The Sun.
London, England, 1858-06-24 00:00:00

FOUL STATE OF THE COUPT AND PASSAGES.

In the course of the day,
Mr. James called the attention of his lordship to
the foul state of the court and passages.
Lord Campbell said that, if he were assured that
the state of the atmosphere was such as to be dan-
gerous to the lives of the counsel, jurymen, and
witnesses, he should feel it to be his duty to ad-
journ the court. His lordship inquired whether
there was any medical men in court
Mr. John Bredall, who was attending the Court
as a witness in the cause which was being tried,
here came forward, and, being swo n, in an wer to
questions put by Lord Campell, he said he was a
surgeon, at No. 3, Moorhall place, Kennington-
lane, and had been compelled to leave the court
three times in consequence of the bad smells. The
atmosphere in court became irrespirable, and it was
quite as bad in the passages. The smells came
from the Thames, or from sewage of snore kind.
He gave it as his opinion, as a medical man, that
it was dangerous to breathe this atmosphere. He
thought it would be dangerous to the lives of the
jurymen, counsel, and witnesses to remain. It
would produce malaria, and perhaps typhus fever.
Lord Campbell said that, in the di,charge of his
duty, he would adj .urn the Court ; but, address-
ing the counsel, his lordship said that if they were
willing to remain he was quite ready to do so.
Mr. Sergeant nee said the counsel were ready
to do whatever his lordship thought best.
L'rd Campbell said he would not keep the jury-
men against their will.
The jury said the smell was very offensive in the
passages, but they didnot smell it so much in court.
The tritl then proceeded.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.—WESTMINSTER.
(Sittings at Nisi Plias, at Westminstor, before
Justice Cockburn, and a Common Jury.)
HELLIWELL V. HOBSON AND ANOTHER.

Mr. S3rgeint Hughes and Mr. Bell were for the
plaintiff ; and Mr. Macaulay, Q C., and Mr.
Archibald for the defendants.

This was an action for libel brought by the libra-
rian and manager of the Derby Mechanics' Insti-
tute against the defendants, the proprietors of the
Derbyshire Advertiser. The libel complained of
was the following paragraph, piked in that publi-
cation :
" Mr. and Mrs. German Reed's Entertainment and
the Librarian to the Mechanics' Institute.—On Friday
evening Mr. and Mrs. German Reed gave their admi-
rable entertainment at the Lecture-hall, Darby. Some
of our readers may probably have remarked that this
entertainment was not announced in the Derbyshire
A deertiser, and as the °miss ion was equally unjust to
our interest and Mr.'and Mrs. German Reed's. we may
with propriety mention the cause of it here. It appears
(and we state the fact from a conversation with Mr.
Reed himself) that Mr. Helliwell, the librarian to the
Derby Mechanic's Institute, received instructions from
Mr. Reed to advertise the entertainment in the Derby
papers, and to forward the usual free tickets to the
editor of each journal. Presuming on his position, and
thinking, perhapq, that he could with safety gratify a
personal feeling towards this journal, Mr. Helliwell di,-
regarded these orders. Tee advertisement was forwarded
to the Mercury and Reporter, but neither advertisement
nor ticket found its way to our office. Mr. Helliwell
should know that he will not ba allowed to pursue with
impunity a similar course of conduct to that of which
we have had to complain. The subject is only worth
alluding to in order to pima professionals who may
intend to vit it Derby on their guard, so that they may
not in future Le defrauded of that publicity which they
dekire."

The declaration laid tivs mAr.ning to be elat the
pi ....ill ~iia
his said office, and disregarded his instructions and
duty in order to gratify personal feeling towards
the defendant, who pleaded " Not Guilty," and
true in substance and fact. that the paragraph was
It appeared that in the autumn of last year Mr.
and Mrs. Garman Reed, by the agency of a Mr.
Magrove, agreed with Mr. Helliwell to give their
entertainment at Derby on certain terms, but it
seemed clear that all the arrangements in the
country were to be made by Mr. Helliwell, and
that, beyond expressing a wish for publicity, Mr.
Reed had given no specific instruc ions as to the
the insertion of advertisements in any particular
paper. Mr. Carson, a reporter on the 4dvvtiser,
finding that the paper had not received any direc-
tions to advertise or any tickets for the entertain-
ment, called on Mr. Helliwell and inquired the
reason of the omission. These two gentlemen gave
a very different account of what passed at that
interview. The former stated that the plaintiff
made very inconsistent excuse?, whence he inferred
personal feeling, and the latter alleged that he told
Mr.. Carson that ha should give, or that he had
given, the advertisement to the Telegr4h, and that
he should have the next turn • that on being asked
for tickets he intimated to Mr. Carson that if he
left his name on a card at the door he would be
admitted, upon which he sail, " You are a rubbish-
ing lot, and I'll publish you next week." Much
contradictory evidence was aiduCed, a detail of
which would not interest the leafier, the learned
judge several times suggesting a settlement, and
giving it as his opinion that the whole dispute was
based on a series of misunderstandings.
Mr. Macaulay, in addressing the jury for the
defence, said that it was a touch-and-go case on the
vet y verge of the law, which had been kept seething
and smouldering since Decmnber in London, to put
money into the pocket of Mr. Fie wker, the attor-
ney for the p'aiutiff, and that it ought to have been
tried at Derby in March.
The L-trd Chief Justice, in summing up, re-
repeated that there had been mistakes and miscon-
ception on both sides, and that it was a great pity
that th, defendants had not made a graceful apology
and withdrawn their second tole% He then went
carefully through the evidence, commenting upon
the different versions given of the conversations
between the plaintiff and Mr. Carson, and
The jury eventually found a verdict for the
plaiutiff--Daml ges, 25/.

MIDDLESEX SESSIONS.—June 23.

(Before the Assistant-Judge, at Westminster.)
Cii:orge Curry,
17, and Thoma; BacAl and Richard Tadnell, who
13, James Webb, 23, Win. Baker,
surrendered were indicted for stealing 102:h. of
fat, the property of Stephen Camden.
Mr. Ribton and Mr. John Dunbar were counsel
for the prosecu•ion, Mr. Mete Alfa was for Tadnell,
and Mr. Sleigh for Bacon. The three other pri-
soners were not defended,
The prosecutor was a bone merchant at White-
chapel, and the property in question was stylen
from his premises on tne 31st of May. The evidence
more or less tended to implicate all the prisoners,
but an alibi was proved on behalf of Tadnell, who
was acquitted, as were Baer-in and Curry ; Webb
and Biker were conv;c.ed and sentenced—th 3 for-
mer to 9, and the latte. to 6 month's hard labour.
Ceorge Cainer, butcher, and Cha,..flaines, a car-
pentor, were indicted—awl/armor fyr stealing Mb.