Star.
London, England, 1822-10-22 00:00:00

A witness, named Rignall, was put into the box,
and proved a second publication on the 10th May.
. The defendant then proceeded to address the Jury,'
and urged the severity of the present prosecution,
The book itself was a mere pamphlet; but he had 4
put a price upon it which would of itself be proof
positive that he had no intention it should circulate
Amongst the lower orders of the people or the igno.
r rant; the price at which it sold was 12s. Gd. an
enormous price for such a publication, and as soon
as he was informed of the prosecution, the subject of
the peseta indictment, being preferred against him
by the Society for the Suppression of Vice, he wrote
to Mr. Pritchard, the Solicitor to the Society, stating.
that he was ready to give up all the copies of the
work in question, and to refrain from continuing the
publication, but his offer had been rejected, and the
prosecution persevered in.
The Cinu Josuoz asked if he was prepared to
prove that fact?
The defendant said, he'hoped Mr. Pritchard and
Mr. Jones would bear testimony to it. He was then
proceeding to read a letter written by himself to Mr.
Wilberforce ; but
The CHIEF JUSTICE informed him such letter was
not evidence.

The defendant next proposed to read extracts from
certain Newspapers, which, he contended, pressed
hardly and injuriously upon his character.
The CHIEF JUSTICE told him, he could not read
these Newspapers ; they had nothing to do with the
present case ; if he had a right to read these News-
papers, he might lead all the Newspapers published
in the kingdom.
The defendant then offered to read :,is Petition to
the House of Commons : this was objected to by Mr.
GURNEY as not being evidence, and rejected.
The defendant observed, he having been put out
of that course which he had marked out for his de-
fence, he must now proceed to read the alleged libel;
he did so, commenting on and justifying the several
passages as he proceeded. He adverted to various
works, which, he contended, had a more mischievous
tendency than Queen Mab; yet they had never been
prosecuted. He denied that lie had any intention of
offending against the laws, or injuring the cause of
religion. He then held in his band a work of the
late Thomas Paine, unpublished in this country, and,
lie believed, the only copy extant ; for this he had
been offered 25 guineas a sheet, but he would not
publish nor sell it ; he had a wife and two small
children, and had no wish to bring himself to a priion,'
and those dear connections to a workhouse. Another
I proof that his object was not to disseminate irreligious
r books was, that he had been in treaty with Carlile
for his shop in Fleet-street, but could not obtain it
because he would not undertake to sell none but Car-
-lile's publications there. He called witnesses to prove,
that when the prosecution was commenced, he offered
to give up the work.
The CHIEF JUSTIUE summed up, and declared his
opinion that the publication was libellous.
The Jury found the defendant—Guilty; but re-
commended him to mercy on account of his poveity.
The trial was not over till six o'clock.
MIDDLESEX SESSIONS.

• Yester4ay these Sessions were opened at Hicks 's
Hall. On the sitting of the Court the CHAIRMAN
k observed that, as the Tate Recognizance Act was about
to be put into operation for the first time at this S/%-
sioni, it became necessary to state, for the informa-
tion of those concerned, that all who had entered into
recognizances must appear at least to plead on the
adjourned day ; and if they neglected, or declined to
appear, their recognizances would be returned to
the Exchequer.
' • Edward Kelly was indicted for an assault on Ed-
ward Hurcomb, a parish constable, on the 11th May
last.' It appeared from the evidence of the prose-
cutor,.that as he and his brother constables, G. Brown
and J.' Moore, were on duty on the night of the Jlth
May; they heard a cry of murder from some person
in the house of the.prisoner, at Paddington ; they, in
the execution of their duty, knocked at the door, traon
which 'the prisoner appeared at a window with a gun;
instead of giving any explanation to the officers, he
threatened to shoot them if they did• not instanily
retire. A woman who lived with the prisoner took
the gun from him, upon which he seized a quart
bottle,' threw it at Hurcomb, and severely wounded
him in the breast.
The evidence of Hurcomb was sUpPortel by the
testimony of Browa and Moore.
Oti the patio( do prisoner, Lydia Webb, a woman
who lives with him, stated that there was no cry of