Star.
London, England, 1810-12-24 00:00:00

0

LAW INTELLIGENCE..

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, DEC. 19.

BELL V. BYRNE.

Mr. TOPPMG stated, that this was an action of da-
mages, brought by Mr. High Bell, a respectable mer-
chant of this city, against Mr. Nicholas Byrne, the
sole proprietor of the paper called the Morning Post.
The defendant was charged in the declaration with
publishing a false and scandalous libel to the injury
of the plaintiff's feelings and character.-
The Learned Counsel, after some general observa-
tions, went into the history of the transaction. About
the period when the arrest of -Sir Francis Burdett en-
grossed so much of the public attention, a correspon-
dence, chiefly concistin-, of letters. and documents un-
der the name of Mr. Roger O'Connor, had appeared
in Cobbett's ,Political Register. An article appeared
in the Morning Post of the 15th of last May, purpor-
ting to be an abstract or report of the speech of the
Attorney General for Ireland, at the time when ti mo-
tian was made in the Irish House of Commons rela-
tive to Mr. O'Connor and other State prisoners. The
speech comprehended several letters, chewing the
Connection between the Irish State prisoners and some ,
persons who had attracted the attention of the Go-
vernment in this country. These letters were followed
in the article by comments on the characters alluded
to ; and the comment, attached to Mr. Bell's name,
in the article, was, that he had been confined on a
charge of high treason, in England, in February,
1798. This was totally untrue ; and yet its effect
upon the character of a peaceable and respectable man
oust be most serious, if it were done away by the
measures which were now adopted, at once to clear,
the plaintiff's character and to punish the defendant.
He (Mr. Topping) knew very little of the Morning
Post, as it seldom fell in his way ; but it was appa-
rent, that the circulation of such a charge, in Lon-
don, must be highly detrimental to any man, in a
country where reputation was the great treasure of a
man. But the character of a due regard and obedi-
ence to the Laws and Government under which we
lived was most essential, and it was that important
branch of character that the slander of the libeller was
intended to cut away. In the present instance, there
conld be no defence, though there might be a feeble
attempt at justification. But that would sink under
the Advocate, and the Jury would only have to con-
sider, what should be the compensation of the plain-
tiff ? The cause was from many circumstances a
singular one ; but not the least Of its singularities
was, that it produced the Attorney General in the
new character of a defender ef_a gross, malicious,
slanderous libel. That Learned Counsel had been
used to other exertions of his great poWers ; he had
now to act the part of one screening the malevolence
of the libeller. At all other times, that Learned
Counsel was seen, pressing in a different direction,
and mustering the whole of his strength to beat down
the cause of the accused. Of these efforts, one must
%ay, in the sentiment of Shakespeare,
" Oh !-it is excellent
" To have a giant's strength ; but it is tyrannous
" To use it like a giant."
However, in the present instance, even his powers
inust fail ; defence was a new field to him ; he most
_ now perform on a new instrument ; and he probably
would be as auk ward a performer upon that as he was
upon the flageolet in the case tried yesterday. The pre-
sent case was, on the part of the plaintiff, one of the
simplest-order. A respectable man had been traduced
. •-•-fheinjury had been suffered through a medium that
must make it the most extensive. A compensation for
that injury was sought of the Jury, and there could be
no doubt that they would do what justice required.
- A person from the Stamp Office attended to prove
.the. paper of the 15th of May.
The part of the article to which the Counsel for
the plaintiff particularly referrod, was a letter from
Yr Arthur O'Connor to his brother, Mr. R. O'Con-
nor, .Inentioning that he had disposed of some pro-
perty to Sir Francis Burdett, but the thing might still
go on in his own name; and the rents might be trans
mated to Hugh Bell, of Charter House-square. This
was followed by she comment ef the Irish Attorney
General, that the persons who were alluded to in the
Forrespondence were of the most suspicioutorder, suck
• Akt§weeny, a State prisoner, and Hugh Bell, a man
fuho had been arrested in Lontidn, iy February, 1798,0 n a
charge of high treason, &c. ThiS report was reptin.
'tea in the Morning Post of the 15th of May last.
The Artoneev-Geeetiao on the part of the de-
fendant, said, that as the Counsel for the prosecution
bad professed to give a simple statement, it should be
Met, on his part, by a simple defence.. The circuit-
stances'pfthe publication were few, inartificial, and such
las must perfectly do may the charge of particular
Malice against the plaintiff. When on an occasion
which was probably fresh in the memory of the Jury,
Mr. Roger O'Connor bad brought himself into the
public eye by certain correspondences ; it became the
habit of his friends, to talk of him as a man of unim-

. _
peached loyalty. Thme correspondences were can-
vassed in the different public prints, and among the
rest the Morning Post, not having, probably, the
same entire faith in Mr. O'Connor's merits, gave its
readers a report of a speech spoken by an eminent
Law Officer in the House of Commons in Ireland--
The report touched upon some circumstances of his
'connection with persons not highly reputable as loyal
or honest subjects. This report was taken from the
Dublin Journal of some years back. The. Jury had:
'already heard how far the present plaintiff's name'
was animadverted on. It was merely in a cursory
and accidental manner ; without any peculiar allu-
stcn, without any peculiar mark of malice, but merely
as a part of the current paragraph. If the-printer
had• exercised any thing like thought upon the s-,11)--1
sleet. he would probably have omitted the plaintiff's
.name. The whole paragraph was taken from a pa.
per openly published, openly circulated, and yet un-
tainted by the plaintiff, in his zeal for vindication.—
If there ever had been evil in the thing, it had been
done, and had passed away in the years which had
aincepassed. This was to be looked to, and to be
the greet tot:mid:ration with the Jury. The trial of
the malicious intention lay with them ; for the charge
Of malice was only to be substantiated by proof of
intention. •It was in this sense that he (the Attor-
ney-General) was inclined to judge of the language
which had been so singularly used by the Learned
the opposite side. It was impossible not
as extraordinary, as very extraordinary
, The proper name for a charge of that
,ag against a pawn In Lis (Olcittunntey-

Counsel on th
to consider it
and orange.
same cow.ni