The Sun.
London, England, 1834-08-08 00:00:00

THE CASE OF MAJOR PITMAN.

Mr. WILK S wished to know what had been done by the
Government in the case of the Magistrate of the name of
Pitman, who was sentenced by his brother Magistrate to pay
a fine of 5/. There was a general feeling in the country
that this fine was aathimproper and unsatisfactory punishment,
and that instead of Tning this magistrate, they ought to have
referred the case to the sessions. He wished also to know
whether there had been any communication with the Lord
Lieutenant of the County of Devonshire upon this subject.
Mr. E. J. STANLEY said that the Government felt that
the matter could not be in better hands than in those of the
Noble Lord, the Lord Lieutenant of the county, and therefore
left the investigation of the circumstances of the case to him.
Lord EBRINGTON said, that as Lord Lieutenant of the
County, he had felt it his duty to state to the Lord Chancellor
the circumstances of this case, with the conviction that had
been obtained, and the Lord Chancellor had, in consequence,
felt it his duty to remove the magistrate in question (Major
Pitcairn) from the commissien.—( Hear, hear.)
STARCH DUTY REPEAL BILL.

Upon the motion of Lord ALTHORP, the Starch Duty
Repeal Bill was read a third time.
STONE BOTTLES DUTY BILL.

Upon the motion of Lord ALTHORP, the Stone Bottles
Duty Repeal Bill was read a first, second, and third time.
SPIRITS DUTIES BILL.

Upon the motion of Lord ALTHORP that the Spirits
Duties Bill be read a third tim',

Mr. BL AMIRE wished to remind the Noble Lord of a pe-
tition that had been presented by him a short time since,
from a body of respectable spirit dealers in Carlisle,
complaining of various matters, particularly of the hardships
they were made by the system consequent on the carrying on
of the smuggling that was practised, and wishing to know
if any step was intended to be taken by Government
with a view to put an end to such a system. Thii
question he begged to put to the Noble Lord now. The
petition also complained that the dealers were under great
difficulties from not being allowed to carry on their
business at any place save ond, and that one being
a chartered fair. It was impossible for the dealers
to know, in most instances, which fairs were chartered
fairs, and he (Mr. B.) wished to know if any measure was to
be adopted in respect of this. He hoped that the Noble
Lord would, upon revising the law affecti.ig spirit dealers,
endeavour to afford them some relief upon this. If he would,
it would tend much to reconcile licensed dealers to the im-
posts now about to be imposed upon them.
Lord ALTHORP said there was certainly nothing in the
present Bill to affect the system of smuggling, either for the
better or the worse. There always had been great difficulty
in preventing smuggling. It undoubtedly was the duty of
Government to do all it could to check it, and it would con-
tinue to use every exertion with thot view. The means
that had been taken likely had had a very beneficial
effect.--( Hear.) With regard to tho chartered fairs, as
distinguished from other fairs, if he (the Noble Lord)
could find any means of defining such fairs, he would most
gladly avail himself of any advantage that might be likely
to be afforded by it. He would give the subject all
the consideration he could. He was aware that the
interpretation put upon the restriction of dealers not going to
any fairs except chartered fairs was very strict, and stricter
than it ought to be.
The Bill was then read a third time and passed.
Lord ALTHORP moved the order of the day for the third
reading of the Consolidated Fund Bili.
Mr. G. F. YOUNG inquired whether any thing had been
done to carry into effect the recommendation which had been
made by the Committee on Official Houses to appropriee a
house to the librarian of the House of Commons.

Mr. HUME said that such a house was set apart, but in the
possession of another person.
Lord ALTHORP was understood to say that he was not
prepared to answer the question.
After a few words from Mr. RUTHVEN

Mr. ATTWOOD wished to ask the Noble Lord whether
in granting such large sums of money, they were given
to purchase the degradation of England?—( Hear, hear.)
He alluded to the state of affairs in Poland, Turkey, and Rus-
sia, and unless the foreign honour of the country was supported
he should oppose every Appropiation Bill.
Lord ALTHORP was satisfied that the honour of Eng-
land was perfectly secure.—( Hear.)
Mr. HUME asked whether it was not intended to take
100,0001. from the Consolidated Fund, for the purpose of
supplying the deficiencies of tithes in Ireland.
Mr. LITTLETON said there was not any such intention.
Mr. HUME said there was such a sum mentioned.

Mr. LITTLETON said there was 100,0001. borrowed
for the purpose of meeting the first demands of the clergy,
and the deficiency of tithes occasioned by the allowance of
one-fifth,would be paid out of the Consolidated Fund.
Mr. SHAW contended, that the whole system was a
delusion, and that there never would be sufficient resources
arising from the Perpetuity Purchase Fund, to pay the yearly
demand of 100,0001.

(LEFT SPEAKING.)

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

HOME CIRCUIT.—GUILDFORD, AUG 7.
(Before Mr. Justice LITTLEDALE.)
Joseph Fisher Perkins, aged 28, was indicted for bigamy.
Mr. Maclean was counsel for the prosecution.
The prisoner, it appeared, had married his first wife at Bir-
mingham, in March, 1825. She was now alive, and preferred
the charge against him at Union-hall. The marriage with his
second wife was proved to have been solemnized at Peter's,
Walworth, on the 16th of July last. She had gone by the name
of Emma Maslin, and had been in the wine business there.
An examined copy of a certificate of a marriage by licence
between the prisoner and Emma Thornley was put in. One
of the witnesses said he did not think Maslin her real name.
Mr. CLARKSON and Mr. CHAMBERS objected that the evi-
dence did not sufficiently show the marriage of the second
woman by the name of Emma Thornley. but
The prisoner was found Guilty. The Jury recommended
him to mercy, and he was sentenced to three months' impri-
sonment.

DICAS V. HARMER, GENT., AND ANOTHER.
This was an action brought by the plaintiff against Mr.
Harmer and another, as proprietors of the Weekly Dispatch,
for a libel in the publication of a report contained in that paper
of the proceedings on the trial of "Dicas v. Onwhyn," the
newsvender, on which occasion the plaintiff recovered one
farthing damages.
Mr. PLATT stated that his client, Mr. Dicas, was an attor-
ney of all the superior courts of Westminster, and had been
so for thirty years, and he had now to complain of a libel in a
weekly newspaper called the Weekly Dispatch. Persons who
had the weapon of a newspaper at their command were fear-
ful antagonists, but his client had had the courage to face
them. Mr. Dicas being libelled in the Satirist, brought an
action against the proprietors, and at the same time cautioned
all newsvenders against selling the paper. Onwhyn, how-
ever, sold the paper, and an action was brought against him,
and he obtained a verdict for a very small amount. Mr. Platt
then read the alleged libel, being the report of the trial, parti-
cularly the speech of Sir John Campbell, the then Solicitor-
General. He (Mr. Platt) considered that the freedom of
speech belonging to the bar was the freedom of the people—
that freedom by which the property, the rights, and liberties
of the subject were protected. Any one who dared to put it
down would be a traitor to his country. But no gentleman at
the bar, be he Solicitor or Attorney-General, could have a
right to travel out of the record, as it was made to appear by
this report Sir John Campbell had done.
The newspaper of February 16 was then put in ; the formal
proofs of the defendant's proprietorship, and the plaintiff's ad-
mission and acting as an attorney, having been given.
Charles Bluck, a coal-merchant, had known Dicas, and con-
sidered the libel to relate to him.

Mr. ADOLPHUS then addressed the jury. He began by ob-
serving that he must be careful what he said, or he might find
on his return to town that he was ranked among those who
were selected by Mr. Dicas as his victims. Without aspiring
to the honours of Ulysses, he should regret deeply been
brought into a contest with Thyrsites. Mr. Harmer (his cli-

ent), who was contrasted with the plaintiff, was'ti every reg. 4
pect a contrast to him. The learned gentleman then pro- \
nounced a panegyric on Mr. Harmer, whom he said he hut
known upwards of twenty years. Those who -tleclair••
libe ty of speech generally meant to say " I
free." It had been asserted that this report
Campbell's speech was invention ; if so, the pl
have shown that it was so. It was of great it'll
proceedings of courts of justice should be laid ber
Those courts were the schools of the purest na,
trated by actual examples. Miserably defective
be the morality of this or any other country were not the pro_.
ceedings of our courts fully and fairly detailed. It was this
privilege which distinguished the court in which they were
assembled from the Star Chamber. He contended it would
be sufficient if the jury believed the report to be substantially
true. If the jury felt themselves compelled to find a verdict
for the plaintiff, he hoped they would follow the example of
the jury in " Dicas v. Onwhyn," and send him to the Mas-
ter's office to pocket the smallest damages, and that would be
the benefit Mr. Dicas would derive from having been thirty
years an attorney. They must act towards the press as Prior
had told the lover to behave to his mistress, and which had
been so happily quoted by Erskine in a case of libel—
_

'I Be to her virtues very kind :
" Be to her faults a little blind."
He was sure they knew the value of the freedom of the press,
and would afford him the satisfaction of witnessing by their
verdict their vindication of one of the principal branches of
English liberty.
The CHIEF JUSTICE, in summing up, told the Jury that they
must be of opinion that the tendency of the publication ins
question was to injure the plaintiff in ms enaracter and con-
fession, before they found a verdict in his favour. Supposing
it had been pleaded that what was published was a fair and
correct report of what passed upon the trial, that might have
been an answer to the present action ; he did not wish to be
considered as laying it down that it would, because counsel,
from the excitement of the moment, made observations that
were irrelevant, and which, as they ought not to have beep
made in court, ought not to be published out of court. The
general rule of law was, that what passed in courts of law,
might be published; but still it sometimes happened that
things passed there which would fall within the exception to
the rule. On this occasion no justification had been pleaded;
they would therefore inquire among themselves whether that
which purported to be a report of the trial, mid the account
of what was stated to be the speech of the Solicitor-General,
was likely to prejudice the plaintiff in his bn,siness as an
attorney. They would say, if the paper contained a false and
malicious statement, tending to injure the plaintiff in his
reputation.
The Jury, after retiring about three-quarters of an. hour,
returned a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages 201.
Mr. PLATT, on the behalf of Mr. Dicas, applied to his
Lordship to certify for a Special Jury, but his Lordship refo.sed
to do so.

DICAS V. HARMER, GENT., BELL, AND OTHERS.

Mr. PLATT stated that this was another action which his
client had been compelled to bring against the proprietors of
the Weekly Dispatch for libel. It appeared as though it was
intended to hunt Mr. Dicas down by means of these publica-
tions. The libel now complained of appeared in the Weekly
Dispatch of the 30th March last, and professed to be a report
of what passed at Kingston on the trial of the action just dis-
posed of, when the cause came on for trial, and the defendant's
counsel not appearing, the Jury gave Mr. Dicas a verdict for
501. On the following day ( Sunday) a large placard or
broadside was exhibited, on which was printed in a large type
" Lawyer Dicas again against the Dispatch for a libel !" In
the paper was given an account of the Kingston trial, and if
that journal had confined itself to the publication of what took
place on that occasion, and had given a fair and impartial ac-
count of the proceedings, Mr. Dicas would not have com-
plained : but they would find it did not bear that character-
The opinion of the noble and learned Judge was entirely
omitted. _

The CHIEF JUSTICE—I don't see how omitting the sum-
ming up of the judge can make this a libel,
Mr. PLATT contended it gave a character to the publication.
The Jury would find that the word " gentlemen" attached to
his client's name was printed in italics ; it also described him
as a " gentleman by Act of Parliament," and spoke of him as
" Mister Dicas." He was sure they would see the motive with
which these things were done, and that the object was not to
give a faithful report of the trial, but to hold up his client to
ridicule. So anxious had Mr. Dicas been to leave no room
for the insinuation that he was actuated by a fondness for costs,
that he had offered to consolidate the present with the last ac-
tion, that one Jury might try them, and thus save expense, he
(Mr. Dicas) being desirous to diminish the costs as much as
possible. To that offer the defendants had not condescended
to give an answer. His learned friend (Mr. Thesiger) would
have no ground for the trite insinuations about costs. He must
choose higher topics for his eloquence. The English bar had
had its Erskiner, " we had our Dunnings."
Mr. THESIGER—We have, indeed !
Mr. PLATT—His learned friend, notwithstanding this play.
fulness of wit, would follow their examples ; he hoped he
would not attempt to go beyond them.
The formal proof was then given of the plaintiff's admission
as an attorney, and of the defendants' property in the paper.
The libel was put in and read. It spoke of the plaintiff as
the well-known Dicas, and alluded to "his susceptible feel-
ings." It then proceeded to give nearly a column and a quar-
ter of the speech of the plaintiff's counsel.
Mr. THESIGER (with whom was Mr. Adolphus) then ad-
dressed the jury. " Dicas again lawyer Dicas against the
Dispatch for libel !" He hoped he was not making himself
liable to an action for repeating those words with somewhat of
emphasis. The plaintiff had come to Guilford to breathe the
country air for the benefit of his health, and to benefit his
character. The task of his learned friend was to clean and
clear the character of Mr. Dicas—of " Mr. Dicas, again and.
again." His friend had shown much zeal, but those who were
acquainted with him knew that his zeol was often in an inverse
ratio with the quality of the cause he had to advocate. He
( Mr. Thesiger) was at Kingston, and he asserted that the libel
complained of was a faithful and accurate report of the trial.
Mr. Dicas having just received a verdict with damages, felt
desirous of a littl more gold to add more lustre to nis name.
Nol
c.f.'
al libelicseamue rsr :et
iDicas'sti
it was
complaineddwta
owno
tsha eisaid
ceohgueornfe
sheeald of. was
„glt
nhse
susceptible
his
clipublicationesemptaideclaration
ey .feetfeelings."
I)
nef
he
complained
o.thers, t
apstlpm4e6hec
dh:
b
what an amiable sensitive plant of the law was Dicas I He
could not be touched without shrinking ; no breath could
assail him but his reputation immediately withered, and when
rudely attacked he came forward at once to vindicate his high
and honourable and gentlemanly character. Then he com-
plained of being termed the " well-known." Suppose it had
been said that he was the " ill-known," there certainly woilld
have been an action brought for that. Then he was called " a
gentleman by Act of Parliament," and that too was said to be
libellous ; and " Mister," in italia, was not to be borne by,
Mr. Dicas. There was no pleasing him. If he was Called
" Mr." Dicas, it was a libel ; it they said " Dicas again," that
was actionable ; if the public were informed that he was " a
gentleman by Act of Parliamerit," that was intolerable, though
in the cause-list he had entered himself as " Dicas, gent.,
one, &c." Then he complained of being called " lawyer."
What I was a lawyer a term of reproach? Suppose they had
said he was no lawyer ; there was an action ready directly.
So that there was no eluding his vigilance. He had all his
broadsides down upon them at once. If he was called no
lawyer, that was disparagement ; if he was called a lawyer,
that was a deep insult. So that, however he was spoken of;
he was at them—yes, " again and again," to vindicate his cha-
racter. He trusted the jury would discourage such actions.'
The jury returneda verdict for the defendant.

EXECUTION OF THOMAS HAMMOND, AT

MAIDSTONE.

This day (Thursday) at noon, the sentence of the law was
carried into effect upon a platform erected on the lodge of the
county gaol, on the above-named malefactor, who was con-
victed at the late assizes of committing a rape upon Mrs.
Sarah Pegg, on the 19th of March last, at Wmgham, in this
county. The dread of a violent death appeared to prey upon
his mind, and his physical poll ers were in consequence much
relaxed. On Monday he was visited by his parents and other
relatives, which terminated in a final separation which it is said
was truly affecting. Yesterday ( Wednesday) the Rev. Mr.
Ovendon, vicar of Wingham, as a last effort to save his life,
applied at the office of the Secretary of State for the Home
Department, in consequence of which a letter was despatched
to Mr. Agar, the gaoler, which he received a few hours
.be-
fore that appointed for the execution. It stated, that as the
offence was of such an aggravated nature, his Majesty's ser-
vants were of opinion, after due inquiry and deliberation, that
the law must take its course. About nine o'clOck the male-
factor attended divine service in the chapel, when the Rev.
Mr. Winter, the chaplain, readand expounded the Scriptures
to him, and engaged in prayer. " After this it was announced
to the prisoner that an uncle had arrived, and desired to see
him. The prisoner assented, and an interview was allowed ;
the prisoner conversed freely, and expressed sorrow that he
had brought so much misery into his family. His father was
in the neighbourhood, but the poor old man dared not hazard
another parting interview. At half-past eleven o'clock, Mr.
Under Sheriff Wildes arrived at the gaol with his officers,
and demanded the prisoner, who was delivered up to the ex-
ecutioner, and his arms and wrists were pinioned in the usual
way. When the culprit got to the room which led to the plat-
form, he requested to retire into another apartment to pray
alone for a few moments, and he was allowed to do so. He
then ascended the scaffold with a firm step, and gazed stead-
fastly at the multitude below him. The executioner then ad-
justed the rope, with his usual celerity, when the unhappy
youth wished to say a word or two. He spoke as follows :
, " I hope that my fate will be a warning to all young men, and
that they will hereafter refrain from attending at public houses."
been The Under Sheriff loudly repeated his dying words to the
anxious multitude. The cap was then drawn down, the fatal
bolt was withdrawn, and in less than a minute-the unfortunate
spectators
youth appeared to be lifeless. After the body had
sus-
pended an hour, it was cut down, anTdhdeelinuve.rem dbertoofhsisp
were in
prisonerattendanwceas to
a stcoountvi,e.yelli_tgt;
w for inter-
mileontw.sWinygouhnagin men, with
rather a prepossessing countenance, and h fate appeared to
excite considerable commiseration.
(many of whom were soldiers) were computed to be from
3,000 to 4,000.

vEUROPEAN,Two
volumes
juunsdtebreetnhepuabbliasvheedtbitylem,
COLONIES, BY JOHN HowisoN,
deserve to be especially introduced to "'r.salisentTlehye,
the public. Mr.
leads his reader to each quarter of the lobe,where
Howison. .
&
fhe foot of a British colonist has trodden, and brings him to a
ull acquaintance with it and its inhabitants, in a manner
which may almost be said to leave us nothing more to desire,
such is the author's accuracy of description and justness of
,J-1,,i-hsoiQct.in.: in ; Herald,
views.