The Sun.
London, England, 1825-01-26 00:00:00

POLICE REPORTS.-DUNCAN V. TIIEND AND OTHERS.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL moved for a rule to show cause
why the verdict given for the defendant in this case should not be
set aside, and a new trial had. The action was brought to re-
cover compensation for two libels which appeared in the Morn-
ing Advertiser, reflecting grossly on the character of the plain,
tiff, a solicitor of the Court of Chancery. The libels purported
to be accounts of proceedings at Bow-street, before a police ma-
gistrate; hut there was no plea of justification put in, nor any
evidence offered even to show that such proceedings ever took
place : the defendants relied solely on the general issue. The
publication was clearly proved; it was unquestionably libel.

loos in its nature; yet the Jury, from soine circumstances
which could only be conjectured, found a verdict for the defen-
dants, contrary to the very simple evidence given in the cause,
and contrary, lie believed also, to the opinion of the Lord Chief
Justice. The inuendoes were proved ;of the character of the
articles there could be no doubt, and of their application to...the
plaintiff as little.
The Loup CHIET JUSTICE—Was not some point as to
the identity raised at the trial ?
The ATTORNIIY-GENERAL.—Yes, my Lord. The .first
libel did not mention,the plaintiff by name, but described hint
as a person residing in one of the Inns of Court. The second
libel mentioned him by name, " Andrew Duncan," as the
person to whom the first article applied. Mr. Brougham then
contended that I ought to call some other witnesses to prove
that the Andrew Duncan intended was Andrew Duncan the
plainti47, inasmuch Wilt. appeared in evidence that the plain-
tiff's father of the same name was living. To this I replied,
that it was evident from the libel itself that the party charged
with the offence was the son, because it was mentioned that the
father became one of the sureties; unless, therefore, a grand-
father was introduced, the libel must have reference to the
plaintiff: Your Lordship, I think, said, " Probably you will
think your verdict should he for the plaintiff; but the amount
of the damages is entirely for your consideration." Now the
articles, unjustified, were clearly libellous; no evidenCe was
offered to show any circumstance which would excuse the pub-
lication ; and therefore I submit that the verdict was clearly
wrong, and that the case ought to be investigated by a second

j ury.
The LORD CHIEF JusTrcE, referring to his notes, said,
I think the case stood thus as to the identity of the parties.
Mr. Brougham put it to me that the libels might relate to An-
drew Duncan the father ; die Attorney-General replied that
this could not be, because one of the articles spoke of the fa-
ther as being one of the sureties; Mr. Brougham rejoined
that Andrew Duncan, the father of the plaintiff might have a
father living ; but I thought ns only two persons named Dun-
can were brought before the attention of the Jury, they must
apply the case to them, and consider the surety as the father,
and the plaintiff as the son.
Mr. B ROL' G IIA think your Lordship said you would
leave it to the Jury.
The LouD CHIEF JusTICE.—If you wished to have it left
to the Jury, you should not have put it to me, as you did very
correctly, in order to force the Attorney-General, if my opi-
nion had been against him, to call another witness. Your
object in so doing was very plain, but it was a very fair one, to
compel the Attorney-General to call some one acquainted with
the facts from whom you might, on cross-examination, extract
something favourable to your clients.—(A laugh.)
The ATTonNxr-Gnx E aar..—And my Learned Friend
had the full benefit of your Lordship's decision against him ;
for lie forcibly asked, " Why is my friend so shy of produc-
ing witnesses ? Why does he leave the case thus short, if
there is not something he ears I may extract which he wishes
to conceal ?"
The LORD CrriEs• JUSTICE.-1 thought, and I believe I
said, that it could hardly be questionable that the articles ap-
plied to the plaintiff:
Mr. BRouoiram.—l think your Lords'aip left the jury to
say whether the articles were libellous.
The LORD Cult r J UST ICE.-011, there could be no doubt
that they were libellous. I own I thought, adverting even to
the speech of the Learned Counsel for the Defendants, that the
Plaintiff' would obtain a verdict ; but I expected it would be
for very small damages.
The LOH D Cur EF rsncE, after consulting with the other
Judges, said—There must be a rule to show cause, unless the
case can be settled in some other way. This is not the case in
which there is a plea raising the general question of police-
reporting ; that, I think, was an action of " Duncan v.
Thwaites."
The AT TORN ET-GT.NERAT..—It was, my Lord ; and I ra-
ther think that the jury considered themselves as a court of
error for the occasion.
The Lours JUSTICE.—I recollect Mr. Brougham
took great pains in his speech to convince them that the deci-
sion of this Court in that case was wrong. I do not mean that
he did so in any manner disrespectful to this Court, which no
one can sunpose ; but that he argued the case with that view.
I told the jury I thought the decision right, but that I derived
satisfaction from knowing that it was so placed on the record
as to be open to correction by a higher tribunal. In this case
we are of opinion that there should be a rule to show cause.
The AT TOY NEY-GENERA r. accordingly took die rule.
BE N A 74 JON

This was an action against the Marshal of the Ring's Bench
prison, for allowing- Sophia Saunders, a prisoner in his custody,
at the suit of the plaintiff', on mesne process for a debt of 1091.,
to escape. The Jury gave a verdict for the entire sum claimed
as due.
Mr. CAMPBELL now moved for a rule to show cause why
there should not be a nonsuit on the ground of variance, or a
new trial on the ground of excessive damages. Ile rested the
first part of his motion on an averment, that the prisoner put in
bail, previous to her render, before the Court, whereas it appear-
ed that the bail justified before a single Judge ; and the second
argument, that as Airs. Saunders was re-taken and lodged in
prison, the plaintiff had really sustained no injury, and, in-
stead of the whole debt, ought only to have recovered nominal
damages.—The Cot: we granted a rule on both grounds.
THE XING v. WAttNFFORD.
This was a rule calling on a magistrate of the county of
Wilts to show cause why a writ of mandamus should not issue,
commanding him to insert in a conviction under the game-laws
the evidence by which it was supported. As the conviction
stood, the informer, who was stated to be also a magistrate,
merely swore to the offence in the language of the statute.
:11r. MER EWZTHER appeared to shew cause; but
The Co t; UT were, clearly of opinion that the evidence ought
to be more fully and particularly set forth, and made the rule
absolute.

THE WINO V. BAIRD. '
This was a rule obtained in last term by Mr. Alderson, call-
ing on Dr. Baird, a physician at Ipswich, to show cause why a
criminal information should not be exhibited against him for
conduct tending to provoke Dr. Beck, also practising as a phy-
sician in the same place, to commit a breach of the peace.
3lr. SCARLETT, who appeared for the defendant, said it
was an application -by one physician against another, and he
should be happy to terminate it without further discussion.
Dr. Baird felt that the net complained of was the result of irri-
tated feeling, excited certainly by considerable apparent provo-
cation, but carried to an excess which he regretted. Ile was
willing to make this apology, and to pay the costs.
The LoaD Cum', JusTice suggested that some gentleman
should look into the affidavits, and determine the form and
manner of an apology, which should be made and accepted.
31r. Brtoucttam, for Dr. Beck, said his client was not ac-
tuated by any desire to injure the defendant; and therefore he
was ready to accept the terms proposed on his behalf; but he
thought, as the offensive placard had been exhibited in a pub-
lic subscription-room, the apology ought to find its way to the
same circle.
Mr. ScaaLETT objected to a publication in the newspa-
pers ; but was willing -further to say, that if Dr. Baird had
known what the affidavit of 1)r. Beck now disclosed, he would
not have proceeded in the manner of which complaint was
made.
After some further discussion, it was agreed that Mr. Plat
should look into the affidavits, and prescribe the form of an
apology ; and that the rule should be enlarged, the defendant
paying the costs.

THE QUADRATURE OF THE CIRCLE.

To the Editor of the Hampshire County Newspaper.

Sin,—A paragraph having appeared in many of the public
prints—" That the French Institute have determined that the
quadrature of the circle is an impossible and vain research,"—
permit me to state that I by no means assent to such an un-
qualified declaration, so derogatory to the author of the uni-
verse, from whom all truth emanates,--and who surely has, in
no instance, left any of his works so incomplete and unfinish-
ed as they have represented. Had they confined themselves to
the method of acquiring it, I should have instantly agreed
with them, for the attempt is certainly futile.
Finding, in four distinct instances, a gross defectiveness in
the approximation of Van Culen, it became evident that some
other course of enquiry should be substituted. I therefore
made the alteration, arid by so doing Succeeded in discovering,
not only the geometrical rectification of the circle, but of all
ellipses, and then their quadratures, thus securing what has
been so long wanting to render geometry a connected science—
the knowledge of the curve, from its first departure from a
straight line, until it has ascended to the most perfect curve
of the circle, with the varying quantity of superficies it em-
braces in its progress.
Although public opinion may prevent those discoveries be-
ing immediately noticed, 1 am persuaded time will prove them
so beneficial that the labour employed will not have been vainly
bestowed. I am, &c.
JAMES SAIBEN, Limit. of the Royal Navy.

His MAJESTY has bestowed a second munifi-
cent donation to the charities of Windsor, in addition to his
support by annual subscriptions, which were transmitted by Sir
Wm. Knighton to the Mayor, in the following sums,:-501. to
the National Schools • 251. to the Dispensary ; 251. to the Pro-
vident Institution ; aLI 251. to the Ladies Charity.