The Sun.
London, England, 1848-06-22 00:00:00

. .
this respect he would follow his example for a single
moment. He was representing before them the pro-
prietor of The Sun newspaper, and he believed he was
perfectly justified in saying that no portion of the public
press was more fairly or honourably conducted. The
jury might have heard much of it out of court, but he
believed in court they had heard less of it than any other
newspaper. He believed he was justified in saying that
in the leading columns of that newspaper there were no
imputations upon Mr. Cochrane; but simply such obser-
vations as a person who was himself interested in the re-
turn that constituency would make might justly offer
to the electors of Westminster on a question
which appeared to him one of considerable im-
portance—namely, whether the man who soli-
cited their suffrages was th© man Is ho at a former
period had assumed the character that had been men-
tioned, and who was accused by those who had penned
the letters referred to as having committed gross out-
rages upon decency and propriety. The letters had been
published with this purpose; and Mr. Cochrane had
thought proper to bring the publisher into a court of
justice. Now, as his Learned Friend had stated, any
person whose conduct or character was attacked was
entitled to bring hie case into a court of justice, and call
upon his assailer to prove the truth of his accusations,
if they were capable of proof; but he did not think his
Learned Friend was justified in complaining, as he had
done, of the conduct of the defendant in this respect,
because, to the best of his ability, the defendant had
attempted to put a justification on the record ; but
the plaintiff had demurred to those pleas as being
too vague and general, and had, therefore, got rid
of them on the ground that they were insufficient
in law. He thought this was rather a curious course
for the plaintiff to pursue on such an occasion. Ile
came forward and avowed by the mouth of his counsel
that he had been guilty of gross fully and indiscretion.
tie was in addition charged with having availed himself
of the opportunities his fraud afforded him, of violating
the sanctity of domestic life ; and, as an additional re-
ward for the hospitalities he had received, of exposing
the follies and errors which others had been led into by
himself. The action being brought, the defendant
offered to place certain pleas on the record, in which,
following the language of the libels, ho declares the
matters contained in them to be true. Now, if the
plaintiff was really anxious .to have the matter ex-
amined into and thoroughly sifted, and to show the
falsehood of the charges, and, as he called them, of the
calumnies against him, ono would have thought that,
however technically imperfect the form of the pleas,
Mr. Cochrane would have been but too happy
to meet his opponent in a court of justice,
and to vindicate his character from such imputations.
Instead of this, however, Mr. Cochrane had got rid of
those pleas by technical objections, and he was sorry to
say it was not foreign to his experience for plaintiffs in
cases of libel to do so under similar circumstances.
It was said the pleas were su vague that Mr. Cochrane
could not tell what was to be answered; but no man
who looked at them fur a moment could doubt the mean-
ing of them. The defendant said, in effect, " You are
the party who travelled about as a Spanish minstrel, and
committed many follies under that assumed character.
You a'so, by such means, gut into
private families, and
you abused the opportunities which you by that means
wished to obtain. You afterwards published a book
containing an account of these adventures, and your ac-
count of them is scandalously immoral, and an outrage
on all propriety and decency." And on what did the
defendant rest his case? On the production of a book,
and on proof of the authorship. Of course the defendant
could hardly be expected to know more of these matters
than was contained in that book. He could not otherwise
follow this wandering minstrel through all the private
scenes of disgusting profligacy which the book had exposed
to the eye of the public. And what was this publication?
An account given in so mysterious a manner with respect
to the identity of individuals, that they immediately re-
cognised themselves, and their own intimate friends
knew them ; and by that means the greatest possible
misery and anguish was inflicted on their own minds and
the minds of their friends and families. Of course the
defendant was not in a situation to state the names and
particulars of the parties involved in these transactions.
The writer, who gave an account of the amorous widow
E—; of the fair daughter of B--; or of the blooming
wife of L--, knew well whom he alluded to, and their
friends and relations might know it ; but the defendant
could nut know it, and therefore he could not plead it on
the record. His pleas, therefore, were objected to by 1
the plaintiff on this technical ground, and the Court held
that they were bad in this respect, and that the defendant
was not in a situation to maintain them. His Learned
Friend in saying that a week's time was given
; what the Court said was, that if the
to amend the pleas
was
wrongdefendant liked to confine his justification to that por-
' tiers of the pleas which related to the publication of a
eas
book under the assumed name of " Don Juan do Vega,"
he might do so.
Lord DENmax—What the Court said was, that if the
defendant wished to confine bis pleas of justification to
that matter he might do so ; but, on the other hand,
that if he thought proper he might amend his pleas.
Mr. COCKBLTRN—Eren supposing the most general
power of amendment bad been given by the Court, it
was impossible the defendant could be in a situation to
state with sufficient peculiarity that which the Court
would have required of him. lie had no other materials
than the book afforded him, and consequently he had
not the information that was absolutely essential for his
purpose. There was, therefore, no plea of justification
on the record ; from the nature of the case it was im-
possible there should be, and therefore he admitted that
in the present instance there must be a verdict for the
plaintiff. He apprehended, however, that in satisfaction
of damages he might call their attention to the state-
ments of the plaintiff himself, not with a view to making
out a complete justification, but to show that he was dis-
entitled to anything but nominal damages at their hands.
The Learned-Gentleman was then proceeding to refer to
the book containing the adventures of Don Juan de
Vega, when lie was interupted by
Sir F. THESIGER, who objected that the book could
not be referred to.
Lord DENMAN—Is it proposed to read those parts of
the book which are referred to in the libels?
Mr. CocKnuaN—Yes, my Lord.
Lord DENDIAN—I do not see how that can be done.
You have not pleaded that the book would make out
your case. The book would be evidence of any facts
stated in it; but you have not pleaded that the plaintiff
published the book.
Mr. WELSBY argued that as they proposed to read the
book, sot in justiAcation, but in mitigation of damage,,