The Statesman.
London, England, 1818-07-29 00:00:00

.

• • .6 IP. •

Mr. WrrHEUELL contended that it had not been,
argued here that the letters were literary property.—t!:
Whether the person who wrote them had the ',snit};
of thinking them fit for publication he winald.not say.
It bad been said that Pliny wrote his for publication,
and hence arose that stiffness which was said to mark
them.
The LORD CHANCELLOR-4 am afraid that my
dull predecessors never thought on the vanity of an
author in publishing his letters, when they gave their
decisions. Now, in 1818, I mustoey that my de-
cided opinion is, that I must and v.lll submit my
judgment to the judgments of those who preceded
me, for I can never agree that the doctrines of this
Court are to be chaliged at the will of every Chan-
cellor who sits in this Chair.
Mr. W MICHELL contended the power of the Court
had not been extended far enough here, for it mere-
ly prohibited the publication of the work, but not
its being generally read.
The Lotto CHANCELLOR said, that was all that
a common Injunction could do, for any man had i
right to read a book, and then tell its contents after-
wards. The Court of Chancery had no right, and
indeed never could interfere with a man narrating
what he had read; and, in fact, it would be below
the dignity of the Court to interfere. Suppose any
ridiculous staff was drawn up in the form of a song,
and this nonsensical song was declared to. be literary
property, the Court might grant an Injunction, bet
would any man say the Court could prevent a person
, from singing that song ? Certainly. not.
Mr. WETHERELL contended then, at very great
length; that the present case was not sufficient to
justify the continuance of thi Injunction.
The CHANCELLOR, however, was of a different
opinion, and at the same time assured Mr. W. he did
not willingly stop Mr. Wetherell's argument, for the
more be heard him the more he was highly delighted
with him, as the more he was pat into the furnace
the brighter he appeared.
Mr. SIDEBOTTOK followed.
Sir S. ktostit.cv then addressed his Lordship for
the Plaintiff, and said she had madean affidavit in re-
ply, to which he must allude. In that she stated
that her late husband, William Gee, by his will gave
the Defendant 4,0001. and also the interest of 6,0001.
for life, with remainder to his children. He left her
17,0001. of which she was to have the interest, .and
unless she saw cause before her death, the said 17,0001.
was to devolve to him (the Defendant) at her death.
By her means the Defendant got a Church Living, of
4001. a year, in Surrey, and she advanced him a con.
siderable sum, he informing her by letter that he
would give her no trouble, nor make any application
to her, if she would resign to him the interest of a
certain sum, or if she did not, he would publish her
lettets. By a letter of the 15th of April last, he
sent back her letters, begging her forgiveness, and
saying it was but justice in him to restore them. He
(Sir S.) must say that the complaint of Mr. Hart, re-
specting this Lady desctibing the Defendant as the
adopted son of her husband, was not well founded.
The LORD CHANCELLOR-Mr. Hart, I suppose you
have seen this affidavit ?

Mr. HART—Yes, my Lord.
Sir S. ROMILLY proceeded. If the Defendant did
not mean to sell the letters. why did he publish the
radvertisement in the N.wspapers ? Besides, his con.
elect was e.sily to be ittlged of by his not giving his
DOD name on the front of the hook. but taking a
"came more adapted for a novel. The Plaintiff placed
In him the most unbounded confidence, and her
letters contained some important family secre.s.
—WSre these to be published abro,d ? Let
it also be remembered, th tt the doctrine of the Court
laid down, or to he laid down in this case, would
form a future precedent, and therefore more attention
should be paid to it. Sir Samuel concluded his
speech by Impressing no doubt relative to the Injunc-
tion being continued.
Mr. Itoortsc, on the sense side, felt that the case
was so strong on behalf of his Client as to require al.
moat nothing to be said. He woeld ask, could the
publication of the lettere justify the Defendant's con.
duct ? How could that be done ? 'I be letters were,
written during the life time of Mr. Gee; and pray
were the letters then written to be thought capable of
justifying` any thing which might subsequently have
happened ?
The LORD CHANCELLOR—Ho says he meant to give
the letters only among his friends. If such was his
intention, I must tell him he acted very strangely in
advertising thins in a public Newspaper. Does the
Injunction wend to Anderson, the bookseller?
Mr. RotteELL—lt does, my Lord.
The Lean CHANCELLOR-110w many copies did he
mean to give away ?
Mr. HART--I believe about 50, my Lord.
Mr. HART then replied.
The LORD CHANCELLOR at very great length went
over the original bill filed by Mrs. Gee, and the
subsequent affidavits. The doctrines of the Court on
this 'abject were so ably laid down, that it sac too
much to espect he would disturb them after they.fied
been 40 years held in the Court. Those who chose
to do so. must go to the house of Lords ; for certainly
he would not, on any account, by his own authosity
disturb them. The present case had no analogy to
that of Perceval and Phipps, for the Defendant, by
sending back the letters on the 15th of April, there-
by renounced every right to publish them. He would
not go into the question of literary property now, but
would nit-host doubt,• say, be must continue this In-
lenction, for the publication was certainly most its-
proper.—lnjunction contineed.
'fhe Court was crowded to eaten during this dis-
cussion.

---...—.
COURT OF REQUESTS, Sorrowaal, Jeri SC
NEWTON V. SUTTON.
Thw Defendant in this case was Summoned for the
som of 11. Bs. the sum pAd fora gold ring set with
pearls. The Plaintiffisshoproan to eminent linen-
draper, and pays his addresses to a young Lady, who
holds a situation of equal importance in the establiih-
wont of a ,fashionable milliner and dtess.maker, in
addition to which they are each of them votaries of
the drains, .and occsionally fret and strut their hour
1
upon the stage at a private theatre in the rprighbnur-
hood- of.. Bank-ski!. From the statement now glide
by the Plaintiff, it appeared, _that be hiising under-
taken to play Antonio, la the Mere/tan; of Venice,
Iwhilst his Lady cut 'O. sapPoit 'the cbantetdr of
Portia, he determined on taking this opportunity of

.
if -7

• • •4

...

r-

_ _~~-

'presenting her with a handsonte ring. an opportunity
which one of the situations of the:play Afforded bim.
very intimate with the Defendant, who is a
working jeweller, he mentioned in' him his wish to
have each *trinket, and I his friend immediately
volunteered his services to procure him one at prime
cost. The ring in question Ives accordingly provided,
and 11. 81., the price demanded, was paid for it. The
loser waited with impatience the arrital of the period
when be should have the opportunity of carrying his
gallant intention into effect. It wised, and the
proudest moment of his life was that in which he
placed the glittering bauble on the finger of his he.
loved. The Lady, proud of the trophy, neat day
exhibited it to her acquaintance, when, to het' great
mortification, and to the still greater.of the Plaintiff,
to whom she communicated the information she had
gained, she learnt, that instead .of real pearl end
sterling ore, the trinket was. composed of beads of
the commonest description, set in a metal almost
valueless, called jeweller's gold. The Plaintiff im-
mediately applied In the Defendant, remoustrated
with him on his conduct, and demanded his money
back. Rensonstranee and demand were equallislis•
regarded, and the Plaintiff had been obliged to
adopt the present course to obtain justice.
Several jewellers were examined, who stated that
the ling was of the most paltry description ; the
material and workmanship together not being worth
five shillings,
The Defendant contended, that the ring was as
good as things of this description usually were. lie
observed it was a fashionable article, and people must
expect to pay for fashion ; and further added, that
with the large stock which jewellers were obliged to
keep on hand, unless they get a moderately good pro.
fit, they would not be able to live at ail.
The Commissioners decided, that* the Defendant
should return the full sum of 11. Bs. and, pay all
costs of suit.. On doing this, the fashionable article
was restored to.him.

KENT SUMMER ASSIZES.

'At Ant n'clocCen..Monday'the lion. Sir CHARLES
A Becrr,* Knight,one or the 'Judges of the Court of
King's Bench, enlererbliidstone in the usual state,
to open tbe bilsitiess of the Summer Assizes of that
district. The Learned Judge immediately proceeded
to the town church, *hire he heard Divine 'Service,
after which he repaired to the COurt.hoase, *here
the Commission was read in the customary form.
Mr. Serfeant LEgs will aisist in the 'absence of Lord
Chief Justice ELLENB.OeOtIoti, who, from indisposi-
tion, is unable to attend the Circuit:*
The business of thise Assize+ appears to he re-
markably heavy at the criminal side. The Calendar
contains the commitments of 72 prisoner,. among
whom are the following on charges of murder :
William Hazleton. agent 18, committed by A.
Constable. Esq. the Rev.' R. D.'iies, Clerk, E. W.
Forman, Esq. and several other Magistrates, charged
on the oaths of George Martin Bird and others, on
a strong suspiCion of being feloniously concerned,
and a party and accessary to the murder of George
Bird and Mary Simmons, on the 7th February, at
Greenwich, and also in the burglary committed in
the dwelling-house of the said George Bird.
Daniel Fitzgerald, aged 23, committed by the
new. J Jones, on a certain writ of Cabins directed
to the Sheriff of the county of Cork, by Sir William
Cusack Smith, of and conceritiru a certain felony and
murder, whereof the said Daniel Fitzgerald stands
indicted at the prosecution of Daniel Byrne, and
others.—(Removed to Ireland on the 15th July, for
further examination, by order of the Lord Chief
Justice.)
Charles Hassey, aged 25, committed by A. Con-
stable, Esq. (and other Magistrates) charged on the
oaths of George Martin Bird and others, on a strong
suspicion, of wilfully and feloniously killing and
murdering George Bird and Mary Simmons, on the
7th of February, at Greenwich—and also with hav-
ing, in the night of the 7th of February, hurglarioutly
entered the dwelling-house of George Bird, at Green.
wich, and feloniously stolen therefrom several
watches, a silver soup-ladle, a aster strainer, and se-
veral other things, the property of George Bird.
John Hogan, aced 25, Aterander Wardrobe, 27,1
committed by the Rev. S. Watson, D.l). and other
Magistrates, charged on the oaths of Cornelius Craw.
ley and others, on suspicion of the wilful murder of
Francis Lad, upon the high seas, within the juris-
diction of the Admiralty of England.
James Clements, aged- 25, committed by the same
Magistrates, on the oaths of the same persons, on sus-
picion of the wilful murder of John Macardale, on
the high seas, Stc.
Alexander Dewar, aged 38, Christopher hiustead,
29, committed by the same, on suspicinir of the
ful murder of Lochlin M‘Learr, Daniel M'Cormick,
and George Stevenson, on the high seas, &c. ;
also charged on suspicion of the ,wilful murder of
John Macardale... Dewar further charged on suspi-
cion of the wilful murder of Bryan Kelly on the high
seas, &c.
There are also Richard Beeching, aged.so, com-
mitted by the Coroner, charged with feloniously kill-
ing and slaying James Terry, at Teuton ;- lied James
Bell, committed by the same, charged with having fe-
loniously killed and slain Wm. Delman, at Green-
wich, thelth May.
The Calendar further contains a number of charges
for burglary, passing forged notes, &c.

A melancholy circomstance occurred at Carmar-
then, on Saturday se'nnight. Mr. Richard Biker, a
traveller for the respectable house of Sutton and Co ,
Bow Church-yard, London, arrived there en the
above evening faom Swansea, and soon afterwards
went to bathe in the Towy ; he swam aerras the
river, but on his return was seised, it- is supposed,
with a fit of ;he cramp, shout the midst of the atteam,
and sunk instantly. The body wee found at three
o'clock no Sunday morning, and on Monday the
Coroner's Jury returned a verdict of Accidental
Death.
The Duke of Bedford's porter cut his throat yPfe
terdey morning, at his Grace's residence in llama-
tnn.place. lie was taken to St. George's Huspitel
with little hopes of recovery.
DEAL, Jut.tr the. whole of the out.
ward bound) except the Broxbournbury, Oich re-
mains.