The Statesman.
London, England, 1818-10-10 00:00:00

VHF) frr rgMA N

GUS' GOlti CIRCUIT, OCT. 5.

et 10 o'clock, the Court 'was opened
'sold Gillies.' Tim cause to be brought before
t Court baring *ached a great deal of interest, the
II was extremely crowded. 'the
.following issue
the tees., in which Thomas Stewart, of Glasgow-
10.1d, is •Pursuer, and Thomas Allen, hanker, is
",dinburgh, and Alexander Wkiri, of Wrest, are
Defenders, was submitted to the Jory
t. Whether a paragraph inserted rot pie Sillth of
1817, in a certain Newspaper, publisbed
nJ eisculaterlin the city of Glasgow, air elsewhere,
Yelled the Belfast News-letter, of which ffie'De-
tenders are the proprietors, and which parseitiph is
hereunto annexed, and particularly set forth had
ieferred to iu the summons, is of and concerning the
"Pursuer; and whether the description of Mr. S. and
Mi. S. of Glasgow, in said paragraph, was. meant
.ud understood to apply to the Pursuer, and_whether
the said paragraph was or is injurious to the character,
credit, or reputation of said Pursuer."
The damages were laid at 30001.
Mr. Jerressr opened the case for the Pursuer, lad
, said that he appeared'- for the purpose of obtaining
reparatiorret the hands of theory for the grievous
injury inflicted en the feelings and reindation of. Mr.
'Stever!. The paregyaph which contained the, libel
wartim:led fidget* Fraud, in capitals. It stated
that .6 singular discovery had lately been made. in
'Glasgow. That a servant of a Mr. S. of that city
bathos heard that a relation had died in Indio. and
left him a cdgsiderable fortune, he applied to his
toaster to assiet him in recovering the money. After
a long delay, his master Informed him, that his ex-
ertions had been_ fruitless, and that there seemed to
be no truth in the report. The libel then went on
to state, that the servant had lately ascertained that
the money left hid been. paid over to Mr. S.-
46 Proper steps," the libel adds, " were then taken
to briug the matter to account, but we are sorry to
add, that our report states there is little probability
of much of the money being recovered, as he
had given a considerable dowry to a daughter, and
lived expensively. The necessary steps of law are,
however, in progress." Mr. Jeffrey dwelt strongly
en the injury which such a statement (acknowledge
Soho false and unfounded) was calculated to do to the
character of a merchant. He theft went over the
history of the case. The present publication was
not the first form in which the calumny had ap-
peared.. An appplication bad been made to the Ma-
gistrates for at exhibition of Mr. Stewart's papers ;
but on the investigation taking place, the absurd al-
legation fell completely to the ground. The character
of a dealer, Mr. Jeffrey observed, was like that of
a woman ; to circulate a libel of the description
which was contained in the Belfast Netts-letter, in
the coffee-room, and among the merchants of Glas-
gow, who hate much connection with Belfast, was
like throwing a firebrand into a pile of combustible
mater. The day in which the Paper arrived in
Glasgow it was so much read and thumbed, that it
was reduced tom tinder, and was more read in one
day than a pious old women's Bible is at the end of
her life time. The libel originated with a person
'whose name is concealed, and the Defroder evaded
firing him up, and therefore they, from choice alone,
were Defenders its the present action. The libel was
evidently of Glasgow or!gin. They refused to give
up the manuscript ; and at first they refused the ju-
risdiction of the Court of Session, but finally they
withdrew this objection, and submitted to the cogni-
sance of the Scottish Court. Allan, the banker, in
Edinburgh, •and M'Kay, the printer, wre only
nominally the Defenders. There is, no doubt, a
person behind them, and that person is, no doubt,
able to stand the issue of the present action ; and
that he will most willingly pay any sum rather then
have his time mined as the author of this atrecioos
libel. Under these circumstances he confidently ex-
pected the Jury to award the whole amount of the
damages asked • for the respectable Proprietors of the
Belfast Nesz;letier are standing the brunt of a
wealthy person.
An eatract from the process lettere the Magistrates
of Glasgow,• and the absolvitor sentence its favour of
Mr. Stewart, was pat in and read ; as was also a
letter from the Solicitors ot Mr. Stewart (Messrs.
King and Campbell), calling on the Defenders for the
statue of the author of the libel.
The publication in the Belfast Newspaper was ad-
mitted.
Several witnesses were called to prove the arrival,
ill Glasgow, of the Belfast News-letter, containing
the paragraph about Mr. Stewart, and the interest
with which it was read.
Mr. B. Carrick, a partner in the Ship Bank,
'where Mr. Stewart discounted bills, had beard the
report. On silting the report in the Newspaper, the
witness told Mr. Stewart that he considered it a
stroke against his credit, advised him to take steps to
clear his character, and in the mean time to lessen
.111ccasaueercial.tratisactietts. After this Mr. Stewart
dir. net do so muck busbies, with We Bank es before.
Some persons who had placed money in Mr. Stewart's
hand, proved that they bad ()mended it in cause-
querns of the story, which had made a great impres-
sion throughout the country.
Mr. MONCRIEFV, for the Defenders, stated, that
Mr. Allan, at the time the paragraph was published,.
was abroad with his wife, whose health rendered.
travelling necessary, and who .died in Italy. it had
been said that the Defenders had refused to give op
author of the paragraph ; but the fact was, that a,
person of the name of Kilbee had firnishetithe iu.
formation ; and the Pursuer was told so. This. piece
of news had been inserted by Mr. liti‘Kay io tlerrou.
sine of business, without his even knowing who was
alluded to ender the initial S. From the paragraph
itself no sue could know to whom it alluded. It weal
only from extrinsic information of the. process that
any person could know to whom it referred. .Wlrtes
the name of the author was 'VOW forily return of
post, Mr. M'Kay repressed his regret,. end states
that it was inserted in the hurry of business fie sat
stated, that in the very first publication, the first op..
portunity in his power, he had published a • peiete4.
contradiction of the paragreph. Thisemple refs's":
Lion be published without betas solicited to do so, and,
this contradiction said that she Vaasgrapit was fain
and groundless.
Severe' witnesses ware celled by tbd Defenders, to
prove the previous ezistence d the• ripest in Gies.
gow, before the publication in the Newsaitter;

.
and that report lad been received 4 gie. -WK.*,
from Mr. Kilbee in the street of Belfast.
Mr. Cocknette replied for the Pursuers. 4•C .
Lord•Gtwea, its mining up, observed, "
1711414
RP in gueativall' . not appear to be a rep
0 legal Proweedie.ov •1 therefore unnecessary
,to go into the law wt igsfiect to the general gees•
lion of the right *f *simper Editors to publish
.11 the Prelfirdiegir.l tie Coins of Law. Mr. Alla*,
'caiild not be acteafed by any ihalicious mbtives'; ind
It is improbable that Mr.. M•Kay could be to ; bet it
does not appear that be did on application at once
give.np the author. Ha is bound to show that the
mumps gave op was that of the calumniator. Da.
mages are doe, not only for actual loss, bet, solatium.
The Defenders do not stand In the place of publish.
era who have given np their author. I think that it
was wholly owing to this paragraph that Mr. Stew.
art was obliged greatly to diminish his business." His
Lordship then went resell
he evidence. The sum
claimed is large, and yoi re not to give vindictive
damagei.
The Jury, retiring for a: tat time, found—Da-
mages) 10001. v ,
'''''''i-----'.--.----'!-4-2"----...--.

P.ALAce-couat Ocr. 9.
BATSMAN v. SRO&
'The Plaintiff in this case was a widow woman, and
owner of a house, the occupier of which had become
considerably in arrear for rent. She in consequence
directed the Defendant, who is a broker, to make a
distress on the premises for a quarter's rent, amount-
ing to 111. 18s. 3d., free of all deductions. The
Defendant proceeded accordingly to make the levy,
and having done so, be waited on the Plaintiff, and
tendered her 81. 125., and receipts for lAnd Tee and
Sewers' Rate paid by the tenant, for 31. 41. 3d. mak-
ing together the amount of the quarter's rent. Mrs.
Bateman refused to receive this sum, and insisted on
the Defendant paying her the full sum which he had,
been instructed to levy, and the Defendant refusing to
do so, she brought the present action. Eight pounds
twelve shillings bad beep paid Into Court by the De-
fendant.
Mr. AGAR, for the Defendant, contended that his
Client had conducted himself in a perfectly legal way;
he was bound to allow the tenant the amount of tases
paid by him. The Act of Parliament provided that
they should, in the firm instance, be paid by the
tenant, and afterwards be deducted frees the rent.
The Learned Judge; on the Act of Parliament
being produced, held that such was the law, unless
there was a specific agreement to the contrary, which
there did not appear to be in the present case. The
Plaintiff not proving any such specific agreement was
Nonsuited.

GREENWOOD MITCHEY.
This was an action to recover I 11. money said to be
doe from the Defendant to the Plaintiff for two chaises.
'lite demand of the Plaintiff was proved. The de-
fenue set up was, that the debt had been Paid by a
bill given by the Defendant, which bill had never
been presented. On the part of the Plaintiff a wit-
ness was celled, who proved tlaat he had loar4be
fttitf
in question. fie was in the service of theVlaintlff,
and had been employed byhis master lobate thebill to
he discounted, when he had the misfortune to lose
The lull was dated the 25th of April, at one meat,'
after date After the bill became due, namely. onl
the 24th of June, the Defendant was waited on, and
a demand made of the amount of the bill. At tMs
time the Ptaintiff offered a bond of indemnity to the
Defendant against any future demand on the bal.—
The Defendant, however, said, he would not pay
unless the bill was produced. It further appeared
that after the acceptance of the bill by the Defendant
the date was altered from the 26th to the 25th of
April. On a subsequent application to the Defend..
ant, he said he would pay the bill on having gond and
sufficient indemnity ; but he would not take the
Plaintiff's indemnity. The Plaintiff now contendeti that
the alterationin the date had so far vitiated the bill,
that nn future demand could be made against tbnDe.
fendant ' ion it

Ant op.. .•
On the part of the Defendant, it was stated, that
the alteration in the date of the bill did not atall affect
the Defendant's liability, inasmuch as it was made
with the coulee tof both parties; and further, that he
hid offered to pay the bill if he had gond and suffi-
cient indemnity : but that be would not accept the
Plaintiff's alone.
After a summing op from the Judge, who o delivered
his opinion, that the bill, notwithstanding the alters•,
lion, which was made with the knowledge of belle:
the parties, was good, and further, that the Defend:
ant's liability would continue for six years; fouod'it
verdict for the Defendant.

!NEJMOUS CONDUCT or 4 WA TCHMA
.......dem..--

MARLOOR9CGII-rtfttltT.—On Friday. font Gentlemen Irene
bron.lit in this'affice..charged by Bonney. a watchman in tas.
Ornbasu-court.road, with assaulting him %kale on duty. He re.
wrserated. that he offered nn provocation to the Gentlemen. two.
being attacked by them, he with difficulty sprung his rain
and secured them. Mr.. Aytto, the first Defendant called upon,: ,
said he resided at 141, Totteolsain-court-no.d ; be had bees. .
spending the evening with some friends; be was returning
home, and seeing a man sleeping, Ivo° the pavement, his head
.aghinat the door, and his heels over the pavement, he observed
to his friends, that some accident might befal him if he continued
' there;
:ant conceiving him to bra watchman on duty, be lifted'.
•ep the inan's foot. and desired him to move; 'wen *bid' the nag&
'rose and strsieb•him "intently on the forehead with* inviestied,!,
and indicted am nand of sit inches in length 4 he alistatrnek Mer
Dean, his companion.land fractured his skull. 'these two Gerd*
aneweshibitesithe marks of the watchman's violence. and called
'II gen, Wallin to substantiate their statement. wkn Mr. Hronkee,
Eubtoniquate stepped forward. He said he had left tbe
reinittemen catitody a minute or two only, they wire per-
-4ltedy weedy, and ant the least i d ; bowing the watch:
mins rattle. he went to the spot a he saw several watchmen
rrike Mr. Ayten, and knock him down with a stick three wor-
m! Hines. Mr. Arlo, Mr. Dean, and Mr. .labnettik of Clank.
Sweet. another of the Gentlemen in casthiy, were eareirsialf
eq the watch-hose. Wigan§ accompanied thin.;
arrived there; the watchmen perceiving that be had only meets
'the transaction, and td' prevent las 'evidence' being received
• livitost him, he too was accused of being concented in the sate..
After some time it was found necessary that medical assistance
should he obtained fur the two-wounded Gentleown.varm they
weve conveyed to the Middlesex hospital, ned were.eampelled
is attend thermic. to answer the watchman's complaint, Mi.
Hants regretted the disastrous treatment the Gentlemen had
Net lyilb,cand repe,,buted in energetic terms the infamies eon-
diet of the watchman ; he sold the. Gentlemen they were dis-
charged, and addressing himself to the watchman, honed. " 1
shall liold you to mail in-answer any cloarge these Gentlemen may
Otter against yota:' The-Orntinnewexpretbed theie tietermilids
ties to prosecute the fellow to the nbaostas