The Sun.
London, England, 1847-06-04 00:00:00

ROLLS' COU it I; June 3.

The Court was occupied all the morning with motions
which were destitute of a particle of general interest.

LEAKS v. LING.

The arguments in this cause, which came on upon an ex-
ception to the Master's report, were resumed ana concluded
to- day.
His LORDSIIIP said that the present case differed from all
the other cases that had been cited, and he would require
time to consult the authorities on the question at issue before
delivering his judgment. It appeared to him that the cir-
cumstances of the case were simply these :—An estate was
devised to certain parties in trust for the testator's wife, and
it was directed by the will of the testator that after her death
it should be sold. Out of the estate it was directed that a
sum of 6,0001. should be raised, and a moiety of interest arising
therefrom should be paid to the widow during her life time, and
the residue to be divided into three parts, between two
nephews and a niece of the testator. During the life time of
the tenant, Robert Shaw King, one of the nephews, was
desirous of raising money from the Norwich Union Company,
who were parties to the exception, and who, before they
would advance any, required to see the will of the testator,
and saw that the property was subject to the charge of
6,0001., a moiety of the interest of which belonged to Sarah
King, who, in order to facilitate the execution of the mort-
gage which Robert S. King was desirous of executing,
agreed to release the property from her charge upon it, but
she did not by so doing transfer her claim to any other party.
A notice of the deed to which the lady was a party was
given to the trustees, which, it was contended, was insuffi-
c.ent, as it did not set forth the particulars of the arrange-
ment which had been entered into by Sarah King. These
were all the facts of the case, as they appeared to him, and
he would look more closely into the cases that bad been
cited.

:BAIL COURT, June 3.
(Before Mr. Justice Wicarrsurr.)

MISS ELIZA COOK-THE QUEEN V. THOMAS WHARTON SHER..

DEN- APPLICATION FOR A CRIMINAL INFORMATION.

Mr. MARTIN, Q.C., said he had been instructed to apply
to his Lordship, on behalf of Miss Eliza Cook, for a rule,
calling upon Thomas Wharton Smerden, the printer
and publisher of a paper bearing the title of the
Daily Advertiser to show cause why a criminal information
should not be filed against him for the publication of a gross
and malicious libel, reflecting upon the conduct of the lady
ou whose behalf he made the present application. Miss Cook
was a young lady of about 25 years of age, and of consider-
able poetic genius. She had written a number of poetical
pieces, and had published to a great extent, and her
effusions had been much admired by those who were in
the habit of reading poetry. The matter to which ha was
calling the attention of the Court, was to Miss Cook of the
most serious nature, as she had been charged with one of the
most horrible crimes that could be perpetrated. In the copy
.if the paper, published on the 29th of May, there appeared a
paragraph, which stated that she had given birth to a child,
and that she had murdered it.

Mr. Juslee WiowrmAN—Murdered her own child?

Mr. A.LARIIN replied that the statement in the paragraph
WAS to that effect.; out there was not the slightest ground '
for the charge. He had a number of affidavits, which stated
hat Miss Cook was a person whose character was wholly
free from reproach, arid that she had never been suspected of
any impropriety of conduct whatever. Of course the publi
cation of such a charge had caused Miss Cook and her friensis
much anxiety. It was in the following words:—
" ELIZA COOK—Considerable anxiety has been excited on
I,e part of the public, who d.. u,,t read the poetical contri-
ba ions of the Dispatch, to know what really can have io-
cla •wd its proprietors to present their subscribers with a por-
.4..it of a woman who has murdered her own child. Such is
fame amongst the masses—a murderess is a heroine and a
poetess unknown !"
He was at a loss to divine the object which the publication
of such a statement was intended to answer. He had the
affidavits of all of Miss Cook's friends, who, on hearing the
charge, immediately came forward and gave the most ex-
plicit denial to it; but he would not trouble his Lordship
by reading them, as it would be sufficient for him
to state that they concurred in saying that there was really
not the slightest ground to suspect that Miss Cook at any
period of her life had been guilty of anything which could
entitle any one to cast an imputation upon her private cha-
racter ; and that, therefore, both she and her friends were
most anxious that the most public and distinct denial should
be at Once given to so foul a charge. He understood, how-
ever, that his Lordship after granting the rule would hear no
more of the matter, as the paper complained of yesterday
published a statement denying, in the most positive terms,
that there was any truth in the accusation which it had put
forward, and to-day he believed some communication had
taken place, which would, no doubt, tend to the same result ;
so that any future proceedings would, in all probability, be
obviated.

-----
Mr. Justice Wianrrnaw—lrou may take a rule.
The affidavit of Miss Cook—after describing her abode;
that she had contributed a great number of original poems to
the Dispatch; and that its proprietors were about to present
their subscribers with a portrait of her—concluded thus ;
" And this deponent further saith that she is a spinster ;
that she never had or gave birth to a child ; and that, on
the contrary, she is a spinster of strict honour and perfect
chastity; and she further saith that she has never murdered,
or been concerned, or charged to have been concerned in the
murder or death of any child whatever."
The following is the retractation to which the Learned
Counsel referred : • .b
"Tit DISPATCH,' AND ELIZA COOK.—It is with great
regret that we find that a paragraph, meant more as an
appeal against the taste of the English people than an attack
upon Miss Eliza Cook, has been interpreted into an aspersion
upon that la,ty's character. The fact that one Eliza Cooke,
or Cook, had recently been executed for murder, and that we
had heard the question asked by a friend, who was not over
well read in modern poetry—what could have induced the
Dispatch to give such a portrait?—led to the publica-
tion of the paragraph ; and, if a libel, we considered it
rather as a libel upon the taste which was better read in
the criminal reports of the journal than in its poetical co-
umns, to which a pointed allusion was made. W e can only
say, in addii,ion, that Miss Eliza Cook has no warmer ad-
mirers of her genius than ourselves; and that it is with un-
feigned, regret we find that a possibility for such a construc-
tion being put upon our paragraph did exist. It certainly
was unimeuti 'nal upon our part. With regard to any action
for libel with which the Dispatch threatens us, we have only
the option of being at their service when and where they
will. If any moral damage has been done, we have made
moral reparation to the extent of our power, and so the mat-
ter must rest."