Star.
London, England, 1803-12-20 00:00:00

mother's. It 74;glie be about nine months '
after the
lett her hutband—he did not keep an account of
dates. Mrs. Ergas was deranged in her mind when
the left Holland, and came home. He produced a
letter from the Defendant to hintfelf, dated Altona,
6th February, which being read, among other
things, contained an account of the derangement of
Mrs. Ergas, and which he lamented in very (trot%
expreffions of regret, Rating alto, that the was deter-
mined to come to England to her mother, and that
he had engaged i cabin in a Pruffian velfel to bring
her over. -The witnefi added, that on her arrival the
came to her mother's and refided there ever fine,
where Rte was delivered of die child, ;which was (up.
ported by the Plaintiff; but he did not know that the
Plaintiff had turned the elde(t fon out of doors—on
the contrary, he was fitted out to the Weft Indies.
Philip Street, a Clerk at the Daily Advertifer and
Oracle Office, proved that the advertifement was
brought to their office by Ergas, the defendant; after
the advertifement had appeared, they received inti-
mation that it was not authorifed by Mrs.Montefiore;
and when he law Ergas, on the if,.th of Oftober, he
refuted to receive the advertifement, telling him that
he bad led them into an error, and that they would in-
fert it no more. Ergas laid, that they had been better
paid for inferting the contradiftion, but that he would
give him 30 goineai for ss snore infertions, and leave
cool. as an indemnity againft any confequences. This
was refuted, and he added, that no money was paid
for inferting the contradiaion, but that as loon as Mr.
Stuart, the proprietor, knew he had been impofed
upon, he voluntarily publifhed the contradiaion.
Thomas Lydon, another Clerk of Mr. Stuart, who
firfl took the advertifement in, Rated, that as loon as
he read it, he thought it a grange one, and carried it
into a back room to Mr. Stuart, who immediately
came out. In converfation with the Defendant, it
appeared that Mr. S. knew his brother, and as he af-
lured Mr. S. that he had Mrs. Montefiore's authority
for that advertifement. that he was her fon-in.law,
( which latter part of the a(Tertion, on inquiry, was
found to be true,) Mr. Stuart was induced to think
the advertifement really came from Mrs. Muntefiore,
and it was confequently inferred.
The publication of the papers, and the hand-writ-
ing of the Defendant being proved,
Mr. Serjeant BkST, for the Defendant, faid, before
he went to the merits of this caufe, he mull jug ad-
vert to a third perfon who had appeared in the courfe
of it—he meant Mr. Stuart, the Proprietor of 7hs
Daily Advertifer and Oracle. It was with much plea.
lure he embraced the opportunity of bellowing on
Mr. Stuart the praife which his conduft merited. He
was not only entitled to the thanks of that Court, but
to the thanks of the Public at large.; and Society
ought to rejoice, that fuch a dangerous engine as a
Newfpaper was under the management of fuch a man.
Although that Gentleman bad been fubpeenaed in
the lin of witneffes againtl his client, he would fay,
that his conduCt in this bufinefs bad been moß•ho-
nourable. When the advertifement was publifhed,
he took all the ufual precautions, and when he found
himfelf deceived, he made as ample and as fpeedy
reparation as was poffible : his conduft was fuch
as entitled him to the thanks not only of that
Court, but of all the world. The Learned Ser.
jeant then adverted to the circumßances of the cafe,
contending with. great eloquence, that it was not
a cattle to require heavy damages. He admitted
that the eondue purfned by the Defendant was not
legal or juftifiable, but that he had been goaded and
enraged by family wrongs and oppreffion. He
condemned the Plaintiff for bringing the anion on
the ridiculous advertifement, when the might have
had better grounds in one of the letters which had
been read ; but he added, if they had proceeded
upon the Ratement in the letters, they would hare
been prepared to have proved the truth of their con-
tents, whereas now they were taken by furprixe, and
were nnprepared to anfwer them. He urged the cir-
cumflance of the wife being delivered in the houfe of
her mother of a child ; and infißed, that though the
defendant might be lane to aU common purpofes, yet
he might be fo far overpowered as to have 101 l
reafon upon that fubjea, when be was fo feverely in-
jured. Feeling for the infirmity of human name he
was fare the Jury would not give heavy or exceffive
damages.
Lord Atvawtty, having Rated the nature of the
anion, faid the law was, that no perfon fhould
are the name -of another in print fo as to make hips
odious, contemptible, or ridiculous. If he did, the
law raid fuch a publication was a libeL No perfon ,
bad a right even to publifb truth of another with a
malicious intent. At the firß opening of this caufe,
he confeffed he thought it was a mere ridiculous
Jgsrib; but be had changed his opinion, for when he
had heard the letters of the Defendant read, it ap-
peared that be had been aauated by a molt malig-
nant motive. In apportioning the damages, bow.
ever, the Jury would not give any thing for what
was contained in the letters ; they formed no part of
the charge on the record, and the only ufe to be
made of them was to thew pa-mama he had publifhed
the advertifement. He mull alto fay, that in this
cafe he thought Mr. Stuart had aaed with great
propriety. It appeared that nothing extraordinary
was taken for the infertion but that it was really re-
ceived as a bwrisfule advertifement; and when be dike,.
vered that he had been deceived, that be immediately
pi:bill/red a contradiftior of it. Confidering what was
the public opinion of the manner in which Bander
was fometimes propagated by the Newfpapers, he was
glad to find it proved that in this cafe there was no
bad motive or intent. Perhaps it might have been
as well if Mr. Stuart had not nulled to the declara-
tions of the defendant. Thet e was alto one other
point he would mention. It would be well if they
were more cautious from whom they received their
reports of the proceedings in matters of law. It was
highly proper that the proceedings of the Courts of
Law Ihotild be public; perhaps our bell rights were
()Wing to that publicity of jnitice ; but the proceedings
ought to be comely detailed, and he was led to this
reflesaion by teeing in the Papers a few days back, an
account that the judgeshad differed in their opinion
in a late great criminal cafe (Adam's), when, in
truth and hit% they had none of them given any opi.
nion at alit His Lordlhip then again adverted to
the Mika of the anion before the Court, and advifed
the Jpry to give diktat damages, neither ("weave
nor trivial, but fuch as they thought the cafe war-
ranted. Verdia for plaintiff—Damages vol.

• Tile **mum anottc.l to by Ids Lordildp boa appeared fn all
At loam& it war uteri futy ihs 1: dm kw • klesshiag PVC'