The Sun.
London, England, 1825-12-02 00:00:00

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Drc. 1.

DREW v. DARNBOROGH.
This was an issue from the Vice-Chancellor's Court. The
question to be decided was, whether the sum of 6001. advanced
to a Mrs. Chamberl& by her daughter (then Miss Chamber-
lain, but since become the wife of the plaintiff) was a loan or
a.gift. It appeared that the late Mrs. Chamberlain had kept a
boarding-school in Surrey-place Kent-road, in which she was
assisted by her daughters. One of them (now Mrs. Drew),
who as well as her sister had some property in her own right,
knowing that her mother was in difficulties, advanced several
sums to hera'amounting in all to 600/. Soon after his marriage
with Miss Chamberlain, Drew said be would claim the money,
and did in fact take steps for that purpose against Mrs. Cham•
berlain, who being alarmed lest he should take legal proceed-
ings for its recovery, sent a gentleman to Drew, offering to
liquidate the demand. Upon this offer the present claim was
made against one of the executors of Mrs. Chamberlain.
The defence to the action was, that the sums claimed had
been from time to time advanced by Miss Chamberlain to her
mother by way of gift.
To prove this, Miss Chamberlain (the twin-sister to plain-
tiff's wife) was called. She stated that the plaintiff was an
attorney's clerk, but at the time he paid his addresses to her
sister, he represented himself as the partner of a respectable
attorney. He was told that Miss Chamberlain had no fortune,
but he repeatedly declared that he required none—that his own
income was quite sufficient for the support of himself and
a wife. Soon after his marriage, however, he told his wife,
that he must get the money she had given to her mother:
but was as often told by her that it was given as a gift. The
witness had given a similar sum to her mother; but she never
intended it in any other way than as a gift. When Drew found
that he could not get the money, he left his wife for a time.
Afterwards they came together, but she left him in October,
11823. (They had then been two years married.) Miss Cham-
berlain was 35 years old when she was married.
In the course of her cross-examination by Mr. Sergeant
Vat:GRAN, this witness admitted that she was an executrix,
and had an interest under her mother's will.
Mr. Sergeant Vaucarest—lt ought perhaps, my Lord, to
have been stated before, that in the order from the Vice-Chan-
cellor for trying this cause, it is, directed that this witness
should be examined, though an interested party.
Lord Chief Justice Btrr —I so understand ; but I have
' always thought, with every respect for the equity judges, that
these orders for the examination of interested parties are im-
proper, and I am not the first judge who thought so. The
late Lord Ellenborough held the same opinion, and thought
that such orders from equity courts ought not to be obeyed by
the common law judges. It is high time, I think, that some-
thing should be finally decided on this matter.
Another witness was called who corroborated the evidence of
Miss Chamberlain, as to the general understanding amongst all
parties (before Miss Chamberlain's marriage) that the money
given to the mother was a gift, and not a loan.
t Mr. Sergeant Van °lima replied to this evidence.
The LORD CHIEF an sTicx summed up, and the Jury,
after an absence of about an hour from Court, returned a ver-
' diet for the defendant.
HEISOIRB OF HARRIETTE WILSON.—POPLETT 5.
STOCEDALE.
This was an action to recover 941. for work done by plaintiff
foe defendant. The laintiff is a printer, and defendant is the
notorious publisher of the infamous Memoir: of the more 'infa-
mous Hat riettr Wilson. The work done was the printing of
some sheets of those memoirs. In the course of his address to
the jury for the plaintiff, Mr. Sergeant Vaughan mentioned, as
an instance of the prurient taste of the public for such works,
i that the early numbers of this a.a.,. ..
.;,...atin was
1 ..,... .a , a, p,.. , cz.. t-oßtract for doing the work was
proved by plaintiff's son. By this it appeared, that he was to
print a thousand sheets per week, for which he was to receive
51. per week on account while the work was in progress, and a
bill at three months for the remainder of the sum to which the
printing might amount when it was finished.
Another witness proved that the charges made by the plaintiff
were reasonable.
Mr. Sergeant WILDE, for the defendant, said, in his ad-
dress to the jury, that the defence to this action was—first, that
the charges made by the plaintiff were unreasonable, and con-
trary to the contract entered into between the patties ; and se-
condly, that the bill at three months, which was to have been
given by defendant when the work was finished, had never
been presented-to him for acceptance. Thus far his instruc-
tions went; but beyond that they did not go : but without for
an instant thinking of what might be the feelings of Mr. Steck-
dale on this occasion, and exercising his discretion as an Advo-
cate, he would. unless he was prevented by the Court, go into
the nature of the publication which formed the subject of this
action, and submit to his Lordship and the Jury that it was
of a nature so infamous, and so directly subversive of public
morals, Its that no man could support an action for his
services in having in any way contributed so send it
' forth to the world. lie had seen the work only since
the commencement of this action ; but, from what he

PRICE SEVENPENCE.

had seen in any one part of it which he looked into,
he had no hesitation in pronouncing it to be wee of
the most scandalous and infamous publications which
had ever disgraced the press of this country. They had heard
of robberies of various kinds of former times ; but it was re-
served for the present day to giVe rise to a robbery of a hiteerto
unheard-of character—a robbery, by means of the erreas, of the
reputation of individuals, for the purpose of effecting another
robbery cf their purses. The Learned Sergeant, after com-
menting on the immoral tendency of the work, read the named
of some of the articles referred to on the wrapper of one of the
numbers, as its contenti, and gave the names of several indivie
duals of high rank, whose conduct in certain cases it pretended
to describe, but whose names (he observed) were only inserted
for the purpose of exciting the curiosity of the ignorant. He
would ptit in some of the passages (suppressing the names of
the individuals to whom they were made applicable), and put
it to his Learned Brother to say whether for the publication of
such a work any action could be maintained. The Learned
Sergeant was proceeding, when
Lord Chief Justice BEST (addressing himself to the Counsel
for the plaintiff) asked whether this work was not the history
of a prostitute, and whether it did not pretend to give in dosil
an account of her alleged amours ?
Mr. Sergeant traconstee said, from what had been stated of
the work, he could not deny that such was its character.
Lord Chief Justice BEST.—Then I have no hesitation in.
saying that no person who has assisted in the publication R
such a work can recover in a court of law compensation for his
labour so bestowed. I am decidedly of opinion, that in the
case now before the Court, the plaintiff cannot maintain the ac-
tion. The man who lends himself to a violation of the laws in
this gross manner, shall not be allowed to demand in a-Cohn
of Justice, payment for what he has done in carrying so cri-
minal a purpose into execution. It would be strange indeed,
if a man could be fined and imprisoned for being an agent in
the publication of such a work, yet be allowed to maintain
an action for his services in such publication. I wish it to be
'here Wstinctly understood—as from what fell from one of
the witnesses, there seems to be some misunderstanding
on the subject, that every servant employed in
publications
of this nature, is equally responsible with his employer foi
its injurious tendency. From what has fallen from my brae
then Wilde, 1 have no doubt, and no man who has heard hies
can have any, of the double object of this publication—first.
the corruption of youth by the exhibition of licentious s&nrs,
and secondly, by the threat of making persons figure on those
scenes for the purpose of extorting from them money, as-the
price of silence. I regret that sitting as Ido here, in a civil
court, it is not in my power to punish in both parties what is
so manifestly infamous ; but I will do what I can. I will
never consent, that he who has done so much to forward such
shameful objects, shall recover arecompence for his scandalous
services. An injury has here been done to society, by the
means of the press—by that press which, when properly usede.
is the agent in one of the greatest of all human blessings. la
this country it is the child of the Government, and it gives the
most effectual support to its perent, which cannot well subsist
without its aid. No Englishman can see it degraded and de-
based by such publications as the present without feelings of
great pain and deep regret. Let the plaintiff be called.
Mr. Sergeant VAUGHAN said, tliat he hilly concurred in
every thing that fell from his Lordship, as to the tendency of
such works, and as to the application of the law to persons
aiding in publishing theft ; but he submitted that it ttid not
lie with Mr. Stockdale—this late repentant sinnner—to make
such an objection.
Lord Chief Justice BesT.-elt lies with any body, I might
here say, with the late Lord Kenyon, who was in the habit of
expressing himself strongly, and who once said in a case—
" I cannot take an account between two men on Hootislow-
heath." So neither can I take an account between the*,
parties, who are not less infamous, though in another manner.—
The plaintiff was nonmuited.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER, DEC. I.
Btpre the LORD CHIEF BARON.
The Court was occupied during the whole day with an in-
formation against a soep-manufacturer, for selling soap with-
out certificate, which contained no circumstances of any public
interest.

COURT OF CONDELEGA TES, DEC. 1.
BRISCO AGAINST PRISCO.
The Court understanding that the last assignation in this
cause had been complied with, directed. by its prase:. that the
Registrar should forthwith transmit his warrant in the usual
form to the Common Law Judges, in order to Lave the cause
heard before the whole commission without delay.
The same learned Judge then said; he was 'desired by one
of his learned associates to state that one of the parties in tbs
cause had recently called upon him at his house. The learned
person in question thought proper to have on that occasion no
communication whatever with this party. It wcs necessary fur
that learned Judge's honour that this fact should be stated ;
and that it should also be declared to be the opinion of the
Court, that the party himself, though perhaps with no improper
intention, had herein been guilty of a great irregularity. The
Senior Delegate concluded by announcing that he now dissolved
the Court.
Dr. LEE begged to be heard in his own explanation of the
matter alluded to.
The SENIOR DELEGATE.—The Court is dissolved.
Dr. LEE—I complain that my learned associates will not
hear what I have tc offer in my o•#n detence. They have made
their statement ; I wish to make mine, that both sides of this
question may be heard.
The other Delegates quitted the Court, regardless of their
learned brother, wo remained for a few seconds in apparent
surprise and displeasure. •
We feel authorised to state, that Sir Wastell Brine. (to
whom the Court's observations were understood to allude) has
transmitted to Mr. Jenner a written and ample apology for the
opprobrious expressions into which his irritation betrayed him
on a former occasion, in speaking of that eminent practitioner.
—(Times.) •
COURT OFREQzys,EroticTKSD,APLIE.
ccuy.
HARRIS
Harrietta TVilsoa': Memoirs have just occasioned a deci-
sion of some interest to all booksellers and publishers, and even
to the public at large—the disputed right of giving back per-
fect books, or parts, in exchange for imperfect copies.
Yesterday Mr. John Joseph Stockdalc, of " Colonade
fame," was summoned by Mr. Michael Harris, a book-
seller and stationer, of King-street, Westminster, to answer
to a demand for his refusing the payment of six shillings,
in contravention of the custom of the trade, and under
such circumstances as do not usually occur. It appeared,
from the statement of Mr. Harris, that the complainant
had purchased three successive pasts of the Memoirs of
Harrietta Wilson from the defendant on account of a gentle-
man, by whom, however, the parts so purchased were return-
ed to the complainant as being in an imperfect state. Com•
plainant, in consequence, now applied to the defendant to
exchange the parts procured from him, which he poaitively
refused to do, asserting that he would only give to complain-
ant the substitute leaf to insert, who might afterwards make
good the deficiency himself. But the complainant, on the
other hand, refused to accept the book in that condition, when
the defendant said, that if the book were left, he should even
charge the complainant at the rate of sixpence a day for ware-
house-room.
Mr. Stockdale, in vindication of his conduct, said, that it
was quite a regular thing for venders of publications to make
111) such deficiencies ; and besides, he objected to the returned
pails Ut.IS r•Ile ...nr)sing a coach were
bought, and after it had gone a journey, a nut happeaea to
get loose, was such carriage to be returned on the coach-maker's
hands merely on that account ?
Here the three Commissioners were decidedly of opinion that
Mr. Stockdale's supposed case of the coach bore no manner of
analogy to the question still before them.
Mr. Harris now submitted, that he was acquainted with a
specific case contrary to the defendant's statement, as to his
(complainant's) being at all liable to make good such imperfec•-
tioes in purchased books. He had recently bought some pubs
licatiotis of Mr. Limbird, in the Strand, which happened to
turn out imperfect; but, upon his applying to that 'respectable
publisher, they were exchanged at once. The Corriplainatie
here exhibited the defendant's books in their actual state, put-
ting it, to the Commissioners whether they themselves woui,d
purchaie the work in that imperfe6t state ; wher. the tiorninie-
sinners each and all declared that they certainly would not.
Stocitdale.--43ut, gentlemen, these entire parts of .4f4t-
Hate Wilson's Mewirs were cut up when returned fey ex-
change to me.
Mr. Harris.—And how could the gentleman who had ordered
them of me, know they were imperfect ti}l he cnt thegt up?
Hereupon an order was made for the paythent data shillings
and costs by the defendant, who seemed to be much dissok-
certed by the decision of the Commissioners.