The Sun.
London, England, 1832-02-09 00:00:00

country would resound the rallying cry, 4 To
your tents, 0 Israel !' " What trashy bombast
is this ! 'Who talks of mutilating the Bible, or
depriving a nation of the benefits to be derived
from its perusal ? Not the Government. All
they desire to see established throughout Ire-
land is freedom of religious opinion ; that the
Catholic should be put on an equal footing wii,ll
the Protestant ; and the former be no longer per-
secuted on account of his religious creed.

Extract of a letter received by one of the first
connnercial houses in the city :

" St. Petersburgh, Jan. 24.

" It has been made known that orders have been sent
to the regiment of the guards to return to St. Petersburgh,
and it may he inferred from that circumstance that there
is no doubt that the peace of Europe will he maintained."

For the last week the table of the House of
Commons has been covered with petitions
against the Bill for the General Registry of
Deeds, and many of the country gentlemen have
expressed themselves very strongly against the
measure. The extensive counties of York and
Cumberland have deprecated the Bill altogether:
the former of those counties having failed in its
attempt to obtain an exemption from its opera-
tion, and to perpetuate the system of local Re-
gistry already in force within the county.

The opponents of the Bill contend that its
effect will be to increase the expense of the trans-
fer of property, and to prejudice commercial
credit by publicly disclosing incumbrances upon
estates ; they urge that if registration be desir-
able at all, it should be local, or within the
county in which the lands lie ; and they say it
is premature to add the necessity of registry to
the other requisites of the law, without, in the
first place, simplifying and cheapening the exist-
ing practice of conveyancing.. These are all
objections deserving of full consideration and
discussion before the Bill shall be passed into
a law.

Mr. CAMPBELL and his supporters, on the
other hand, argue that the effect of the Bill is
wholly misunderstood, for that its tendency will
be to strengthen the security of titles, by prevent-
ing the possibility of secret incumbrances, and
to diminish the expense of conveyances by
making titles deduccable frem the register hook
itself. They say it is ridiculous to fear the
publicity of deeds, when wills are open to every
one's inspection, and that none will be allowed
to search the register but those who are inte-
rested in the business. They contend that the
introduction of a system which prevails very
generally on the Continent, will be a great pub-
lic benefit and convenience, and that the landed
gentlemen out of ignorance, and the lawyers
from selfish motives, are striving to upset a very
wholesome measure of Reform.

We have doubts whether the Bill be not pre-
mature, because we do not collect that it is to
be preceded by, or accompanied with, any dimi-
nution of those expensive legal formalities which
are now necessary on the sale or mortgage of
landed property. If a purchaser of an estate is
to be visited with his lawyer's bill as heretofore,
it is not easy for him to understand how he is
benefited by his purchase being registered. The
late Mr. HUMPHREYS pointed out the means
of making an enormous saving in charges for
conveyancing, but scarcely any of his suggestions
have been adopted by the Law Commissioners,
and the charges are likely to remain pretty much
what they have been. In Foreign States an
estate is conveyed by a mere transfer in the re-
gistry book ; but, as nothing of this kind is in-
tended to take place in England, we do not see
how, for the present, there can be any saving of
law expenses. After the lapse of years the re-
gistry may certainly afford assistance in the de-
duction of titles, but unless the system of con-
veyancing is otherwise reformed, the benefit of
this will, we fear, be much less than Alr.
CAJtP-
BELL imagines.

But supposing the benefits of registration to
be conceded, it remains for Mr. CAMPBELL to
show why it should be confined to our metropo-
litan office, rather than that local registers should
be established in the respective counties. The
system of judicial centralization has been carried
very far in this country, but it by no means fol-
lows that because legal proceedings are carried
on almost wholly in London, lands should be
registered in London without reference to dis-
tance, or local convenience. The reason of the
thing is certainly not in favour of registering in
Middlesex a transfer of lands lying in Cumber-
land, nor is it very consistent with the advantages
of publicity that is alleged as an argument for
registration. There may be objections to local
regitration, of which we are not fully aware, but
Mr. CAMPBELL has not stated any, and is, we
think, bound to satisfy the House of the supe-
rior advantages of the proposed metropolitan
office. Without desiring to impugn the Bill
altogether, we really think the petitions against
it have been sufficiently numerous and respec-
table to make it incumbent upon Hon. Members
to consider it thoroughly before they give it their
unqualified support.
Sinee writing the above we find that Mr.
CAMPBELL himself has expressed his intention
of referring the Bill to a Select Committee,
which shall represent all the interests involved in
the question. This is as it should be—manly
and to the purpose. We know that Mr.
CAMPBELL has only one object in view—to be-
nefit the country.

His Excellency Prince ESTERHAZY, accom-
panied by his son, sailed yesterday for Calais, on
their way to Vienna.

The Edinburgh Review, in its notice of
the " Life of Sir THOMAS LAWRENCE," quotes a letter
written by the artist from Rome to his sister, in which he
relates an occurrence which took place whilst he was
painting his splendid portrait of the Pore, now in the
possession of the KING. S►r THOMAS expressed a sort of
half-wish that the Pore had put upon his finger the ring
which he wore when he was elected ; when the old man
immediately sprung from the chair in which he was sit-
ting, and, rejecting the offer of assistance from two or
three prelates who were in the room, hurried off and
brought it. " I may almost class this with the Emperor
of RUSSIA'S stooping to put the pegs into my easel, arta
then, with me, lifting the picture on it. The latter cir-
cumstance quite equals CHARLES V. taking up the pencil
for TITIAN ; and the only trifling thing wanting to the
parallel is that I should be a TITIAN.''

COURT OF CHANCERY.-(THIS DAY.)

ROBERTS L'. KNOWLES AND OTHERS, .--.EX.TARTE

JUNCTION.

Sir EDWARD SUGDEN moved, on behalf of the
plaintiff, Mr. Richard Roberts, for an injunction ex-parte
against the defendants, until the legal rights of the parties
shall have been adjudicated upon. The bill stated
that the plaintiff, in the year 1825, invented a new
machine for spinning cotton and other fibrous
materials, far which he had obtained n patent. Having
considerably improved the original invention, he obtained a
farther patent in the year 1830, and duly enrolled a speci-
fication of such improved invention. In the judgment of
most experienced and scientific individuals, this invention
was perfectly novel. Ooe of the defendants had
been permitted by the plaintiff to inspect the machine
thus improved on the premises in Manchester. That de-
fendant is a workman and mechanic, in the employment
of the other defendants. 'fhe plaintiff, after a certain
time, suspected that the defendants were making at their
own manufactory a machine similar to his. He
enquired if his suspicions were well founded. The
defendants replied that they had made a lumbering
soft of thing of the kind, but that it was not at
work nor fit to be inspected, promising them at the same
time, that if they made any machine resembling the
plaintiff's which could be worked, the plaintiff
should have the opportunity of inspecting it. They
had since made a useful spinning machine, pre-
cisely like the plaintiff's, in all essential respects,—the
only difference between the two being, that upon the defen-
dants' a certain cord was attached to a part of the ma-
chine that was stationary, whereas the similar cord
was attached to the carriage-post of the plaintiff's ma-
chine, and which was kept in constant motion. The de-
fend routs had also positively refused to allow the plaintiff to
see his machine. The whole of these facts were positively
sworn to, and

Hui LORDSHIP at once granted the injunction to re-
strain the defendants from using or making, or causing to
be made, any such spring machine as the one i❑ question.

ROLLS' COURT.-(THIS DAY.)

His Honour the MASTER of the Row; sat at the Rolls'
Court, Chancery-lane, to-day, for the first time since the
end of Hillary Term. The Court proceeded with petitions,
upwards of 120 of which are set down for hearing before
his Honour. Nothing, however, worth reporting had
curie before the Court when our reporter left.

VICE-CHANCERY COURT-(THIS DAY.)

This being the first Seal after Hilary Term, his Honour,
the VICE-CHANCELLOR, sat at Lincoln's Inn, and took
motions to-day.

SHIPLEY V. WRIGHT.

It having been arranged that this part heard bankrupt
petition should be proceeded with to-morrow, his Ho-
Nouß, on Mr. Montague's corning into Court, enquired
whether lie would be able to attend the Court to-morrow.
Mr. MONTAGUE said that he could.

Mr. PEPYS thought it would he more convenient if his
Honour would proceed with motions to-morrow, as that
was the only part of the business of the Court which was
in arrear, and the disposal of them would be a great relief
to the suitors.

Ti.e VICE-CHANCELLOR would adopt any course that
was most convenient to the bar, which would tend to the
relief of the suitors of the Court.

Mr. MONTAGUE observed, that he would attend the
Court any day his Honour chose to mention in the case of
Shipley and Wright.
Mr. KNIGHT stated that it would be a great personal
convenience to him if Shipley and Wright was appointed
for Monday. He felt satisfied there were sufficient mo-
tions to occupy the Court to that day.
The VICE-CHANCELLOR said that there was now no
very heavy weight of causes, he would, therefore, finish
the seal in the first instance, and take the bankrupt peti-
tion of Shipley and Wright on Monday.

CLARKE V. TIOLDWITCII, FISHER, AND WESTON.

Mr. Parrs applied for an injunction to restrain the de-
fendants from digging, raising, or taking any coal
from under the estate of the plaintiff, and from Selby-
street, which was already raised. The defendant, Mr-
Holdwitch, who had formerly been a coach-maker, re-
siding in Long-acre, obtained a lease from the plaintiff of
certain pats of his property, but that lease did not au-
thorise the opening of mines. Subsequently, however,
under (as it was contended by the Learned Counsel for
the plaintiff) a representation of the great services be had
rendered to the plaintiff in his family affairs, he induced
him to grant him a licence to open his mines under his
farm, the plaintiff taking one-fourth of the property in
consideration of the great expence attendant on the opening
of the mines. This the Learned Counsel contended was a
great misrepresentation ; but independent of that, Holdwitch
had under-let the mines to the two other defendants,
whereby the plaintiff was defrauded of his share of
the property, and the defendant had invalidated the
contract entered into. In the course of the ap-
plication the Learned Counsel read several letters
from Holdwitch to the plaintiff, which, on account of the
illiterate and unintelligible manner in which they expressed
the writer's intentions, created considerable tnerrivaent in
the Court.

Mr. PARKER appeared for the defendants, and contended
that it was impossible to argne that the agreement had
been obtained by the defendant from the plaintiff under
fake representations, or that he was imposed upon, the
plaintiff knowing for twelve months previous to the agree-
ment being entered into that there were coals ,under the
property.

The VICE •CHANCELLOR was clearly of opinion, upon
the face of the agreement, its nature was such that it
could not stand for a moment, as it was evident the plaintiff
did not understand it at the time he signed it.—lnjunction
granted.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH.-(THIS DAY.)

ARCHBOLD, ESQ. V. SWEET.

This was an action brought by the plaintiff, Edward
Archbold, Esq., barrister at law and editor of various legal
works, to recover a compensation in damages for an in-
jury stated to have been done to his professional charac-
ter by the defendant publishing a third edition of a legal
work originally edited by the plaintiff, but so altered in
that:edition, which was edited by another person, although
his initials were attached to it, that his character as an
editor of such works was deteriorated.

The cause occupied all the forenoon, but it was only
interesting to the parties concerned.
Mr. CAMPBELL and Mr. FOLLETT appeared for the
plaintiff; Sir JAMES SCARLETT, ➢lr. WILLIAMS, and Mr.
LEE, for the defendant.

The Jury found a verdict for the plaintiff, damages 51.,
subject to the opinion of the Court upon a point of law.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.-(THIS DAY.)

LIBEL.-.IIUNT V. LAWSON.

In this action, which is against the Times, the plain-
tiff, the Member for Preston, conducted his own case.
He said he felt it necessary to say a few words in explana-
tion why he appeared in person to conduct his own cause.
The action was against the printer of the Times, but he
was only a nominal defendant, the real ones were the
proprietors of that Paper—men of great wealth, who
were clearing their 30,0001. a-year by it, and such was
the state of the public Press at the present moment, that
he felt he could not ask any gentleman at the bar to incur
the odium and abuse which he would do if engaged on his
side. He therefore had come himself to ask of the Jury
reparation for the most infamous libels that had ever ap-
peared even in the Times before. It had been his
lot, as some thought, his misfortune, to be be-
fore the public for the last twenty-five years as a
political character, and during all that time he had
upheld the rights of the people of England. As this
action was almost life or death to him, it would be neces-
sary for him to go a little farther into his own political
history than what would perhaps be agreeable; but he
considered it necessary. He was a real advocate for the
liberty of the Press, but these sort of beastly attacks upon an
honest individual were what he should rejoice to see, if he
were its greatest enemy, for they must work its ruin.
As the Press of this country was at present conducted, in
place of being a blessing, it was a curse to the people, for
it did not speak the truth. He was come prepared to prove
there was not one word of truth in a series of libels which
had appeared against him. In 1830 he was elected to
serve in Parliament for the borough of Preston, and since
that time he had not uttered one word differing from his
former sentiments, as expressed before the public for the
last twenty-five years. He would not appear in false
colours, but avow that he appeared before the Jury as a
radical Reformer, and this it was, because he was so, that
the present action had come before the Court. It was be-
cause he had bad the hardihood to differ with his Majesty's
Ministers upon that subject which had agitated the country
front one end to the other. At the time the Reform Bill
was introduced, lie gaving his opinion of it that it was of a
sweeping nature, and one which he never expected to see
brought in by any Ministry, but it did not contain many
of those principles which he had advocated during
the whole of his long political life. He had attended
many large meetings at which petitions had been

agreed to, hod] to the King and Parliament, and the
language of none of thorn had bean so bad that
they had been refused either by the King or Parliament.
Invariably they had been received, and sometimes
acted upon. He contended, along with the late Duke
of Richmand, that every man who was taxed ought
to have a voice in the representation ; that had been his
creed from the first, and was so still. As he said before the
Bill was a sweeping measure, and, at the time of its in-
troduction it had given satisfaction to 99 out of every 100
of the people of England, but now, when the people had
had time to consider of its provisions, he would say seven
out of every eight were not satisfied, because it kept the
representation from them, and they wanted the ballot and
short Parliaments. Because he said this, the Press ac-
cused him of being against all Reform ; it would not do
fur them to say, " here is an obstinate radical Reformer,
who votes for the Bill, but wishes it to go further ; who
sates his honest opinion, but wishes to go further." In
the Committee he had voted against some of the clauses,
but on all the principles of the Bill he had voted with the
Ministers. But this would not do for the Press, they
must have " the whole Bill, and nothing but the Bill ;"
upon the rejection of the Bill by the Lords, his Majesty
had been pleased to dissolve the Parliament, and he was
called upon by his former constituents again to pre-
sent himself as a candidate for their suffrages. It
as then that the Times began to attack him, evidently
for the purpose of preventing him from being returned
again. He would make an offer now to the Learned
Counsel for the defendant, even at this late stage of the bu-
siness, if he, Sir James Scarlett. could put a witness in the
box who could prove that one word of the libels were true,
he would walk out of the Court and trouble the Court and
Jury no further ; but no, that course they could not
take; they knew that they were all false ; in fact they
had admitted it in their pleas. The Hon. Gen-
tleman then read the alleged libels. One of them
was from the Times of April 26, 1831, and
was as follows The effigy of the recreant Hunt has
been burned on the famous field of Peterloo, where he has
addressed thousands of persons ; but more persons
danced around the ashes of his effigy than he ever
saw in the days of his prosperity. The band played
the ' Dead march in Saul,' and his name was exe-
crated on the scene of his former glory." This was taken
up by his opponents at Preston, and posted up in large cha-
racters in all parts of the town. It was said that he
was a traitor to the cause which he had advocated all
his lire, and for this thousands who used to thank him
had for this conduct burned him in effigy. He was pre-
pared to prove that every word of this was a falsehood.
This libel first appeared in The Sun ; and when that
Paper reached Manchester, a meeting of his friends was
called, and a contradiction of the whole statement was
forwarded to the Editor; that Editor had moat honourably
inserted the contradiction, but what was the conduct of
the malignant proprietors of that Paper ?—(holding up
the Times.) They sent abroad the falsehood, but never
once could they find room for the contradiction. They
could afford space to contradict a report of the
death of May the Burkite, but they could not afford room
to contradict a falsehood relating to him, Mr. Hunt.
He would now state the facts as they actually occurred.
At the dissolution of Parliament the Unions of Manches-
ter did meet, they paraded with bands of music, and when
they come to that part of the field of Peterloo where
the hustings stood on the famous 19th August, ISI9, they
played the " Dead march in Saul ;" but in place of burning
him in effigy, or reviling him in any way, his name
was cheered, and the meeting dispersed peaceably. Burn.
mug of effigies did take place, but they were a week
after, and were the effigies of two of his enemies
Major Burley, the commander of the yeomanry in
1819, and Richard Potter, the writer of a letter to the
London newspapers reviling him. He would show how
Tire Sun acted, they inserted the libels on the 25th, and
on the 28th they published the letter in contradiction.
Had the Times acted in that way he would never have
troubled either his Lordship or the Jury. The Jury would
remember that only a short year and a half ago this con-
sistent Paper strenuously supported the Government of
the Duke of Wellington, and at that time was in violent
opposition to the present Ministry. They now supported
them, or rather they had been supporting them, for
it was evident to any ono that they were now preparing
for another change, when they would again be as bitter
opponents to their present friends as they were before.—
T bey had heard a great deal lately about the march
of intellect, but if this great leading journal of Europe
was allowed to go on, and libel their opponents by
such odious means, they ought to hear no more of
such cant. The other libels charged him with
having sold himself to the Tories, but as that
had been said in the House of Commons by Mr. O'Con-
nell, he did not bring it forward as a charge further than
to spew the animus with which be was pursued by the
editor of this Paper. Being a freeholder of Somersetehire, he
attended at the election for that county, and there again
the Times, in their report, made the people cry out,
" We will have no Hunt ! Hunt is a traitor, a turncoat,
and a villain !" These were rather hard names,
to be sure ; but he would be ashamed to bring
forward any thing that took place at an election
but this was not true, he knew how it was made up ; the
reporters got some half dozen friends about them to cry
out " Hunt is a villain," and then down it goes as
Hit were the cry of the meeting. Sometimes they were with-
out the assistance of those friends, and then one reporter
cries to another, " We will have no Hunt-,Hunt is a
turncoat ;" this equally passes as the opinion of the meeting.
At the great Spa-fields meeting, where he attended, the
Times found great fault with him for using the word
" boroughmonger." The Jury would be perfectly aware
that that same Paper had rung the changes upon that word.
The Learned Counsel would say this was a mere political
squib, and he ought to take no notice of it, but was
a man to be called a recreant, a villain, a turn-
coat, and a liar, by this, as they term themselves,
the fourth state of the realm with impunity. They had
bullied the King, they had bullied the Lord§ and bullied
the Commons, but there was now only one thing more
to do, and if they could once bully a Court of
Justice, then adieu to the liberties of Englishmen.
He trusted that the Jury, by their verdict to-day would
put a stop to such disgraceful proceedings; and by the
damages they would give, preserve a man's character from
being stolen from him in this way. The Learned Gentle-
man then called the following witnesses :
Mr. Tomlins, from the Tax-office, proved that the de-
fendant was the publisher of the Times at the time of the
libels.

Mr. Turner produced the Times of the 26th April, and
2d and sth May, from the Stamp-office.
William Briant was sent for on the 29th April to Mr.
Hunt's house.

Sir J. SCARLETT objected to this line of evidence.
Cross-examined—Could not say how many actions Mr.
Hunt had brought for these same libel.
The libels complained of were put in and read.
Edward Cullen, from Manchester, was there on the 22d
April last. There was a procession on that day in
honour of the King having prorogued Parliament, and he
was in the procession ; they had a band of music; it went
over St. Peter's-fields playing " See the conquering hero
comes," and when they came to the place where the hust-
ings were erected on the 16th August, 1819, they played
the " Dead March in Saul." On that day no effigy wan
burned ; on the Monday following there were two effigies
burned. Attended yesterday as a witness in Court, and
was apprehended by the Deputy Constable of Manchester,
and kept all night in a very uncomfortable place.
Cross-examined—ls a silk-weaver by trade, could not
get more by the Reform trade, nor had ever said so ; was
at a meeting on a Sunday in Manchester, when be made a
speech, there were about 10,0030 people present; is a
householder, but not a 101, one at present.
Re-examined—lf he had work he could make 10s. a
week, never made anything by Reform. They met on
Sunday in order to petition for the lives of the men at
Bristol. Had heard of the Privy Council meeting on a
S:inday.

Nathan Broadhurst, also a housekeeper in Manchester,
was at the field of Peterloo on the 22d April. No effigy
was burned, nor any disrespectful language used towards
Mr. Hunt, but the reverse.
Cross-examined—It was near ten o'clock when they
were at St.:Peter's-fields, did not stop above an hour. Is
a silk weaver and occasionally a bill sticker, did not stick
up a bill headed " Illegal Murder." Never applied to
Dr. Carpenter for money at any time.
Re-examined—The " Illegal Murder" related to the un-
fortunate men at Bristol, for whom they intended to peti-
tion at the meeting on Sunday.
These two witnesses were in custody, for being at the
late Sunday meeting at Manchester, charged with sedition.
Sir JaxEs ScanLETT addressed the July. He said
Mr. Hunt in his speech had made a great complaint of
his sufferings in his trade, in his character, and even stated
that his life wasetadangered, by these libels as he called them.
In his speech also, he had urged a great deal of
declamation gainst the Times. He had made
a long explanation why he had conducted his own
case ; but he might be assured that no gentleman
at the bar would have been afraid to undertake
his case for fear of the odium which would have been cast
upon him. Mr. Hunt seemed to be in error as to,
the meaning of the words, " the liberty of the Press."
No information by an individual who felt himself
aggrieved by a.: libel, nor any trial to which they re-