The Sun.
London, England, 1847-11-16 00:00:00

EVANS V. LAWSON.

This was an action for an alleged libel, published
by the defendant in The Times newspaper. At the
trial a verdict was given for the defendant; but Sir
F. Thesiger had moved the Court to set aside the
verdict, and to grant a new trial, on the ground that
the Learned Lord Chief Justice, who tried the cause,
had misdirected the jury.
Lord DENMAN now delivered judgment. He said,

this was the case of a rule moved for the purpose of
setting aside a verdict given for the defendant and
having a new trial, upon the ground that there had
been a misdirection at the trial. He (Lord Denman)
had asked the jury whether the letter (the alleged
libel) meant to impute misconduct on the part of the
plaintiff, that misconduct being that the plaintiff had
knowingly sold a sword as one which had been
worn by Lord Nelson at the battle of Trafalgar,
but which sword was a forgery, since it was
known that Lord Nelson had not worn any sword
at the time of that battle. The alleged libel pur-
ported to have been written by Sir Harris Nicolas,
and if the statements in it were true, they showed
conclusively that the sword was not that of Lord
Nelson. In answer to the question which he (Lord
Denman) had put to the jury, and in compliance with
his wish that they would examine the letter, they
answered that it was doubtful whether the plaintiff
was charged with a fraud, and therefore they returned
a verdict for the defendant. The letter did not im-
pute fraud to the plaintiff in obtaining a large sum of
money for the sword, for he might have obtained a
large sum of money for what he had given a small
price, with the full belief, nevertheless, that the
sword was genuine. There would, therefore, be no
rule in this case.—Rule refused.

REGINA V. HUNT AND OTHERS.

Four prisoners, named respectively Reuben Hunt,
William Hunt, harlotte Hunt, and Harriet Hunt,
were brought up to receive judgment upon an in-
dictment for conspiracy, upon which they had been
tried and convicted at the Central Criminal Court.

A vast number of affidavits were put in by the de-
fendants in mitigation of punishment, and read by
the officer of the court.

Mr. COCKBURN, Q.C., Mr. M. CHALMERS
(with whom was Mr. J. Brown) having recall
facts of the case to the memory of the Court,
Mr. Justice COLERIDGE gave judgment, and dwelt
upon the enormity of the offence which had been com-
mitted by the defendants in conspiring together to
defraud a person of the name of Rogers of about
3,C00/. They bad endeavoured to effect that object
by perjury and forgery; and had attempted to per-
vert the course of the law in order to effect their
purpose. The sentence of the Court was, that Reuben
and William Hunt should be respectively confined in
the Queen's Prison for twelve calendar months, upon
each of the three counts of the indictment, and be
kept to hard labour there ; and that Charlotte and
Harriet Hunt should be respectively confined in the
Queen's Prison for six calendar months upon each of
the three counts in the indictment. Upon being
informed by the officers of the court that there was
no hard labour in the Queen's Prison, his Lordship
ordered the prisoners to be confined in the Coldbath-
fields Prison.

Lord DENmAN, in the course or the day, stated that
the Court would take the new trials on Friday next,
instead of the special paper.
Notice was also given that the Court would sit in
bunco on the following days after term :—Saturday,
Nov. 9.7 th ; Friday and Saturday, Dec. 3d and 4th ;
Monday, Dec. 6th, and four following days; and
on Saturday, the 11th of Dec., at twelve o'clock, for
j udgment.