The Sun.
London, England, 1849-06-26 00:00:00

to cite the case of George the Fourth for pub7ication
in this rin the m \finer i e fl eaal oo that
, I a a te • -"
re la-, t to ihe King, e Liu u,igilt r :Light
r not have been jiwitieo; buy, et mainly ah. n a man coin-
, plained of being libelled in a newspaper, he ought to be
• the last to take that opportunity of publishing in a
newspaper a lib,l of another. [Here the Learned
Judge read the remaining articles charged as libellous.
He le ust observe that it was clear that on the part of the
Weekly Dispatch, and of the Duke of Brunswick
also, that the Duke of Brunswick had been
subject to very atrocious libels in a certain
infamous newspaper ; ibis thy, U.eekly Dispatch
was perk ctly awa, e ot, and in one part ot the articles
complained of as libellous. the editors of the Dispatch
seemed to have drawn a distinction between their own
conduct and that of the newspaper in question. He
(Lord Denman) agreed fully with the Learned Counsel,
that the most ample liberty nhould be given to
the public journalists in observing on known facts,
either public or private, and with respect to the Govern-
ments of foreign couniries, they had a perfect right to
state any opinion they might entertain, unless it re-
Icted on private character; but then the personal cha-
racter of a man might be such as to be affected greatly
by his public acts, and he might ahow himself to be in-
famous and cruel, and to deserve the name of traitor and
t) rant; but no parson had a right to charge those public
acts upon him, unless he could prove them. Now, it did not
appear to him (Lord Denman) that the publication fell
at all within the question, either of historical statement
or political remark. There were several publications,
and he was of opinion that the first publication was not
protected by the Statute of Limitations, because it was
sold at the office, though not in the ordinary way, and
any one anieht have brought it there. He thought that
that publication was one for which the defendant was
answerable. It had been stated in the Dispatch, and
told with great eloquence by their counsel, that " it is,
after all, a proud reflection to the people of the island
of Britain, that it is the haven of repose and secu-
rity to which the barque of the political exile
invariably speeds, in order to escape from storms,
and commotion at home," and then the cases of the King
of Fiance and the Duke of Brunswick were referred to
in illustratfoa of that sentiment. But tuwe the notion
of the liberty of the press, it must nut b..; atweti to
public journalists to assail the character of public indi-
viduals who came to seek a haven of repose
in this country by stating facts most highly discreditable
and unwarrantable, and even cruel, on their parts, and
which would subject them to the highest punishment if
they were brought into a court of law. It appeared
to him that he had gone through the facts of this case,
and it was entirely for the jury to [say what damages,
if any, the Duke of Brunswick was entitled to, if they
thought those publications were libellous, and he left the
matter entirely in their hands.
The jury retired, and, after being absent for about 20
minutes, returned into court, and stated they found for
the plaintiff—Damages, .500/.

EXCHEQUER.-(THIS DAY.)
(Sittings at Ni i Prius at Westminster before the LORD

CHIEF BARON and a Special3;;;)-
NOTTIDGE V. RIPLEY AND ANOTHER.

This csse was resumed to-day.
Mr. MILNE, a commissioner of lunacy, proved having
seen Miss Nottidge at Mr. Stilwell's asylum on two oc-
casions in company with Dr. Pritchard when he con-
versed with her, and came to the conclusion that she was
of an unsound state of mind. Dr. Pritchard had since
died, but he tntertained the same opinion. She endea-
voured to avoid or to evade all questions respecting her
own peculiar religious opinions, which circumstance was
of itself a ground of suspicion as to her sanity. Her
only d, lusnn was upon religious opinions, and she
spoke leas,nAly upon other subjects. Delusion upon
a particular subject was sometimes called monomania,
and persons who were under the influence of it were
sometimes harmless, and were allowed to go at liberty.
Mr. Proctor, also a commissioner of lunacy, said reli-
gious delusion was a common form of insanity, and
persons under the influence of it were perfectly sensible
and reasenahle upon other subject-.. He thought the
fact of her having, itnmedia:ely on leaving the asylum,
given all her nioney to the per.on who was the subject
of ncr delusions was a proof of her insanity.
A clerk from the Batik of England stated that 5,7281
75. 7d. in Three-and a-Qtn,rter Cent. Annuities had
hen transferred by the plaintiff to Mr. Henry James
Prince in May, 1848.
Mr. COCKBURN then addressed the jury
Learned Coun-el c .mmented at great length upon the
address of Sir Frederick Thesiger and the evidence
which had been produced in the case. in reply. The
The trial had not concluded when we went to press.