Star.
London, England, 1828-01-28 00:00:00

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Wzrzauss JAN. 36.
Salmis in Banco.
!PRINGLE G. IVWILLIAM.

• '

This was an action of libel, which it was alleged wool
contained in a letter written by the defendant to the
Co►rtmittee of the Battle•bridge and Holloway. road
Company, of which the plaintiff was clerk and agent.
This letter directly charged the plaintiff with having
been guilty of prrjury in the evidence given by him,
before a Sheriff's Jury. The case was tried a few trays
since, before the Lord Chief Justice, at Guildhalls when
a verdict was returned for the plaintiff—Damages 40s.
M►. Serjeant Musa, on the part of the defendant,
now mowed for a rule to show cause why that verdict
should not be set aside, and a new trial granted, on
the ground of 11 d.isstirection on the part of the Judge
in leaving it to the Jury. The Learned Sergeant con-
tended, that inasmuch as that the, alleged libel was
wrissin•by the defendant on the subject of the disposal
of property in which he had an interest, and was ad-
. seised to those who were afterwards to possess an in-
terest itt-its that it was a privileged communication,
and that its contents could not be made the ground of
an action of libel ; and in support of his argument the
Learned Sergeant cited several cases in which this doc-
trine had been held.

The Comte, upon the authority of these cases, deter.
mined to grant a.sule to slew cause.—Rule granted.
COURT OF 'EXCHEQUER, JatioA ILY 26.
• • MALL V. LONGMAN AND OTUEAS. -
Iwthis.ease an action of damages for libel had been
wriest by she plaintiff, a teacher of languages, agaihst
the defendants. The case had been tried in the Sittings
after last Michaelmas Term, and sc verdict found for
the defendants. The circumstances are fresh in the
public mind. Tbis day Mr. Baeuerium moved for a
rule to thew cause why that veraid.ahould not be
•et aside, and a new trial granted, on the ground that
the Learned Judge who tried the cause (the Lord Chief
Baron) had erroneously instructed the Jury to find for
the defendants, if the plaintiff could adduce no proof of
hawing sufferedloss through the libel. Mr. Brougham
argued, that this direction of the Learned Judge, though
correct in a cases/ verbal libel, or spoken slander, was
erroneous in the present case of published libel, and, as
such. calculated to turn away the attention of the Jury
from the nature of the libel. •

The Lotto. Cates Balms declared his belief, from
memory, that be had put the real nature of the libel to
the Jury, when he left them to consider whether the ins-
Iptued charge against the plaintiff, of wanting common
honesty. meant an the libel in question any thing mote
than site imputation of plagiarism.
aims litii.Lomt-:-11 you charge a man with an im-
possible felony—is stealing a house, such a charge,
twee thoughayou should prove the words, would not
maintain an action .fot libel; so, if you impute to a
man a, want of common honesty, and then that it means
a . charge. of plagiariau, as union for libel cannot
be muffins& >c 1 'l' •• . •
Mr. Siovjeltan contended that the charge of plagia-
,giam_ inastnuck as it imputed a fraud
legainstotbst person accused, and tended to injure his
amoral repute on. t.),orts I tar
Bereft *miaow-consider ect the- Chief Samals diret•
does to be quite content, add total's been properly fol.
lowed by the Jury.—Rule- refused.

, .
POLICE INTELLIGENcit.
MANSIO -HOUSE. •
• Senegal persons were Summoned to pay church rates, &seta Rat '
Rester of tlto parish of Bicliopsgate, the iiishop of Chestas
One of 41 defendants, an Irisfrwinnals, who rent, a hake In the
parish, declared that she was so poor she could not pay the Right
Reverend Gentleman, who, she hoped, would take her poverty into
consideration, and be satisfied with her good wish.. Upon being
informed that she must pay the rates, she begged to know what
benefit she was to derive from discharging the amount?
The Loan MAYOR told her that she would have, amongst other
things, the benefit of seeing and hearing the worthy Bishop preach
in the Church every Sunday.
The defendant said that she was a Roman Catholic, and obliged
to contribute to the support of her pastor, who had no other means
of maintenance, than that which the liberality of his sock afforded.
Besides, the benefit. which had been just described couki not be re-
ceived by her without more payment. If she thought flt to go to
the Church, she mast pay for her seat, so that the demand made
now upon her yeas not at all to be justified. She hoped that the
worthy and humane Bishop of Chester would reflect upon all this,
and remit the rate in her instance.
The Loan Maros said, that it was his duty, in compliance with
the Act of Parliament, to make the order. His Lordship allowed
the defendant a preparation to.pay of three months.
GUILDHALL.
Saturday Mr. Colk, the chemist, who resides opposite the clock
of St. Dunstan's Church, in Fleet-street, informed the Magistrate,
that about six o'clock on Friday evening a small bullet, from au air
gun, passed through the fan light over his shop window, and per.
limited a pound of hair powder within a gimp case on the opposite
side of the shop. That there was not an intention to kill any one
belonging to the premises •he inferred from .the facility with which
the gun might have been fired from the part of the Church directly
opposite his house. He conjectured that it was intended fur some!
persan who was riding on the top of a stagecoach. Mr. Alderman
CROWDER said it was a strange affair, and be hoped the mention
now made of it might be the means of übtainink some information.
lie thought Mr. L. 1% ilk would do well to advertise a reward.for the
discovery. Mr. Colk said he was not under alarm for himself ; but
he fitmly believed it had been aimed at some one with a 'diabolical
intent.