The Sun.
London, England, 1812-11-30 00:00:00

_4dmiralty-Office, Nob. 28, 1812.

Admiral Sir John Thomas Duckworth, Com-
mander in Chief of his Majesty's- ships and ves-
sels at Newfoundland, has transmitted to John
Wils(pri Croker, Esq. a of thirty-three Ameri-
can vessels_ detained, and two English vessels
(taken by American privateers) recaptured, by the
€quadron under his command.

rldnairalty Office,' Nov. 28, ' 1812.
. .
Copy of a Letter from Captain Hockinp, of his ;Majesty's
sloop the Dominica, addresSed to Rear-Admiral Sir Froncis
Laforey, and transmitted by the latter to John Wilson
Croker,'Esq. •
, . .

• His Majesty's ship norriinica, St. Thoinas's,
SIR, ' - Srpt. 12, 1812.
• I- have the•satisfaction to acquaint vyou of the
capture of the American schooner Providence,
by his Majesty's sloop Dominica under my coin
nand, yesterday, the 11th, in latitude 19 deg. and
longitude 63 deg. 15 min. after an anxious chase
of ten hours. - She is pierced for twelve guns, but
has only four, having thrown the rest overboard,
and- a complement of sixty men ; has been out
thirty days, but has made no captures.
I have the honour to be, &c.
ItOBT. HOCKINGS, Commander.

Crown-ggice, Nov, 28, 1812.
Members returned to serve for the new Parliament.
T °rough. of Clithero—The. Bight • Hon. R. Stewart, corn-
Monty called Viscount Custlereagh. The Hon. Robert
' ' •
Borough of Newton7-Major,Gen, Peter Heron. John Ireland
Blackhurne, Esq.
County.of Dorset—W. M. Pitt, Esq. E. B. Portman, Esq.
Boning! of Dorchester—C. IL Bouverie, Esq. Robert Wit,
jun.•lisi.
Borough of Lyzne•Regis—John Facie, Esq. commonly called
Lord Burghersh. Henry Pane, Esq. .a Major-General in
the Army. •
Borough of Weymouth and Mcicombe Regis ;Sir John Mut.,
raY, Bart. • The Right Hon. T. Wallace. Joint
,Broad-
--Inirt, Esq.. HO. Trail, Esq.
Borongh .of Bridport—W. D. Best. Esq. Serjeant at Law.
Horace Davidkholwell St. Paul, Esq.
Fowiugh of Shafton, otherwise Shaftesbury—Richard Bate-
man Robson; En. Hudson Gurney, Esq. -
Borough of Wareoani-Robert Gordon, Esq. Theodore Hen.
Broadhead, Esq. . ,
Borough of Cortfe Castle—Henry Bankes, Esq. Peter W.
Bitker, Esq, •
COunty of Antrim—The Hon. John Richard Bruce Oneill,
The Right Fluma. Francis Seymour, Earl of Yarmouth.
Borough,of Belfast—Sir Edward May, Bart. -
TONVII of Carrickfergus-Arthur Chichester; Esq,
Borough of Lisburne—The Right Hon. Henry 'Seymour
Moore, commonly tailed Lord Henry Moore. •
County of Cavan---;•;athzniiel Sneyd,' Esq. The Right Hon.
John Maxwell Barry, Bart,
County of Clare•--Sic Edward Brien, Bart. AuguStine Fitz-
" Gerald, Esq.
Borough of Ennis—The Right Hon. James Fit2Gerald.
County of- Cork—The Hon. James Bernard, commonly called
Lord Viscount Bernard. The Hon. Richard flare.
City of Cork-LMountifort Loo field, Esq. Sir Nicholas Con-
.way Colthurst, Bart.
Town of I'm:trton—Sir John Keane, Bart,
Town of Baudbn Bridge—The Hon. Richard Boyle Bernard,
Barristej at Law..
Town of Kinsale-=-Henry Martin,-Esq. Barrhter at LaW.
To'w'n of Mallow-James Lawrence Cotter, .Esq.
County of Donegal—Sir James Stewart, Bart. ,
:Lieut. Gen.
George Vaughan Hart.
County of Fermanag-b:—Major-General the Hon. Galbraith
Lowry Cole. • Lient.'Gen. Mervyn Archdall.
Tim on.; h. of Enniskillen—Richard 4aginnis, seri. Esq.,‘7
County of Galway—JameS Daly, £sq. The Right Hon. Denis
Bowes Daly.
Town of Galway—The lon. Frederic Ponsonby.
County of Kilkeiniy—The Hon. James Butler. The Hon.
Frederic Ponsouby.
City of Kilkenny.—Lieut. Colonel. Overington Blunden.
C:onaty of-Limerick-The Hon: Wyndham Quin. Lieut. Col.
_ . .

W. ()dell. _
Ciunty of Louth—The Right Hor. John Foster: The Right
Hun. Robert Jocelyn, commonly called Lord Viscount
Jocelyn.
Borough of Dandalk—John Melge,Esq. •
County of Mayo—The Right Hon. Denis Browne. The Hon.
Henry INugustus Dillon. '
County of Tipperary—The Hon. Major-General Montagu
James Mathew. The Hon. Francis Aidhoro Prittie.
Borougli of Cloornell—The Right lion. W. Bagwell.
City of Casliell—Sir Charles Laxton, Bart.
County of Tyrone—Thomas Knox, Esq. The night Hon. Sir"

John-Stewart, Bart.
Borough of Dungannon—George Peter. Holford, Esq.
County of Waterford—,Riebard Power, Esq. Field Marshal
Sir AV. Carr Beresford, Knight of the Bath.' •
City of Waterford—The Right Hon. Sir John Newport. tart.
11+,0) Ugh of Dungarvop—'lue Hon. Gen. George 'C'y'zd pole.
County of Wes-tineath—The Hon. Hercules noLert -I'acken-
ham. Gustavusillochfort, Esq. . •
Borough of AthloneJohn Wilson Croker, Esq.
Town of upon Tweed-Alexander tkilita, Eiq. Henry
Het eage St. Paul, Esq. .
County of .Sligo—Charles O'Hara. Edward Linge Cooper'
Esq.
Borough of Sligo—The Right Hon. George Canning, .

LONDON: Pritited by !:7IIOIIAS WOOD, of No: 2:2, Russell-court, Brydges-street, Covent-glinicn; :Published by Wll.ll AM ABMIGY:t SCRIPPS, Smut'
At the 4tnc, Okyi9B, No: 112, where Adtertiwnents,, Orders tur the Paper', Letters for the. Editor, .4S:e. (post pai),

MW. REPORT.

COURT OF KING's BENCH, Noss 43

aUDGMENT FOR CHALLENGING.

_ .
Mr. Aiken, who had been fotind guilty of libel'.
ling Mr. Delap; late of the Ist Dragoons, or
"King's Own, but now of the Surrey militia, in
posting him a caisard and a scoundrel, in March
last, at ibbetson's, and other cOffee-houses, was
again brought lip, to receive sentence..
Mr. JUSTICE GROSE, in pronouncing the sen
ftense of the Court, observed, that there PutsF,totuebting very peculiar in the defendant's case—
it was marked with an uncommon and unusual
degree of malignity. For more than four years;
froin. Iscts to .1812, he had suffered . the ref
membrance of what he 'assumed td be 4-
studied insult to rankle in . his mind, and
during the whole of that time, he had availed
himself of all possible opportunities, of al! at-taint •
able means, of endeavouring to provoke Mr. De':
lap to fight a duel. Fortunately, however, thosd
efforts had been vein ; anti the defendant had good
reason,. as Itn-:g 03 he lived, .to be Outdid to the
•prosecutor for not h..-Ivin...T, accepted the challenge
-had he complied; one, mot likely, would have
been murdered, and the surviving doe!list Vrould
have ever afters been, branded with the name of
murderer !, It wlts- fiartunate. that ti.rctunstanceS.
had taken such a course ;'but the whole of the
eilftlHant's ct:ufinet; in this trans:-tetion, shewe_ii
the. absolute flecessity of ex.erting the anthority of
the:Couti, to protect the prose6utor from outrage, ,
and -to prevent, if -possible, further bueaches
sof
the law by the defeadant.': The sentence of the .
Court was--e That -the defendant be imprisoned;i
the King's Bench prison;, for the snaee Of SiA
Calendar Months :. and at the expiration of chot
term, to give security for hi, good behaviour tor
Seven Years, himself in 50-01. und two sureties iii
2,101. each:. .

LIBEL IN THE A'2,71-GnI,LiCAN.

LOVELL V. GOLDSMITH.

This was an action brought by the proprietor
of The Styttesman, against the "cond)icor of a
Weekly Print, called The Anti-Gailican Mo*
;War, to obtain damages, for having- libelled the
plaintiff, in accusing hiin of being concerned in a
plot to destroy Louis XVIII. On going before a
JtirV, a verdict bad been obtained for the de-
fendant.

A itule'had been obtained to slew cause, wli
a new trial should not be granted; and
tion was now made to have it made absolute.
Mr. SCARLETT stated, that the application wa%
founded on an alleged error in the record, in stat-
ing that the defendant was '' the Proprietor" of
The Anti-GallivanMo~u#ctr-rwhereas it ought to
have been said, '' the sole proprietor," if such
were intended, and that was. a questionable fact.
Lord ELLEsibizouGH- observed, that the parr
ties were curious if not extraordinary nu m; tor,
two days before the trial of the present action,
the defendant herein had been the is
London, when the jury, on that occasion had very;
properly given him one farthing damages. tht
that occasion, Mr. Goldsmith bad accusedlA3vdi.
of enormous slander, and he knew not what—,
but such was the . jury's verdict on that charge.
In this action, they had not even found a verdict
for the plaintiffs-74.bad been returned for the de,-
fendant. On the whole, it would be much better
if the parties couldi)e persuaded to enter a stat
processus.l

Mr.SoARLETT observed, that he had mi instruc-
tions to consent to anv thing of the kind; and ia
this -case.he did not like to take any respon,:ibi-
lity upon himself. Linder these Lances
possibly the Court_ would allow .the matter. to,
be deferred, to enable him to obtain further in.
structions.
Lord ELLENTBOROUGH comented_to this; ;for he

knew very well-that. Counsel were 'often .bl.4nod

when they stepped without the limits of tfre:r 1:1-
struCtions, although_ they might have in so doing
pursued the best possible course for the benefit of.
their clients.

Sir W. GARROW., to COTISOIV Mr. Scarlett,: woulti
observe, that with respect to any blame, ha intl4
likely shbuld' divide it with his Learned Prieint;
for if he were to,.take any responsibility upon him.-
self, and to acquiesce in the suggestion of his Lord 7
ship, very probably he should not give entire sa-
ti3faction to the parties.—The case was therefore
directed to stand over.