Star.
London, England, 1829-12-25 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

Seals, Re-hearings, and Appeals, before the Loan CHANCILLOR,
previous to Hilary Term, 1830.
Bankrupt Petitions—Wednesday, January 13 ; Thursday, 14 ;
Friday, 15 ; and Saturday, 16.
The First Seal— Monday, IL
Re-hearings and Appeals—Tuesday, 19 ; Wednesday 20.
The Second Seal—Thursday, 21.
Petitions—Friday, 22.
Seals. Pleas, Dram , and Petitions, before the Vice CHAN.
cm.r.oa, previous to Hilary Term, 1830.
Bankrupt Petitions—Friday, January 8; Saturday 9 ; Monday
11 ; Tuesday, 1I ; Wednesday, 13; Thursday, 14 ; Friday, IS;
Saturday,l6.
The First Seal—Monday, 111th.
Tuesday, 19th, Wednesday, 20th—Pleas and Demurrers.
The Second Seal—Thursday, 21st.
Friday, 22d—Petitions.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, Dec. 24.
ANOTHER LIBEL.
TIM KM V. SILL.
This case was then called on, and there being only nine Special
Jurors, Mr. Atomism. prayed a tales, when three Common Jurors
were added. - The following Jury were then sworn :
John Joseph Austin Thomas Barker
William Jameson Samuel Brown.
Henry Mayo Talesmen.
Wm. Thompson Joseph Wardell
Thos. Henry Buckle Wm. Scholefield
Dukes Colson Edward Smith.
John Lowndes
Mr. UOIIIIIOII opened the information, which charged against
the defendant the following publication :
" There were rumours in the highest political circles last night,
that a certain Noble Lord, holding a station of vast responsibility,
and who is said to be on terms of disagreement with another of
his Majesty's advisers, bas been charged with bartering ecclesias-
tical livings. His Lordship's friends do nut believe tbe imputa-
tion, and repel it strongly ;'While they intimate that the dealings in
the wages of clerical advancement have been transacted by his
Lady without his Lordship's knowledge. By slow and painful
degrees the secrets of State come out. Such. is the nature of the
human disposition, that differences and quatrell are much sooner
reported abroad than the causes of them. The disgrace of losing
office is known at least a week before the reason of the dismissal
can be ascertained."
The Arroanar-Gzusaat said, that this was the last appeal he
should have to make to the Jury upon the subject, of libel. The
prosecution now before them was at the snit of the Lord Chan-
cellor, whose private honour and character were grossly Impepad
by the libel in question. It was not because of his high rank and
station that beihuuid endure the vilest libels upon his private clus‘
ranter and integrity, without seeking to bring the authors el ewe
to punishment. The Lord Chancellor had very extensive patrols-
age in the Church, and this patronage be was bound to administer
with hands undefiled by any sordid consideration. The writer of
the paragraph made this charge in the most insidious manner, and
at a time when some individuals had an Interest in circulating ru-
mours that a great misunderatang existed amongst his Majesty's
Ministers, and these ruinous at last resolved themselves inns
direct .attacks upon the Lord Chancellor. Some newspapers saki
that he was deftly in debt, and others insisted that duns were
constantly rapping at his door. One went so far as to say that he
had borrowed 430,000 from a Learned Gentleman, in consideration
of which he conferred upon him a legal appointment. The present
libel not only charged the Lord Chancellor with the alined dealing
in ecclesiastical preferment, but it goes on to trader* the funs of his
Lady, by saying that it was not him that did it, but that it was door
by his wife without his knowledge, thus scandalously sacrificing
IL.
Lady Redhurst for the pretended purpose of viedisiting his • .
, ship. This libet-arpeated is the dies, of which two iftWes
pshilabed owy week. the prosecution woe not brought apleft
prOprietor'of darPapes, Mr. Whiting. but against the anther. Oa
the Saturday night Mr. Whiting sae/ the first edition and corrected
it, and there was no such article in it, bet the article did appear

in the second edition, in which it was inserted by the authority of
Mr. Bell. Thli was one of the camels ,whkh sr• proprietor was not,
deserving of prosecution, and, tbkrefere; proceedings were instituted
against the author. Mr. Ben had formerly insinuated, and, per-
hem alight that day do so again, that be was not the author, but
esellved it from somebody else. Now, if he would tell who
that somebody was,. and give suck evidence as would enable the
totrUChancellor to place him upon the floor of that Court, be (the
Attorney General) had, the authority of that Noble Lord for saying,
that he would virtually waive the prosecution against the present
defendant. The Learned Gentleman then Galled
Mr. Edward Painter—l am the printer to the Atlas Newspaper..
On the 14th of June, Mr. Bell was Editor of that paper. I inserted
the paragraph in question by the direction of Mr. Bell.
Cross-examined by Mr. Batt —I remember the circumstances
under which I received them. I got mere than one paragraph&
and the same thing that occurred on that night as to copy main
every Saturday night.
Henry Shepherd—l am a relation to Lady Lyndhurst-Ave
name was Sarah Geary—and I have no doubt the paragraph alluded
to Lord and Lady Lyndhurst.
Cross-examined—l supposed it applied to him, because be had
ecclesiastical preferment la his power.
This closed the case for the prosecution.
Mr. Bell then addressed the Jury in his defence. The greatest
wish he had was in the present instance to vindicate himself from
the charge of being a scandalous libeller. It was with him a ques-
tion rather of character than any thing else. The Paper be con-
ducted was remarkable for its impartiality in all political matters•
It was very true that an intimation bad been conveyed to him that
be might, by giving up the author, escape from the consequences of
a prosecution. But then, he would not only break the confidence
which his friend reposed in him, but he would also break confidence
and destroy faith and friendship elsewhere, perhaps to a greater ex-
tent than he could possibly be aware of. He was placed in a peculiar
situation ; and he thought it was more honourable to take the con-
sequences of the accident upon himself than to implicate his friend
who did not Insist upon his inserting the paragraph, but only gave
it to him as a rumour in circulation. and rumours were the ex.,
elusive property of newspapers. The defendant proceeded to read
the libel, which excited some laughter, and contended that it was
not written in any evil spirit, but in the true and legitimate manner
of a newspaper, as a rumour only. He then quoted an opinion of
Lord Kenyon's to spew that that could not be a libel which was
inserted inadvertently, or which was nut inserted with malicious
intentions. This opinion was peculiarly applicable to his case, for
be bad no malice, and the article was inserted inadvertently. It
was inserted at tht latest period at which any thing could be
inserted in the paper; he had no time to consider of its im-
portance, and it was printed in scraps as he wrote it. Cer-
tainly If he bad had time so consider the subject he should not
have inserted this paragraph—not that be considered it libellous—
but that be never would deliberately insert any thing in the paper
which could wound the feelings of any individual. He bad no
malice against the Lord Chancellor political or personal, so that
he came within the case from which be had quota( Lord Kenyon's
opinion. He bad been friendly to Catholic Emancipation, so that
he could have felt none of that political animosity which was sup-
posed to have influenced some writers who had published pa-
ragraphs reflecting on the Lord Chancellor. Mr. Bell here
read an extract from a pamphlet on the Catholic Question,
published by him three years back, to abew the side of the
question be then advocated. Personal malice it was impossible
for film to feel, for he bad no wrongs to redress, no injury to com-
plain of. The Defendant then proceeded to compare the state
of the periodical press at present with its state in the reign of
Queen Anne, the Augustan Age of English literature, contending
that the advantage was greatly in favour of the present mode of
conducting newspapers. With respect to the character of the Lord
Chancellor, it was too high and exalted, in the eyes both of the
public and his colleagues, to require vindication by bis condemna-
tion : but though he considered it impossible, yet if the Jury should
chance to think that a verdict of acquittal would throw a• stigma
on the character of that Noble Lord, be entreated them not to give
it, but to find him guilty. He was far from seeking their verdict
at the expense of the slightest stain on the Lord Chancellor's cha-
' racter. Better far it would be that an humble individual like him-
self should suffer, however innocently, than that the reputation of
so exalted and useful an individual should be reflected upon.
Lord Tzerxmoot briefly charged the Jury.
The Jury retired for fifteen minutes, when they returned the
following verdict :
" We find the defendant Guilty; but, in consequence of a doubt
being on our minds as to the existence of a malicious ittention on
the part of the defendant, we beg to recommend him to mercy."
The Arroaser-Gaszaat said that he should have great pleasure
In forwarding the recommendation to the Lord Chancellor, who he
was sure would give it his consideration.
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS. Dec. 24.
fittings at Westminster, before the Cour JUSTICE and a Special
Jury.

Int T. RI.2IIILIT CROFT, SAIL T. LIST**.
Mr. Tnitssuiza stated, that this was an action against the defen-
dant, for having a criminal c6aversation with the plaintiff's wife.
The defendant had pleaded not guilty.
Mr. Sergeant Wilms said, that the Jury had already learnt
;he nature of this action from his Learned Friend, and they
would find it attended with many peculiar circumstances. By
the defendant's conduct, the plaintiff was reduced co a situa-
tion of great distress and anguish, and that conduct was such
as would be found, he thought, to have proceeded not from
influence of passion, but to have been occasioned by the most
mean and sordid motives that could be imagined. The plaintiff
was the son of Sir Richard Croft, and the possessor of a very
old Baronetcy ; be was now about thirty years of age. Tin
lady, whose conduct was the subject of the present action, was
a Miss Lateward, a young heiress, of 3,5001. a year. The plain-
tiff became acquainted with her, in consequence of visiting at
the house of her father-in-law, Colonel Mann who was an
othcer in the same regiment with himself. She had been a ward
in Chancery, and when the defendant, who became acquainted
with her in 1823, applied to the Lord Chancellor fur permission
co marry her, his Lordship objected to give his consent, till
the lady had attained seventeen years of age, and gave the
parties leave' to make another application to him on the subject.
That application was made in the following year, and by his
direction the terms of the settlement were fixed. Those
terms were, that the fortune should be subject to • charge of
£7OO a-yeer for her husband. for his life ; to another charge at
4500 a•year, till she attained the age of II ; and then of 4300
a-year, till a certain sum named in the deed was accumulated for
the benefit of younger children. That accumulated fund was fixed'
for the tint of these younger children, at 410,000 ; if there were
two, it was to be 415,000; and if three, 420,000. The eldest son
was, at his death, to be entitled to the whole estate; but if she
shou:ld have no eldest son by the first marriage, and should then
marry again and have a son, be was to take the estate, in exclusion
the d ughten by the first marriage • end If there were also
dangluers by the second marriage, the lady was to have the power,
either by deed or will, to put them on the same footing as the
daughters of the first marriage. He thought the Jury would agree
with him, that this power, vested in the lady, was the chief
cause of that Milk intercourse which bad led to the present action.
The parties wemthilmillied in 11124, io tots • daughter was born,
sod is ISMS, ace of a most violent attack of illness,
the was to go 'to the house of Mr. Scott of
ikeldivi a log/del man of great eminence In the treatment of
'll.llllll His wife did not accempany him, but went to,
am beta 4 hermasher, Mrs. Hamm. where she condoned tilt
Aral ilaparmlare mac year whim, with the family of Colonel
Matlec, she west to Boulegtie. There the defendant breams
eggesinted with her. and 'by his seduction that separation,
-Which had existed for a date, pertly trust the bad state of
her hemkh Mice the birth of bar daughter, and partly in mu-
Moamar of the severe illness of her hushed, was rendered,
Remanent. The Jun/ waist base reason to ate in the course
qf die cause, that her health bad been mom& impaired as to-albeit
the Mee of her mind ; sod some motes which she Iss4writtai
Mid Mew *woke( self-allemadom then hilly meowed (ether
wheal to ylier husband. so Bromley, sod for assay other
acts which. she would not otherwise have commoitt d. seal
hoped that ibis evil orght be beets toe over by-thetas' of time;
Her lioabood, Sod, he believed, dm hanalf,l leaked (award
wish pleasure to their rammismoimil tima mamma of di* *me
=would mishap liem takes .piscoria. Not the 4"
stepped le just what the tomrporary separatism if
husband and wife was about to onaloate, and his act prevented the