The Sun.
London, England, 1834-06-11 00:00:00

CRIMINAL INFORMATION.

At the sitting of the Court this morning, the ATTOR-
NEY-GENERAL applied to their lordships for a rule to show
cause why a criminal information should not be filed
against a printer, for having printed and stuck up in his
shop window a libellous placard, charging the
deponent, an attorney, with malignity in circulating
a report that he (the author of the libel)
had been the abetter of an outrage recently committed
upon the deponent ; it also charged him with having
driven his wife away, and taken another woman under his
protection, and that he had five or six little sprouts to
maintain.
The COURT inquired if the placard had been sent pri-
vately to the deponent or any other person ?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL—NO, my lord, but it was
stuck up in the shop-window.
The Court, after consulting for a few moments, said,
that it did not appear to be quite a case for their inter-
ference. —Rule refused.
LIABILITY OF LANDLORDS.—THE KING V. MILLS.
This was an indictment for a nuisance tried before Chief
Justice Denman, at the Bedford Assizes. The de-
fendant was the proprietor of a piece of ground in the
neighbourhood of Bedford, upon which he had built seve-
ral small houses, and let them to tenants. There being
no drain or sewer from the premises, a public nuisance
was the consequence. The jury found the defendant
guilty. A rule to show cause why the verdict for the pro-
secutor should not be set aside, and a verdict entered for
the defendant, was afterwards obtained by Mr. Kelly.
Mr. Sergeant STORKES and Mr. AUSTIN now applied
to show cause against the rule. The single point was as to
the liability of the defendant, and it was maintained that
the defendant had rendered himself liable by being the pro-
prietor of the land, and having been the originator of the
nuisance, from the mode in which the houses had been
erected.
Mr. KELLY, in support of the rule, contended that the
landlord could not be liable for a nuisance committed by
his tenant; and as the houses had been let for a period of
six years, and no complaint of nuisance made until within
the last two years, it was evidently the fault of the tenant
that a nuisance now existed. Besides, the landlord could
not make a drain from the premises to the common sewer,
without trespassing upon the property of his neighbours.
The COURT was of opinion that the defendant having
become the owner of property, and built houses upon it
for his own profit, the natural consequence of the position
of which was, that a nuisance would take place, had ren-
dered himself liable and was guilty of the nuisance.—Rule
discharged.
DOE V. BARNES.

This was an action of ejectment, and the point at
issue was to try the validity of a will, involving
the title to very extensive property in Dorsetshire.
An application had been made on a previous occasion by
Sir James Scarlett for a rule to change the venue of the
trial from the county of Kent, on the ground that a pre-
judice existed against the defendant from the influence of
the plaintiffs, and the great disparity in tke rank of the
parties. The application was refused, and a second appli-
cation was now made by the same learned counsel, founded
on upwards of sixty affidavits.
Mr. TOLLETT and Mr. MAULE were heard against the
rule. The application was a direct reflection upon the
character of the county of Dorset and its jurors, and most
of the affidavits upon which it rested had been made by
persons in humble life, who could have no means of ascer-
taining what the feeling of the jurors was.
Sir JAMES SCARLETT replied.
Their Loansuirs were of opinion that no new grounds
had been laid before them for altering their formerdecision.
Rule refused.

" The Bourbons have disgraced me," said
Talleyrand in a prophetic mood ; " the example of the
Directory, and of Napoleon, has not proved a lesson
to them. Well, they too will meet their downfall.
There is something in me which is sure to prove fatal
to those who neglect me."
Under the Villele administration, observing
M. Ferrand enter the Chamber of Peers supported by
two footmen, Talleyrand said to his neighbour, " Look
at Ferrand, he is a type of the government, he fancies
he is walking while he is carried."
PROTESTANT EMIGRATION.—Our valu-
able Baltinglass correspondent mentions that a great
number of the protestants of that neighbourhood are
emigrating—the tenants of Lord Wicklow in the Glen
of Imeal are all going, and many of the protestant
tenants of Major Acton are abandoning their different
holdings. It is reported in the county that the Irish
protestants will be replaced by English settlers.—
.Dublin Register.