Star.
London, England, 1820-02-25 00:00:00

pense or delay in the one than in &II otirr. The de-
fendant had alluded to the new laws. The necessity of
those laws was to be referred to conduct such as
defendant had been guilty of. Those laws were not
for the purpose of restricting the freedom, but of
restraining the abuses, of the Press, This case was
an illustration of what the greeest lawyers and the
'dearest friends to Liberty and the Constitution, had.
said, that those who restrained the licentionsne,s
were the best friends of the Liberty of the Press.—
The defendant knew well that the Act, authorizing
banishment for libel,. was not applicable to his of-
feace. The Attorney-General would not have
brought a criminal inTormation if the publicatirni
were of a doubtful character, if any reasonable man
could doubt whether i► was a libel or not. The
Learned Gentleman then pointed out, with suitable
remarks, the more striking passages in the publics"
tioti in question.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE said, that the defendant
had professed to read extract!: from newspapers.---:
lie might have quoted correctly, he, indeed, knew
nothing of the matter ; but it v..as known to the
Jury that proprietors, editors, and printers of news-
papers, bad a very'great interest in the impunity of
Venders Ott papers, since, if the venders were restrained
or punished, their profits must be reduced.
• The Jury found him Guilty, and he was commit-
ted ; the LORD Cuter JusricE telling him to be in
readiness to be called to-morrow.

TILE KING V. Wilt MORN.

This defendant, a Avretched-looking old man, way;
convicted, in a similar manner, of selling
.the &line
publication, in Evesham-bwildings, Somers-tol.rn.
The Jury recommended him t mercy.
The Lotto CHIEF JUSTICE said, the Court would
attend to any case which the defendant could lay be-
fore them in mitigation.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said, that they would
not press for the judgment of. the Court, if it should
not be found necessary.

TUE KIM V. LAINSBURY.

James Lainsbury, the younger, No. 2, Pulteney-
court, Pulteney-street, Queen-square, was next coil-
v:cted of the same offence. •

TILE KING V. RIDGE,

♦has then called, but the SOLICITOR-GENERAL re-
criested that it should stand over till to-morrow, as he
was called away upon public business.
The LORD CAUL! JUSTICE assented.

Mr: Dolby stood up, and held some conversation
with the CHIEF JUSTICE, upon the importance of
Mr. Sherwin's attendance at his trial.

The CHILI JusTica said, if his opinion was asked,
he thouAlgt it of no in.pnrtance.—Mr. Dolby thanked:
his Lordship, and left the Court.

OLD BAILEY SESSIONS.

Yesterday, John Dirg, aged 20, and George Bird,
aged 21, (brothels) were capitaily indicted for break-
ing open the house of Mr. W. Wyllie, at Fulham,'
and stealing plate, &c. The prisoners were both
found Guilty—Death.
James Wright was put to the bar,:on an indictment,
charging him with robbing the Marquis of Bucking-
ham of divers sum of money. _

Mr. Axurtews, Counsel for the prisoner, informed
the Court that he wished to withdraw his plea of
Not Guilty, and pleaJ Guilty. This, after some con-
versation, was allowed to be done.
The Noble prosecutor also spoke in his behalf, ob-
serving, that he did not think the crime was done.
from any innate propensity to thieving—but that he•
had, of late, unfortunately, acquired such an invete-
rate habit of thinking, as to he scarcely ever able of
knowing what he was about.—The judgment of the
Court was postponed.