Star.
London, England, 1830-12-15 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

SECONDARIES OFFICE, DEC. 14.
LIBEL IN THE NEV MONTHLY MAGAZINE.
•HELDRAED 1. COLDUIif •ND DENTLEY.

This was an action againgst Mr. Colburn and his partner, the
prietors and publishers of the " New Monthly Magazine," for a G.,
against the plaintiff in the September number of thatMsgazi!;e this yr.:
The damages were laid at 5001. Mr. PHILLIPS appeared f r
plaintiff, and Mr. HOLT for the defendants. The defendants
feed judgment to go by default, and the Jury was summoned t.i
the damages.
There was a considerable delay waiting for Mr. Phillips, u.n wee
engaged in a case at the Old Bailey.
Ikli. PHILLIPS stated the plaintiff's case. He was a surgeon and
instrument maker ; a great benefactor to an unfortunate class of people
who were brought deformed into the world. He had practised as a ren, t.
lap surgeon nearly 40 years in this metropolis ; he also possessed some
literary talents, which had brought him here to seek redress for a IN!.
The defendants were the eminent and well-known publishers. Among
their publications was the " New Monthly Magazine," which they had
placed under the guidance of one of the first names in English literature,
whom he should not have the bad taste to eulogise—he meant
Campbell, the author of " The Pleasures of Hope ;" and, foot
his great talents, any thing coming from him possessed particular
weight. The plaintiff had published a book on his own peculiar pro.
fession' which he sent to Mr. Colburn for publication ; the lauer seg•
gested the publication of the Work in parts is his Magazine. Br.
Sheldrake did not wish to dismember his book, bnt he allowed
him to publish some conversations which the plaintiff had had
with the late Lord Byron, on the subject of his deformed leg.
This sou agreed to, and this part sent to the defendant tcr
publication. It was due to the public, that nothing should h,
published which was not fit to appear, and the parties should at
least read before they published. The extract was published, and
in the very month after it had appeared came the libel complaintd
of, which be should characterize u a most perfidious ate)! ;
what else could he call the act of parties who had solicited the
former publication and paid for it, and who afterwards spoke nf that
publication in the manner it vas done in the October number of
that Magazine? Mr. Phillips then read the libel, which was signed
by Mr. Campbell, (and, said the learned counsel, I am sorry fu:
it.) It stated that Mr. Campbell regretted the former publieutien—
that he had not seen it until it sou published. Ile eharatteriz:d
the article as " offensive ; " that It got to the press by an unfortunr,
accident, arising from a change in the sub-editorship of the Magazine;
it also called the article " this puff of an instrument-maker," and said
that the writer viewed the publication " with horror ;" and it went
to state, that the article contained " a foul and false libel on the al.
ratter of the late Dr. (Bennie, of Woolwich." He (Mr. Phillip)
denied that the article contained any such libel, and dared the orb r
site to produce it. After some further observations, he proceeded t,
the proof of his case.
After Mr. Holt had been heard for the defendant, the Secondary was
about to address the Jury, when they declared that they thought it ui
necessary, and after a short deliberation, returned a verdict of bl.
maga, with costs.