The Sun.
London, England, 1833-01-31 00:00:00

THE KING V. DRAKE.

The SOLICITOR•GENERAL showed cause against
a rule for a criminal information obtained by Sir J
Scarlett on the part of Mr. Knight, the Chancery
barrister, against Mr. William Walter Drake, for a
libel on the former gentleman.
Sir J. SCARLETT was about to support the rule,
when

The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE said that the Court
were of opinion that the rule should be made ab-
solute.—Rule absolute.

THE KING V. MINSHULL.

A rule Nisi for a mandamus had been obtained
by M•. POLLOCK against Mr. Minshull, the Magis-
trate, calling upon him to receive certain evidence
on an information laid by Johnson, the informer,
against a publican named Williams, for selling spirits
without a license.

Sir J. SCARLETT now showed cause. Williams,

the publican, had applied for a license at the Quarter
Sessions, and he received the license, signed by
four Magistrates out of six. When the information
was laid against him he produced his license, and
Mr. Minshull dismissed the case.

Mr. F. POLLOCK supported the rule.
Rule discharged, with costs.
EX PARTE ALLSTON, ESQ.

Mr. PLATT moved for a rule Nisi for a criminal
information against the printer and publisher of a
newspaper, called the County Press for Hertford-
shire, Bedfordshire, .S.c., for a libel in that paper
upon Mr. Allston, a Magistrate of the county of
Hertford. The Learned Counsel read the para-
graph, which he said was an attack by the Tories,
who had been triumphant in that county, upon the
Whigs, their fallen enemies, to which party Mr.
Allston was said to be attached. The article was
in the form of a comment on the conduct of the
`Whigs ; and in it Mr. Allston was charged with
improper conduct in his station of Magistrate, in
the rase of a person named Williams.
Rule Nisi granted.
THE KING V. BAINES AND OTHERS.
This was an application on the part of Mr. Cob-
bett for a criminal information against Edward
Baines, and Edward Baines the younger, publishers
of the Leeds Mercury, for a libel, stating that Mr.
Cobbett had been disqualified from taking his seat
iu the House of Commons for the borough of Old-
ham.

Mr. BAINES, on the part of the defendants, had a
fatal objection to make to this rule, which was, that
no certificate from the Stamp-office had been
produced according to the provisions of the Act of
Parliament. The fact of the defendants being the
proprietors and publishers appeared only on the affi-
davits of Mr. Cobbett and his attorney.
The COURT thought th e objection well-founded,
and discharged the rule.
EX PARTE WEATHERHEAD.

Sir J. SCARLETT moved for a rule to show cause
why a criminal information should not be filed against
William Francis, for a libel. The application was
made on an affidavit of Mr. Weatherhead, an opu.
lent brewer at Great Marlow, which stated the fol-
lowing circumstances :—A son of the applicant, a
Captain Weatherhead, died a short time ago, at
Thigliton, and on the 12th of January a paragraph
announcing his death appeared in a Windsor paper.
In the same paper appeared a letter to the editor,
alluding to an opulent trader at Great Marlow
(which the applicant stated to be unquestionably
applicable to himself), charging him with a series of
misconduct in election and other matters during a

long period ; also with improper conduct in endea-
vouring to influence persons by menaces and bribery.
The letter concluded with a reference to the para-
graph of the death of Captain Weatherhead, and a
remark that, " in the words of the Decalogue, the
sins of the father had been visited on the son."
The Learned Counsel then read the affidavit of the

editor of the newspaper, which stated that Mr.
William Francis, a schoolmaster of Great Marlow,
was in the habit occasionally of supplying articles
for the paper ; that the paragraph and letter in
question were in his handwriting.
The COURT granted a rule Nisi.
THE TIMES NEWSPAPER.
At the rising of the Court a gentleman addressed
their Lordships, stating that he wished to apply for
a criminal information against the printer of the
Times newspaper, for a libel contained in the Times
of this day week, a copy of which he held in his
hand. He said he had applied to the editor, who
had at first partly promised, but now refused, to give
up the author of the libel.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE—It is contrary to the
rule of the Court to allow a criminal information to
be applied for by any one but a gentleman of the liar.
Applicant—Will your Lordship, then, allow me
to have the assistance of Counsel in moving it to-
morrow ?
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE—The rule of the Court
does not allow motions for criminal informations on
the last day of term, but your Counsel may men-
tion it to-morrow, arid the Court will then see whe-
ther it is a case in which they may think fit to relax
the rule in your favour.

There has been a ridiculous report through
town for the last few days that ►he Duke of WELLINGTON
was coming over to Ireland as Lord Lieutenant.—Dublin
Morning Reg isle r.