The Sun.
London, England, 1858-08-20 00:00:00

LAW IN2'E.

SECONDARIES COURT.
In Common Pleas, befort Mr. Secondary Potter and a
Specal Jury.)
EXTRAORDINARY CAS, OF LIBEL.—MACKAY V.
BUiLOCK.

This was an action toagss damages in a case of libel,
published in n pamphlet, ettitlect " A Letter to the Lord
Chancellor," in which plainiff was charged with wilful and
corrupt perjury by defendan:-

Defendant had suffered julgment to go by default.
Plaintiff is a solicitor of ccasiderable practice, and defen-
dant a Major-General in the East India Company's service.
Mr. Slade, Q.C., for plain iff, stated the case as follows :
—That plaintiff was a highlj respectable solicitor, who was
much in favour with all whoknew him, with the exception
of defendant, who was ROW tics persecutor. Defendant was
gentleman of high standing in the East India Company's
service (Major-General), aril .had married a sister of the
Lord Chancellor, and the pry would see that the fact
of such a letter being addressed by defendant to
his father-in-law would be f considerable weight against
plaintiff. Now, in the electim of 1852, Sir Alex. Cockburn.
and another candidate were returned for the borough. of
Southampton, and Bullock was unsuccessful. A petition
was presented to the Hong of Commons, and a person
named Marston, who was examined as a witness, was
charged with perjury, and tied at the Queen's Bench and
convicted. Plaintiff was solicitor to Marston on that occa-
sion, and upon his conviction defendant charged plaintiff
with having deliberately and scandalously sold his client.
If Mr. Mackay had done thisthing he deserved to be struck
off the rolls. An action was brought, and plaintiff recovered
at 11. estminster a verdict of £2OO damages. Instead of
apologising for his libel, General Bullock repeated the libel
in a pamphlet to the Lord Cbincellor, in which he charges
Mr. Mackay with perjury. second action was brought
in the Court of Queen's Bend), in which plaintif received
damages £5OO. The matter Mu slumbered for 18 months,
and then defendant published a second pamphlet against
plaintiff, addressed to the Lord Chief-Justice, Lord Camp-
bell. The pamphlet contained the foulest abuse of every-
body concerned in the second trial. From Lord Campbell
down to the crier of the court, every one came in for the
vilest abuse. Even lie (Mr. lade), who was counsel for
plaintiff, came in for his share, And was charged with a sub-
ornation of perjury; and Mr. Sergeant Shee, defendant's
own counsel, came in for a shore of vituperation. No one
escaped. This pamphlet, with another, was sent to South-
ampton, and distributed among all the local authorities. In
the present year a third pamphlet, which gave rise to the
present action, was published, addressed to the Lord Chan-
cellor, upon Mr. Justice Bytes' presentation to the bench.
In this letter is the matter complained of. Defendant as-
serted that " Lord Campbell cautioned the jury against
Mrs. Bullock's evidence as she was an interested witness,
but ho bad not cautioned them against receiving Plaints 'o,
who had uttered the vilest and most scandalous perjury."
Now that was wit t a jury:bad to try, and they and gave
the plaintiff X5OO. Mr. 613de passed over the attack upon
himself. Lot d Campbell passed over the attack upon him-
self. They laughed at it as idle abuse. Mr. Mackay was
bound to take notice of the attack upon himself. It was
deliberate persecution, and unless he came into the court
could not keep his head above water. These accusations of
perjury, printed and published and disseminated in p'aintiffs
native town, was death to plaintiff, and the jury must now
step in between Mr. Mackay and his persecutor.
Jatncs Joel Bennett—ls a printer and publisher of South-
ampton, and knew defendant. In 1857 the defendant brought
the 1857 pamphlet to him, and requested him to publish it.
Witness mentioned that there was some strong language in
it, and defendant said, "I will indemnify you against ail
prosecution." We are liable to the excise. It is usual.
Mr. Slade—lt is not usual. It is the law.
Witness—One hundred and fifty copies were printed, and
two sent out by with-Qs—one to Lord Campbell, and the
other to Sir Frederic Thesiger. My. name is to the first
edition. I did not print the second edition, and there is no
name to it.
A portion of the second edition was read, and charged
plaintiff with deliberate false swearing. There was also an
attack upon Sergeant Byles, who cuuld not defend him,
being called to the Bench. It also abused Mr. Sergeant Shoe
for neglecting his cause. Cons'aint charges of perjury were
made in the pamphlet.
Mr. Hawkins, Q.C. (for defendant)—That was dis pd
of in the first action.
Slade=-It was published since.
Mr. Bennett, cross-examined—I have been a printer in
Southampton two years.
By the Jury—lf the author's name appears there is no oc-
cation for the printer to put
A Juror—l believe it is requisite.

Witness—Oh ! no.
Mr. Slade—You will find it so.
Mr. Weston—l am a town councillor of Southampton. I
first saw the pamphlet addressed to Lord Chelmsford in the
White Hart at Southampton. It was in the smoking room.
Mr. Hawkins objected to this as evidence of pub i, ation.
The learned Secondary thought he could receive the evi-
dence.
Mr. Sparks was then called.
Mr. Slade—Yon were called before ; why were you ab-
sent ?

Witness—l was sent for.
Mr. Slade—Who by?
Witness—Ger eral Bullock.

Mr. Slade—l thought so.
Witness examiced—l am a lawyer's clerk. I am clerk
to Messrs Page and Lee, of Southampton. Messrs. Page
and Lee are not the defendant's solicitors. They may have
been. They were. (Here the witness was cautioned.) I
distributed the pamphlet "A Recapitulation of Facts." I
distributed a quantity in Solithatnpton. (A list was then
handed to witness, who admitted sending all in the same
except one.) I left one at the police-station. I saw Mr.
Mackay, who threatened to proceed against ate if I did hot
desist and give up the name of my etvployer. Under that

threat I gave up the name.
By the Jury—l was not paid anything. I merely felt an
interest in the general question.
The list was then read. The witness then said there were
high and low in it; more low.
Mr. John Styles said he received the pamphlets from the
last witness. They were generally canvassed.
Cross-examined—l am town sergeant of Southampton.
I have transacted business with Mr. Mackay. I oace en-
eorsed a bill fur him. I execute process for him.
Other witne.-es.wer.—....u.d, who stated that they had
seen the pamphlet, and that the witness ..parrs nail given it
to them.
Mr. Slade—Ts it necessary for me to address the jury ?
The prisoner—Not at all necessary.
The case was proceedieg when we went to press.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.-Aug.2o.

OLD COURT.
(Before Mr. Justice Willes.)

RAPE.

Charles Slatter, a young man, a baker, lately residing
in Greenwich, was indicted for a rape committed on a girl
named Cotterel.
The case was proceeding when we went to press.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE-(THIS DAY.)

MARLBORO UGH- STREET.—SHAMMING FITS.--A
miserable-looking fellow named Angus lir Lead was charged
with shamming fits for the purpr,se of exciting charity.
From the evidence of a constable it appeared that, seeing
a large crowd assembled round the prisoner in the neigh-
bourhood of Oxford-street, he went up, when he saw bim
lying on the pavement apparently in a fit, from which, how-
evr..r, he soon recovered on seeing him, and, having ascer-
tained that he had been practising a similar trick very much
of late, he took him into custody. On the previous evening,
in Lancashire-court, Old Boad-street, he pretended t 3 have
a fit, when some persons kindly gave him some tea and
brandy, after ‘shicli he said he was better and would go.
Mr. Bingham--I should think so. I shall send you for
ten days, and make an endorsement that you may be looked
after by the surgeon.

POSSESSING SKELETON KEYS.—Henry Ball, of 12,
tlariiet-street, Pimlico, blacksmith, was charged with
loitering is Saukville-street, with the intention of commitiing
a felony. . _

Charles Coles, 317 A, a detective officer, proved watching
the prisoner, in company with another man, about Sack-
ville-street and the Burlington-gardens, for nearly an hour
late on the previous night, and taking him into custody,
and on searching him he found seven keys on him, three 01
them being skeleton keys. On asking him to account for
their possession, he solo they all opened his door. Be had
known him for a long time, but was not at present prepared
to say he had been convicted.
Remanded for a week. for inquiries to be made as to the
prisoner's address and antecedents.

THAMES.—THE MILE• END TOLL NUISANCE AGAIN
A tradesman applied to Mr. Selfe for a summons again,
Matthew Gooden, lessee and collector of tolls at the Mile
end-gate, who was recently fined 30s. for en assault, for
unlawfully demanding and taking more than the legal toll.
Mr. Selfe—Why, I am hearing about the Mile-end toll-
gate every day.
The applicant—l don't wonder at it. There has been a
good deal of insolence, extortion, acd abuse at that gate.
Mr. Yam dley decided on fining Goodeu for an assault on Mr.
Punt, a licensed victualler. The toll was only 3d. for one
horse and a cart. Gooden charged me 4d. for my horse and
cart yesterday. I told him I should complain to a magis-
trate, and he said he cared not fur that, he should put
magistrates at defiance.
Mr. Selfe—The lessee is a sharp ft llow—are you sure lie
is not right ?
The applicant—l don't knew, sir; I want your advice.
Mr. Stoddart, who had appeared against the lessee in the
morning after Mr. Vsrdlcy's decision
assault ease, said the
three persons came to that court for summonses against
Gooden, fur charging 4d. instead of 3d. He found Gooden
was right in each case. A business horse and cart had to
pay a toll of 4d. ; a pleasure van, or a cab drawn by one
horse had to pay 3d. only. In Mr. Punt's case, he was only
liable to a toll of 3d., for he drove a pleasure chaise cart—a
four-wheeler drawn by one horse.
The applicant—Then I must take out a summons.
Mr. Selfe—Before you take out a summons study the Act
of Parliament for a week or two.
THE DIVORCE AND MATRIMONIAL CAUSES ACT
—Mr. Stoddart, solicitor, of Arbour-street, East Step.
ney, applied to Mr. Selfe for an order of protec.
tion under the recent Act of Parliament to protect the pro.
petty and money of Mrs. Henrietta Wright, wife of Ben,
jamiu Wright, who bad deserted her.
Mr. Stoddart said that Mrs. Wright was entitled to pro•
perty under the will of her late father, and it was to protec_
this property he now sought the order.
Mrs. Wright was sworn, and said that she lived at No. 3,
James-street, Devonport-street, Commercial-road East,
and that she was married ten years ago to her present hus-
band. Her husband deserted her seven years last June.
She was entitled to property under the will of her late
father. Her husband was a gentlernan'a butler. He went
into service four years ago, and promised to pay 10s. per
week for the support of herself and children, but had not
done so.
Mr. Selfe—Does he know where to find you ?
Mlrrs.. Wright—Yes,
S
was he when you last heard of him ?
AS\e
Mrs. IVrigbt—ln Manchester, sir; he is there now,
believe.
Selfe—Take the order, Mr. Stoddart, you have proved
enough.
ed

DUNDEE TRADE REPORT.—The flax market has
enntiun d very firm aroughout the week, and the better
descriptions find ready buyers at gradually improvd,g
prices. There is also some inquiry for medium and lower
qualities, but in prices of these there is not much change to
notice. A good
many arrivals have taken place during the
week from different Baltic ports,but without having anyelfect
in depressing the cuatket, as the accounts from abroad give
no indication whatever of lower prices, but the reverse.
Fine tows and codillas continue in fair:demand, at full rates.
Jute moves off freely, and prices -are well maintained. There
is a good demand fur yarns at full prices. In linens there is
a fair business doing.—Dundee Courier of Wednesday.