plaintiff's employ, his business had
not in any respect been materially altered. Both
these witnesses were cross-examined at great length
ey Mr. J. Smith, but nothing of any importance
was elicited.
A man named Clegg was also called to prove the.
-pecial damage suffered by the plaintiff from these
publications; but he proved nothing.
The defendant, Mr. J. Smith, then addressed the
Jury. After some observations respecting the law
1f libel, he proceeded to deny that he had been
actuated by any malicious motive or personal hosti-
dry to Whitehead, or the profession to which he be-
longed, and explained that his reason for suffering
judgment to go by default was, that he feared he
might, if he attempted a justification, fell in some
•rifbng point, and so be defeated, although he might
ave established the truth of almost every particle
in the statements he had published. lie described
the defendant as an obscure attorney, and corn-
(bolted upon the spelling of a letter he had received
from him. He contended the man could not have
been actuated by a sincere desire to vindicate rite
character of his wife, inasmuch as when the wo-
men, Yates and Marshall, were, by a subscrip-
tion, to which many attorneys contributed, freed
from the effects of the contempt of Court, he
'lid not institme further proceedings against them.
Ile alluded to several instances in which his Paper.
had incurred the risk of loss and penalty from a de-
sire to promote the public good ; and he showed the
estimation in which these efforts were held by read-
ing the names of Roscoe, and others, amongst the
most respectable inhabitants of Liverpool, who had:
subscribed to defray the expenses attendant upon the.
former trial, in which he had been defeated by the
plaintiff. Ile maintained, too, that no evidence had
been given to prove any specific damage to the
plaintiff.
The defendant called no witness.
The UNDER SHERIFF briefly charged the Jury.
After upwards of an hour and a half's deliberation
the Jury at ten minutes before eight returned a ver-
dict—Damages, 100/.

----------
LIFE OF AN M.P.--The life of the regular
House-of-Commons-man is not a bed of roses. It is
scarcely possible, at the first sight, to conceive any existence
more wearisome. At half-past three o'cloclz he goes down
to prayers; he takes his seat among cold, desolate
benches; petitions come on ; long unseasonable speeches
entitle ; then, perhaps, the question is hunted down into,
the corner far a detail, where it is worried, mouthed„
mumbled for three or four hours, and finally escipes, at
Last, to he hunted again at the next convenient. oppor-
tunity. At seven, perhaps, our assiduous senator escapes
up-stairs to a plate of cold meat, and a glass of brandy
and water : and is half an hour afterwards he is fairly N-
I :seated till two, nay three o'clock in the morning. Al-1
perhaps this laborious gentleman never speaks hitnseir;
has no particular interest in the subjects discussed,—has
no ambition to gratify,—ao purpose to answer. Perhaps
fcr him all the pleasures and luxuries of life await ; cheer..
ful society-, music, books, wine, love, all that riches can
purchase and youth enjoy. What induces the choice he
has preferred ? Heaven only /wows! And yet the more
wearisome a pursuit at the beginning, the more seductive
it often becomes at the end. Business grows upon men
more than pleasure : only, indeed, to men who do not enter
into it themselves, the daily work of the House of Com-
mons is scarcely business,—" totius negotii caput
fentem ignorant." But it may be observed, that of all
public speaking generally pursuits those which lead to
en-
gross and tyrannize the mind the most. At the Univer-
sities, the Members of a speaking club rarely think of any
thing else but the club. On the stage, how invariably
actors herd together,—how invariably their conversation
turns on the art and its professors. So in regard to
the House. A party of Members met at a dinner fly at
once to "that interesting debate"—" Mr. STANLEY,"
" Sir GIZA ALES WEIIIE:tELL," " the sugar refineries,"
and the indomitable ''Bid." This it is that makes the,
society of A/embers dull to the gay world, and insipid to
women in particular. Few ladies, however ambitious in
general, long preserve much sympathy with the Perlis.
mentury ambition of their husbands. And here is a
marked difference between the French and the English
roman. The rewards which social distinction bestows
in France are much more gratifying than those which it:
c(.:ta,pnugt
aratitoan in
andpolitical Englandyet in France, women value psiblie
honours much higher than the,
honours of the salon ; and it would be well for England
here it were the same. —New Monthly, a magazine which
is conducted with great spirit awl ability,

ADDITIONAL CHURCHES.

The Eleventh Annual Report of his Majesty's
Commissioners appointed by virtue of an Act of
Parliament passed in the 58th year of the reign of
his Majesty King Geo. 111. c. 45. entitled " An
Act for Building and promoting theßuildingof Addi-
tional Churches in populous Parishes," is Just pub-
lished.
In their last report his Majesty's Commissioners
stated that 134 Churches and Chapels had been com-
pleted; in which accommodation had been provided
for 192,974 persons, including 106,154 free seats to
be appropriated to the use of the poor.
They have now to state that thirty-four Churches
and Chapels have since been completed at the follow-
ing places :—At Alverstoke, in the county of South-
ampton; at Riddings, in the parish of Alfreton, in
the county of Derby ; at Bedminster, in the county
of Somerset ; at Birkenshaw, and at Heckmond-
wike, in the parish of Birstal, in the county of York;
at Morley, in the parish of Batley, in the county of
York ; at Brampton, in the county of Derby ; at
Burslem, in the county of Stafford ; at Ilford, in tha
county of Essex; in the parishes of St. Mary and
St. Cuthbert, Carlisle; at Cleines, in the county of
Worcester ; at Cheltenham, in the county of Glou-
cester; at Netherton, in the parish of Dudley, in
the county of Worcester ;at Horwich, in the parish
of Dean, in the county of Lancaster ; at Pendleton,
in the parish of Eccles, in the county of Lancaster ;
at Enfield, in the county of Middlesex ; at Glossop,
in the county of Derby; at Hampton Wick, in the
parish of Hampton, in the county of Middlesex ;
at Huddersfield, in the county of York ; at New
:Mille, in the parish of Kirkburten, in the county of
Voris ; at Myron, in the parish of holy Trinity,
Kingston-upon-Hull, in the county of York ; at Hol-
beck, in the parish of Leeds, in the county of York ;
at Orniskirk, in the county of Lancaster; at Rich-
mond, in the county of Surrey; at Coseley, in the
parish of Sedgley, in the county of Stafford; in
Little Queen-street, in the parish of St. Giles, in
the county of Middlesex; in the parish of St.
Botolph, Bishopsgate, in the county of Middlesex ;
at St. Chad's, Shrewsbury, in the county of Salop ;
at Warminster, in the county of Wilts; at Thornes,
in the parish of Wakefield, in the county of York;
at Wolverhampton, in the county of Stafford; at
Hoy land, in the parish of Wath-upon-Dearne, in the
county of York ; and at Warrington, in the county
of Lancaster. In these thirty-four Churches and
Chapels accommodation has been provided for 39,393
souls, including 21,928 free seats, to be appro-
priated to the use of the poor. Thus, on the whole,
168 Churches and Chapels have now been com-
pleted, and therein a total provision made for
231,367 persons, including 128,082 free seats, to be
appropriated to the use of the poor, according to the
scale laid down by his Majesty's Commissioners.
His "Majesty's Commissioners have further to re-
port, that 27 Churches and Chapels are building at
the following places :—At Aberystwith, in the
county of Cardigan ; in Woburn-square, in the parish
of St. George, Bloomsbury, in the county of Mid-
dlesex ; at Cleckheaton, in the parish of Birstal, in
the county of York ; in the parish of St. Philip and
Jacob, Bristol ; in Worcester-square, in the parish
of Walcot, Bath ; in the parish of St. Michael,
Coventry ; in Sharp-square, in the parish of St.
James, Clerkenwell, in the county of Middlesex;
at Cheshunt, in the county of Hertford ; at East
Stonehouse, in the county of Devon ; at Great Yar-
mouth, in the county of Norfolk; on Saffron-hill, in
the parish of St. Andrew, Holborn, in the county
of Middlesex; in Highgate, in the county of Mid-
dlesex; at Brighouse, in the parish of Halifax, in
the county of York ; in the town of Halifax, in the
county of York ; at Wordesley, in the parish of
Kingswinford, in the county of Stafford; at Syden-
ham, in the parish of Lewisham, in the county of
Kent ; in the parish of Lyncombe and Widcombe,
in the county of Somerset ; in Travis-street, Man-
chester, in the county of Lancaster ; at Paddington,
in the county of Middlesex ; at Todmorden, in the
parish of Rochdale, in the county of Lancaster; at
Shenton, in the parish of Stoke-upon-Trent, in the
county of Stafford ; at Hyde, in the parish of Stock-
port, in the county of Chester; at Abersychan, in
the parish of Trevethin, in the county of Monmouth;
at Liverstone, in the county of Lancaster ; at Turi-
sta, in the parish of Wolstanton, in the county of
Stafford ; at Toxteth Park, in the parish of Wolton-
on-the-Hill, in the county of Lancaster ; and at
Pemberton, in the parish of Wigan, in the county
of Lancaster. The state of the works in each of
these Churches and Chapels, on the Ist day of July
last, is fully detailed in the schedule accompanying
this report, marked (A.)
His Mejesty's Commissioners have further to re-
port that plans have been approved for sixteen odic'
Churches arid Chapels to be built at the followiug
places :—At Nineveh, in the parish of St. Martin,
Birmingham, in the county of Warwick; at Tock-
,boles, in the parish of Blackburn, in the county of
Leiscasi er ; at Hebden Bridge, in the parish of
tpseisess, in the county of York ; at Hetten-le-hole,
in the paeish of Houghton-le-Spring, in the county
of Durham ; at Bollington, in the parish of Prest-
bury, in the county of Lancaster; at Norbury, in
the parish of Stoasport, in the county of Chester;
at Lane-Erid, in the
_parish of Stoke-upon-Trent,
in the county of Stafford ; at Burleigh-street, in
the parish of St. Martin-in-the-Fields, in the count
of Middlesex ; at Spotland, and at Wuerdle, in the
perish of Rochdale, in the county of Lancaster; at
Tyrremouth, in the county of Northumberland ; at
Aspa, in the parish of Wigan, in the county of
Lancaster; in Edward's Garden, in the parish of
Winwick, in the county of Lancaster ; at Stratford,
in the parish of Westham, in the county of Middle-
sex; and at Wrockwardine Wood, in the parish of
Wrockwardine, in the county of Salop. The build-
ings, in these cases, will be commenced as soon as
tenders for the performance of the works have been
a sleeted, and the conveyances of the sites obtained.
I Its hlajesty's Commissioners have under consi-
deration plans for the two Chapels to be built at the
following places :—At Tredegar, in the parish of
Bedwelty, in the county of Monmouth ; at Ben-
well, in the parish of St. Nicholas, Newcastle-upon-
Tyne, in the county of Northumberland.
His 'Majesty's Commissioners have further to
repot, that they have proposed to make grants in
aid of building Churches and Chapels at time fol-
lowing fourteen places, viz.:—At Carmarthen, in
the county of Carmarthen ; in the parish of St.
Mary, Dover, in the county of Kent; at Dawley,
in the county of Sie.lop ; at West Houghton, in the
parish of Dean, in the county of Lancaster; at Old-
bury, in the parish of Hales Owen, in time county of
Salbsp ; at Crosstones, in the paessh of Halifax, in
the county of York ; in the town of Liverpool, in
the county of Lancaster; in the neighbourhood of
Gray's Inn-lane, in the parish of St. Andrew, Hol-
born, in the county of Middlesex; at Newtown, in
the county of Montgomery; et Tong, in the parish
of Prestwich, in the county of Lancaster; in the
parishes of Stepney; St. Luke, Old-street ; St.
George in the East, and St. Giles in the Fields, in
the county of Middlesex; the plans for which have
DOI yet been laid before the Board.
His Majesty's Commissioners annexed a schedule
to their last report, containing a list of applications
which have been made to them from various places
for and towards building new Churches and Chapels;
a copy of vii;ch, and of the applications which have
since been made, accompanies this report, marked
(B), omitting those places in which grants have
been proposed to be made.
Since the last report the parishes of St. Martin,
Birmingham, and St. Oswald, reurham, have each
been divided into two distinct and separate pa-
rishes; and the parish of Tres-Ai-4'am, in the county
of Stafford, has been divided into tieree distinct an,
separate parishes, under the provision of the 16th
section of the Act of the 58th Geo. 111. c. JO; and
the Chapels at the Wick, in the parish of Hampton,
the county of Middlesex; at Woodhouse, in the
pariah of Leeds, in the county of York; and at
Barnsley, in the Game county, have been made
Churches of districts, under the provisions of the
21st section of the same Act; ;.end districts have
also been assigned, under the proviwim of the

16th section of the Act of .59th Geo. 111. e. 134, to
the Chapels at Stanley and Alverthorpe, in the
parish of Wakefield, in the county of York; at Low
Harrowgate, in the parish of Pannel, in the same
county ; and in the parish of Monmouth, in the
county of Monmouth.
His Majesty's Commissioners have since their
last report, and without any aid from the Parliamen-
tary Fund, afforded, or expressed their willingness to
afford, facilities for the obtaining additional bury-
ing-grounds for the parishes of Canford Magna, in
the county of Dorset : lloniton, in the county of
Devon; Mangotsfield, in the county of Gloucester;
Maybull, in the county of Lancaster; Teddington,
in the county of Middlesex ; and Wellington, in
the county of Somerset; and also sites for new
Churches and Chapels in the parishes of
Bam-
borough, in the county of Northumberland ; Cheadle,l
in the county of S:afford ; Leytonstone, in the
county of Essex ; Leamington, in the county of
Warwick ; at Solihull, in the county of Warwick ;
St. Germains, in the county of Cornwall; Shipton-
under-Wichwood, in the county of Oxford ; and at
Barnet, in the county of Hertford.
His Majesty's Commissioners have further to
state that ( with the exception of the case of the
Chapel at Sennicots, in the parish of Funtingten,
where, in consequence of its very peculiar circum-
stances, the Board have granted the right of nomi-
nation to such Chapel to Charles Baker, Esq.) they
have thought it right to suspend the further conside-
ration of the applications made for a declaration of
perpetual patronage to Chapels under the 3d Sec-
tion of the Act of 7 and 8 Geo. IV., c. 72, until
the duties and powers of the Commissioners are
better defined by a Bill which has passed both
Houses of Parliament, and which, when it has re-
ceived the Royal Assent, will come into immediate
operation.
In conclusion, his Majesty's Commissioners have
to state that since the opening of the Commission
they have determined on and made provisions for
the erection of 227 Churches and Chapels.

The Exchequer bills which have been issued to
:his day amount to 1.367,4001.
W. CANTUAR. HARDWICKE.
BROUGHAM C. ALTHORP.
LANSDOWNE. DUNCANNON.
GREY. B. C. STEVENSON.
E. LANDAFF. S. LUSHINGTON.
C. J. LOvDON. J. LONSDA.LE.
MELBOURNE