The Sun.
London, England, 1868-08-07 00:00:00

SUMMER ASSIZES.

TIO'ME CIRCUIT.— GUILDFORD, Aug. 6.
(Before Mr. Baron Martin and a Special Jury)]
HARDING V. VALENTINE AND ANOTHER—IMPORTANT

CASE-POSTING ALLEGED DEFAULTERS.
This was an action of libel of rather an unusal

character, the ground for the plaintiff instituting
the proceedings being that the defendants had
posted him as a defaulter at the last Epsom races.
Sergeant Ballantine, Mr. Garth, Q.C., and Mr.
Hill appeared for the plaintiff ; Mr Hawkins, Q.C.,
and the Hon. Mr. Thesiger were counsel for the de-

fendants.
Sergeant Ballantine, in opening the case for the
plaintiff, said it was one of considerable iwportance,
not only so far as he was concerned, but to the pub-
lic generally. The plaintiff was originally a surgeon
in the navy, but he had married a lady of consider-

able fortune, and since then he had entirely given up

his professional pursuits, and lived upon his means,
passing a good deal of his time with his family at Paris.
He was, like many other gentlemen, very fond of the
turf, and was the owner of several racehorses, al-

though they did not run in his name ; but, as the
jury were aware, this was a very commonpractice,
and was considered perfectly legitimate by the rules
of the turf, and the name in which the horses of
the plaintiff were entered was Temple. The defend-

ants carried on a very extensive business in what
was called, in betting language, commission or
betting agents, and their practice was to take
money and to make bets with the public at large.
They had an agent in Paris named Barnes, and
he believed there was no doubt they carried on
their operations in connection with the turf to

a very large extent. The plaintiff, while in
Paris, became acquainted with Barnes, the agent
of the defendants, and made several bets with
him on their account, but not to any large amount ;
and there was a sort of running account between
them relating to their respective winnings and
losings, and in the spring of the present year there

was a small balance due to the defendants

by the plaintiff. The amount of the balance was
really very trifling, and the plaintiff had on several
occasions expresse 1 his readiness to pay it ; but
notwithstanding this, the defendants seemed to
have made it the ground for the extraordinary pro-
ceeding that was subsequently adopted by them. A
short time previous to the Derby race of the pre-
sent year being run it would be remembered that a
mare called Lady Elizabeth was in the ascendant,
and it was generally supposed a certainty that she
would win the race, and he believed that the de-
fendants stood to lose a very large sum of money if
this should turn out to be the case, and he was
afraid that this had something to do with the pro-
ceedings that they had taken in reference to the
plaintiff. It appeared that Mr. Harding had made
some bets with Mr. Barnes, the agent for the de-
fendants in Paris, one of which was 100 to 25
against Lady Elizabeth, and he had also backed
another horse called Speculum for a place at 2 to 1 ;
and the result of these bets, if they had both come
off, would have been that he would have won £l5O,
but as it turned out by backing Speculum he would
have been the winner of a balance of £25. The
Derby day arrived, and the dAendants,without any
warning or notice whatever, and solely because the
plaintiff did not make his appearance in the betting
ring, posted him as a defaulter in reference to the
small balance of account to which he had referred,

an at the same time gave notice that all bets made
with him would be cancelled. The plaintiff did go
to the Derby, but he did not go to the betting-ring,
and he was entirely ignorant of the proceedings
that had taken place until he was informed of it
by a friend, and the consequences were really very
serious to him. Ile was a member of the Junior
United Service and several other clubs, and he was
really ashamed to show himself at any of them ; and
in addition to this, according to one of the rules of
the turf, a person who had been declared a defaulter
could not run his horses at some of the meetings, and
was liable to be warned off the course. The
plaintiff felt that he had no alternative but to bring
this action, but he thought it right to state that the
only object he had in view was to vindicate his cha-
racter and reputation, and he did not for a moment
desire to put any money into his pocket. lie be-
lieved he should be able to show in the course of the
ease that the plaintiff had had a communication
with one of the defendants, Mr. Valentine, upon
the matter, and that this gentleman had expressed
his regret for what had taken place, and had pro-
mised to make an apology, which was all that the
plaintiff required ; but this promise had never been
carried out, and the plaintiff was therefore com-
pelled to proceed with the present action.
Alr. F. Harding, the plaintiff, was then examined,
his evidence being merely a repetition of the open-
ing statement of the learned counsel. Ile said that
the total balance due to the defendants upon the
bets that had been made previously to those upon
the Derby was not more than £5 or £6, and he said
that he met Mr. Valentine, one of the defendants,
in Paris, and offered to pay him, and he told him
he had not got his book with him, and he did not
know the exact amount, and he had better let the
matter stand over. The plaintiff stated that he
was possessed of ample property, and was the owner
of several racehorses, one of which was the horse
called Fitz-Ivan, and he observed that he was in
confederacy in racing pursuits with Pane.; Murat.
Ile said that he went to the Derby tLat year solely
for pleasure, and did not go into the betting ring,
and he never received the slightest notice or warn-
ing that the defendants intended to post him as a
defaulter, and he did not know of it until ten or
twelve days afterwards, when he was informed of
the fact by a friend. The effect of his being posted
as a defaulter would be that he could not run a
horse at Ascot or Goodwood, and lie was liable to be
warned off at Ascot by Lord Colville, and by the
Duke of Richmond at Goodwood.
Baron Martin—What is the man's name who
would warn you off at Ascot ?
The plaintiff said, Lord Colville. He went on to
state that he was a member of the Junior United
Service and several other clubs, and he found the
cold shoulder shown to him very soon after he had
been posted as a defaulter in the manner described.
The plaintiff went on to state that some time after
the occurrence he met Mr. Valentine at. Amiens, in
company with a gentleman named Gideon, and he
told him then that he did not want money, but all
he required was to clear his character, and he
should be satisfied if the defendant inserted a state-
ment in the sporting papers admitting that he was
in error. At this time the present action had been
commenced ; and upon Mr. Varentine saying that
he did not want to have any law, witness promised
to stay the action if he would do what he requested.
The defendant promised he would do so ; and a
friend of witness, Mr. Pickford, of the Grenadier
Guards, communicated with him upon the subject.
Nothing, however, came of this, and the action pro-
ceeded.
Mr. Hawkins said he should postpone any cross-
examination of the plaintiff for the present.
Mr. W. 11. Pickford, assistant-surgeon, was then
called to speak to the communications that took
place between him and the defendant, Mr. Valen-
tine.

The learned counsel here held a short conference
together, awl with their respective clients.
Mr. Hawkins then addressed his lordship, and said
that he would consent to a verdict for the plaintiff,
with 40i. damages; but with a view to setbothpartie3
right before the public he would like at the same time
to be permitted to make a short statement with re-
ference to the circumstances under which the defen-
dants had published the libel complained of. The
plaintiff was posted as a defaulter on the morning
of the Derby day ; and it was only right to state that
by one of the rules of the turf the defendants
would, in strictness, have been justified in taking
that course, as he was not present ; but on their
part, he was ready to admit that they were mis-
taken in the view they had taken of the matter, and
that in a moment of irritation they had adopted a
proceeding in which they were not legally justified.
This being so, they desired through him to express
their great regret at what had happened, and to
withdraw all imputations upon the character of the
Plaintiff. He thought he ought, at the same time,
to say that there was no doubt that the defendants
carried on their business in the most honourable
manner, and that enormous sums of money passed