The Sun.
London, England, 1841-02-22 00:00:00

has averaged 250; but there are now about 300 on the
ground.
" The extent of work performed to this time consists of
about 1,000 feet length of pile-driving for the foundations
of the quay-walls, upon which upwards of twenty engines
are at this moment in full operation; and of excavations
amounting to nearly 70,000 cubic yards. The soil pro-
duced by the latter is advantageously applied to the forma-
tion of the embankment for the Close Dock ; it is very
adhesive and impervious, qualities particularly favourable
for sea embankments, and for making and maintaining the
Docks ; and this the late storms have sufficiently tested,
no damage having been done thereby to the embankment
eor to the piling.
" The Osborne Quarry, the property of the Company,
has also been opened by the contractors, and preparations
are made for conveying its stone to the docks. The con-
tractors 'have also made .arrangements for obtaining other
stone from Gurnet Bay, Portland, and Swanage ; and
have deposited a large quantity of blue Has limestone, and
of timber in store upon the Company's ground.
.‘ Means are likewise in preparation for conveying
thither the soil purchased from Mr. Buchan at Wolston
Cliff.

" Considerable preparation of machinery for carrying
on these works has likewise been made by the contrac-
tors. Independently of the pile engines, already at
work, a powerful dredging engine, lighters, waggons,
dec., are also making, and near completion. I have
therefore, reason to expect that the entrance and southern
side of the Tidal Dock will be ready for the reception of
trade by the end of the present year.
I remain, Gentlemen, your very obedient, faithful
servant, " FRANCIS GILES."
Now there could be no doubt of the truth and accuracy
of the statements made by the engineer, because they
were made in the presence of many persons who were
deeply interested in them, and hundreds present at the
meeting might have contradicted them had they been
incorrect. Now was it not important that the public
should know all these facts, and if so, what better plan
could be devised for such a purpose than publishing
them to all the world in the columns of a newspaper ?
Now, gentlemen, after the proceedings of the meeting
appear to have gone on a considerable way, Mr. Ri-
chards, the plaintiff, is represented to have risen and
made a speech reflecting very strongly upon the concern
altogether, upon the conduct of the Directors, of the en-
gineer, and in fact of all connected with it ; and in an-
swer to this, Mr. Liggins, the Chairman upon the
occasion, is represented to have made the observations
which are now complained off. But, gentlemen, ob-
serve, if there had been any intention to calumniate Mr.
Richards, the offensive remarks would have been put
in large characters, or in some singular type, or by
directions in another part of the paper the attention of
the public would have been directed to the part con-
taining the libel in a long and voluminous report, so long
that, with all due deference to my client, I think that
long before the public could come to the paragraph
complained of; they would be heartily tired of the
whole subject, unless, indeed the reader was one of
those persons who speech was reported, or one of those
very deeply interested in the undertaking. Can you,
gentlemen, believe for one moment that Mr. Young,
or the Directors, for although I am not here for one
individual of the Directorship, I may be per-
mitted to say, was it possible thet the Directors, in
employing a reporter to attend the meeting, could have
the slightest intention of reflecting upon the character
of Mr. Richards, who, they could not be sure, would
attend the meeting ? Was it not rather that the public
should have some idea of what was going on with re-
spect to a great national undertaking, and how far they
had reason to expect a beneficial result ? Now, gentle-
men, I will call upon you to look to the report, and
you will find that Mr. Richards has his fair share of
the columns. If you were to find that this was a gar-
bled report—if there was given merely those speeches
conveying a strong censure upon the plaintiff, you might
have said it was an unfair and partial report ; but when
you find that everything that Mr. Richards said was at
the same time communicated to the public, with what
was said against him—that Mr. Richards's answer to the
charge was inserted, as well as the charge—when you
find that, as you will do on looking to the report, I am
sure that I am only wasting my bie ale as well as your
time, in saying aga'n that there was no intention
to offer offence, or any design that something
should be inserted, calculated to reflect in the
slightest degree upon the character of the plairitlff.
For, gentlemen, at the repot t says in Mr. Liggin's speech,
Mr. Richards was a party to the application to Parliament
for the Act of Incorporation, and it was to be presumed
that he was well acquain:el with all that hal taken
place. And give me leave to ray, gentlemen, that the
Attorney-General admitted that he was one of the ori-
ginal undertakers, and that his name was inserted in the
Act of Parliament, and, therefore, gentlemen, it was
impossible but that Mr. Richards, if his name
was inserted in the Act of Parliament, must
have been one of the original promoters of the concern ;
• and we find that Mr. Richards has actually had actions
brought against him for calls which his discreet attorney
of the present day has thought proper to settle, although
lie made some show of resistance, getting costs to a
certain extent, and then (bopping the actions. More-
over, gentlemen, if this had been a " bubble" Company ;
it it had been established in fraud, as is now insinuated
by the Attorney-General, so instructed by Mr. Ri-
chards, I am quite sure his Lordship will tell you that
Mr. Richards might have successfully defended himself
against any claim for calls, because when a Company is
fraudulently constituted the Directors can make no
claim for calls upon the shareholders, and therefore five
actions, at least, in the time of Mr. Lowless, having
been commenced against Mr. Richards, and he having
paid those calls, it is quite evident' he must have
known that it was a mere pretence to say that
it was not a real bona fide Company, established
for a beneficial public purpose,; because if Mr.
Richards was convinced that he was right in the in-
structions he has given to his counsel, he might have
resisted the payment of those calls, and resisted suc-
cessfully. Then here is a gentleman who was an ori-
ginal undertaker, paying those calls,accordiug to the state-
ment made by the Chairman (which statement, of course,
was made, for it cannot be denied, and Mr. !Richards
has not attempted to deny that a faithful report is given
of what passed,) and Mr. Richards, not very deeply of
fected by the charge made against him, applies to my
Learned Friend to create a mock interest in his favour,
and to suggest that it operated so much upon his mind,
that he was so affected, so overwhelmed by it, as to be
compelled to come into a Court of Justice to vindicate
his character, and that it might not be left under such
a stigma.—(The Hon. Gentleman then read the al-
leged libel.) That is what the Chairman says—Mr.
Richards cannot deny that it is a faithful report—and
what does Mr. Richards say? Why, deeply affected at this
charge against him, Mr. Richards said that "if he had
made any statement of that sort the Chairman would
have been the first to stop him." There is indignation
fbr you! The Chairman says, " You, who knew every
thing, who was a party to the Act of Parliament—who
was perfectly acquainted with the whole concern—you
stated that it was a bubble Company, whilst you must
have known that it was not a bubble. Company. You
have, therefore, stated what you know cannot be
true." This, says my Learned Friend, is a de-
liberate charge of perjury. Then Mr. Richards says—
" If I made any statement of that sort the Chairman
would have been the first to stop me." Now I would
rather that Mr. Richards should state his feelings on
this subject than have them stated by the Attorney-
General, and here we have his feelings exhibited by
Mr. Richards, or rather we have no feeling, a perfect
indifference to the charges, or at all events we have the
statement of Mr. Richards, and what does he say ?
That "if he had made any statement of that sort the
Chairman would have been the first to stop him. It
was stated there that he believed there was fraud—
that he admitted to be a strong term, but he did not
wish to be personal in the slightest degree." That was
rather an odd mode of procedure in Mr. Richards. He
says, " I charge you, the Directors and original under-
takers of this undertaking, with being a fraudulent and
deceitful set of persons, who have established a bubble
Company to delude the public, and I, a poor innocent,
attracted by your prospectus and brilliant prospects,
have been induced to join it, have been entrapped into
a concern of no value and have lost my money. I don't
mean anything personal. You are all a fraudulent set of
men, but I don't mean it personally but generally."
Now, as a Company consists of individuals, as a Com-
pany itself cannot be fraudulent ; and as a Company is
a number of individuals associated, it is the individuals
who are fraudulent ; and when Mr.. Richards says " I
don't mean anything personal when I charge fraud," it
is sufficiently clear that Mr. Richards must have in-
tended to impute fraud personally to the Directors, or
his words will be altogether without meaning. Then,
e I etys "It was stated that he was privy to all the in-
troductory arrangements, but that he must beg leave to
eny." Now, Gentlemen, observe the fairness here—
the original undertaker,
Chairman states that he was an
that lae must have known all that had taken place, and
Aontrary. Now, sup-
that he had stated that it was a bubble Company,
rn a h cei r of Mr; 4ich.ards—
hat th.e newspaper re
portpi wherease
isthehuhai:dl
they would not
nbilnelluntrelt7:tvelei e intentionkncohwa ? They would have
the statements
what would have been the C.f)urse
but
unanswered, would
suppressed
atehde
tahn:twae
at all,
wall; ch he ,;ape; they
made by the Chairman, which, unanwei
.ed the statement of
In-
stead of this they have introduc,
" It was stated that he was privy
Mr. Richards, that
but that he
have been taken to be admitted by Mr. r lame.
to all the introductory arrangements,
must beg leave to deny ; he was merely asked in
I have endeavoured to show you that my Learned
Friend has really, I think unfairly—l don't wish to
the street to become a subscriber." Now, Gentlemen,
Drake strong observations—but I think unfairly and '
im-
properly represented this case to you, because I
kiend opened this
be-
lieve that at the time my Learned r
case, you were of opinion that nothing more was wM Lig-
gin's intro-
duced into the newspaper than the report
speech against the plaintiff, and that Mr. Young_
had lent himself to the intentional malignity of the
Directors, by publishing that and that only to the world.
Of course it this were proved it would be a strong case
against Mr. Young. that he had desired to contribute 1
to the malignity of the Directors against Mr. Richards, 1
the plaintiff. But you must take the newspaper into i