The Sun.
London, England, 1866-02-15 00:00:00

COPY OF AFFIDAVITS LODGED IN COURT.

At Edinburgh, the sth day of January, in the year 1866,
in presence of Thomas Knox, Esquire, •one of her
Majesty's Justices of the Peace for the City of Edin-

burgh,—

Compearod William Lothian Hamilton, who having
been solemnly sworn, depones and says :—I was one of the
jurors empanelled and sworn to try the case of Maria
Theresa Longworth or Yelverton, residing in Edinburgh,
against the proprietors of the Saturday Review, which was
tried before Lord Jerviswoode and a jury, including my-
self, at Edinburgh, upon the 4th, sth, and 6th days of
December, 1865. Depones, that the verdict then returned
by the jury was a verdict for the defenders, by a majority
of nine to three. Depones, I was one of the minority of
said jurors. Depones, in the jury-room a dispute arose as
to the law laid down by the presiding judge as applicable
to the case, it being on the one hand maintained by me and
by Mr. Hill, another cf the minority, that Lord Jervis-
woode had stated, as matter of law, that while a newspaper
can report the whole proceedings in courts of law, yet in
making comments on these proceedings it has no special
privilege ; and it being on the other hand maintained by two
of the majority that the press is privileged, and in a diffe-
rent position from a private individual, and that such pri-
vilege is necessary to the interests of morality. Depones,
the majority of the jury did not appear to have heard the
law as stated by Lord Jerviswoode. Depones, a note was
written on behalf of the jury, and sent to Lord Jerviswoode,
requesting him to inform the jury of new as to the law ap-
plicable to the case. Depones., Lord Jerviswoode returned
a message by the Clerk of Court, declining to give any such
direction, except in open court, and intimating that he
would give the jury the required direction if they came back
to court. Depones, after some discussion, the jury, on the
suggestion of two of the majority, that it would. be deroga-
tory to their dignity, resolved not to return to court. De-
pones, I confidently believe that if the jury had heard and
understood the law laid down by Lord Jerviswoode they
would not have returned the verdict they did. All which
is truth, as the deponent shall answer to God.

(Signed) W. L. HAMILTON, {ln presence of T.
Knox, J. P.
Copy of this affidavit signed by
Ditto.
WILLIAM HILL,
Copy of this affidavit signed by In presence of W.
ROBERT RIDDEtry Purves, J.P.
At Edinburgh, the sth day of January, in the year 1866, in
presence of Thomas Knox, Esq., one of her Majesty's
Justices of the Peace for the City of Edinburgh,—
Compeared Andrew Smart, who, being solemnly sworn,
depones and says :—I was one of the jurors empanelled
and sworn to try the cause of Maria Theresa Longworth
or Yelverton, residing in Edinburgh, against the proprie-
tors of the Saturday Revieiv, which was tried before Lord
Jerviswoode and a jury, including myself, at Edinburgh,
upon the 4th, sth, and 6th days of December, 1865. De-
pones, that the verdict then returned by the jury was a
verdict for the defenders, by a majority of nine to three.
Depones, I was one of the majority of nine who returned
that verdict. Depones, 1 did not hear a groat deal of what
was said by Lord Jerviswoode in his charge to the jury,
and I did not understand the law as laid down by the said
judge, at the said trial for the direction of the jury.
Depones, explanations were given in the jury-room to the
effect that Lord Jerviswoode had stated that a newspaper
was in a different position from au individual, and was
privileged. Depones, if I had understood the law stated
to the jury then, as I had understood it afterwards, when
I saw it reported in the newspapers—viz., the Scotsman,
Caledonian Mercury, and Daily Review—and, as I now
understand it, I would not have concurred with the majo-
rity of the jurors. And I add also, upon oath, that in jus-
tice to the pursuer in the said case, I believe the verdict
returned by the jury would have been different had all the
jurors who tried it understood the law laid down to them,
and that there ought to bo a new trial. All which is truth,

as I shall answer to God.
(Signed) ANDREW SMART,
Copy of above also signed by
Wm. MANDERSON,
Copy of above also signed by
ANDREW GARDNER,
Copy of above also signed by
DAVID DOUGLAS,
Copy of above also signed by
ADAM DICKSON,

In presence of T.
Kuox, J.P.
presenc3 of J.
Pall, jun., J.P.
presence of J.
L Marshall, J.P.
In presence of T.
Knox, J.P.
In presence of T.
Knox, J.P.

" Mr. Dickson excepting only tho words, "I did not hear
a great deal of what was said by Lord Jerviswoodo in his
charge to the jury."

At Queensferry, Jan. 8, 1866, in presence of David Craig,
Esq., one of her Majesty's Justices of the Peace for the
County of Edinburgh,
Compeared David Leuchars, who being solemnly sworn,
depones and says :—I was ono of the jurors empanelled
and sworn to try the cause of Maria Theresa Longworth or
Yelverton, residing in Edinburgh, against the proprietors
of the Saturday Review, which was tried before Lord Jer-
viswoode and a jury, including myself, at Edinburgh,
upon the 4th, sth, and 6th December, 1865. That the ver-
dict then returned by the jury was a verdict for the de-
fenders, by a majority cf nine to three. Depones, I was
one of the majority of nine who returned that verdict.
Depones, I did not hear a great deal of what was said by
Lord Jerviswoode in his charge to the jury, and I did not
understand the law as laid down by the said judge, at the
said trial, for the direction of the jury. Depones, expla-
nations were given in the jury-room to the effect that
Lord Jerviswoode had stated that a newspaper was in a
different position from an individual, and was privileged ;
and I add, also upon oath, that, in justice to pursuer in the
said case, I believe the verdict returned by the jury would
have been different had all the jurors who tried it under-
stood the law laid down to them, and that there ought to
be a now trial. All which is truth, as I shall answer to
God. DAVID LEUCHARS.
(Signed) in presence of David Graig, J.P.

Crimping in the Port of London.

(From the Shand Mercantile Gazette.)
ipptng
We learn that tho Board of Trade have decided upon
licensing a suitable person in the port of London, in accord-
ance with the provisions of the Merchant Shipping Act
(sec. 146), to engage or supply boys and apprentices for
merchant ships. This decision has been taken in conse-
quence of the illegal and fraudulent practices resorted to
by unauthorised persons, who advertise in the metropoli-
tan and provincial papers, holding themselves out as agents
for shipping boys and apprentice; and imposing to a seri-
ous extent on the credulity of parents and guardians. The
numerous prosecutions of these persons directed by the
Board of Trade, and conducted by an official from the de-
partment of the Registrar-General of Seamen, have led to
the conclusion that an effectual mode of abating the nuis-
ance complained of would be the appointment of a licensed
agent for this port, in addition to the superintendents of
mercantile marine office; whose hands are fully occupied
in the discharge of their special functions. It is conceived
such an appointment would be the most effectual means of
protecting the parents and guardians of youths who decide
tc enter the sea service from the designs of persons who
not unfrequently allure boys from their homes with splen-
did promises of advancement, and induce their protectors
to pay premiums in order to receive advantages which are
never realised. The premium once secured, the youth
on whose part the money is deposited is bound
to the master of some collier• or coasting vessel, where
the ill-treatment to which he is subjected impels
him to make his escape on the first convenient opportunity,
thus making way for another. Of course, in first-class
services this state of things is impossible ; and with the
owners of first-class ships these crimps have no connec-
tion whatever. We regret, however, to state that there
are some shipmasters who, if they do not actually connive
at these practices, and actually share the plunder with the
crimps, have, at all events, so little consideration for their
apprentices, that the boys they take on board, where they
do not desert to escape ill-treatment, are frequently aban-
doned to the mercy of designing knaves in this metropolis,
who follow them up, so long as there is anything to be
gained by the pursuit. It is time this iniquitous system
should bo repressed with a strong hand ; and we are, there-
fore, happy to find that the Board of Trade have confided
to the Registrar-General of Seamen the duty of nominating
a fit and proper person for the appointment of licensed
agent for London. We understand that no salary will be
attached to this appointment, but that the remuneration of
the supposed licensed agent will consist of certain fees
which ho will bo entitled to receive, under the provisions
of the Merchant Shipping Act.

COUNT D'ORSAY'S COAT.—The namo of D'Orsay
was attached by tailors to any kind of raiment, till Vestris
tried to turn the Count into ridicule. Application was
made to his tailor for a coat made exactly after the Count's
pattern. The man sent notice of it to his patron, asking
whether he should supply the order, and the answer being
in the affirmative, the garment was made and sent home.
No doubt D'Orsay imagined that some enthusiastic admirer
had in this way sought to testify his appreciation ; but, on
going to the Olympic Theatre to witness a now piece, he
had the gratification of seeing his coat worn by Liston as
The Hon. Grantley Berkeley's Life
a burlesque of himself.—
and Recollections. Vol. M.
NEW MUSIC.—" The Return Waltz," by the
Marquis Chisholm. Duff and Hodgson. This talented
musician, whose dance music is of the highest order, again
surprises us with a brilliant waltz, which opens with
Japanese introduction. The arrangement of the whole
1 shows palpably the touchings of a master-hand.