Star.
London, England, 1823-11-21 00:00:00

being obierred: anti he had farther addei, that if any
i'mproperodilar was found to exist SJI• making a filmed
coOrnitieliesklon'tothe-rublie .of the state Wthe Itoyal
Mind, ukt*blic peels, inthe faie eigrei se of its functions,
might'eall the attention of the Public to the fact,
Wt. Hereey said"he -was bound: to submit to what
hail been stated by the Learned 411dge, and he would
snow proceed to state to their Lordships what had been
said by other Journals on the subject of his Majesty's
health. The defendant then proceeded to read extracts
from the Real John Bull, the Times, and other Papers.
The Couat observed, that these papers, unless proved
by affidavit, could not regularly be received by them;
and the Lord Chief Justice asked the defendant how be
could expect to benefit himself by reading other libels?
he advised him to refrain from that course.
The defendant continued.—He was sure he should
not suffer in their Lordships' mind for any irregularity
he might fall into, but he was anxious to read these ex-
tracts, and to ask how it was that the Attorney-General
had suffered the leading journal of Europe, as it called
itself, to escape, whilst the humble Sunday "A lines was se-
lected for prosecution, u nless he was actuated by personal
motives? He was convinced the Attorney-General
was actuated by those motives, and if he had now the ho-
nour of sitting in Parliament, he would not fail to move his
impeachment. He knew the Attorney-General was ac-
tuated by this feeling, for he could prove by evidence
that the Learned Gentleman had said to the agent of
the Noble Lord through whose influence he obtained
his seat in Parliament, that he considered Mr. Harvey
as the greatest enemy he had.--Mr. Harvey then ad-
verted to what had passed amongst the Jury when out
of Court, and mid he had it from one of that Jury, that
.if his Lordship had asked on what they grounded their',
recommendation to mercy, they would have told his
Lordship they founded their recommendation on the',
conviction. that the defendant had been misled by his
information, and not by any malicious intentions. And
had his Lordship in reply stated malice to be necessary
to constitute a libel, they would instantly have found a
verdict of not guilty.—He would not now detain the
Court further than to advert to what had been said by
their Lordships in prosecutions of a different character.
Their Lordships had repeatedly said, that Christianity
was part of the law of the land ; and .he would add,
that mercy was one of the brightest.ornaments of the
Christian religion. Their Lordships, in the high station
which they filled, were best enabled to exercise that
Christian attribute; and they would not fail to recollect
that the surest way to obtain for themselves mercy in
Heaven, was to eitend to ethers mercy on earth.
Mr. Chapman said be had nothing to state to the
Court; his defence "was contained in his affidavits. _

Mr. Harvey Added, that affidavits to character had
not been adduced, because it was not viewed as a cii-
'minal proceeding that involved moral principle; and
that, as in the case of the John Bull, no affidavit had
been put in, setting forth .that the Sunday Times had
subsequently published worse..matter than that charged
to be libel. Having adverted to the sentences of the
John Bull,
Chief Justice Asaorr read the sentence in that ease.
Mr. Justice RAMEY desired Mi. Harvey to be seated.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said, that much had been
observed on his personal motives :,he again declared that
the prosecution was advised before lie knew anything
about who were the proprietor and printer of the Sun-
day Times--; so that, on personal grounds, he hail not
anything to stimulate him to proceed, or to induce him
to abstain from continuing the prosecution. He knew
nothing of the parties until long after the prosecution
had been determined upon. As to'* the Papers having
teemed with such rumours," that turned out to be un-
true; and as to the mischievous character of the libel,
all persons of decent mind must admit the fact. He
(the Attorney General) did not desire any heavy sen-
tence; he required what was commensurate to the of-
fence; but it would be deserting his duty not to call on
their Lordships for such sentences on the parties as would
tend to prevent the repetition of such offences.
The Court having consulted for half an hour, the
CHIEF Justice left the Court to go to Guildhall.
Mr. Justice BAYLEY then proceeded to pronounce the
'sentence of the Court. His mind, he said, was (silly sa-
tisfied with the propriety of the decision of the Jury;
seconded as it is with i recommendition to mercy. As; •
far as it was possible for the Court to attend to it, consist-
ent with the rules of justice, that recommendation had had
all the weight it deserved. The case came also seconded
by the affidavits Of medical men as to the health•of one
of the defendants (Mr. Harvey), and the Court would
be most unwilling that- the punishment should add
greatly to .his bodily afflictions. No one, however,
ought to have made the statement contained in the San-
nines.- tiniest it bad been' derived' from the purest
sources 'sfe: information .and not from general ru.
MOUT. The Ebel, too, it was to be remarked, was fol;
lowed up.by'observations on his: Majesty, which a per-
son of a kjnd and feeling heart would have abstained
from =icing.' No man, as Editor of a Paper, should
pledge hiaiself for a fact deriied from mere rumour ;
let him not impose on the Public, but give the source
from which' he derives his information.--Alluding to the
case of ChapvtCan;whe in his-defence, statedthat he was
only sronsieulty the printer,bis ll..ordithip animadverted
stronglyonthethoughtlessnesiandintproptiety(lie would
abstain from .using harsher expressions) of any per-
son making affidavit that he is the printer of a Paper,
when he is not so in reality : on a serious cansideratiott
of the whole circumstances of the ease, the judg-
ment of the Court was, That the defendant Daniel
Whittle Harvey pay a tine of' a® to the King, be im-
prisoned in the Marshalsea for.three months, and give
secprity for his good behaviouei-himself in £lOOO, and
two sureties in £5OO each ; and that the other defend-
ant, J. Chapman, be imprisoned two -months."
The defendants werr then taken from Court in the
custody of the tipstaves. •
YOUTHFUL. DEFIIAVITY:
Mr. CHITTY said -he moved the Court, in a 'very-dis:
' tressing case of misconduct in It/young man articled to
an attorney of this Court residing in the country, prry-
ing for a Rule to shew cause why he should not 'be at'
liberty to transfer the young man's indentures to ,ier4
his time with some other attorney. The party on whose
behalf he .moved had received a very small premium
namely, one hundred guineas. The young man had,
it appeared, seduced the Attorney's daughter, .a child
• !under 14 years of age, just returned from school, and
was, beside, detected in an attempt Upon * iiirrvant'
girl. Thus is turned.out Ise was discovered 50 be a Very
depraved character, and on that ground, it wee sub='
mined, the Attorney had just cause to desire to get rid'
of him. The father of the young man woula not cots-
Item to transfer his articles, but was willing ba.sh§uld '
give them up, on condition that the Attorney tandd st.
turn the hundred guineas premium. . -
14r.Justice-Baumr—Takel role to sheW