The Sun.
London, England, 1834-02-22 00:00:00

64d
/&60 //e

(No. 2,934.)

manufacturer, Limehouse, March 17—W. Homan, smack.
owner, Barking, Essex, March 14—8.. George, stage-coach-
maker, Parker-street, Drury-lane, March 14—P. Barratt, jew-
eller, New Bond-street, March 14—S. E. Hobbs, grocer, Hit-
chin, Hertfordshire, March 14—M. Tyler, brewer, Lincombe,
Somersetshire, March 24—J. Atkinson, dealer in slates, Cock-
ermouth, Cumberland, March 20—T. C. Waters, ironmonger,
Bristol, March 15—T. Wood, ironmonger, Bilston, Stafford.
shire, March 15—J. Taylor, timber-merchant, Manchester,
March 5.

_
-,:40 ,.-4, .....- . ---
_,--,- 4 2.0e1
f'..1•:,4.).-
...,,,,...., ... , - --.- , .i.. , Lffrz, r,
,-- '=--------- it ‘ • ' .... o.iTi• - LtAti. 9 \ -1 .
14- I .. -- l' ...r. . ,iik- \.`
'-''rtiv - -11.-f .-
N't,PAILt =-•- \ ' -", - '''''':47,',l::,... ,
. . ,
1.-.- A.. , 4' . . _ 7 - - ,// 0 •\.,„..,_ .
1 - ' -..t4 1 47.4. ..:.:,-,: ~: . -, f"-- ' ~,,,,- 'ag v:
'. ki`\ \ , , ',O-, • - ~ '7‹......x. )..4-4.-. - ,
'4 Illith'a,:‘ --\...\l** :1-1- i :=2'"'s:/..11\\,\,-'.. t;
!-4,,,. lti. '...... : , , ..,4.\.,.., ' ~,- \.A. ' ,
_.,...., 2,4., ,„; ,_ • t .
~
,
-4 .1,...,11-4\
........,,,.. „0,--...-4..,,,,-4
I ‘L.
, it_ LI ..,i. _
.....--, ,
( .r#:°--',4. \. l'o .cr:-.' . ,o.< N -:,=•--.•,---'-' ------7--:,:„.......---7
( :
'".'•1.4 vv. _-,,,....c.,....4,tr _,,.4.5.,-- r:, - i.,-.1

" Hoc opus est:"

" Quantum mutatus ab illo!"

( PRICE 7D.)

Cross-examined by Sir J. SCARLErr—Had been at Bewdle
since this action. Went to the " Standard" office in the nam:'
of both Mr. Crudington and Allport. Has no other clients a'
Bewdley who intend to bring such actions as these. Was a:
Bewdley a week, and lived in Mr. Crudington's house. Had a
letter on Saturday last, between four and five o'clock, to say
that the justifications were withdrawn ; and about 8 o'clock a
notice to attend the Judge on Monday.
By Mr. PoLLocx—There had been three previous orders to
amend the pleas, and part of the last was, no future amend-
ment should be made, and the Judge consented, on the ground
of the distance which the witnesses came. The pleas were word
for word the same on the record.

Sir J. SCARLETT objected to the reading of the pleas.
Mr. Pouocx—They are here, and we consider them read.
That is the case for the prosecution.
Sir J. SCARLETT then proceeded to address the Jury for the
defendant. Having expressed some impatience at the long
speech made by his Learned Friend Mr. Pollock, he should
not make one himself: he considered half an hour quite time
enough, though his Learned Friend had continued one hour
and ten minutes. _ _

Mr. POLLOCK said if these remarks were indulged in he
should notice the time consumed by his Learned Friend on the
northern circuit.—(A laugh.)
Sir JAM ES SCsaLErr resumed. Some gentlemen had the art
of prolonging cases by remarks upon every trivial circum-
stance ; it was only the other day his Learned Friend spent
three hours in endeavouring to persuade a jury that it was no
libel to say of a Bishop who had so far forgot the precept, " do as
you would be done by," as to retain money not his own in his
hands, that he acted contrary to justice and equity, and to-day
he had spent an hour and a half in trying to persuade the jury
that was a libel which, for the honour of his genius let it be
said, he did not begin to read himself until he was just about
to address them ; and after going tediously through it he found
his libel at last like a needle in a bottle of hay, very
rusty and pointless. Why was so much time wasted in
this case from Bewdley, and who was this tanner of Bewdley
that it should be necessary to bring his case before a Jury of
London citizens, to vindicate his honour at Bewdley ? And
where was a single witness to prove that the tanner of Bewdley
had suffered anything from the alleged libel ? His Learned
Friend had endeavoured to influence the Jury by pleas which
were withdrawn last week ; every tyro in the law knew that to
be irregular. He (Sir James Scarlett) could make no objection
to the general issue, but he had objection to the reading of the
pleas, which had been withdrawn, Such a course was a perfect
novelty, but he excused it, because his Learned Friend wanted
matter. He had gone on a great deal about a man not being able to
dine at an election dinner without being libelled, in terms so
affecting, that he wondered his Learned Friend did not shed
tears.—(Laughter.) He thought the case of this poor tanner
would certainly have made him weep. It was not very long
ago that his Lordship stated to a jury that publications arising
out of contested elections had better be disregarded by all par-
ties; and he (Sir J. Scarlett,) was lately counsel for a Learned
Friend who was himself a candidate, and who had been at-
tacked in several libels. His Lordship advised the Jury
to pass over the first and second, because they
were almost simultaneous with the election itself, but the
third, being six months after date, when it might have reason.
ably been supposed that party spirit had subsided, a verdict fcr
the plaintiff was given upon it, but only to the amount of 20s.
'Why were the pleas withdrawn in this case? Notice was
given last Saturday, and a letter might have gone to Bewdley
in a night, but still nothing was done. Why was this ? Be-
cause, in fact, it was discovered a little too late that the letter
complained of was not a libel. It did not in any wise
relate to the plaintiff's character as a private man, nor was
it calculated in the least degree to affect him in his
trade and business. In the late general election a Member, of
course was roturned for Bewdley, and a dinner given to cele-
brate the success of the popular candidate, of which an-account
had appealed in the " Worcester Herald," which, however, his
Learned Friend had not read to the Jury. Upon reading that
account some one wrote a letter to the "Standard," which
really contained no libel at all, but concluded with a scrap of
Latin, in which Mr. Allport, no doubt thought all the libello,s
matter was con- tained :
" Facilis descensus averni ;
Sed revocare gradum, superasque evadere ad auras,
Hic labar, hoc opus est."
He remembered a play in which a schoolmaster quoted Latin,
at which the person whom he addressed was much annoyed—
" Facilis descensus averni," says the schoolmaster. " Sir,"
replies theman, " I,will not endure such abuse."
"Sed revocare graduum superasque evadere ad auras," con-
tinues the schoolmaster. " Zounds I" cries the man, " why
that is worse and worse."—(Laughter.) The plaintiff ought
to have been informed by his adviser that these words were no
libel at all, but merely a quotation from Virgil. There was
. .

net even an inuendo in it that Mr. Alport was a bad tanner,
or that he could not sustain his credit. No, his Counsel had
not proved that, but left the Jury to draw it out of the Latin.

- ,
" Hic labor, hoc opus est!"
There was the libel; that was the most laborious part;

That was the sting.—(Laughter.) Nor was it worthy of an
English Jury to be occupied with such a case as
this ?—lf it was treated as a libel at all, it would
be a bad precedent. If, as his Learned Friend had
said, those who won would laugh, it was natural that those who
lost should be allowed to rail a little. Mr. Aliport had figured
in the " Worcester Herald," and some disappointed elector
thinking he would also figure in the London papers wrote to the
" S andard" here to take him down a peg or two. There was
no libel of and concerning his trade and business, as stated in

the declaration which described him as " a tanner in good cir-
cumstances, and carrying on business in good fame;" but there
was no evidence to prove that called. But the libel did not say
one word against his eminence as a tanner in Bewdley, nor
was even a copy of the paper, containing the libel produced.
The publication was admitted, but the libel was denied. The
plaintiff's attorney had been, a week at Bewdley, and good quar-
ters, no doubt; but the counsel for the prosecution had not
ventured to ask him if he believed Mr. Allport had suffered
by the letter. Mr. Crudgington was sitting before him ; but
that gentleman had not been called upon to give evidence.
Mr. C. was spoken of in the letter as an independent gentle-
man, who had condescended to associate with a tanner, and the
association was deemed unnatural, and it was observed of him

Surely it was no libel to say that a gentleman forming a new
association with a tanner, had descended from his rank—it
could be no libel upon the tanner. As to his being a man of
no note, and that he had everything to gain, and nothing to
lose, such were the common expressions used in reference to
persons who wished for political changes, that they might
have to exercise some privilege which they did not perhaps
before possess. All through the letter, it would be seen by any
unprejudiced person, that Mr. Allport was spoken of in a
political sense only, and not in reference to his character
or standing as a gentleman or tradesman. It was
said that Allport was lower in rank than Mr. Crudging-
ton, was that a libel ? A great attempt was made to shew there
Was an indemnity, but there was no proof of it. They teased the
editor to give up the author ; he could not find the letter and
there was no proof that it ever existed. No doubt if a verdict
for ss. was given, the mail coach would go down with ribbons,
because costs would be carried. It was, however. a paltry
thing, and he hoped the jury would give a verdict for the de.
fendant—was it necessary that a political squib like this should

be made the subject of an action ? Was there any proof of da.
mages ? He would undertake to say if this was made the sub.
ject of damages, there were thousands of such libels, and the

profession would have no time to attend to any thing else. The
letter was merely to shew that the successful candidate was not

supported by the higher part of the Corporation, and not affect-
ing the plaintiff in his bussness. He trusted that the jury would
by their verdict shew they entertained the same notion of the
case as he did.

The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE summed up the case shortly to
the Jury, who, after a consultation of nearly forty minutes re-
turned a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages, 40s.

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

We think we ought to congratulate Ministers, as well as the
public, on the majority which has rescinded the motion for a
committee of inquiry into the conduct of Mr. Baron Smith.
That committee would have done no good to counterbalance
the enormous evil resulting from its being considered, as it
would have been throughout nine-tenths of the Irish popula.
tion, a triumph over the Judicial Bench. That Bench presents
almost the only moral barrier to the never-m*4'i; violence
of the Irish agitators; remove it, and nothing remain,
but an immediate appeal to brute force. We have sees;
that the Government never treated the question as a mi.
nisterial one ; this was evident from the conduct and de-
clarations of Ministers themselves, as well of those who
voted for, as of those who voted against, Mr. O'Connell's mo-
tion for the committee, and from their total abstinence (since
Sir Edward Knatchbull gave notice of his motion) of any soli-
citation or attempt to muster their friends in support of the
decision of Thursday se'nnight. They felt that the vote of
that night was calculated to produce the salutary effect of con-
trolling the indiscretion of the learned Baron whose conduct
had been impugned : and they must, therefore, rejoice in a
result which has cut away the necessity of any further inves.i.
gation,—superfluous as further investigation must have beet,
with respect to the learned object of the inquiry, and mis-
chievous as regards the people of Ireland.—Tintes.
The frivolous though insidious motion made last evening 133
Lord Chandos produced a debate, the whole of which, untie
the last half hour, was amongst the most stupid and tiresome
which we ever heard. It was, with that exception, a true
low-price- malt-tax, land-ruination, corn-law, country-gossip
At length, in an evil hour for himself, on came O'Conne 1
whose speech will be found in our report; but of which, les'
the agitator should go to the Scrgeant.at-Arms to answer us
we think fit to take but little further notice. Nevertheless
we may remind the reader, that there II a personage who some.