The Sun.
London, England, 1848-11-07 00:00:00

BAIL COURT.-(THIS DAY.)

CRIMINAL INFORMATION.-THE QUEEN ON THE PRO-
SECUTION OF THE MAGISTRATES OF CHELTENHAM V.

HADLEY.

The ATTORNEY GENERAL applied to the Court on

behalf of several of the magistrates of the Cheltenham
division of the county of Gloucester for a rule calling
upon John Hadley, the printer and proprietor of a news-
paper called the Cheltenham Journal and Stroud Herald,
to show cause why a criminal information should not be
filed against him, for printing and publishing a libel re-
flecting on the public character of the magistrates of
Cheltenham generally. He would read the libel, and it
would at once be seen that it reflected severely upon the
Cheltenham bench of magistrates. The libel was pub-
lished on the 31st of July last, and it professed to be the
report of a speech of a gentleman named Lingwood, an
attorney practising in Cheltenham, and addressed to a
close meeting of the Cheltenham Conservative Associa-
tion. The Learned Gentleman proceeded to read the
speech in question. It commenced by stating the opinion
of the speaker that it was not sufficient for the people of
Cheltenham to return a Member to Parliament, but they
must have their local offices of trust filled by men of
their own colour. They had had yellow officers long
enough, and it was high time they were got rid of. The
character of a public officer was public property, and so
long as a public officer misconducted himself he was liable
to befound fault with, and from the magistrate on the bench
down to the bum-bailiff who levied a distress, all were re-
sponsible for what they did and said. (The Attorney
General remarked in parenthesis that he wished the gen-
tleman would act upon this principle, and take upon himself
the responsibility of the libel). The speaker then went
on to say that it was his duty to tell the meeting though
he was extremely sorry to do so, that the magistrates of
the town of Cheltenham prostituted their offices to poli-
tical purposes, and it was his intention to present a me-
morial to the Lord Chancellor, "the man who sat upon the
Woolsack," upon the subject of their conduct. He would
not, the speaker continued, allow their public offices to
be prostituted in this manner, for until they got justice
administered impartially, the people of Cheltenham were
not free men, but slaves. The other day a poor man
came to him and said, " What am Ito do under these
circumstances • here am I summoned by the magistrate
for the rates, although they know I am poor and cannot
pay, but they know I am a Conservative and this will
enable them to strike my name off the register while
there is a neighbour of mine who has not paid his rates,
although he has got plenty of money, but he happens to
be a yellow, and, therefore his rates are excused him, so
that he may get on the register." The speaker concluded
by staking his reputation upon the truth of his state-
ments. The Attorney-General said he thought the Court
would agree with him that this was a most scandalous
imputation upon the Cheltenham magistracy. He had
affidavits of the leading members of tbat body, declaring
that the statement that they prostituted their offices to
political purposes was totally untrue, as was also the
assertion that they had excused persons from the pay-
ment of rates because they were yellow or upon any pre-
tence whatever, He had also the affidavit of the over-
seers of the parish confirming these declarations, and
here in ordinary cases his application would end, but
there were other circumstances connected with this par-

titular case-
to which he thought it right to call the
attention of the court. On the 7th of August there was
another number of this paper published, containing mat-
ter relating to this particular speech. It appeared by
that paper, that Mr. Lingwood addressed a letter to the
editor, complaining that his speech had been inaccurately
reported, and stating that he had sent a letter to the
magistrates disclaiming some of the sentiments expressed
in the speech. The editor of the paper attached a
note to this letter, insisting that the speech had been re-
ported as it was spoken. But that did not matter, as
the letter itself, so far as the magistrates were concerned,
only aggravated the charge which the speech made
against them. It did not state what part of the speech
was inaccurate, whether it .was the part relating to the
threat to memorialise the Lord Chancellor, " the man
who sat upon the Woolsack," or excusing parties for
non-payment of rates in prostituting their offices to
political purposes, and accordingly Mr. Williams, the
clerk of the magistrates, wrote a letter to Mr. Lingwood,
pointing out the vagueness of his communication—
stigmatising the speech as a crime, and announcing the
opinion of the magistracy that the matter was beyond
their limits of an apology, and would have to be de-
cided by a Court of Justice. In conclusion, the
Learned Attorney-General said, it seemed to have been
the result-of a settled purpose that Mr. Lingwood should
have made this speech contrary to the usual practice,
all the other newspapers but this particular one were ex-
cluded from the meeting where it was delivered, and it
would be for the printer and proprietor of the newspaper
to explain whether he had not been indemnified for
printing and publishing this libel in his paper.
Mr. Justice PATTESOIi granted the application.

COMMON PLEAS.—(THIS DAY.)
(Sittings in Banco.)
PAVIDSON V. noux.
This was an action for infringement of copyright on
the part of the defendant by publishing in the Musical
Gem the words and music of a song which it was alleged
was the property of plaintiff. The action was tried be-
fore Mr. Justice Williams at Guildhall, and the verdict
was subs!antially for defendant.
Mr. Sergeant CHANNELL now moved, on various tech-
nical grounds, to set the ♦erdict aside, but
The COURT refused the application.

MIDDLESEX SESSIONS.
(THIS DAY.)
(Before Mr. WITHAM and a Bench of Magistrates.)
The November general sessions were opened this day
before Mr. Witham, at the Sessions House, Clerkenwell-
green. The calender is comparatively light, the number
of prisoners (about 70) being much below the average,
John Lake, aged 30, was indicted for stealing a po-
tato-fork, of the value of six shillings, the property of
William Jones.

The prosecutor lives at Hounslow, and was robbed of
the fork in question, which was afterwards found in the
prisoner's possession.
The prisoner, who is a farm labourer, said in his de
fence that he purchased the fork for two shillings from a
woman at Hounslow, and that whilst he was making the
bargain with her she managed to pick his pocket of five
shillings and sixpence.
The jury, however, disbelieved the statement, and
found the prisoner Guilty. He was sentenced to three
months' imptisoment and hard labour.

BOW-STREET.—(THIS DAY.)
Thomas Mopdy, the young Irishman who was on
Friday last remarde4 upon the charge of cutting and
maiming a fellow-countr) wan named Murphy, was again
placed to the dock, but no one appeaping for the prose-
cution, he was disehgrged. It is rumoured that the pin
secutor and his witnesses were intimidated from ap-
pearing.

WORSHIP-STREET.—(THIS DAY.)
Maria Ann Evans' lately in the service of Mr. Lewis
Pesman, 15, Lamb-street, Spitalfields, printer, was
charged with robbing the latter of a variety of valuable
articles.

Mr. Pesuaan stated that he had for some time previous
to the 4th inst. reason to suspect the Owner's honesty,