The Sun.
London, England, 1857-03-07 00:00:00

riVk kIN MAIICH 7, 1857.

LAW OF LIBEL FOR _NEWSPAPERS.

DAVISON V. DUNCAN---ONE FARTHING
DAMAGES.
This case, which has attracted much public attention,
came on for trial yesterd ,es morning, before Mr. Justice
Crompton, at the Northern Circuit, Durham.
Mr. Atherton, Q.C., Mr. Manesty, and Mr. Udall were
counsel for theplaintiff ; Mr. Hugh Hill, Q.C., Mr. Over-
end, Q.O , Mr. Ferrer, and Mr. Unthank were for the
defence.
The plaintiff in this action was Joseph Davison, a soli-
citor in the city of Durham ; the defendants, W. Duncan
and J. T. Duncan, proprietors and publishers of the Dur-
hant County Advertises.. The action was brought to re-
cover damages —laid at I,oool.—for a libel. The defen-
dants pleaded first, not guilty; secondly, that the facto
were true; and thirdly, that the statement complained of
was a just and true report of what had taken place, and
that they published it without malice.
Mr. Atherton stated that the plaintiff, Mr. Davison,
acted, previously to the resignation of the late Lord Bishop
of Darham, as the secretary of that prelate. The libel of
which Mr. Davison complained was contained in the
number of the Durham Advertiser dated the 10th of Octo•
ber last, and the form in which the libel appeared was a
professed report of the proceedings of a meeting alleged to
have been held at Hartlepool by the commissioners of that
place. Now, as one of the pleas of the defendants was
that the injurious and calumnious statements contained in
the report were true, it became necessary that he shoUld
explain how manifestly and egregiously untrue these state-
ments were. Mr. Atherton then entered into a history of
the appointment of commissioners at West Hartlepool,
under the Town Improvement Act of that town, and
showed that by the 50th clause of the act the board was
empowered to construct a cemetery for the use of the town,
and by thel3oth clause to appoint as chaplain of the same
the minister for the time being of the district of Christ-
church in that town. The commissioners having deter-
mined to exercise the powers granted to them, a cemetery
was constructed. It then became necessary to get a portion
of the cemetery consecrated, and the first step was to petition
the bishop to consecrate it. The petition was signed by the
Rev. Mr. Ridley, vicar of Stranton : Rev. Mr. Burges, in-
cumbent
of Christchurch ; and affixed to it was the com-
mon seal of the commissioners. The petition was prepared
and the consecration took
ace accordingly. But pre-
viously, on the 15th of December, 1855, the late Bishop,
Dr. Maltby, being considerably oppressed by infirmity,
finding it difficult, if not impossible, to transact all the
duties of so large a diocese, executed a commission giving
power of performing the duties of the see to the Lord
Bishop of Manchester, the Venerable Archdeacon Bland,
and the Rev. Canon Douglas. The consecration being com-
pleted, it became necessary to appoint a chaplain, and Mr.
Davison prepared the necessary document. He did not sup-
ply the name of the clergyman to be appointed, but sent the
document with a blank space in the proper position to Arch-
deacon Bland. Some little time after the archdeacon came
to the office of Mr. Davison, bringing witht him the li-
cence, and directed that the Rev. John Hart Burgos's name
should be inserted in the blank space, he being the in-
cumbent of Christchurch, and the person pointed out
in the act of Parliament. This being done, the archdea-
con put his signature to the document, and properly de-
scribing himself upon the face of the instrument as " com-
missary specially appointed." Now, in the libel complained
of it was affirmed that the bishop confirmed the licence,
that it was presented to him to be executed by Mr. Davi-
son under a false pretence, and accompanied by a deception
practised upon the bishop, who, it was alleged, bad been
induced to execute it, not knowing that it was a licence in
favour of the Rev. Mr. Burges. Of course as the bishop
never saw the instrument, this report was egregiously and
preposterously untrue. Mr. Atherton then read the fol-
lowing extract from a report of the proceedings at the
meeting of the Hartlepool commissioners, which was pub-
lished in the defendants' newspaper :
A document in conncteion with the Hartlepool Cemetery,
which had been received by the clerk from Mr. Joseph Davi-
son, was put in and read. It profeesed to be a licence from
the bishop to the Rev. John Hart Burgas, as chaplain to the
cemetery, and reciting in the usual way, that " iu pursuance
of a petition," he.
On the reading of the document several commissioners ex-
pressed their surprise at its contents. :To petition had been
presented either by the town or the commissioners.
The Chairman said he thought it was a clumsy device on
the part of Mr. Davison to get Mr. Burge- into the office.
The Rev. Mr. Ridley said ho had received on Saturday last
a communication from Mr. Barg.,-;, st eing that be had re-
ceiveda
whatlicenc wefars mometet by bishop,he. Being at a loss to un-
derstand such a communication, he, as
vicar of the parish, Mote to the bishop, and had received the
reply, of which the following is the subst 'nee :—" The
bishop desires it to be made known that a document, repre-
sented by Mr. Joseph Davison to be a mere licence for the
West Hartlepool Cemetery, woe laid before him for his signa-
ture. No name was mentioned in the licence, and certainly
not M.r. Burges's. If the name of Mr. Burges had appeared in
the document, the bishop would have refused to sign it."
A Commissioner remarked that it appeared that the whole
of the proceeding had been a fraud upon the bishop as well
as upon the public on behalf of Mr Burgos.
The Rev. Mr. Ridley said it was a great scandal upon Mr.
Davison.
After some further discussion, a resolution was agreed to,
and a copy ordered to be sent to the bishop, to the effect
that the commissioners did not admit tho necessity for any
such document.
Mr. Atherton, having read the foregoing extracts, re-
marked how very grave an imputation this report cast
upon the conduct of Mr. Davison. It amounted to this,
that Mr. Davison, the professional secretary of an aged
and infirm prelate, whom he had served faithfully for so
many yea's, had impoc-d upon him a gross fraud for the
purpose of serving the purpose of his friend Mr. Barges.
In explanation of the letter of Mr. Maltby, the bishop's
son, Mr. Atherton contended that both the father and the
son had clearly been mistaken. He urged that when the
proprietors of the Durham Advertiser received the account
of:this meeting from a reporter, they should have deferred
its publication for at least a week, when they might have
ascertained its truth, and in the same number in which
appeared the bare might also have appeared the antidote.
The defendants, however, published this report on the
10th of the month, the meeting occurring only three
days before. A question might be raised, why did
not Mr. Davison summon the reporter, or the person
who uttered the words complained of, but supposing
Mr. Davison had brought his action against the
latter, he would have been involved in far nicer points
than were involved in the celebrated plea to which he
should presently refer. Mr. Davison lodged his complaint
so early as the 29th of October, but it was not till the 2d
of December that the defendants put their plea upon the
record, and it was this—that the injurious and calumnious
statements were true in very fact. Now, the defendants
had either inquired into the truth of the allegations made
in the report, or they had not. They bad either found that
the allegations were unfounded, in which case the malig-
nancy of the libel was known to them, and they put forward
and deliberately defended these false and
injurious state-
ments; or else, without taking the trouble to inquire, they
recklessly, with the means of knowledge before them, shut
their eyes to the truth, and, whether the accusations were
true or untrue, they at haphazard put down, recorded, and
insisted on them as true in substance and in fact. The learn-
ed
.counsel animadverted upon the conduct of the defend-
ants in not apologising as soon as possible after they had
ascertained the falsity of the allegations. They had
pleaded that it was a fair report, and that it was done with-
out malice ; but Mr. Davison had reason to believe that it
was not published without malice. It was a question whe-
ther it was permissible in point of law to give even a cor-
rect report of what took place at a meeting of the Hai tie-
pool Improvement Commissioners, to defeene the character
of Mr. Davison, and valuable as tLe services of the press
undoubtedly were in this free country, he had very con-
siderable doubt whether it was to be permitted or en-
dured that the publishers of journals like the Durham Ad-
vertiser should give the publicity which their circulation
afforded to the defamation of charaeter, to libel and
slander, quite without foundation, and in many cases
uttered with express malignity. It was true, iu some in-
stances, that defamation by some parties was rather a
compliment than otherwise. But when it got into a coun-
try journal like the Durham Advertiser, and thence into the
London papers, if the person calsiumniated was in a public
position,the character of the defamer was perhaps unknown
and in such a case the calumny of one man was just as
fatal as the malice of another. Die friends of the person
calumniated could not take the trouble to ascertain the
truth of the charges, and the offence was rendered a hun-
dred times greater than it would have been if the defama-
tion had been allowed to remain within its original limits.
plea, and this was likely to become
jTuhstei
fiCcoautriot ofn w(a2us eaenb'as
ißench had decided that the plea of
one of the causes celebres, owing to the plea which had
been pronounced bad. The conductors of the public press
generally, who were anxious to sanction their own impu-
nity, and perhaps also looked upon the existing law as un-
favourable to the public, had taken up this case of the
Durham Advertiser, and the question had been discussed
and commented upon. Mr. Atherton then remarked that
there were several inaccuracies in this report of the meet-
ing of the Hartlepool Commissioners, and he dwelt espe-
cially upon the fact that the reporter had omitted either
to give the document itself, which he said was laid be-
fore the commissioners, and that be had not even
stated that it was signed by Archdeacon Bland, as the
commissary of the bishop. The suppression of this fact
proved, he contended, that the report wag AS unfair as the
Court of Queen's Bench hod decided the plea wee wrong.
The following evidence was produced for the plaintiff's
Case :

The learned judge then summed up, stating his opinion
that the expressions made use of at the meeting clearly
contained libellous matter. Reporters and newspaper
proprietors were private individuals performing very use-
ful and important functions, but if they circulated
slanders they must be held responsible, as other private
individuals were.

The jury retired for a short time, and at two o'clock re-
turned with a verdict for the plaintiff--one farthing da-
mages.

ARKET NEWS.—(This I:ay.)

COVENT GARDEN.

The supplies of fruit and vegetables were only moderate,
and the trade generally ruled steady, as follows :

FRurT.

Pine apples, per lb. 6s Od to 10s Filberts, per lb is to is 4d
Colonial do., ea. Os Od to Os Od Cobs., p. 100 lbs. 140 s to s
Grapes, per 1b...12s Od to 20.7 Almonds, p. lb. Os Od to Os Od
Foreign do Os Od to Os Od Walings, per 100 6d to Is Od
Melons, each 3s Od to 5s Od Figs, per doz is to 3s Od
Peaches, p. d0z.... 3s to 830 d Strawberries, per
Nectarines, do. 2s Od to 8s Od pottle Od to Od
Apples, p. h. sv. 6s Od to 8s 3d Gooseberries, per
Pears, per d0z....8s to 103 Od half sieve ....Os Od to Os Od
Oranges, per 100. 3s 6d to Os Currants, p. do. Os 0,1 to Os Od
Lemons, p. doz. 03 9d to 2s Od Plums, per do. 2s Od to 5s Od
Apricots,p. doz. 2s Od to 6s Od Groan gages, do. 4s Od to 7s Od
Cherries, per lb. Os to Os Od Raspberries, p. potl. Oil to Od
VEGETABLES.

Greens, p. doz. bnn. 3s to 3s 6d
Cabbages, per doz. is to is 9d
Savoy do., p. do. is Od to 2s fod
Cauliflowers, do. ,:sod to 58 Od
Brocoli, p. bun. is 0,1 to is
Potatoes, per ton 603 to 130 E
New do., per d 0....... Osto
Peas, per quart ...9d to is Od
Turnips, per bunch 2id to 6d
Carrots, per bunch...sd to 7d
Cucumbers, each 2s to 4s Od
Garlic, per lb 6d to Os Rd
Sorrel, per sieve Od to Os
Spinach, p. d0...2s Od to 2s 6d
Brussels sprouts, per
half do 2s 01 to 3s Od
Onions, p. bush 2s 6d to 4a 9d
New do., per bunch 4d to 6d
French beans, per
100 2B 6d to 4s Od
Leeks, per d 0......... 2d to 4d
NE WGAT E AND

Shallots, per lb.. 6d to 83
Florseraddish, p. bun. 2s to 5s
Parsley, per do. 3d to 4d
Celery, per do Os 9d to is 63
Beet, per doz. is Od to 2s Od
Parsnips, per do. is Od to Os
Small salad, p. pun. 2d to 3d
Mushrooms, p. ptl. 2so, I to2s 3d
Artichokes, each ...4d to 8d
Lettuces, per score 9d to is 3d
Endive, per score is 6d to 3s
Radishes, per bunch 21 to 3d
Tomatoes, p. hf.sv. 4s to Os Od
' Walnuts per 100...0s 8d to is
Chillies, per 1001 s Od to Is 6d
Capsicums, per 1001 s Od to 2s
Rhubarb, p. bun. 9d to is 6d
Asparagus, per 100 Gs Od to 9s
Sea kail, per pun. Os ed to Os
Turnip greens, per
bush is bd to is Gd
LEADENHALL.

-----
Turkeys, 5s Od to 103 Od; Geese, 55 Od to 8s Od each ;
Ducks, 2s 6d to 3s Od ; tame rabbits, is 3d to 2s 01 each ;
wild do., 10d to is 2d ; Pigeons, 10d to is 3d each ; large
Surrey Fowls, 68 to 123 ; barn-door do., 3s 6d to 53 6d ; Chick-
ens, 5s Od to 9s Od per couple ; Capons, Os Od to Os ; Hares,
2s 6d to 3s 6d ; Grouse, 2s 3d to 3s 01 each ; Pheasants,
3s to 4s 6d ; Partridges, is 9d to 2s 3d; Woodcocks, 35 Od
to 3s 6d ; Snipes, is 6d to is 9d; Teal, is 6d to is 9d; Wild
Ducks, is 9LI to 2s Od ; Widgeons, is to is 3d ; Plovers, is 6d
to le 9d each ; Guinea Fowls, is 9d to 3s ; Roasting pigs, 6s
Od to lOs Od each. Ostend fresh butter, —s to -• s Od ;
English do., 15s Od to 18s Ocl per dozen lbs. ; English eggs,
Os to lOs ; French do., 7s 6d to 8s per 120; Leverets, 2s tid
to 3s Od each.

NEWPORT.
Beef, from 33 4d to 4s 6(1 ; mutton, 38 84 to 4s 104 ; veal,
43 Od to 5s 01; pork, 4s Od to 59 Od per £3lbs., by the car-
case.

WHITECHAPEL.
Beef from 3s 2d to 4s 6d; mutton, 3s 6d to 4s 10,1 ; veal,
4s 01 to 5s 03 ; pork, 38 8d to 53 per 81bs., by the carcase.

- - _
BILLINGSGATE.
Turbots, is 01 to 123 ; Brills, 2s 01 to 7s each ; Salraon,
is 9d to 2s 61 per lb ; Cod Fish, is 61 to 7s each ; Sole-, 4d
to 2s 6d per pair ; Trout, ls 03 to 03 per lb ; Lobsters, 2s to
4s 6d; Crabs, 6d to 3s Od ; Whitings, 35 Od to 7s perdoz. ;
Common Oysters, 12s to 16s ' • Natives, 503 to —s per bsh. ;
Mackerel, 60s to —s per 100 ;Smelts, is Od to 3s 6d per doz. ;
Skate, 6d to Od per lb; Shrimps, is 6d to 2s 6d per gallon ;
Bloaters, 5s Od to 8s Od per 100 ; Fresh Herrings, 4s
to Os per 100; Scotch do., Od; Sprats, 5s Od to Os Od pes
bushel ; Doreys, is Od to 7s each ; Haddocks, 4s to 103 per
doz. : Pike, 6d Sturgeon, 61 per lb ; Prawns, 7s Od to Os;
Mullets, 6d to is 6d each ; Plaice, 4d to is each ; Halibut,
Fd per lb ; Flounders, is 6d to 2s Od per doz. ; salt fish,
Od per lb ; Eels, 8d to Is.

BREAD.
The prices of wheaten bread in the metropolis aro from
80 to 9d ; of household ditto, 7d to 8d per 4 lb loaf.

HIDES AND SKINS.
Market hides, 561 b to 641 b, 5/d to kid ; 6411, to 721 b, sid
to old ; 721 b to 801 b, sid to 6d ; 801 b to 881 b, 6d to 6sd ;
881 b to 961 b, Gld to 7d ; 961 b to 1011 b, 7d to 74d ; 1041 b
to 1121 b, Od to Od ; upwards, —d to —d ; horse hides,
lOs Od to Os ; Caif skins, light, 3s 01 to 5s Od ; ditto
full, 9s 6d to Os Od ; Polled Sheep, 10s Od to 12s Od ; Keats,
8s tid to 103 ; Half-breds, 8s 6cl to lOs Oi ; Downs, Gs 6d to
8s Od ; Shearlings, is 4d to is 5d ; Lambs, Os Od.

HAY MARKETS.
SMITFIFIELD.—Meadow bay, 21 lOs to 4/ Os clover do.
31 lOs to 61 Os ; and straw, 1/ 4s to 1/ 83 per load.
A full average supply and a sluggish demand.
CUMBERLAND. —Meadow bay, 2/ lOs to 41 4s ; clover
do., 3/ to 5/ Os ; and straw, 1/ 4s to 11 9s per load,
Supply talerably good and trade steady.
WHITECHAPEL.—Meadow hay, 2/ lOs to 4/ Os : clover
do., 3/ lOs to 51 Os ; and straw, 1/ 4s to 11 8s per load.
Trade dull, at late rates.

LLOYD'S SHIPPING.—Ibis Day.)

,e..--_

LONDON, March 7.—Wind this day at noon, W. ;
moderate breeze and cloudy weather.
FALMOUTH, March 6. —Wind W. N. W.—Arrived —Ma-
tilda, from Rio Janeiro ; M. W. Babbage, Vera Cruz.
DARTMOUTH, March 6.—Wind N. W.—Sailed—Cla-
rendon (s.s.), for the Cape of Good Hope and India.
TORBAY, March G. —Sailed—Berl in , for New York.
Boxer' lIR on, 1.W., March 6.—Off the port—Annan-
dale, from Mauritius, for Bremen.
SWANSEA, March 6.—Wind S.S.W.—Arrived—Bella
Donna, from Coquimbo; Mary, Riva da Sella. Sailed—
Friends, for Malta.

CARDIFF, March s.—Two steamers came in collision in
Penarth Roads to-day, and one of them sunk.
CRRISTIANSAND, Feb. 23. ['he Constance, from Stock-
holm, for England, whioh was towed up here previous to
the 30th Nov., after being on shore to the eastward of this
place on the 12th Nov., has been discharged and surveyed,
and found to be so much injured that she was abandoned,
and will be sold.

The publication of the paper was admitted.
Mr. W. W. Brunton, clerk to the West Hartlepool Com-
missioners, stated that he attended a meeting of that board
on the 7th Oct. Produced a copy of Mr. Burger's licence.
Believed that the document was read by the chairman at
the meeting. It was dated the 27th September, and was
a licence from the Bishop, signed by Archdeacon Bland,
empowering Mr. Burges is inter bodies in the consecrated
portion of the New Cemetery.
Cross-examined by Mr. Hill—lt was read by the chair-
man, Mr. R. Ward Jackson. Several commissioners, whore
names he gave, were present. Mr. Jackson, after reading
the document, said it is with the bishop's seal specially at-
tested. After it was read several of the commissioners ex-
pressed their surprise and astonishment. Several of the
commissioners asked of witness if he had made an applica-
tion for the licence, and he replied to them, " No petition
had either been sent by the commissioners or the town."
Several of them said that they could not understand the
necessity for such a document, as the burial ground, hrd
already been consecrated. The chaiiinan said that Mr.
Ridley, the vicar of Stranton, was the proper person to
inter bodies, and that the licence was a clumsy device of
Mr. Davison to give Mr. Barges a status. Mr. Ridley, the
vicar of the parish, rerearkc i that ho (Mr. Ridley) had
written to the bishop, and that he had received an answer
from the bishop that Mr. Dasison's document had been
laid before him by that gentleman, but that Mr. Burger's
name was not in it. If it had been he would not have
signed
it.
Canon The
a letterlt, ; y . too One of
, the he
commissionersg d,
said it waswas signed by the
Rev.
a fraud.' Another that it was a scandal upon the Church.
Mr. Ridley replied he did not S C 3 that. It was a scandal
upon Mr. Jos. Davison, the late bishop's secretary. The
commissioners repudiated the document. The commis-
sioners are elected by the owners of property in the town.
The meetings are held fortnightly. For the last year and
a half they have been attended by the reporters, and the
proceedings reported.
Mr. Peel, the next witness, produced a petition for con-
secrating the cemetery at West Hartlepool. It was signed
by the Revs. Ridley and Burges, and was sealed by the
commissioners. The Bishop of Manchester conseqated the
ground.
The Rev. Mr. Burges produced the original licence to
Iti• gsvneads signed 0 D
.eheennne 'v'eaidtsh,
" George
tßhhilmee t
12ud7,nt
hde
()corn;
mtshei eps
commissary specially
epore.fe ta hop,iley
ab
pi sphei
n t e I:d proved that he
13
ishop Auckland
inw asseapptpeetni Archdeacontibtee
rd, Eland
itewhs aea sryl
others, Was handed
to him by the bishop's steward, Mr. Qreasiy When he

(PER ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH.)
SOUTHAMPTON, Saturday, 9.30 a.m.
Wind W., fine.
Arrived—Jura, steamer, from Liverpool ; Rapid, Sun-
derland ; Pearl, Cardiff; Charlotte and Undine, Wood-
bridge; Water Nymph, Sunderland.
Sailed—Elizabeth, for Cardiff; Barkley, Sunderland.
LIVERPOOL, Saturday Morning.
Wind W.N.W.
Arrived—Syria, from SL John's, New Brunswick; Ti.
tania, Taragona.
Sailed—Ennerdale, for Pernambuco; Africa (s), New
York; Circassian (e), Newfoundland.
QUEENSTOWN, March 5.
,Wind S.W.
Arrived—Detroit, from Callao.

(BY SUBMARINE AND BRITiS El TELEGRAPH.)
GRAVESEND, Saturday, 9.45 a.m.
Wind W.N.W. ; four hours' flood • fine.
Arrived, the 6th—Meteor, from Table Bay; Earl Mul-
grave, Nassau ; May Flower, Demerara; Cybelle, Ber-
bice ; Vizcano, Savannah; luvanhoe, Calcutta; Adelaide,
Odessa.

Arrived, the 7th—Harrie.:,, from Dunkirk ; Ocean, Dun-
kirk Albatross, Rotterdam ; J. K. L., Singapore.
•DEAL, Saturday; 9.30 X. 03.
Wind N.W., moderate.
Passed the Downs on the sth—Floke, from Shields, for
Vonedag.
Passed— Blackfriars, from Madras, for London ; Land-
scape, Ibrail, London ; King John, Llanelly, London ;
Dorothy, Taganrog, Neptune, Australia, Dundee.
Anchored—Susan, from London, for Rouen ; Alida,
Shields, New York ; Lelia, London, St. Thomas.

The committee appointed by the House of Lords to
consider what improvements might be made in the print-
ing of the minutes of the house, amongst other things,
recommend that the divisions be taken and-printed in
the same way as those of the House of Common,. •
The wreck of the Northern Belle in foggy weather is
a,very dangerous obstacle to navigation. A few days
ago a ship bad a narrow escape by striking it,
It is understood to be in contemplation by mutual
arrangements between the South Western Railway and
the Steam Packet Company, to land passengers from
Jersey and Havre free of all dock charges,

was at Auckland tie licences were sent to Mr. Greasly
to be sealed, and handed to him for consideration. When
the licence was handed to him Mr. Burgess's name was not
on it. There was a blank in it for the name. He brought
it to Durham in that state. He took it on the 27th of
September in that state to Mr. Davison's office. Mr.
Davison was secretary to the late bishop. He directed
that gentleman to insert the Reverend George Hart Bur-
ges's name in the licence as incumbent of Christchurch,
West Hartlepool; he was aware that the cemetery had
been consecrated upon the petition of the vicar of St an-
ton and Mr. Burgos. The name was inserted in his (Mr.
Bland's) presence. After it was inserted, he (Mr. Bland)
signed.
Crossixamined by Mr. Hill—lt was on his responsibility
that the document was signed. He was aware that there
was an unseemly controversy at West Hartlepool.
Judge said he would not have any religious contro-
versy there.
Re-examined by Mr. Atherton—ln using the term " un-
seemly" he did not apply it to Mr. Burgos.
Mr. Jackson, a clerk in Mr. Davison's office, stated that;
he (witness) filled up Mr. Burges's name in the licence.
The learned Judge then expressed his opinion that after
the explanation now given it was a great pity to go on with
the case.
Mr. Hill, Q.C., then addressed the jury for the defend-
ants. He protested against the conduct of the plaintiff,
who, instead of writing a note to the editor of the Durham
Advertiser, which was admitted by him to be a respectable
journal, and in which that note would have been published
in the very next impressibn, and would have at once cor-
rected any mistake that the parties bad fallen into, chose
to bring this action against the defendants. The West
Hartlepool commissioners were a public body, appointed
by act of Parliament, and responsible to the ratepayers,
and therefore a body whose proceedings were of interest
to the public and properly reported by the press. This
report, he observed, was objected to as libellous because
it was not a report in extenso. But he maintained that
it was a fair condensation of the proceedings. He
contended that the report having been sent to the de-
fendants by their reporter, and relating to public matters
not only of interest to the town of Hartlepool, but to the
whole diocese of Durham, they were justified in publishing
it. Hezeinarked that 60 years ago, in the case of Woodfall,
the printer, Lord Mansfield had laid it down that the jury
had not to decide with regard to the libel, but with regard
to its publication. Since that decision, however, an act
had been passed which left it to the jury to declare whether
the publication was a libel or not. He alluded to the case
of " Lord Lucan v. the Publishers of the Daily News,"
in which case the conduct of that nobleman had been
severely reflected upon ; but the article having been
published in the interest of the public, the jury gave a
verdict for the defendants. The report in the Durhane
Advertiser was a correct account of the proceedings, and
published in good faith ; and therefore if the jury did give
the plaintiff a verdict, let it be for the smallest coin in the
realm.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—(YrsTERDAY.)
The SPEAKER took the Chair at 4 o'cksek.
PRIVATE BUSINESS.

The following private bills were read a, second time
and ordered to be committed :—Cork Comnirners' Gas •
Liverpool Docks Committee and Birkenh earl Decks
and Swan,ea Docks. •
The Norfolk Railway bill was withdrawn.

INDUSTRIAL SCHOOLS.
In answer to a question from Sir S. NORTHCOTE,
Sir G. GREY said there would be no objection offered
by the Government to going into committee on the In-
dustrial Schools Bill to-night pro forma, in order that it
might be reprinted with the amendments of the promoter.
THE BURIAL ACTS.
Sir DE LACY EVANS asked if it was t'ae intention
of Government to introduce a bill to ameiad the Burial
Acts ; and if so, whether there would be any objection
on the part of Government that a dance similar to clause
Bof the Burial Ac:: for Irel pasted in the year 1853,
be introduced the..ein, securing certain sacred rights to
bury in family vaults in existing cemeteries ?
Mr. MASSEY said that the Government had bad the
subject under consideration, bat that in the present
state of affairs it was not likely they woul I introduce a
bill. He we unable then to state what would be the
particular provisions of that measure.
WEST LONDON UNION.

Lord C. HAMILTON asked the President of the
Poor Law Board whether the deficient accommodation
for the casual poor in the West London Union had been
officially brought under his notios ?
Mr. BOUV.ERIE said that, having seen a statement
in the public journals with reference to this union, he
had caused inquiries to be made into the subject. He
found that in the Union Workhouse there was a room for
casual poor, but that when it became full, those who
could not be received in the workhouse casual vrard
were sent to a place in the neighbourhood of
King's-cross, which afforded the worst poasitle
shelter. .'lt was no better than a stable,
with a division in it for men and women, who were sup-
plied with a rug and 6 oz. of bread. Means had been
taken for remedying that state of things.
THE LIGHT DUES.
Mr. J. EWART asked the Vice-President ,af the
Board of Trade whether it was intended to make any,
and what, further reduction in the light dues levied by
the three general lighthouse boards, under the M. trchaut
Shipping Act, 1854 I
Mr. LOWE said that in 1854 the light dues for Eng-
land, Ireland, and Scotland were consolidated and
placed under the control of the Board of Trade. Since
that time they had taken off dues to the amount of
100,0001., and had erected 21 lighthouses, and were
now negotiating the erection of 13 more. Without in-
cumbering the funds the Board of Trade were making
arrangements for reducing the dues 50,0001. more.
(Hear, hear.)

AMEER ALI MOORAD KHAN.
Sir F. KELLY asked the President of the Board of
Control whether, in the case of the petition presented to
her Majesty the Queen by his Highness Ali Moorad
Kban, on the 13th November last, and by her Ma-
jesty referred to the Board of Commissioners for
the Affairs of India, any decision had been come to by
the Board ; and if so, on what ground the communication
of that decision was withdrawn from the petitioner, who
was now in London awaiting such decision
Mr. V. SMITH said that a communication was not
made to Ameer Ali Moorad Khan, because it was thought
he had left the country. The Government afterwards
found he was in this country, and they had now con],
municated the decision to him.
PERSIA.
Mr. LAYARD asked, now that the negotiations f-or
peace with Persia had been concluded, if the Government
would lay the papers with regard to it on the taVie of
the house I
Mr. V. SMITH said that there was the same objec-
tion to laying the papers on the table now as t'aere was
before signing the negotiations for peace, told he rag_
gested that the house should wait until the negotiations
for peace had been ratified.- There way, no necessity to
present the papers to the house, and still less for the bon.
gentleman to press the question. No v,.ite for the ex-
penses would probably be taken this ses,sion.
CORRUPT PRACTICES AT ELECTION ACT.
In answer to a question from Sir F . KELLY,
Sir G. GREY said that the Corrupt Practices at
Election Bill was still in force, and would remain so for
some time. When it was passed it was provided that
it should remain in force till August, 1857, and till the
end of the next ensuing session of Parliament.

PERSIA.
On the motion of the adjournment of the houQe,
Mr. LAYARD renewed his question with reference
to the production of the papers rclative to Persia.
Mr. V. SMITH repeated his answer given above.
Mr. GLADSTONE said that he was not satisfied
with the answer. If they were not to discuss the ques-
tion till the assembling of the new Parliament the war
would be over, and all interest in the question at an end.
After some remarks from Mr. WHITESIDE, the
subject dropped.

THE RESOLUTE.
In reply to some remark from Mr. EVELYN relative to
the conduct of the Admiralty in reference to the Arctic
vessel Resolute, in stripping and dismantling her,
,Sir C. WOOD said that on the arrival of that ship
into this country every att3ntion was paid to Captain
Hartstein and his crew—(hear, hear) —and he offered
on the part of the Government to send them
back to America in a Government frigate, but which
be politely declined accepting. What had been done tr•
the Resolute had not been done discourteously to th•
American Government, but with a view to her preser-
vation. The same was done to the most valuable ships
In our navy when they were not required for active

GUANO,

IMPERIAL PA R LIA MEN T. time could not be gained so as to make a double transit
____,a_-__ in
A24ftehrouorsfutireepoluahrlkics wfrooumidcgaato"
HOUSE OF LORDS.—(YESTERDAY.)
The LORD CHANCELLOR too
THE 'Lusa- MAGISTRACY. The subject dropped.
1
took his seat on the wool. ' CHINA.
sack at 5 o'clock.
nnenlopthuinnwg.
E:
, Sir P. KELLY asked the Government if they in.
i tended to continue to ao on • the ordinance relative to
i carryit,g the British fildg in the China 'waters t He con
Viscount DUNGANNON gave notice that on Tees- i tended the ordinance WP,I ille al.
Lord PALMERSTON raid the question was re.
day next he shoal move for a copy of the memorial of I
the Protestant Association of Mike/my to the Lore, , opining that which had . onstituf.ed so loot!: a debate
Lieutrates,enant, compmithlaini and ng of
Anthem a case in pe' tinue acting on the ordinance referred to.
sons connected with the Irish Church Missionary Society The subject then dropped.
were concerned.
IRISH POOR L&W. The adjournment was then agreed to,
EAST INDIA AND CHINA.
The Earl of WICKLOW presented a petition from the On the motion of Lord tIOTHAIT an adc'ress was agreed
guardians of Rathdrom, in Ireland, praying the house to for copies of any in,!in,,ria,, r..oelved b',.- Viscount Pal.
to take into their consideration the state of the poor in noerston in 1817 and 1848 it ,:11 the Eust India and China
that county (Wicklow); and to consolidate the unions in Association of Liverpool, together with the answers re.
Ireland, and thereby lessen the expenses of such estah- valved thereto.
lishments.
Their lordships then adjourned.

WAYS AND MEANS.
On the question that the Speaker dv leave the chair
and that the house resolve itself lots A committee of
ways and means,
Mr. DISRAELI said—l understand from what passed
yesterday that the Chancellor of the Exchequer would to.
day make a statement as to the coarse the Government
propose to take with regard to financial matters ;'but
after I Mt. the house I find that the right hon. gentleman
made the statement which I anticipated to have heard
from him to-day. I shall therefore take this oppor-
tunity fairly and succinctly to state to the house the
course which we on this side were prepared to take with
respecttofinanciaclomuresae must b
suresineomrdoidniafied under therycircumstan ex-
traordinary and how far that .
traordinary circumstances` which we have now to cocotte.
ter. The Chancellor of the Exclisrper, in introducing to
the house his financial proposition, stated that there was
a very large increase in the income derived both from
direct and indirect tsx se and he entered into a compari-
son of the relative amounts which accrued from those two
sources. I think the right hon. gentleman stated very ac•
curately that the direct taxes had produced 21,000,0001.,
and the indirect taxes something more than 39,000,0001.;
but he omitted one item of no mean importance, and that
was the locet taxation of the ceuntry. I need not remind
bon, gentlemen of the large amount of that local taxation,
nor how materially it alters rho balance which the Chan.
cellor of the Exchequer strnok in his financial state-
ment. We have no wish, sir, to disturb in any way the
balance which exists between direct and indirect taxa-
tion. Our opposition to the income tax has never
been founded upon the fact that it is a direct tax, but
upon the circumstance that it is a direct tax of 9se most
invidious and intolerable character. It was our 'view
generally, when the Chancellor of the Exchequer origi-
nally brought forward those propositions which in a more
modified form we are now about to consider, that with
wise financial arrangements, perfectly sound in principle
and legitimate in practice, and with a well-considered
reduction of our expenditure—a reduction regarded only
with respect to the efficiency of the public service, and
with no ocher consideration—a reduction which we
should have recommended, whatever might be the
state of the Exchequer, whether exuberant or ex-
hausted—it would have been possible to make adequate
financial provision for the year without any material
addition, if any, to the taxation of the country. We
were ready, indeed, notwithstanding those opinions, to
consider the propositions of the Government in a
spirit which would rather have erred in perhaps unne-
cessarily favouring the Exchequer than in attempting
to offer obstacles to the policy which Ministers origi-
nally recommended. Therefore, so far as the income tax
was concerned, we were prepared to give every possible
assistance to the Government ceneietent with maintain-
ing the spirit of the settlement of 1853. I would even calf
it the compact of 1853, and I am rather surprised that a
very high authority upon financial subjects in this house
—the right hon. gentleman the member for Portsmouth
—should have derided the idea of a compact. (Sir F.
Baring—No.) On referring to an excellent speech which
the right hon. hart. made in 1853, I find he then laid it
down in very strong and nervous language that the set-
tlement of that year was a compact of such a character
that when 1860 arrived he should be surprised to see any
Minister bold eleough to continue the income tax.
(Hear, hear.) With regard, then, to that portion of
the financial scheme which assumed the form of direct
taxation, we wished to consider it in the most liberal
and conciliatory spirit, and, provided we could have
obtained from the Government a virtual pledge teat
the compact of 1853 would be fulfilled, we should have
supported the general policy recommended in that re-
spect. It was with that view that I gave notice of a
resolution which, while it would not have injured the
Exchequer at the present moment, would have secured
that in 1860 the income tax woold not be higher than sd,
in the pound. Such was our policy with regard to direct;
taxes Let me now state the course we intended to pur-
sue with respect to the indirect taxes proposed by the
Chancellor of the Exchequer, The most important of
these indirect taxes which the Ceancell a- of the Exche-
quer proposed to deal with was the tea duty. It was
our lot, Sir, to propose originally tt,a,t the house should
consider the question of the tea duty. It was our opinion
that we could not deal with e tax of more importance, or
one which bad a greater influence upon the commerce
of the country and the general prosperity of the people.
Great opposition was offered to the consideration
of that question. Many persons of very high au-
thorityarticle were of opinb,n that the exeriiineet was cne
which ong
quantity
a whichdmade.
Weee Areinformed
proposed to that
ra the
was limited, and that the only consequences of our legis-
lation would b., the supply not being proportioriately
increased, to injure the revenue, without benefiting the
consumers. Nevertheless, taking the most sedulous
jmeans to obtain the very best information on the sub-
ect—and here I may offer cur thanks to a gentleman
a hose name was frequently mentioned in the recent de-
bates, Sir G. Bonham, for the assistance he gave us--
we believed that the views to which I have referred were
erroneous—that the quantity of the artier was, if I may
use the epithet, illimitable, and that if we operated
boldly upon the tea duties we should greatly stimulate
commeice, very much advance our manufactures, and,
above all, confer a great benefit upon the body of the
people. We had not the honour of carrying that mea-
sure. It was, fortunately for the country, carried by
our successors, and I ask the house whether all the be-
nefits anticipated from that great change have not been
fully realised ? (Hear.) There Las been no change in
our fiscal laws which has operated more beneficially to
the great body of the people. It has been proved
that the quantity of the article required is really illimit-
able. I'he immense increase in tee amount of our im-
pottations proves that, and every anticipation of benefit
to commerce, to manufactures, and to the community
generally has been perfectly realsed. IVith these views,
Sir, and not believing that a great increase of taxation
was necessary, and being prepared to make great sacri-
floes with respect to increased local taxation, believing,
too, that when the war ceased the tea duties ought to
fall to the particular amount which they would have
touched bad not the war occurred, it was our intention
to resist any change in the settlement of 1853 with re-
gard to the tea dillies. I cannot say that anything that
nas occurred since has at all shaken our general views
upon that subject: I donotwant to introduce iuvidiougy
into this discussion any consideration with respect to the
affairs of China, but I may perhaps be allowed to observe
that, if you increase the tea duties ins' ead of diminishing
them at a time when the supply of the article is less, and
likely to continue to be so, the consequence must be most
injurious to the consumer. (Hear.) Let the house ob-
serve, however, that we are not now in the position in
which we were when the financial propositions of the
Government were offered to us. Nay, sir, I find the po-
sition in which we are placed is very different from what
it was when the noble viscount announced to us yester-
day that it was the intention of her Majesty's Ministers
to appeal to the country. I understood that then the
noble viscount, believing that the decision of this house
on Tuesday night was an erroneous one, had made up
his mind to appeal to the people to say whether they
would sanction that decision. What was our position
at that moment ? The House of Commons had censured
the conduct of the agents of her Majesty's Government
in China, which conduct had been sanctioned by her
Majesty's Ministers; and the noble viscount accepting
tour resolution as a censure upon his Government, wished
appeal to the country, in order to ascertain whether
it approves or condemns our proceedings. But, after I
had addressed the house, the noble viscount, Ie
my great surpthe, informed us that her Majesty's Mi.
meters have superseded the agents whose conduct we
tth
understand
pade onp l
et t
,coh
sae
y leggedCwouhr at
eht the
et jbh• uaesy;
bad censured. I cannot, Sir, understand the consis-
tency of that proceeding on tee part of her Majesty's
Ministers. It places this house in a very peculiar posi-
veal I could
ot
ou
ttaiiiene.nof: fobutuhrtectenorombaulperpe
sanction our decision, having in the meantime superseded
the persons upon whom cur sentence was
appears to me extremely inconsistent. Pronounced'
l Elear.) But
what is the actual position in which
itself placed ? The noble vi the house finds
of viscount pon the ue tion
war, says be utterly contemns thenq 8
pinion of the ex-
isting House of Commons, and of a future House of C appeals to the opinion
Commons which is to assemble
in May, How, Sir, can 'House of
we bind a future ,
Commons on
a subject quite • t tasthat °I
as im mr an
ii,
war—the subject of taxation, ifopinion with
our
respect to the affair in China no influence
is to have.
with the noble viscount
11118 er announces
? If a 111
that the solemn opinion of this house upon th, subject
of war is not to influence his conduct, and he appeals to
a future House of Commons, to assemble in May, I can-
not see how he can ask the condemned and contemned
house to levy new imposts uponthe fa
people. If .
the
-to the anticipation
tune House of Commons_ip, according
.ou• decision with ef the noble viscount, to reverseect
it to be bound by the
re-
spect to China, how can we yap
decision of a moribund house with respect to taxation ?
I think it would_ be well for the house to consider
whether at the present moment we cannot do better
than vote new taxes under circumstances which deprive
tea not e
of all authority, and which, if in a legal, at
us
deal sense, render it impossible
a constitutional
least in
for us to deal with the property of our constituents.
What would be the consequence ? The now house
is to west in May. We can have the budget in
May-
We have often bad the budget in May. In
1848 the budget was 'brought forward in August. Oa
a question so important as that of direct or indirect
taxation, involving considerations of so various and so
momentous a character, it would be much better that
the new house should be left to decide, unaided by the
judgment of a house which has been deprived of all autho-
rity, and which constitutionally has no right any longer . .
to deal with the property of the people. What power
has this House of Commons to pass laws that the people
of England shall pay taxes for a year hence, when our
authority was virtually destroyed the moment that the