Star.
London, England, 1810-07-11 00:00:00

tuation where he may be again exposed, even to the
chance of being once more reduced to the state from
which he has been rescued r
Mr. Justice La Ilt,astc—:o There Would hate been
*a great difference in the case, if the boy had been in.
veigled awat. Here he left his father's protection at
a period when it could no longer avail him."
Mr. Justice Caose---4" If the child had wished to
be removed, that would have been a different ques-
tion ; we are in the use of granting these writs for the
benefit of the child only."—aule refused.
THE ICING V. PINERTY.
Mr. CVMPOOD moved to have the trial in this ease
postponed till the Sittings after next Term, on the
ground of the absence of material witnesses for the de-
fendant ; among
_others, on account of the absence,
in Ireland, of Mr. Ponsnnby, Mr. Foster, Etc.
moved this on amended affidavits, stating these Gen-
tlemen to he material witnesses to prose many of the
facts in the publication. Mr. Curwood observed, that
in the present indictment, the usual practice of set-
ting out particular parts of the publication as libel-
lous was not adopted, but the whole publication, con.
sisting of many folios, was given. lice publication
commenced with stating the apprehension of the de-
fendant
on his proceeding with the expedition to
Walcheren, where he had gone with the view of writ-
ing and publishing a narrative of the expedition
and then proceeds to express his conviction that this
had proceeded from personal animosity entertained
against him by Lord Castlereagh ; a suspicion which
he goes on to justify by a statement of facts. It would,
therefote, be a question with the Jury, whether these
circumstances, stated as facts, were true or false ?
for, upon their truth or falsehood, must the malignity
of the libel, and, of course, the innocence or guilt of
the defendant depend.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH said, if the publication was
calumnious, the Judge and Jury could not care as to
thetr uth of it.

•
the plaint#ANCitt inithediatetei and ittaehtni a bond
for 8500 chore, payable in February next, and this
agreement was afterwards confirmed by the defend-
ant ; having thtts, however, got rid of the execution,
the defendant turns round, and declares that 'Mt
Comrie is not his solicitor, and therefore not authorii-
ed to enter into any engagements which would be
binding to him, the defendant ; and immediately filed
two bills in equity against the plaintiff, on the subject;
and an outlawry having, through the negligence of
the defehdant's attorney, issued against him in that
Court, he now came to ask their Lordships to reverse
it. He (the Attorney-General) hAd no wish to press
the outlawry against the defendant ; but he trusted
the Court would think the justice of the case required
•that the plaintiff should not be placed in a Worse situ-
'etion through the indulgence which he had extended
to the defendant, than he was previous to granting
him that indulgence. The justice of the case demand-
! ed that the defendant should be bound by the terms
of that agreement of which he had enjoyed all the
advantages.
The COURT said, they wished in this case to make
the agreement of the defendant and the award subset.-
' vient to doing justice- to both parties. When the
award was agreed to, the defendant was at perfect li-
berty to have adopted or rejected such a measure :
when he entered into the last agreement, that was
not the case : if the situation in which he was then
placed were considered, under momentary expectation
of having a distress Rut into the Opera House, of
which he was part proprietor, a circumstance which
would perhaps have suspended the public representa-
tions at that theatre, he omid scarcely be considered
as a free agent., Under this pressure he was happy
to accede to any terms. It appeared, however, that
of the £2200 awarded, 41760 still remained unpaid,
though the last instalment should, according to agree-
ment, have been paid in December:;not only that
;
sum was due, but also the interest upon it from the

-"Mr. Cunwoon conceived that the question would time the different instalments became due to the pre-
be, if it was calumnious ? If the facts were true, and sent day. He, therefore, anxious to meet the justice
the language in which they were stated was tempe- of the case in every point of view, would order that
rate, be conceived the publication could only be re- stun and the interest upon it, to be immediately paid
garded as a discussion of public measures, or of the to Mr. Hill; and a sum sufficient to cover the costs
acts of Ministers, which could not be denied to the as between attorney and client, to be placed in the
public of this country, without trenching on the liberty hands of the Master, and all proceedings in that Court
of the press, so essential to a free state. Therefore, and in Equity, to be put an end to on both sides.
to prove the facts stated in the publication, the pre-' The ATTORNEY-GENERAL.--I understand your
sence of the witnesses enumerated in the affidavits Lordship to direct the ptineipal and interest, and a
was material. sufficient sum to Over the costs to be paid immedi-
.
Lord ELLENnonourat said, the calumnious nature ately to the Master.
of the publication had nothing to do with the facts. I . Lord Et.i.mtamtotion.—"Probably the most conve-
As he now understood it, the publication charged ' nient way would be to pay Je2ooo to Mr. Hill, as the
Lord Castlereagh with employing the powers of his amount of the debt and interest ; and £5OO into the
office in executing his own private purposes of re- hands of the Master to cover the costs ; both sums to
venge. If such was the nature of the assertion, there be paid to.inorrow, previous to tilt Court reversing
could be no doubt of the calumny. The truth or the outlawry.
falsehood of the charge was not at issue, and could I
have no effect on it.

HILL V. ROXCRTS.

The ATTORNEY GENERAL had no objection to the
question being put to Lord Castlereagh himself ;
but still farther, he could inform the Learned Gen-
tleman, that Lord Castlereagh knew nothing of the
order for preventing Mr. Finnerty from accompany.
ing the expedition till after it had been issued.
Mr. Finnerty presented himsilf to the attention of
the Court, but

Mr. RiADER moved that a Warrant of Attorney.
granted by the defendant to the plaintiff, should be
set aside on the following circumstances :—The de-
fendant having two bills, amounting to £4.2, which
hu wished to get discounted, applied to the plaintiff
for this purpose, who consented to discount the bills,
the defendant taking 4222 in cash and the remainder in
jewellery. Of these terms the defendant was obliged to
accept, but on inquiring into the value of the :vides of
jewellery he had received, he found they wen? not worth
the one-third of the sum he had been charged for
them. In these circumstances, be did what was in-
cumbent on him as an honest man. He tendered
back to Mr. Roberts the £22 and the jewellery, on
his restoring to him the two bills, and giving up the
Warrant of Attorney, which he had granted him.—
This, however, Mr. Roberts refused to agree to. Rule
to sbew cause granted.

Lord ELLENEORMIGH told him, they had alrea ify
heard him by his Counsel.
The application for postponing the trial was accor-
dingly refused.—The trial is, therefore, fixed for the
Sittings after Term.

SURREY THEATRE MOMS.
On an application to the Court, to make the rule
absolute which was obtained on Tuesday last for a
criminal information against Messrs. Slater, Sarel,
and Barrett, Mr. Palm moved to have the rule en-
larged till next term on the part of Messrs. Slater
and Sarel. Mr. PARK stated, that those defendants i
had not been served with a copy of the affilavits till 1
Thursday ; they then called a meeting of persons
who had been witnesses to their conduct at the Thea-
tre, but only four attended. The affidavits for the,,
prosecution were of immense length, and it was im-
I
possible to collect the affidavits in answer soon enough
to be in time.

Lord ELLEXBOROUntig. They don't want a mul-
titude of affidavits. If they could, they might bring
a plain denial of the charge, and we would have at-
tended to their request for enlarging -the present rule.
There has been obviously a tumult, and they ought
to have given some satisfaction to the Court on that
subject." _ _