Star.
London, England, 1822-01-03 00:00:00

to time. wear iipteuesl la regret at the ne4
ceselty he was under of adopting this course, as he
had always wished well .to InatiP. Jersey; and bad -GutpdtAt.l...--Another of ME- esrlac's Mom...—
given her proof of. such a disposition towards her ; against whom a warrant had beengrantedhy Mr.
but her Ladyship had now, by her own condect, Alderman THouPsoNo last week, was taken out of .the
forced from him notice, and drawn down these corn- 'shop on Tuesday, and conveyed to the Compter. Yes-
ments on her conduct. The libel concluded by in- liters* he was brought up, when the information
timating that Lord Jersey And her Ladyship .were against him was upon the oath of John Parton, iosce
about to visit the Continent ; that no doubt the Cowin- of the honest roma of the Bridge-street Association);
tess.would prove a very acceptable. tenant to her Ma- charging him with selling to him the Address houtri
jesty at the Villa Pesaro; but they were well assured &formers of Great Btitaau, of the 24th Of June.
there was one thing which Lord Jersey was deter- prisoner save his name, John Barclay. He said hr
mined upon, that was, that her Ladyship should not was a printer, and had been an apprentice to Mr.
have l3ergami for her Courier. Mr. Scarlett de- Sherwin, 24, Paternoster-row. His master, on quit-'
Oared his attachment to the Liberty of the Press was ting that business, had given him up his indentures,
as great as any man's; but he trusted that liberty and being out of employ, he was attracted by a bill
would never be suffered to descend to licentiousness ; in Carlile s shop-window, which stated that a lad was;
and whenever it did, as had been the case in the. wanted. He accordingly offered his services, and/
present instance, that the verdict of the 'Jury, fol-' Mrs. Wright, the housekeeper, immediately engaged,
lowed by the judgment of the Court, would inter-. him at 10s. a week. His business was to sell the
pose to check such licentiousness, and punish the pamphlets in the shop, but he declared he did not
offender. Mr. Scarlett then called know whether they were libellous or not. _Not being
Mr. Thomas Wright, clerk to Mr. Harmer, the prepared with bail, he was commited to jail for want
Solicitor for the prosecutor ; and he stated, that of sureties. Thc prisoner was a decent-looking lad,
on the Ist of June last he purchased the paper in about 17 years of age. Murray, the attorney of die
question at a printing-office, No.ll, Johnson's-court, Association, attended the examination.
Fleet-street; the names " Shackell and Arrowsmith, MANsioN.HOLJSE.—Yeqerday, Edward Roach, a
printers," were on the door. It looked like a pri- porter, was brought up, charged by Mr. Adanison,of
vate house. Did not know the person of any of the Fenchurch-street, auctioneer, with having stolen a
defendants. hamper of bottles. Mr. Adamson stated, that on the
The next piece of evidence was, an examined copy 31st of December, he attended an auction in Simi-
of the affidavit filed, in pursuance of the statute, by lane; as he WAS afterwards walking along Bucklers'
the Proprietors of the Paper, Mr. It. T. Weaver and bury, he saw the pa ironer, whom he knew to. be a
Mr. T. Arrowsmith, which was in the usual form; porter generally employed by auctioneers, carrying a
and it went on to state, that the Paper was to be hamper. He asked the prisoner wisat he had in the
printed " at No. 9, Dyer's-buildings, Holborn." The hamper ? to which the latter replied, " Nothing."—
publication in question appearing, from the imprint, Upon being pressed, however, he said he had china;
to be printed in Johnson's-court, Fleet-street, by Tho- but upon examination of the hamper, which witness
mas Arrowsmith and W. Shackell, obliged him to carry to Sise-lane, it was found to con-

• PAILICR.

1 The SOLICITOR-GENERAL objected, that this was
i no evidence to connect the defendants with the Paper
given in evidence; for that the Act of Parliament,
which had substituted a new species of evidence af-
fecting the responsibility of Newspaper Proprietors,
' whilst it made an examined copy of the affidavit filed
at the Stamp Office evidence to prove ownership, in
a Court of Justice, it at the same time required that
the names and places of abode of the printers and
publishers printed in the imprint of the Paper pro-
duced, should correspond with the names and places
of abode mentioned in the affidavit filed. Now this
was not so ; and therefore there was no proof that the
Mr. Arrowsmith and the Mr. Shackell, whose Chris-
tian names were set out in the information, were the
same persons as those whose surnames only were
painted on the door in Johnson's-court. At all events,
there was not the slighted evidence whatever to af-
fect Mr. Weaver.
Mr. SCARLETT, in answer to the objection, con-
tended, that the evidence adduced was sufficient to
connect the defendants with the Paper in question;
but, in any event, he submitted that it was a ques-
tion for the Jury..
• The CuIEF JUSTICE observei, that as the Act of
Parliament, which required that the names of the
Proprietors and Printers of Newspapers should be re-
&istered at the Stamp Office, in order to afford a more
easy mode than formerly of establishing the fact of
ownership, &c. had substituted an entirely new species
of evidence from that required in all other cases, he
was bound to construe it most strictly. In his judg-
ment, there was no evidence to affect Mr. Weaver ;
and as to whether the other defendants were con-
nected with the publication, it certainly was a ques-
tion for the Jury; but their connection with it rested
upon very slight grounds.
There was no other evidence to affect the defendants,
and after a witness had been called to prove the for-
mal introductory matters of the information, and the
case being closed,
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL prc eeded to address the
Jury on behalf of the defendants. He contended
strongly, first, that there was not the slightest evi-
dence to connect his clients with this publication. All
the evidence was, that the witness had purchased the
Paper at a house in Johnson's-court, on the door of
which were the names Arrowsmith and. Shackell ;
but non constat that the persons of those names so in-
scribed on the door, were the defendants Arrowsmith
and Shackell. But, secondly, supposing the Jury
could come to so extraordinary a conclusion upon
such evidence, that they were the publishers of the
supposed libel, he insisted that the paper itself was
not a libel. It was not a libel in any way affecting
Lady Jersey's private character, and could only be
considered as a legitimate commentary upon the con-
duct of a Lady who appeared in a public character,
associating herself as a partisan upon a subject which,
unhappily for the country, had for a long time agi-
tated the public mind, and produced a division in
public opinion. In this point of view the publication
was privileged, and not libellous. He went through
the whole of the alleged libel, paragraph by para-
graph, and contended that, in every point of view,
the defendants were entitled to an acquittal.
The CHIEF JUSTICE, in his charge to the Jury,
stated that there were two questions for their consi-
deration. 1. Whether the defendants, Arrowsmith
and Shackell (for as to the other defendant, they
were bound at once to acquit him), had published
the Paper ?—and 2. Whether, supposing them consci.
entiously satisfied, as reasonable and honest men, of
that fact, the paper itself was a libel ? Upon the first
question, he confessed be had never known a slighter
case brought before a Jury, to fix defendants with
the publication of a libel. The Jury, however, were
the proper judges of the evidence, and, no doubt,
they would give the case an important consideration,
free of all bias or prejudice one way or the other. As
to the secpnd question, supposing they were satisfied
as to the first, they were the judges of the law as
well as the fact, and they would say whether this was
a libel. The Act of Parliament required that he
should pronounce his own opinion upon the law ;
and, attending to the solemnity of that requisition,
he was of opinion that the paper in question was a
scandalous and defamatory publication, and there-
fore a libel for which the defendants, if proved to be
the publishers, were criminally liable. They were,
however, to pronounce their own opinion notwith-
standing what they heard from the Judge.
The Jury deliberated about ten minute,,, and found
the defendants Not Guilty, but .said they did so on
e ground that the evidence of publication by them
was not satisfactorily made out ; but they said they
Ya4l UO-41114itt that the paperin question was s libel-
la

tain-39 bottles, sallidi witness knew to be his pro-
perty. The prisoner was committed.
MARY-LA-BONNE ONFlCE.—Yesterday Mary Bes-
soar, an elderly woman, underwent an esaruination
before EDMUND GRIFFITHS, Esq. the sitting Magis-
trate, charged on suspicion of being the receiver of
the property, consisting of. plate, wearing apparel,
tam to a large amount, stolen from Mr. Skeer, of
Washingly Hall, in Huntingdonshire.—Staples and
Buckeridge, two .of the officers, traced some linen
and wearing apparel to the house of Mr. Stonestreet,
a pawnbroker, in Oxford-street, who attended with
some of the property, which was identified by a
woman in the service of Mr. Skeer.—The pawn-
broker said, the prisoner had pledged the articles
from July last to the very day she was taken. , The
officers, by most active exertions, have obtained'a
Blue to the remainder of the property, which they
consider can be produced in a few days.—The Ma-
gistrate remanded the prisoner for a week.
UNION-HALL.—Yesterday John Coles and Joseph
Abbott were brought before J..HEDGER and D. Kin.,
Esqrs. charged with having stolen four bags of
clover. • They are also suspected of` being concerned
in committing various burglaries and robberies in
Kent and Sussex. In the lodging of the prisoners
were found two setters, a pointer, and some thorough
bred terriers, some dog whistles, and a quantity of
wire snares, such as at used by poachers.--They
were remanded for further examination.
TOWN-HALL, SOUTHWARK.—Mr. Alderman J. J.
SMITH, the acting MAgistr ate at this Justice Room,
WAS engaged for a considerable time yesterday, in an
examination with a view to the discovery of the mur-
derers cf a male infant, which had been found by a
waterman on the 17th of December, upon one of the
starlings on the west side of London-bridge. The body
of the c:iild was wrapped up in flannel, and inclosed,
together with a large stone, in a coarse bag. A Co-
roner's Inquest had been held upon it, and a verdict
of Murder brought in against some person or persons
unknown. The Churchwardens of St. Mary Magnus,
in which parish the body was found, had offered a
reward of £ for the discovery of the murderers, and
the officers on both sides of the river have been using
every diligence to obtain some clue to the perpetrators.
At length, Welfare, an officer of this establishment,
got private information that a young woman had
stated that she had seen a child thrown into the river.
succeeded in tracing this young woman out, and
,brought her up yesterday before the Magi.strate, when
her deposition was taken, which was to the following
effect :—That her name was Elizabeth Canty, and
that being on London-bridge in her way home to the
Alorough, about eight o'clock in the evening of the
12th December, she observed a man-with something
wrapped up in his arms, which she soon knew from
its cries to be an infant. He was standing over the
first arch of the south-east part of the bridge. He
looked about him cautiously on each side, to see if he
was observed, and she distinctly saw him thrust the
bundle with the infant through the ballustrades of
the bridge into the river. Suspecting his intention,
and seeing a female with him, she addressed herself
to her, and said, " The man is going to drown the
child ;" to which the woman replied,. a What is that
to you r or," Mind your own business." While this
conversation was passing, the man accomplished his
horrid purpose, which was no sooner effected, than
he and the woman made off down Tooley-street.--
The description given of the parties by Elizabeth
Canty is, that the man was about five feet four inches
high, dark complexion, and large dark whiskers, and
dressed in a light drab coat. The female 'was a tall
stout woman, and had ou a dark gown, a slate-
coloured whittle, and a black willow bonnet, with
red ribbons.—From a review of all thecircumstances,
the Magistrate was of opinion, that the body found
by the waterman was not that of the infant which
had been thrown into the river in the manner de-
scribed by the v. itness.

Yesterday morning the area in front of Mr. NICHOLS'.
house in Parliament-street, printer of the Votes, was
forcibly entered, and the thieves stole from the pantry
upwards of fifty pounds worth of silver plate, and
other articles of value.

LAWYeas.--According to the Asiatic Researches, a
very curious mode of trying the title of land is prac-
tised in Ilindostan: Two holes are dug in the disputed
spot, in each of which the plaintiff and defendant's
lawyers put one of their legs, and remain there till
one of them is tired, or complains of being stung by
the insects, in which case his client is defeated. hi
this country, it is the clicnt,-and not the lawyer, who
Inds his foot into