Star.
London, England, 1803-06-29 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCI.

COURT or KINGS BENCH, JIINI sy.
THE RING V. MAJOR JAMES
The Defendant was brought up to receive Judr
meat upon a Criminal Information for a Libel infert-
ed by him in one of the Morning Papers, againfi Ma-
jor-General Burton, a Member of the Hoafe of Com-
mons.

The information was read, which charged,him with
writing and caufing to be saferted in a Morning Pa-
per, a libellous paragraph, touching a matter elepend-
ing to the Court of Chancery between the Defendant
and the Profecutor. •
The Libel retledted on the Profecutor as an unna•
tural bother, &c.

Two alfida;tts were read, one from the Profecntor,
the other from the Defendant.

The Profecutor, Major-General Burton, Rated, that
the Defendant was a natural fon of his father; that
his father had appointed Cie Profecutor his executor
and refiduary legatee, bit left a legacy of acool. to
the defendant ; his father had, however, given him
power eitherto pay the money at one payment, or to prey
the interell of it ; he had regularly paid the intereft to
he defendant's affigr ecs, and had frequently ME fled the
defendant in his dirtrefs, having given him at one
rime tool. and at another 2001.: the prefent profecu-
tion was merely in vindication of his charaeler.
The affidavit of the defendant flared, that he was
a prifuner for debt, and that if the legacy of zoool.
was paid to him, he could obtain his difcharge, un-
der the Infolvent Mt ;—it alfo Rated, that the bill
filed in Chancery was by the advice and opinion ofa
Learned Counfel (Counfellor Rommilly).
Mr. Es se t a r, on the par t of the profccutionAlated,
that as the detenciant had no Counfel, he did not in-
tend to piers upon tl.e Court thofe rffifervations which
he (liquid other Wile have made; he (Mould only men.
lion Oat• it was evident, that te objeCt of the libel
was to hive an improper influence in a cattle depend-
ing in Chancery : it began with a fort of a larsentation
on the condition of Lord ELDON, who was to deter-
mine a caufe where an unnatural brother would be
brought before him. ft was very plain to fee what
was the objet of the publication.
Mr. Chrittie then addreffed the Court and read
the opinion of Mr. Rommilly, which was favourable
to his claim.
Mr. ERSKINE replied, in a few words, that it was
not the propriety of his filing a hill in Chancery, but
the impropriety of his publithing a libel in the newt*.
papers, which was now the Intik& of confederation.
Major Chrifiie then mentioned to the Court, that
when the fubjeO came halt before them, his Lordihip
had obferved, that the fault committed by a brother
in a moment of irritation wa, venal, when compared
to that of a printeroaho deliberately, and coolly pub-
hiller/ thole things.
Lord ELLEN Imam, c laid, he had already noticed
that ; 4>ut at precut, he wilted to know whether the
profecutor (as the defendant was now a prifuner)
would not be content that the defendant ffiould give
fecurities for his good behaviour?
Mr. ERSKINE replied, that General. Burton only
brought forward this profecution in defence of his
charaOer, and would be content with whatever deci-
Cum the Court thought proper.
Mr. juttice GROSE then paired fentence, that the
defendant ihould he bound in his own recognizance
for pool. income up to receive judgment rs hen prayed.
He obferved, that if there was any repetition of thole
libels, this Court had it in their power to pals a fen.
tence much more grating and difireffing to the feel-
ings of a Gentleman than what they now paired, and
that the defendant ought to feel that the profecutot
was very lenient on this occafion.