The Sun.
London, England, 1820-05-11 00:00:00

THR KING V. SIR FRANCIS BURDETT.

Mr. DEN MAN being called, said he. would take
the opportuni,y of laying before the Court • the
new grounds which he had to offer in support of
the motion for a new ttial in this case.- The ob-
jection was a technical one, and applied itself to

the form of the infOrnoitioo. The ioloimaliou

set out the libel at great length, but entirely on►it-
ted an inuendo to all the assertions except
one, and perhaps this was the cause of the
Learned Judge's charge. Tbe Learned Coun-
sel them. itad the Letter from, Sir Francis

Burdett, which was the libel, and in that part
of it where it sets out that the people
,tverr
Cut down by dragoOns,
..an inuendo was added, as
it this charge was " of and concerning" the Go.
verontent and the troops of the King. The
Learned Judge in
.his summing up supplied front
the /numb, which was jonitt ed in the in-
fOrtnatiott, and he also told the" Jury that the al-
lusion to the boroughmongering tact ion applied
to the Government. The words boroughmonger-
ing faction; on he contrary, he contended, could
not apply to the Government, unless- an iniondo
to that effect, was ..idded, and this inference should
he proven in evidence. liVhere words were ego'.
•cocci in their import, he &übmitted they should be
prosed,io evidence.. lie admitted that the Learned
Judge was rightin telling be Jail that the words
the reign of terror and of blo-id," were " of
and:cOncernto4" the Government ; but he denied
that his Lordship was correct in asking them to
draw the same-inf, metier Iron) the allusion la the
horoogfonoitgeriog faction, or the winds " dra-
goops." Without en inuendo su.tained in evi-
dence to that eft ct, the d " dragoons," in that
part of the letter where the writer said " the peo-
ple. were cut down by dragoons," could not be
presumed to mean the King's soldiers, yet the
Learned Jodge,- in charging the J.lry, pot this
coostructinn upon them. He also ohj c d to the.
Learned :Jll.l/ge di•siring -Jttry to look upon
.the paper ahogc.Zi!et, for his Lordship should only
call their -attention to that part of it, where an
iuuendo was added, and to Which alone the de-
fendant .could apply his defence, as it was this.
part alone-which charged crimi,•ality of intention.
Witih.regard'io the 'refusal of evidence to prove the
truth of the facts set tntt in the:letter,. as lie had
urged this before,. lie would, not now touch upon
i-it, bun watt Moil he. should. have an opportunity
of no.ving'faic Court in arrest of lodgment.
'I heir:Lordships having consulted for some orne,.
ruled agoinst'Mr. Dent-own, on the objection which
be urged to•lhe framing of the information, as a
ground for a new trial. , - • • .
The CiIIEF JUSTICE' •observed, that the
nation chat ged the defendant with having written
and ritilished a libel, in which „he asserted, that
the people were cut down by. the King's troops,.
VtitiCt4 was it libel ":of and concerning," not troops
generally, but the said troops.of the King., Here
then was an inuendo to this- passage, and ibis* was
I lie only one gnat' required it, -for words, that are
of plain import did. nut require an inuendo to ex-.
i)itsin. them: His Lordship thcP took a review of
-the.other parts of the objection, and declared that
he'lhought the Learned Judge was correct in lay-
ing whole paper tor their consideration before
the Jurv.—No • one could 'pretend to say, that if •
the Ju-e toad never dwelt on any of the pas+ages,
the Jiiry 'would fail to draw the- inference than the
winds " blood and of terror referred
to his: y's Government.. As tO I he' o her
point, hi. Lordship declined kiying v any oiion
upon it until .came
.before the Court, upon a mo-
tion in arrnEt 01 judgMent. 1
_

Mr. J,l!..tiet- ICAYLEY lid Mr; Justice HotRoYD
declaird,.tltat ;hey';igreed entirely in the opinions
tietttped 6}; the C h t Justice

• 'Mr Justice'. BEST. entered at • some length into
areview of tile priocipal p.titits whieii, -at the
trial, hr 1,4 d cAllecithe *rittentu,n of the Jury. llis
Lordship said, that with'regard to the refusal of
evidence as to the float of the statements, he
thought then and still was of the same opinion,
that tintli or takity was of no consequence in a
.question of hhcl, but that it depended entirely.
upon the temper in which the libel was written.
Lie said he agreed entirely with nis Learned Bro-
thers the view hirh they took of the objection
to the intormation, as a ground for obtaining a
new trial., •
- The CHIEF JUSTICg now said, that from the
statement vehi4 hit is Brother (Best) had made of
the. grounds upon which he charged the Jury at
the trial, he was convinced the conduct of o:at
Learned Judge upon the occasion was quise.uo-
,exceptionable. With regard to the deficiency of
inuendos in this information, he tools-noexception
to it.on that account, for he was of opinion that
the too frequent use. of inuendos was become the
great ;objection, to -modern pleading,----Motion for
new trial refused.