The Sun.
London, England, 1818-07-29 00:00:00

WEDNESDAY. JULY 29, 181 g.

CL)' F. OF THE BRE FISH GALLERY, PALL-MALL.
.1-1-1 EXIIIBFFION at this GALLERY, o
the WORKS of the ITALIAN, sPANISH, FLEMISH,
avid DUTCH SCHOOLS, is OPEN froin NINE in the
Morning until SIX in the Evening, and will he CLOSED
on SATURDAY, the sth olAugast.
By Order, JOHN YOUNG, Keepet.,

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF CHANCERY, .Itair 23.

RIGHT TO PUBLISH LETTERS.

GEE V. PRITCHARD AND ANDERSON.

This important cause chi. day Occupied the at-
tention of the' LORD CHANCELLOR from-a little
after ten until. three o'clock. It was 'a into ion
made by Mr. HART, on the behalf of the defend.
ants, cite Rev. Mr. Pritchard and Mr. Anderson,
an eminent hOokseller, in Piccadilly, to dissolve
an injunction which had been obtained by ulte
Plaintiff, Mrs. Gee, the wife of the testator, whose
naroeal son the detendant Pritchard was, retrain-
ing.thent from publishing a certain work, entitled,
" The Adopted Son, or twenty Years at Bedding-
ton, containing Memoirs of a Clergyman, inter-
spersed with other interesting Correspondence."
Mr. HART; after adverting -to the .allegations
contained in the plaintiff's bill, proceeded to con-
tend in favour of his application. 'lhe present
injunction, he said, had been granted on an cx-
parte application, mid by the affidavit filed in sup-
port of it the Court was given to understand that
Mr Pritchard was an orphan,
.at.d taken notice
(.4 by the late Mr. Gee from motives of humanity,
While in fact the real state of the'case Was, that
Mr. Pritchard was his natural son. His affi-
davit met that assertion, by stating that he
had been—taken home, and treated, not only
by Mr. Gee, but by the plaintiff also, as the.ir
son; the latter of whom he bad been in the
constant practice of calling mother :.and that
until the death of his father he had been uniform-
ly treated as her son by Mrs. Gee, and bad
alwass been given to understand -that he would be
provided for as such, the testator having .no other
children or relatives. That the correspondence
which had existed between himself and the plain-
tiff was conducted as between mother and son,
and that it was the intention of the testator that
the defendant, Pritchard, should have been better
provided for, as the provision, exclusive of the
17,0001., was very inadequate td his support, as
intended by the testator. The affidavit also al-
ledged the defendant's belief that the affections
of the plaintiff had not, in the contemplation of
the testator, been considered 'susceptible of any
alteration, or be would never•have placed in her
bands such unlimited controul over him, the
testator having by his will declared he wished
her, the plaintiff, to do more by deeds than
words to 'show her affection. From the dis-
agreentent that had taken place, and from the
high station the plaintiff held, coupled with her
large property, great doubts had arisen among his
parishioners-that he bad been guilty of something
to cause the feelings complained of. towards him
by the plaintiff. It haul been asserted that he had
married contrary to the wishes of his father and
the plaintiff, anti consequently the only resource
lie had left, was to publish the letters in quiestion,
isnd thereby convince his parishioners of his inno-
cence. He denied that he intended to publish the
book, in question for the sake of profit, atm. also
Orr he intended to give publicity to any of the
secrets concerning the family. The question here
was, observed Mr. Hart, would the Court inter-
fere, by injunction, to prevent ti,e publication of
letters not sent as confidential. lie contended the
present was merely a literary correspondence, and
that the plaintiff had no property whatever in the
letters in question. The 'Learned Counsel pro-
ceeded at great length in support of his applica-
tion, in the course of vtliich he adverted to the
cases of Pope and Kerr, decided by Lord Hard-
wick ; Chesterfield and Thompson, and Percival
and Phipps.
'file. LORD CHANCELLOR said the book had been
publicly advertised.
Mr. Ilsirr said it was, but tile defendant posi-
tively swore not for profit.
Sir SAMUeL Routetv said it was impossible to
think they meant to give them away.
Mr. HART contended, it might as well be ar-
gtied that a mast) aright not publish letters, though
containing private correspondence, when they
also contained facts which could only be esta-
blished on the face of them. The only tact charged
against the defendantiPritchard seas his marriage ;
and this it was that occasioned her to turn bin

mit of doors a few days after the decease of his
at her ; when, to ichnt this fact, the defendant

swore that his marriage took place hot only with
the consent of the testator, but the. plaintiff also.
These were the grounds which distinguished. this
case-from all others, and he trusted the prayer of
the applicants would be granted.
Mr. WETHERALL contended for dissolving the
injunction. The question here was, how tar let-
ters written by one person during friendship, fa-
miliarity, and mutual correspondence, could be at
libel ty to publish, when that friendship ceased to
exist, those letters he had received. There was
no charge in this case that the letters had been

.written noder a promise of confidence or trust ;
nothing that could in the widest sense be taken to
invest a right to claim Weir being delivered up.
Mr. ‘Vetherall, adverting to the letters and cor-
respondence of Swift, Pope, Chesterfield, &c.
observed it could not be considered that those

great met!, with many others, had in view at the
time of writing them the irublication of their let-
ters and correspondence. •
The LORD CHANCELLOR said, he was afraid his
dull predecessors had never taken into their view
the notions of pet sons who wrote letters'. The
great difficulty was how to get rid of the prece-
dents of Pope, Chesterfield, &c.: but, said his
Lordship in conclusion, " When I go out of this
Court, it. will be a matter of great satisfaction to
me to have it said, that the judgment I have given
did not depend on the leng-th of the Chancellor's
foot."

Nr.WernaaALL, in procee.ling, adverted to the