Star.
London, England, 1825-08-17 00:00:00

st'mMpe ASSIZES.

• GLOUCESTgR, AUGUST Is.
usati.Joss v. it knees. -- •
Mr. TAult'roe stated, that this action was brought
to clear the character of the plaintiff from calumnies'
cast upon it by the defendant in a letter sent by him to
a person named Woodley. It would be necessary that
they should know that a Lady, named Smith, who
resided near Worcester, had several daughters, one of
whom married a person . also named Smith, and also.
Cher bad married Mr. Woodley, the person to whom the
letter was sent. There bad been far a considerable
time an attachment between the plaintiff and Miss Mary
Smith, one of the daughters of Mrs. Smith ; and in the
latter part of last year the plaintiff visited Mr. Woodley.
About this time it was reported that a daughter of
-Mrs.
Smith, who bad married a person of the same name
near Bridgnorth, had eloped with a Captain Jones. It
was to that circumstance the letter referred. (The
Lei.rned Counsel read the fitter). Such a libel required
Ito comment. The defendant Was an opulent man, car-
rying au husiness as a wine-merchant, at Cheltenham.
The plaintiff 1i...a also beea in that trade, but had retired
and. was living oa his property; he should prove the
libel to be of the defendant's hand-Writing, and should
a.-.lc such damages at the hands of the Jury as would
vindicate the character if the plaintiff.
Mr. Thomas Woodley sa'd, I live at Cambr;dge. I
am the btoth.er.in law. of the defendant. We married
two of the daughte:s of Mrs. Smith, who resides near
Worcester. She has a daugh.er named Mary, who is
unmarked; another arum d Sophia, mart ied r. Smith,
of Bridgnorth. 1 believe that she does not now lave
with him. I know that the plaintiff had paid attention
to Miss Mary Smith for seven years. She is a daughter
of MI s. Smith. I invited her, and also the plaintiff, to
visit me in Cambridgeshire. They came on the Ist
of October, 1824. They came together. The plaintiff
stayed three weeks, and Miss Mary Smith stayed seve-
ral months. I received this letter (the libel) by the
post, while Miss Smith was in my house, the plaintiff
be et, gone. 1:. is of the hand-writing of the defendant.
I had Leard fr••m Mass Smith that her sistet at Bridg-
north had eloped with a Captain Jones, who is the
brother (lithe plaintiff.
Cross-examined by Mr. Witiour—The courtship be-
tween the plaintiff and Miss Smith was of seven years'
standing; it was not so long on account of the plainer'
youth, he being about 50. The first wife of the de-
feadani 'was my sister. I considered the letter to be
written in confidence. I received it on a Sunday morn-
ing, v‘i e r 4.,wiars dressing to go to church; my wife
asked to,see it. I told her she should not, but she said
she would never rest easy without she did. I told her
it contained something very unpleasant, and she must
not let hr r sister see it. She promised she would not,
and I went to church. Oa. my return, the first thing
1 saw was the letter on the mantle ph ce, and my wife'
and her sister standing by the fire. Miss Mary Sarah
said, Here is a pretty. set out ;" and 1 said, " Mrs.'
Woodley,. have...you—ltt Mary see this letter r She
teazed me for an hour and a half, and I
could . not •help it; -but. she has promised not to tell
r,Jone s." . .

lds....hinice Beattooon—How could you be so foolish as to trust
a woman with a secret ?
The letter was put in and read. It was to the following effect :
AM:eased to l'ir. Wondtty. Cheltenham, NOV. 11; 1824.
" DEAR Tnonuts—l quite erected you totsve replied to oar's.
Mr. 'Thomas Smith is at the Blythe; .I saw him the other day, and
he said that Mr. Joneehad called upon Lanvin town, which we were
starprhied io bear ; whether Mary eras with hint or no we could not
learn. aOl was from home sihen'Alr. J. called. I suppose he has
left•you.; if-he has it is quite as well, as it has come out he is and
has been playing a doable and deceitful part. You arc no doubt
Aware of the circumstance between Captain Jones and Sophia.
“ Wilt Yowbelleve it, when I tell you that Mr. J. is at the
bottom if everything, and was the cause of that unhappy business?
Will yen iselieve it, she Captain threatens to expose him, and you
may rot assured, that what I tell you is fully proved and substan-
tiated. I have not heard and cannot tell half the diabolical schemes
be has put in practice, with regard to the above affair, sad if Mary
did but know what he says, and how NI talks of her, she
arm
never
see or speak to him again. Mr. Loggmore says he .it s
Tld
enter his house, and Mrs. Smith says the same. All this tell pie
in coolitlence ; act as you please. Mamma desires her kind love se
all, and to tell you that she intends to write soon.
," I remain, dear Thomas. your's, most sincerely,
• ' " J. BINCKES."
• Mr. C. Penang addressed the Jury for the defendant, end caw
tended that the letter having been written in confidence, coat amt
be considered a libel.
Mr. Justice But:nouns gave it as his opinion that the
letter was clearly a libel. 'The defendant, in the letter,
asse,ted that these matters had been proved and sub.
stantiAted, and not merely that helad heard them. If
she defendant had only stated it as hearsay, or hid now
proved it as fact, the observations would have had_
greet weight, btit instead of that, he takes upon him.
self to state that the plaintiff had been guilty of dia..
bulicil conduct, and that he does not know halt of
what.* has been guilty of. As it was not justified, it
must lie'taken 'to be false ; and on the mere publication
of sue l Matter; the law implied malice. • The publi-
catiOa was proied ; the damages were a luestion for
the JoAy, and the amount of them ought to be a 'fair
and moderate compensation' for the injury done.
The iisry haying deliberatid for a considerable time, found a
verdietlor the defendant.—Some other eases of no interest were
disposed of.—Thls evening the basing's, of the Oxford Circuit was
brought to a conclusion..
• CARLISLE. '
. . . . •
CLARKS- D. FAIRRAIRN AND OTHERS.
This was au.actioit of trespass. Mr. Soweitsv -opened the plead-
ings, and Mr. Scanlan stated tie nature of the same.
On the cause beieg called on, his Lordship suggested a reference
of all matterkin iiipute. . . .
Mr. BROW/HAM lam oily concerned for Mr. Fairbairn; Mr.
Alderson is Counsel for; tins other defendants. Lwill spew that
my client had nothing to do with the trespais, and was an iss.,
uocent party.
Mr. Sea Burr was proceeding. to address the Jury, when the.
Court was set in $ roar of linghter, by a persOn vociferating train
the, gallery, "Go on, lead on, Mr. Soden r He was,.however,
very uncerethaniondy *it'd, by a javelin-man, from possession of
. ..
his seat.
Mr. Hasegawa—My Lord, I assure Yost that he :
clients' friends, they are all too peaceable—,{Laughtet).
Order having been restored, , Mr.. Soarlett proceeded
to detail the trespass. Flom the statement of. the
Learned Gentleman, it appeared that the plaintiff was a
coach-proprietor residing at Dumfries, and running his
coach, the " Robert Burns," from Glasgow to this. place,
where the plaintiff had •an agent. The Robert Burns
was an opposition coach. The defendant, Fairb. airn,
was a coach-proprietor at Carlisle, and the others were
his servants, hence arose a jealousy between the parties,'
From the further statement of the Learned Gentleman,
it seemed that the plaintiff's coach was on its jaaroey
from-Glasgow to Carlisle, with two passengers outside
and one in, on the 26th lay of March last, and when
witliin a mile of CM lisle, a party of twenty-five persons
mopped the copch, and declared that it should proceed
no farther. The mob then proceeded to drag the
p •sserigers from the coach, and the guard and coach-
man from the box, the latter of whom they left it.
the ;middle of the road. They then took - the coach on

sons of my