The Sun.
London, England, 1835-06-08 00:00:00

SECONDARIES' OFFICE.

LIBEL--NUTT V. SMITHSON.
This was an action for damages at the instance of Mr. Nutt,
a solicitor in Canterbury, against Mr. Smithson, proprietor of
the Kentish Gazette, for several alleged libels affecting the
character of the plaintiff, that appeared some time ago in that
newspaper.
Mr. PHILLIPS stated that the plaintiff, who is Coroner of the
county of Kent, had been sworn into the situation of Sheriff-
deputy at the last election for that county, and had taken a
solemn oath to do justice in the performance of the duties of
that office. That he had performed these duties conscienti-
ously there could be no doubt, this being admitted by his most
bitter political enemies. The Learned Counsel then read the
passages from the Kentish Gazette. The first was dated the
-24th of February last, and was in these words :—" Civis' is
quite correct. Messrs. and Nutt have for ever disqualified
themselves as deputy returning officers for the city of canter-

bury. The history of the rotten votes polled by the Blues at the
election would unfold a tale,' which our fastidious respect for
the penal statutes precludes us from narrating." The second
was contained in the same paper of the 10th of March last, and
consisted of the petition of Mr. Lushington. This petition,
which Mr. Phillips described as a " tissue of libels," stated,
among other things, that " the said John Nutt and acted
as deputies with gross partiality in taking the poll, for the
purpose of forwarding the interest of Frederick Villiers, to
the injury of your petitioner, illegally, and in violation of the
freedom of election, by rejecting, and refusing tolreceive upon
the most frivolous and contradictory grounds and pretences
the votes of many persons who were duly registered and enti-
tled to vote at the said election; that the gross partiality of
the said John Nutt and in taking the poll is obvious, from
their having admitted on the poll for the said Frederick Vil-
liers numerous voters to whom precisely similar objections ex-
isted, without the slightest possible difference, as to the voters
of your petitioner." The Learned Counsel delivered a long
and eloquent address to the Jury, in which he complained--
in very strong terms—of the injury which these libels were
likely to do his client, both in his moral and professional cha-
racter.
Verdict for the plaintiff—Damages, 501.

COURT OF THE DEAN AND CHAP-

TER OF ST. PAUL'S.

JUDGMENT-BELCHER V. BELCHER,

This was an action at the instance of Captain E. Belcher,
of the Etna, against Diana, his wife, to compel a restitution
of conjugal rights. It was resisted on the part of the Lady,
who prayed the Court to grant a separation, on the ground of
cruelty. The facts of the ease have been for some time before
the public.
The Learned JUDGE delivered his judgment at some length.
After a most deliberate consideration of the case, he was clear
that by law he was bound to pronounce that Mrs. Belcher had
failed in her proofs, and it was his duty to order her to return
to mutual co-habitation, for which purpose she was allowed till
the session of Michaelmas Term.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.

HATTON GARDEN.

On Saturday, immediately on Mr. Rogers taking his seat
on the bench, he addressed Inspector Wilkinson, of the E
division, and intimated that he had that day received a letter,
stating that a murder was suspected to have been perpetrated
upon the body of a girl by her own sister, with whom she re-
sided. The letter, it appeared, had been first forwarded to
Mr. Rawlinson, the Magistrate of Marylebone-office, who, in
consequence of the circumstance happening in the district of
this office, forwarded the letter to Mr. Rogers. Mr. Rogers
read the communication as follows :

" Sir—l am very sorry to inform you that the death of a
child took place on Sunday night last, in consequence of the
cruel treatment of her sister, Mrs. , of , New-
road, and she is going to have it interred without an inquest
being held on the body. If you send to see the child, she is
most shocking to look at.
" MRS. MASON,
" Draper's-place, New-road.
" To Mr. Rawlinson, Marylebone Police-office."

Mr. ROGERS said that after such a communication it was
highly essential to prosecute rigid inquiries about the neigh-
bourhood, and he directed Inspector Wilkinson to proceed in-
stantly for that purpose, and handed to him the letter, with
instructions to give information to Mr. Stirling, the Coroner,
if there were proper grounds for suspicion.
The Inspecter left the office, but he did not return during
the hours of business, and we consequently cannot tell the re-
sult of his inquiries.