The Sun.
London, England, 1858-10-20 00:00:00

2 -
HE EXTRAORDINARY PROCEEDINGS
- AT-NEWCASTLE.

TUESDAY EVENING.
At the Gateshead Police-court this day, before
the Mayor, Alderman Pollock, and Messrs. Hawke,
Wake, Hodgson, and Crawshaw, magistrates, the
case of " Manson v. de Maricourt" came on, which
has excited so much interest in this town for the
last few days. The police court was densely
crowded with people, and numbers, unable to gain
admittance, assembled outside.
A little before 11 o'clock Viscount de Mariconrt,
accompanied by his brother, and attended by his
legal adviser, Mr. E. Glynn, came into court, and
a few minutes afterwards Mr. Manson, the com-
plainant, attended by Mr. Scaife, made his appear-
ance. Mr. A. Pring offered his services as interpre-
ter, and was sworn to interpret to the defendant,
who did not understand English sufficiently well
to enable him to comprehend the information.

The defendant pleaded not guilty.
Mr. Scaife detailed the history of the assault and
the circumstances which led to it. He described
the Westgate municipal ward contest, and read the
letter of Oct. 12th, abusing Mr. Dunn, the Count
de Maricourt, and the " arch-traitor" Louis Napo-
leon. On the day on which that letter appeared in
complainant's paper, the Northern Daily Express,
a card, with " M. de Maricourt, llme Dragoons,"
was left in the office, and on the other side an invi-
tation to meet the writer in the smoking room of
the Central Exchange. That letter the editor never
got till next evening, but on themorning afterwards
a gentleman—who would be proved to be the de-
fendant—called at the newspaper office, asked for
the editor, and after having walked about the office
for some time in a very excited manner, he pulled
out a pistol and demanded where the editor lived.
He then went up stairs into another room, and
walked about in that room in a very excited away.
The next thing was the young gentleman calling at
the house of the editor at Gateshead, and without
any colloquy at the door, he with one bound burst
into the room and stood beside the editor. The
learned gentleman then recounted the facts which
have become so notorious, as to the behaviour of
defendant. He went on to state that defendant and
complainant having gone together to the consulate
in Grey-street, they met the Count de Maricourt
there, and the complainant expressed his regret to
the consul that he should have said what he hasl
done if the charge against the count was untrue.
Complainant proceeded to make an apology for what
he had said in the paper; but asubsequent letter which
he (Mr. Scaife) would put into court would show the
reason why this apology was not published. The
latter part of Mr. Sea& s address was a very able
exposition of the English law, judiciously admit-
ting some extenuation of the defendant's fault. He
demanded for the complainant the full and impar-
tial protection of the law. He disclaimed all idea
of vindictiveness on the part of the complainant,
and asked only for the protection of that law which
the defendant himself would receive. Mr. Scaife
then examined the following witnesses for the case :
Mr. John Henry Rutherford, manager of the
Northern Daily Express, proved the visit of the
defendant on the 13th inst. He was very much
agitated, and pointed out the letter, and also the
editorial notice attached. Mr. Mather, the book-
keeper, there being no other person present who
was conversant with the French language, con-
versed with the defendant, and ultimately witness
gave defendant the editor's address, and requested
Mr. Mather to accompany him to the house, but
that order he: shortly,afterwards countermanded.
Witness afterwards found the letter produced, which
had been left for the epitor on the previous evening.
Mr. John Lowther, a reader in the newspaper
office, identified the defendant and his brother as
being the persons who left the letter on the pre-
vious evening.
Mr. Christopher Mather, _ book-keeper, corro-
borated Mr. Rutherford's evidence.

Mr. S. B. Manson, the editor, being sworn, de
tailed the circumstances under which the Viscount
came to his house, and proceeded to state as follows :
—The Viscount told me I had slighted his card. I
asked him, what card ? He said his card invit-
ing me to the smoking-room of the Central
Exchange Hotel. I said I had neither received the
card nor the invitation, and I again said he must
leave me to my work, and let the Count call upon
me at the office. He said the Count could not come
and that he had come for me. All this time I
and defendant were standing opposite to each
other, the pistol in the hand of M. de.Maricourt
pointed at me. Defendant spoke English with diffi-
culty, and I did not understand him. Defendant
told me I must come with him, and I answered I could
not come. I was told a cab was waiting with
his brother in it, and then I agreed to go with
defendant, on the understanding that he would go to
the Consulate. I asked to be allowed to dress, and
the Viscount agreed to let me. The brother was
waiting outside, with a thick stick in his hand, and
the Viscount had also a stick in his hand, but never
offered to use it, nor to use a horsewhip. I may say
that I went voluntarily, but on compulsion. I was
not dragged there, but I certainly went with the
pistol at my head. I was in such a fear as I never
was in my life before. (Laughter.) I was thinking
of the serious sight that Mrs. Manson in a moment
might have placed before her eyes. It was my im-
pression that the pistol might go off in the agitation
of the defendent—that was my greatest cause of fear.
The witness then explained all the circumstances
which occurred between leaving his house in Gates-
head and the arrival at the Consulate, Grey-street.
He met the Count de Maricourt in the office of the
Consulate, and on the Count saying that he had
never interfered with, though he admired, our in-
stitutions, and that he defied the man to say he ever
asked his vote, he (the complainant) agreed to pub-
lish next morning the words the Count had uttered,
and after some other matters passed the Viscount
conducted him down stairs, where, after expressing
his satisfaction at the result of the interview, the
Count offered his hand to the complainant, who ac-
cepted it, and they separated.
Cross-examined by Mr. Glynn—Witness had been
editor of the Northern Daily Express from July,
1856. He was the writer of an article headed
" Madame," in the Express of Sept. 24. He also
wrote the editorial notice at the foot of the letter of
Oct. 12, and the article headed " Doings in the
Westgate." There was a period during his editor-
ship when he resided out of Newcastle with his
family. He lived away for many reasons, but had
no particular reason for it.
Mr. Glynn said he would not press the question
as to the reason of complainant's absence from New-
castle, because he did not wish to throw dirt on the
complainant's character.
Cross-examination continued—The manner of the
defendant was anything but deliberate. As an editor
witness was entirely responsible for the publication of
the editorial letters ; in that he acted as the agent
of the proprietor. The proprietor was Mr.
Mar-
shall, but witness declined to state who interfered
in the paper. He would not state, either, who
" Martyr,' the writer of the first letter, was. That
letter was corroborated by four persons, and witness
deemed that this corroboration was quite sufficient
to justify its publication.
Mr. Lehorey, superintendent of police at Gates-
head, stated that he apprehended the defendant at
Blyth on the Saturday. On Friday, between 4 and
5 o'clock, he got a brace of pistols from Mr. Pape,
of Collingwood-street, which had been given to him
by the son of the French consul. Those pistols he
now produced in court.
Mr. Manson, being recalled, thought the pistol
now produced had some similarity with the pistol
he had seen, but that in the hand of defendant was
very brown. He admitted that he could not see
-whether the pistol was cocked or not. He heard a
clicking like the cocking of a pistol, and he saw,
from the construction of the pistol, that the trigger
could not be used unless the pistol were cocked.
Mr. Anthony Pape, gunmaker, deposed that the
defendant and his brother called at his shop
on Wednesday night last. They, came to get
a bullet mould and key. The materials were asked
for by defendant. The pistols produced in court
were the pistols which the defendant gave to wit-
ness. They had apparently been loaded for some
• time.. The charge was extracted. It consisted in
• both pistols of powder and a piece of lead hammered
up to make a ball.
Cross-examined—The pistols were nit efficiently
loaded at all. He would not have used them if he
had wanted to shoot a man. It was just as likely
that the pistol would miss fire as not.
• Mr. Glynn then addressed the magistrates in de-
fence of his client. He expressed his admiration
of the services which the press had rendered to the
country, and the respect and jealousy with which
he should look upon any interference with the
liberty of discussion, but he observed that there were
times in which this liberty was exceeded, andlaw-
yer though he (Mr. Glynn) was, he would say that
the law afforded no protection in many cases in which
a .person was attacked in the press. The Count de
Maricourt, since he came to reside amongst us, was
known but to few persons, for his disposition was a
siugularly.retiring one ; he had come into public
only on one or two festive occasions, such as the
launch af Messrs. Palmer's ; but on the occasions
when the Count had spoken, so far from his lan-
guage being in bad English, he (Mr. Glynn) thought
T
the Count expressed himself admirably.
Count, however, was not known to many personsf
in Newcastle ; but in order to hear of the name o
Maricourt we should go to the Infirmary, or
' amongst the poor and destitute in the abandoned
districts of the town. (This allusion elicited loud
applause in the court, which was, however, in-
stantly checked.) Mr. Glynn, after referringto the
offensive
article headed " Madame," but declining
to read it, then went through the direct attack on