The Sun.
London, England, 1819-12-11 00:00:00

WRIGHT V. J. CLI3I4IENT.

This was an action agaitiSt tiie defendant 'for
publishing two alleged libels, contained in Cubbett's
Weekly Political Register; one o►► the 4th of
January 1817; and the other on the 3d of July
1818, imputing to Ole plaintiff the forgery of cer-
tain letters, obtaining money under false pre-
tences, &c. &e:

Tlie plaintiff's case was conducted by Mr. SCAR-
LETT, Mr. GURNEY and Mr. DENMAN, and the
defendant's by Mr. ADOLPHUS and Mr. PLATT.

SCAELETT, iu stating the case fur the plain.

tiff, distinguished this from the action which had
Jost been triede by observing, that this was a case
of a notch more aggravated nature ; inasmuch as'
it seriously affected the interests of a private in-
dividual, on points upon whieh'his very existence,
in society depended ; witereaS the former arose
out of a matter connected solely with the politi-
cal character and conduct of a person, who was art
actor in some of the continental transactions of the
last war. This distinction was the more likely to-
engage the attention of the Jory, considering the •
aggravated nature of the libel now presented to
their notice. The plaintiff %Vas a person well known
to the literary part of the City of London. as be-
ing the conductor or manager of part of the Parlia-
mentary History of the 'Country, namely, Reports •
of Proceedings in Parli4ment, published under the
name of Mr. Cobbetr. In te.oimotty of the value
and importance of that publication, in-which Mr.
Wright had displayed so notch talent and indus-
try, for his own part, he confessed there was no
book he had ever read; from which he had derived
so rued) professional knowledge, as troni that
upon the «Object of Election Law. The defend-
ant, Mr. Clement, was a gentleman well known •
as rite editor or proprietor of The Observer news-
paper, and he (Mr. S.) would say of that publi.
cation, that he believed it to be a most respect- .
able newspaper, and conducted in such a way as
to excite very general satisfaction, by taking no
part in pclitical discussion, but merely publistong
occurrences of the week for the information and
instruction of his readers. The pUblication in
which the. alleged libels, whi'lt were the subject
of the present action, were contained, was not
one of which the defendant avowed himself to be
the 'proprietor, although it would he proved that
lie was the agent of the propri,oor. What share
or interest he ,had in the sale of it was not publicly
announced, par indeed for the purpose of the pre-
sent action was it necessary to inquire. In order
explain the nature of the libels, tor which Mr.
Wright 9Onatit a compensation in damages, it be-
came necessary that he shoal ewer into the his-
tory of the party libeilio4 and lie pall libelled.
The Jury were intorrned from the plear,iings, that
the libels ware Pablished in Cobbett'a Political Re-
gister. It was unnecessary for him to state who Mr.
Cohhetr w as. When that gentleman cane to Eng-
land, he opened a bookseVer's shop or Pall-mail,
under the emblonatical insignia of the Kittle, the
Crown; the Cnahion, and the Mitre, 'with the-.
loyal device of '" Fear God and Honour the
King." . Under such circumstances, nothing was
Inure likely than that Mr. Wright 'shotild antici-
pate the most advantageous results, in point of
character and respectability, from - a connection
with .his Gentleman, so announcing himself to
public notice. The Le tried Counsel • proceed-
ed to read an extract from the Works of Mr.
Cobbett, of that day, to shew the horror and .
con! ehipt Which flie author entertained towards
Paine, in which a lively and eloquent deserip.
tion was given of that man's situation when
doomed to a • dungeon in Pat is, having fallen
a .victim to those persons whose violent pas-.
sions were turned loose tinder the inflaence of
his pen. At this period• Mr. Wright f owed his
connection with Mr. Cohbett, Which.cominued
until the year 1810, dot big which interval the
plaintiff had been his mast oseful and active co-
iolintnr, in bringing forth the Political Register and
the Parliamentary Debates. In 1810 Mr. Cob-
bett was tried and convicted of a libel published
in his Register, with respect to military panish-
ments. On that ocra,,ion a negociation was en-
tered into by Mr. Cobbett with the Government,-
for the purpose of arresting the judgment that
awaited him, on condition of his discontinuing the
publication of his Register. Mr. Wright was his
confidential agent upon that occasion, but the
negociation having tailed, Mr. Cohbett was sent
to Newgate. In consequence of this the Regis..
ter proceeded ; but in the• mean time 'disputes
having arisen between Mr. Cobbett and Mr.
Wiight;upon matters of .pecuniary claims on the
part of the latter, which coded not long after
in open hostility, the negociation alluded to
having tailed, it was an object with Mr: Cob..
bett, for the preservation of his public popularity,
to keep that matter out of view. Mr. Wright was
the only depositary of -this secret, except Mr.
Reeves, a. gentleman of high character, through
whom the application was made to Mr. Percival,
then Chancellor of the Exchequer. This circutn-,
stance, however, by some means was divulged, and
Mr. Cobbett, attributing the connunnication of it
to Mr. Wright, published the•libel on the 4th of
January, 1817, which was one of the subjects of
this action. The libel consisted of a letter, pub-
lished in The Register, and was occasioned in con-
sequence of certain observations published in
The Times. Newspaper of the day concerning
Mr. Cobbett's applied, ion to Govermneut to
deprecate the sentenc of the law. That libel,
Without naming Mr. Wright,' sufficiently express-
ed Mr. Cobbet's conviction, that that Gentleman
was the channel of the communication, and was
expressed itt toms the most injurious to his ch. •••1
racier ; and any person acquainted with the par-
ties and their connexion must at once come to the
conclusion, that Mr. llrtight was the object of the
libel. That Gentleman, however, thought the
subject then unworthy of legal proceedings, front
the obscure mannet in which it was expressed, he
being then desirous of withdrawing himself 'troui.
public observation. 'l' hos matters rested unlit the
year 1818, when a General Election took place
for the City of Westminster, for which there wet e
several Candidates ; amongst others, the late s.
diitingnished ornament- of his country, Sir Sa-
m ud' Ronolly, Sir Francis Burdett, Mr. Kiunaird,
and a Gentleman named Hunt. This latter Gen-
tleman was considered to be a popular Candi-
date, and certainly, in, one sense, he might
be so ,considered, 'inasmuch as• he (Mr. S.)
understood that he was a very great favourite
among the-old veuitteli;-and ehildreu, who gene-
rally formed his audience. It had, for a consi-
derable time before, been the study' of Mr. Cuba
btu, in his vs' icings, to recoil-Intend this Gentle-
man to the favour and goad opinion of the Citi-
zens of IVestminster, as a fit and proper Repre-
sentative of their sense in -Parliament. In short,
his object seemed to be to write. Hunt up,
as the only man who could properly represent the
free and enlig,htetied inhabitants of Westmins-
ter. On the occasion in question, Mr. Cleary,
Who interested himself in the success of Sir

Butilett, 'being (tecirons of proving to
the Ele tors of Westminver that the opi-
lion of Mr. Cobbctt Wog tint sprays the same
with respect to Mr. H I's character and
nd conduct. prOtiOred a letter, written by Mr.
Cohbett in the year 'ISO% addressed by that Gen-
t iem2lll to MT. Wright, in which were the fol-
Irmintz expressions :—" There 14 one Mint, the
Itr;stol-man ; beware of hitn—be lives with a
%*****—the wife of another man, with whom he
ii.rieiing about the country—a sad fellow ; have no-
thing lii to will) him. Adieu. Wst CoEBaTT." This
letter wag read at the hustings, in order to show
that 111. Hunt was not a p, rson worthy of the
honour to which he af.pired. The letter being thus
read, it produced the a Elect which the Jury might
naturally suppose. The circumstance was after-
w sink comomnieeled to Mr. Cobbett, then in Ame-
rica; and at a meeting which took place at the
Crown and Anchor Tavern upon the subject, Mr.
Hoot took occagion positively to tleclere, !bat the
loci., so product d was a forgery. The result, with
te,pect to Mr. Cobbett's proceedings, walked the
temper of his mind, and shewe,l a malignity of
heat t, scarcely credilde of a man possessing the
powers and the acquirements for whirl, he had
t.'iven him credit. Ile'resor, ed, in the rvielni!y
of
the situation in which he was pl-,ced, to a species
of cruelty the most barbarous atol nut-atural --
Iles
conduct was like that of a man who,
unable any longer to meet his antagonist in
the fair field of argument, had recourse to the
concealed dagger or the poisoned auntie. I w4i
tl,e artifice of s hose end sordid mind, which,
when unable to ans wet its adversary by the powers
of re;isoning, stopped all further argument, and
charged the opponent with the en to tniStt'On of an
atrocious clime, Who pert a man of the most
barbarous, unrelenting, and malignant pas-
sions, c,,tdd, ever{ in the feeling :of perso-
nal anger and animosity, heap upon his ene-
my an imputation rtf a foul crime, which
at the time he must know to he false Und. r
these circuit stances he wrote the second libel,
which was lie subject of the action. The Learn-
ed Counsel then proceeded to state the libel,
which was in a letter addressed to Major Cart-
wtiglkt, " On the Rum Farce at tl:e Crown and
Anchor, 17111 Nov: 1818, and particulatly on the
conduct of Sir Francis Burdett, and that of Cleary
and his associate IVtight, with regard to the for-
gery," from which the following extracts were
read:—" It is the fate of feeble animals,when they
get into mire, to hors, themselves by their efforts
to emerge ; a complete instance of wiriCh see have
in the conduct of these associates on the 17th nt
November last, Mr. Hunt, upon this occasion,
produced my letter to the Editor of The New
'Stink Evening Post, declaring the letter read by
Mr. Cleary, at the hustings, to be a forgery done
by himself, or got from a man who had in many
instances been guilty of a similar offence."
" Yon, my dear Sir, know the history of this Wright; you
know all his tricks, all his attempts. The public do not, and
I will not new trouble the public with a detail which, if put
in a suitable form, would make a romance, in the words of
tenth, far surpassing ally thing that ever was imagined of
neird torpitode. I will execute this task one day or other,
if the caitiff should pet forth any thing by way of palliation.
Ie the mean while, there is Mr. Walker, there is Mr. Mar-
grave, there is my Attorney, there is Mr. Swan, there is Sir
Fraiicis Burdett himself, there is my son John, who, though
Ire was then a child, syill never forget the big round drops of
sweat that, in a cold winter's day, rolled down the caitiff's
ferehead when he was del, vied in fabricating accounts, and
when I took Johnny by the hand (who had brain whimper-
ing. for pour Mr. Wr'iglit') and said, look at that man, my
dear; those. drops of sweat are the effect of detected dis-
honesty! Thud: of that, my deur child, and you will always
he an honest man !' Mr. Peter Walker and Mr. Swan were
present at this scene, which took place in my room, in New-
gate, in 1811. Oh, oh ! now we lieve it out! now we have
before us the third accomplice in this vile transaction. That
Wright was their aecompliee was all I wanted to see proved,
and now it is proved. Surely the immaculate being, preced-
ed by the milk-white charger, wilt not attempt to maintain
that the fatless immaculate person who rode that charger, had
a moral right to use against Mr. Hunt and a lady, and in
favuur of Sir Francis Burdett, a letter, 'and such a letter,
gotten front a man who stood charged with deft ending the
pretended author of a letter, and who stood so charged upon
the oath of Sir Fraacis Burdett himself."
The Learned Counsel then went on to read other parts of
the libel, which charged Mr. ‘Vright with borrowing money
iu the name of the author, without the authority of the lat-
Ler, &c. &c.
Mr. II treer, who came into Court when the trial was called
on to-day, rose at this time with considerable warmth, and
hutted the Learned Judge would not allow him to be libelled
with falsehood. The Learned Counsel had stated that lie
(Mr. Hunt) had declared at public meeting, s bat the Let-
ter attributed to Mr. Cobbett teas a forgery.
The Cutter jusncg said he had not heard the Learned
Counsel wake any such observation; he had rue; ely read the
lib& llous publication, as he had a right to do; and if it libel-
led any other person titan the Jilaintiff, his Lordship was very
sort y for it,
Mr. SCARLETT then resumed, and commented upon the
ettreelaas character of the libel ; and in alluding to Mr. Celt-
hetes abuse of the powers which nature had giveu hint, said
• it was true, that he might have the intellecte of an angel,
hut they were those of a fallen angel. Fir then dwelt upon
the question of damages. and contended that this was the
wily tribunal in which the plaintiff could seek for redress,
which, if he could not find at their hands, it were better to
blot the power of writing out of the catalogue of human ta-
lents. No doubt could exist of the responsibility of Mr. Cle-
ment for the consequence of this publication, because he was
the agent of a person who, from a distant clime, sent forth
to the world this malevolent libel.
A witness, named Stennor, proved that he purchased the
Register, containing the first libel, at Mr. Clement's shop.
George Granger proved that he purchased the second at the
same place, ills the Gilt March, 1819.
Mr. Thomas Hansard, the printer, heitig shown the letter
read by Mr. Cleary at the election, swore positively that it
was the hand-ieriting of Mr. Cohhett.
Mr..lohn Paul, an accountant, employed to arrange ac-
counts between Mr. Wright and Mr. Cobbett, also proved tire
same fact. The letter had been put into his hand by Mr.
Wright, as one of a set les, and it was sliewu by witness to
Colibett in 1311, and he made nu dispute about its being
big hand-writing.
Mr. NV i law Jackson also proved it to be Mt. Cobbett's
hand-writing.
Mr. Thomas Cleary gave the like evidence, and proved that
it was the same letter which he read at the Lastings, having
received it from Mr. Wright.
Mr. :Liman] was again called, and on his cross-examina-
tion admitted, that he had fremeriy printed Mr. Cobbett's
Register, and that that work was always its opposition to
every existing Administration.
Mr. Wm. Jackson, again examined, stated that the defend-
ant admitted to hits, souse time since, that Tire Glo.erver
Newspaper, of which he w;ss PrOprietor, would yield a penat
of a hundred pounds a week, as soon as some ineumbraaces
were removed.
• Mr. Aisoaenus then addressed the Jury in a very able and
powerful speech, on behalf of the defendant. In reply to the
topic% urged by the plaintih 's Counsel, he said they were
wholly inapplicable to the present. questiou, inasmuch as they
were merely strictures upon the political character and con-
- dact of Mr. Colthett, with which the defendant had nothing
tai do ; he being a mere vender of the first had. With re-
spect to the second, he proposed to offer evidence for the
purpose of spewing, that long prior to that publication,
he had ceased to sell Mr. (obhett's Register ; ae had po-
sitively prohibited every assistant in his shop from sell-
iee that publication, under Any pretence whatsoever;
and that the. copy in question had been soli without
bit privity, knowledge, or consent. With respect to the
qiiestion of damages, the usual foundation in such cases bad
mat been laid, alasinneb as the Jury were left wholly in igen).
retaa: as to who Mr. Wrigh,t was, what good fame he had hot,