The Sun.
London, England, 1831-06-14 00:00:00

ROLLS COURT.

His Honour, the MASTER, of the Rom.s, sat at the Rolls
Court, Chancery-lane, to-day, to hear petitions, none of
which, up to the period of our reporter's leaving, possessed
any point of public interest.

VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT.
This Court sat in Bankruptcy at Lincoln's Inn this
morning, but nothing worth reporting had taken place
when our reporter left.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH.

M'OWEN V. WOOD.

This was an action to recover damages for an assault
committed on a child of the plaintiff's, having been bitten
in the le; by a (log belonging to the defendant. The ca,e
was stated by Mr. Fou.x.r, and the witnesses examined by
Mr. EA KIX. The case was proved, and also that the
child had been ill a fortnight after hiving been bitten.
Mr. CAmrianu., for the defendant, said that the dog
did not belong to him, that it was the property of a dis-
charged servant. He also thought that the plaintiff had
been very ill advi'ed, for even in the opening of the plain-
tiff's case it was admitted that the defendant paid the
doctor's bill, and had given orders that no expense should
be spared.
Lord TENTERDEN charged the Jury, and they immedi-
ately returned a verdict (or the plaintiff—Damages 57.

BIGGINS V. BREMERTON.
In this case the pleadings were opened by Mr. JArtvls,
jun. and the case stated to the Jury by Sir JAMES SCA R-
LETT—He said, that this was an action brought to recover •
the v due of a poi tmanteau,
which was illegally detained
by the defendant at his office in Liverpool, under the cir-
cumstances that he would now state to them. He said,
that the plaintiff had arrived at Liverpool from Dublin by
a steam-boat, and got a porter to carry his luggage and
take bins to a coach office, as he was anxious to get on to
London as soon as possible. The porter took him to the
coach-office at the Saracen's Head, which belonged to the
defendant; he enquired when the first coach for London started,
and was told that the first which started was from that
office at four o'clock ; the plaintiff then offered an Irish
Bank note which was refused unless a discount was made ;
this he refused, saying that he ,A•ould go to the Bank and
would get the money for it, and on the way he would
make inquiries, and that if he found an ear:ier coach he
would go by it, in the meantime requesting to leave
his trunk till he came back, which was readily granted.
On his way to the Bank he found that another coach went
at half-past two o'clock, and took his place by it. He
then returned for his luggage to the Saracen's Head-office,
which was refused him, unless he would pay the half of
the fare, which amounted to 15s. This he refused, but
offered to leave the double of the sum to abide the event
of a suit. This was refused by the office-keeper, who
would do nothing hut what he had said, namely, give up
the trunk on receiving payment of the half fare, so that
the plaintiff was obliged to proceed on his journey with-
out it. On his arrival in London he commenced an action
against the present defendant, who then sent an intima-
tion to the solicitor for the plaintiff, that the portmanteau
had been forwarded to the Saracen's Head, Snow-hill,
where it might be had by sending for it, but that Mr.
Bretherton would bring his action for the half fare.
These statements wete proved by the porter who car-
ried the luggage, and the porter from the other office from
which the plaintiff start, d.
Mr. CAMPBELL,. on the part of the defendant, produced
evidence to show that the plaintiff had actually taken his
place, and on their refusal to take the Irish note he left
his portmanteau as security till his return. It was also
given in evidence, that in consequence of the plaintiff's
seat having been booked the defendant had lost no less
than three tares, for, after his leaving the office the first
time, three gentlemen applied for three outside places, but
as they_then had only two remaining besides the one hooked
for the plaintiff, and the gentlemen wanted all to go toge-
ther, they declined to take the two seats which re-
mained. The book was produced, and it appeared
that the name of the plaintiff was not. entered,
hut merely put down as for <, a Gent.," it was hosv-

'vet ;tvoi n that this entry referred to the plaintiff, and
vas written in his presence.
Sir J; SCA 11 LETT in reply contended, that the weight
it evidence was on his side, that no contract was enterer:
:Ali about this seat, and that any experience he had eve.
'tad of coach-offices, had not shown him that th.
Tactice was as bad been stated by the clert
f the office in Liverpool. He said in lookira
iver the book he found no entries of " a Gent" up to tht
ime of the transaction ; after; wards it certainly appe,red
some instances, but he thought it strange it shoulr
,nly begin then. The Learned Gentleman concluded
long reply by hoping that the Jury would give such da
mages as would convince coach proprietors that, with im-
punity, they could not set themselves up as equal tr
King, Lords, and Commons," by making laws to answer
their own ends.
His Loßnsuir then summed tip, and after a long con
:ultation the Jury returned a verdict fur the plaintiff.__
Damages 20s.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.
LIBEL.—ST. JOHN LONG r. CHUBB.
This case having been fixed for this day by arrangemen
of Counsel, the Court from an early' hour became very
crowded, and Mr. St. John Long, who was present,
excited much curia.ity. About half-past nine o'clock,
Mr. Serjeant \Visor, (with whom was Mr. CHARLES
Pnissies) stated the case to the Jury, in the course of
which he ctanplained of the publication in question as a
,rocs and wicked libel, sure incapable of proof, and con-
taining assertions that the defendant was a licentious, ig
norant, and cruel man, going about from family to famil \
Ike a vampyre, in search of more human blood,
—that he was a seducer and vile destroyer, and adding,
that his second trial was coming on, and expressing a
hope that justice would be done to him, for on the former
occasion he had produced a host of witnesses—infatuated
tools—maniacs, whom he had deluded to his infernal den.
The Learned Counsel earnestly entreated the Jury to con-
sider the effect the insinuation contained in the libel
might have upon his practice with regard to delicate
females, particularly when the title-page asserted, that he
was a " successful female destroyer." The defendant
however, (lid not pretend that he had any support to
the libellous insinuations in the pamphlet, or that he bad
a salutary proof to produce, but he merely had instructed
his Counsel to amuse the Court and Jury with a powerful
and witty address, exposing all his, (the plaintiff's) mur-
ders, his (lest( uctions, and his licentiousness; but he would
implore the Jury not to let their feelings get the hater of
their understandings, and not allow the wit of the Counsel
to sting him to death, without one tittle of evidence. He
was sure they would think the jokes that would be
afforded by his Learned Brother (Spankie) very funny;
but that they would not let it affect their opi-
nions upon the facts of the case. It was true
that his client had been unfortunately convicted ;
he had a host of the regular medical world arraigned
against him, because he did not agree with them in his
mode of treating his patients; and the libel applied to the
number of individuals who had been rescued from the
grave, and who spoke in approbation of his method of
treatment upon his trial, the term of " infatuated fools,"
and because the Learned Judge happened to express some
doubt upon the case, he was designated as the " Super-
annuated Judge." The Learned Gentleman again called
upsn the Jury not to listen to the address of the Counsel,
and, in the absence of proof, not to join in his
(the plaintiff's) destruction. He is undertaking to effect a
cute of certain diseases, no matter in what manner, sav-
ing, " I wish to serve mankind, and I will if I can ;"
and he (the Learned Counsel) knew of his own know-
ledge that medical men often effected cures, unknown to
themselves,witkout their slightest expectation, and yet Mr.
Long, who has by his mode of treatment cured numbers
of persons of con=..imption, is described in the libel to have
cured a set of " infatuated fools." The Learned Coun-
sel concluded by observing, that the present was a case that
ought to be proved by evidence, and not by long speeches
and abuse, against which he cautioned the Jury, and
warned them not to be led away by the well-known inge-
nuity and sparkling wit of his Learned Friend. The
Learned Gentleman then called
Samuel Taylor, who was examined by Mr. CHARLES
clerk to Mr. James Harmer, the plain-
tiff's solicitor. He knew the defendant Chubb; he is a
printer and publisher, living at 48, Holywell-street,
Strand. The pamphlet now produced he purchased at his
shop on the 23n1 of December last. He did not see the
defendant at the time, but he saw him after this action was
commenced at Mr. Harmer's office. He spoke to him
upon the subject of the pamphlet, and he said that none
had been disposed of since the action was brought ; but
he (witness) saw some sold two months subsequent to
this ; he had purchased two or three only yesterday,—they
are those now produced.
Cross-examined by Mr. Serjeant SPANK/E—l enquired
of a female in the shop who was the author of the work,
but she did cot tell me. The defendant acknowledged
the name of the author to Mr. Woolen, but it was not till
after the action had been commenced, when he was told
it was too late. The whole proceedings of bringing the
action occupied three weeks.
Mr. Serjeant SPANKIE-Only three weeks! Why, Mr.
Harmer acted with much dispatch.
Cross-examination continued—lt never was proposed
to the defendant to give up the prosecution if he would
name the author. Mr. \\'ooler never said the author was
a particular friend of his.
Re-examined by Mr. Serjeant WILDE—IIe had since
heard that the author was a Captain—a maniac ;he hart
been told lately that the Captain is insane. He paid a
penny for the book.
Mr. Serjeant SPANKIE-Pray how many did you pur-
chase ?—Witness—Five, Sir.
Mr. Serjeant SeaNKlE—Five for fivepence.—(Laughter.)
Witness continued.---Men walked about the streets with
bills, descriptive of the book, stuck upon long poles.
The libel was then put in and read.
Mr. Serjeant STANK& E, for the defendant, in a luminous
speech full of wit and humour, addressed the Jury. The
Learned Counsel commenced by observing that, as might
be perceived, be was labouring under a severe cold and
hoarseness, and therefore whether he should (as his Learned
Friend had told them) be witty or serious, he did not
know, for his friend had completely led him away by his
eloquence. It had been just suggested to him that Mr.
St. John Long must of necessity be a Scotchman, because
his process was conducted by rubbing—(Laughter)—hut
whether he be a Scot or a native of the Sister Kingdom, he
would lead the nations composing the Union to decide.
He felt great surprise that his Friend had closed his case,
as the record propounded that the plaintiff was at the
rime a medical practitioner of medicine. Now, no proof
hal been given of that fact, no evidence had been adduced
that he was a member of the College of Physicians, or
that he had received any diploma from Apothecaries'-hall.
The libel only treated him as a confirmed quack, self-con-
stituted, He (the Learned Counsel) would ask if he
(St. John Long) had been a member of any medical insti-
tution, if his Learned Friend would not have availed him-
self of that fact, and have shown it upon oath, in order
to establish his case, and to show that he was a person
claiming the title, and that the libel had designated him a
quack, a boasting pretender to medicine, and pretending
to sciences he did not possess. There was no pretence to
consider him as a practitioner of medicine, but pos..
seating no other title than that he believes himself wiser
his predecessors, and that hie has discovered much
all the colleges and institutions in the world
could,eromtrvati
find
out- With respect to the situation of the un-
oh
rniue.os all
ttahr'e:t, in thz! Strand. He had expressed himself
than all
ha was an obscure printer, in Holy-
perfectly willing to give up the author, but did not
do so in time, the action having commenced, and he
ivas told it was too late. He merely alluded to this
fact, to show ate was perfectly willing to do so, and that if
he (Mir. Long) wished to punish any person, the author,,
was the proper person, he being the greatest delinquent
and most fit person fora prosecution, although he would
admit that the printer was also liable. The Learned
Counsel then went into the p irtictilara of the libel, and
conclude?, by observing, that if they (the Jury) considered
the plaintiff was entitled to a virdict, he was a man
„home medical and private character ought to be thrown
into the scale, and only nominal damages should be given.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE recapitulated the evidence,
plaintiffwha,;prohfaersisbioenenbreunmptilgosiairtn
be,
tahneyobulo,ould
and commented thereon as he proceeded. His Lordship
told the Jury, that if they were of opinion that the cha-
racter
been thrown upon him by the • • in 9"Y
publication question,
give him their verdict. The only
[natter rt ()ref
two questions for them
to consider were, if the contents of the pamphlet were
libellous, and if so, what • •
amount of damages the plaintiff
tvas entitled to ?
The Jury retired, and then came into Court finding a
verdict for the
nraocteurvi

CLARE.--A " Terry Alt's" notice has been
d on the property of Mr. JAMES REDDAN, in the
served
of Cloney. Yesterday evening 10 stand of arms
were delivered to the Rev. Mr. CURTIN, P. P. of Broad-
ford, by the peasantry in that neighbourhood, who have
come to the resolution of obliging every man in possession
arms to surrender them, or they will make prisoners?'
them, and carry them before the next
is a happy change..... LimErick Evening Post.
Magistrate. This