The Statesman.
London, England, 1810-07-06 00:00:00

'iiii ' SI AI'FSMAH.

■~~

-_-~„

7-ur

and other means pf.foree, said to ho used iii'driw.
ing out the youst men of France," and who has
not cited these ail affording a complete " proof
that the people of France hate Napoleon and his
Government, assist with reluctance in his wars,
and would fain see another Revolution." Should
it be suffered that the lawless libeller should tell
the inhabitants of this country that 'they were
pressed into the ranks of our army with more sc.
verity than that which was exercised by the iron
baud of oppression employed by the Ruler of
France? There was, larked, a degree of delicacy
perceptible in the present publication, but it was
delicacy only for the enemies of this country. The
author, after alluding to the means which Bona-
parte employs in filling up the ranks of his army,
correct, himself, and represents them not as acts
practised, • but said to be practised, by Bona-
parte, in accotnplishing this object—" The means
which Napoleon employs (or rather which they
say he employs) in order to get together and to
discipline his conscripts." And who were these
whom he thus marks out as the • theN whom he
thus taunts as with the term of the greatest re-
proach—' the loyal?' a term. which ought to en.
suro respect and regard, as embracing the first
duty of subjects in a well-regulated State toe Ards
their Sovereign. This was the character of the
libel which the Di fen:taut, Mr. Colsbett, was
n.tw called on to answer for. if this was the
character of the libel, which, he presumed to think,
could not be denied, their Lordships would rea-
dily see the tendency of such a publication,
and they would easily estimate what the conse-
quences would have been if the publication bad
produced the effects which it Was calculated to have
produced. What if the solstitial' had -caught the
spirit of dissatisfaction andidisgust, which was thus
suggested for their adoption ? What if the dame.
thus sought to be kindled thronghout the whole.
kingdom had been lighted up? The consequences
were too fatal even to be pointed at. It would hive
gone to break up every thing that was estimable in
societ:..—it would have gone to the destruction of
civillo :ion and good government in the country. It
might be said by the Defendant that the publication
in question had no such tendency, and that these
effects had not been produced. That- it had not
the tendency contended for, he (the Attorney-Ge-
neral) denied; though he admitted that, happily, it
had not produced the effects which it was taleu.
lated to produce. .That the publication in ques-
tion had not produced the effects which (night
have been expected from it, we owed to the love
of the subjects of this country towards their So-
vereign and the established Govertoneet. IWe
owed no thanks, on this head, to Mr. Cobbett.
It became, however, the • duty of that Court to
prevent and gnard against the recurrence of such
libels in time coming. Mr. Cobbett himself had
taught the Court what the • consequences of
passing by such publications with impunity
would be. He had told the Court that other li-
bellers had been passed by, and argued upon that
- as a grohnd for his own impunity. If he were to-day
to be passed by, or to be visited with a light pu-
nishment, would not this, to-morrow, be ad-
duced as a precedent in favour of other libel-
lers? Would they not be entitled to say, " If I,
by libelling, be enabled to make a fortune, and to
amass wealth, when, in return, I will only have to
sustain so slight a punishment a s that passed on
Mr. Cobbett, will I not cheerful y incur the pe.
nalty ?" If the Court should no w visit Mr. Cob-
Lett with a slight punishment, could they answer for
it that their arm would be strong enough, uext
year, to check the evil to which he (the Attorney-
General) contended they were called on to give
a vital blow this day ? It now lay in the Court
to indict on the Defendant, Mr. Cobbett, a
just and wholesome punishment, adequate to his
offence. They had had before them libellers on
the private character of individuals; such they
had esteemed proper objects of punishment ; and
the punishments so inflicted would tend to died-
.
nish the frequency of the offence, if not to pre-
vent it entirely. They had had before them those
even who had been guilty of libelling the Adminis-
tration of justice in the country. That was a
high offence, because it tended to take from the
credit and authority due to the judgments of the
Courts of Law, and tended to make them less
effect. Such offences, and justly teo, -were visit-
ed with a severe chastisement. But, if that
offence, great as it was, were to be compared with
that now under consideration, it must sink into
utter insignificance. The present libel went. to
subvert society itself; and, whatever might be
thought of the atrocity of others Which itad pre-
ceded it, the present was one of a much darker
and blacker hue. The Court were therefore
called on to inflict such a punishment as should,
at least, make men pause before they em.
barked in libels similar to that published by
the Defendant, Mr. Cobbett. The army,
against whom this libel was in a peculiar man-
ner directed, called on the Court for justice
against its traducer. 'rho Government ..called
on -them for confirmation of its legal powers ; fur
what Government could possibly exist if it were
not protected against such attacks as thFse ? the
country, which looked with. horror:on the mis.
. chievous tendency of the hhol Myr,. ander cool&
deration, Called on them foroprotection -against the 1
numerous evils Which the prOpagation of such pub-
lications was calculated to engender, going, as they
did, to the total subversion of social order, and to
the existence of this country as a-nation. Being
once brought before the Court, they (the public)
knew that they might have confidence in their prp.
tectiun, and that they would no longer have occa-
sion to dread a repetition of such outrageous in..
suit. He called on the Court, therefore, for judg-
ment on the Defendant. lie called fur justice;
and that justice, he knew, would be tempered
wilt mercy ; but he trusted, that the Court would.'
not forget that mercy was' equally due to theFub.
lic as to db. Defendant at the bar.
Mr. fi nitow, on the same side, deemed it gone-
ce aary fur him to say a single word.
The Court, after consulting for a few minutes,
ordered the four Defendants to be committed to the
custody of the Marshal of the Marshalsea of the
Court, and to be brought up again on Monday
meal.

-•.-~

z

COURT OF COMMON. FLlthil, slime 6.
YOUNGER V. RivarT.
This was an action of trespass to recover spe-
cial damages, for losses sustained in consequence
of the Defendant's retaining peasession of certain
premises let to him by the tenant of the Plaintiff,
heyond theistipulated term for which the said pre-
mises were so let. •
Mr. Serjeant BEST, for the Plaintiff, stated,
that his client was tenant ro the father of the De-
fendant, and rented certain premises, for which
he held a lease of ten years. The said lease coo.
taining a covenant, by which it was agreed, that
if, at the expiration of ten years, the lessor did not
renew the said lease, for a further term of ten
years, he should -pay the lessee one half of such
expenses as•he might have incurred by building or
other improvements on the premises ; provided,
at the termination of the lease, he was• in posses-
sion of the said premise.. Thd Plaintiff had been
at very considerable expense in building and he-
-1 proventents, the whole amounting to 4001.; but
from some reriou, was induced four years preri.
ous to (Ise expiration of his lease, to let the pre.
05(.8 to a person named Waller, upon a special
agreement, that he should be allowed to retake
possession thereof ten days before the stipulated
nullifier of years for which ho held the lease should
he complete. Waller afterwards became a bank.
rupt, and the present Defendant; at the Sheriff's
sale, purchased the agreement entered into be.
tweet' Waller and the Plaintiff, and in virtue
thereof took possession of the premises, which he
held for a term rather better than two years, regu.
larly paying his rent. On the Plaiti•ilf, however,
demanding possession of his premises, at the time
appointed in the agreement, the Defendant refused
, to. admit him. 'elm lease held by the: Plaintiff,
therefore, expired without his being in possession,
' and be was its consequence deprived of'-the advan.
Ages of the covenant. This loss having accrued
_through the tonduot of the Defendant, he brought
his action to recover 2001. the sum which he was
entitled to receive had he not been so fraudulent.
ly prevented from entering, in pureuance of the
agreement. It was evideut, from the tenor of
the wholeconduct of the Defendant, that his prin.
ciPal object in first purchasing the premises, was
to trick the Plaintiff out of his eventual right.
Sir J. MANSFIELD observed, that an action of
trespass could loot be maintained in this case, inas-
much as the Defendant was in lawful possession.
Be advised, however, that the action should be
brought on the terms of the covenant, as the for-
cible exclusion of the Plaintiff frdrn the premises
was no ground sor concluding, that the possession
.crag not bona fide his right.
lIERBERT V. COLLETT.
This was an action to tecover 371. 10s. the
amount of money due by the Defendant to the
Plaintiff, for the Mee 4 a (Mid,- the spurious eir_
spring of the Defendant. 'Matt-eras agreed upon
fur the support of the child witte,-ss. per week,
which the Defendant negleciete to pay from the
14th of A !Test, 1805; tti• this 30th of May,
Mb ; and finally forced the.4llaintitr to bring the
present action. ' ' - • .
Mr. Charles Hamilton, the attorney 'of the.
Plaintiff, proved the acknowledginant or the debt
by the Defendant ; but said he had not presented
the account to the Plaintiff; fearful of its reach.
trig the view of 'his wife. In .ausne‘ to a, qui:s-
tints pot- by Mr. Serjeatit Beat, at the suggestion
of the Defendant's Attorney, he denied being
himself the father, of the child—no very impro.
bible answer, as he appeared to be nearly seventy
~ • •
years of age.
Mr. Serjeatit SIIYIPIIYRO" observed, if the wit.
ness was not the father of the child. iii question,
liewas at least the parent of another bantling ;
he meant the action before the Court, which he,
Mr. Serjeant Shepherd, had the pleasure of nars-
ing, and which he was happy to, find was a fine
promising infant.
Much mirth was excited by the allusion, and
the Jury returned a verdict fur the Plaintiff, with-
out a moment's hesitation.
BRIDGES V. BERRY.
Mr. Serjcant VAUGHAN stated this to be an
action on a hill of exabange for 1191. accepted
[by the Defendant, and drawn on him by a person
lamed Box. lie would prove the hand-writing of
the Defendant, and trusted he should be entitle
to a verdict.
Mr.Serjettnt SUEPRERD, fur the Defendant, con.
tended, that there were no jest grounds whatever
fur this action ; and, in support of his assertion,
stated, that the bill for which the action was
:brought, had long since been paid. He admitted
that the Defendant had passed such a bill to the
Plaintiff, which became duo, and was not honour.
ed. -In order to pay that, however, the Defers.
dant took to the Plaintiff another bill, drawn by
him, and accepted by a man named Ivory, which
was received by the Plaintiff in liquidation of the
' former -bill. The amount of the latter bill was
1171. 1 ts. 2d. and the dirket:lice between that sum
•and 1191. was paid in oak: The Defendant heard
ho more of Ivory's hill until the 20th of January,.
;ii month after it became dee, when he was arrested
for the amount, efid.orcourse refused to pay it,
from the. Plain tiff having neglected to give him
that legal notice of its urat.paymeiteby which lie
'might .have taken steps to recover -the sum. The
Plaintiff then finding that he had forfeited his claim
to•the latter bill by his inch neglect, most unjusti-
fiably and unwarrantably brought his actinu on the
original' bill of thet_Detendatit, -aike lie bad int-
properly detained in his pOssession.
In answer-to this statement, it was contended
for the Plabitiff, that the original bill was detained
as a collateral security, and the wisdom of such a
measure was proved from thecircumstalice uf Itory
shortly afterwards becoming a bankrupt.
The Learned Judge was of opinion, that the
original bill should have been given up to the 1),!..
feudaut, and that the Plaintiff should be liable to
any loss which was attributable to his own neglect,
in not giving the necessary information to the De.
t "ant of the non-payment of the bill. lie re.
rved the point, however, for further defibera.
on ; and a verdict was taken for the pl.iintiff,
abject to a ituusuit on the opinion of the lodge
leing knowp. .

--,-:

w

-..--r .-

COUNT it Y MdRICETS.-77

At last Haddington Market, Wheat, sold ked-
vily, prices about Is. per boll cheaper. .Elarley,
about is. 6d. per boll deafer, best,36s,mrient_
prices 27s to 315.; Oats niuch the same as tight
week, hest 31s. current prices 2'2s. to oa.; r.,,_
_CMG
and Beans about Qs. per boll cheaper, test $Ol.
current prices 2'ls. to 275. 6d. 'ThereWo rit 894
bolls of Wheat in the market, wherec4 .76 sold.
at prices from 30s. to 51s. per boll.-Averege
425. 2.12 d. per boll. .
Trinity Fair, Dundee, was held last week.-
Hogs and Lambs suet a ready sale ; Ewes and
Wethers were not so much in demand. The show
of Cattle, though matte) very great as on the last
two years, was considerable. .Tbe excessive
drought, and purchasers standing aloof in expec-
tation of a reduction of 'prices, made the market
dull the first part of the day ; but towards after-
noon a general sale on good terms was effected.
'Horses sold well, prices very high.
t At Southall Cattle Market, near Uxbridge,
Middlesex, oti Wednesday, June V, theca were.
1128 Beasts ; 2,830 Sheep, 1650 Lambs and .74
Pigs. The price of beef was from 4s. 84.. to
ss. 6d. ; mutton 4s. to ss. 10d. ; lamb 55. 6d. to
17s. ; and pork ss. 10d. to 7s. J. Per stone, sink.
Ling affals.
At Cambridge Horse Fair, the 'shim was very
inconsiderable, and but few buyers ; must of the
inferior kind remain unsold.
Coventry Fair was well supplied with cattle,
which sold at, reduced prices. A large show of
sheep, and prices something lower than at the
neighbouring fairs. A great fair of horses, which
appear to be falling in price.
• Boston Market, on June 27, was• but thinly
supplied with samples of Grain ; Wheal has fallen
in price 4s. or 51. per quarter. The Oat trade is
brisk, and good samples in advance 2s. or 31. per
•
quarter, and sold as follow : Wheat 98s. to 1095.
prime samples as high as 112 s. ; Oats from 20s. to
28s. per quarter.
BURY. June 29.-We had a pretty good sup-
ply of Wheat at market this week, whirls sold for
rather more money than last week. Barleys are
scarce, and,sell fur moremoney. In other Grain
and Flour Ile alteritlion.
iA li ENII A 31, JUNE 28.-We had scarce any bu-
siness done at our mat ket this day ; we had a few
samples of wheat, which went off; heavily at lot
week's prices. No business in the barley trade.
At Corpus Clsiisti Fair, held at Stamford, on
Monday, fat Stock sold readily at good prices.
The dryness of.the season prevented- a quick sale
of lean cattle; many Scotch and. Irish beasts re-
mained unsold in the evening. •
Lame, JUNE 26.-We had a very small market
to-day. Wheat add Barley, of . prod qualify,
fully.snaintain our last quotations. Oatsare much
in demand, anti dearer 3s. per quarter. We no-
tice no alteration in any other description of grant.
Particulars as follow :L.Wheat, best, 1084. to
110 s.; ditto, second, 89s. to 945.; Barley, 41s. to
42t. ; Oats, best, 30s. to 355. ; ditto, second, 20$.
to 2p..; and Beans, 505:•-to 5.15. per. quarter.
:Einevtoikr, pos. ta 925. per sack.
• Vitiattou, Jules,: 30.-We have scarcely any
thing doing in our Corn Mar :.et this day ; A Sew
large lots of Oats were saved, but the late rains
caused a'great dullness in the buyers. %Vlseats
Were a trifle lower. Oats at no. variation. Beans
none at market.
WA ILETIELD, Jeer 29.-We had a pretty good
supply of Wheat for this day's market by our
farmers, as well as a tolerable supply up the river;
having but few buyers, caused a heavy sale in fine
samples, at full Is. per quarter cheaper ; other
sorts are scarce saleable. Fine Malts were in de-
mand, and about Is. per load dearer. Oats plen-
tirsol, and from Is. to 25. per quarter higher. in
Beans but little alteration in price.
At Ipswich -Market, on the 30th of June, there
was a-middling supply of Wheat, and a short sup-
ply of all other Grain. Barley and Beans may
each be noted Is. per quarter dearer; in other
articles little alteration from last week's currency.
Prices as follow : -Wheat Os. to 120 s. ; Barley,
37.4. to 495. ; Beans, 435. to 495.; Grey Peat,
44c. to 48s. ; Boiling Peas) .605.; and Oats, 261.
,i Li, 30s. per quarter.
led

THE 11 R V E.Sl'.
EXTRACTS PROM PROVINCIAL PAPERS.
During the present
_%eek we have experienced
in this neighbourhood very plentiful showers,
and yesterday and this day se►eral hours of steady
raia, which cannot fail to have the most beneficial
effect on the hay:harvest, the, adiaticiug CrOK of
corn, and on vegetation in general. Iti conse.
(pence of the large 'WA of °allay on hand, and
the seasonable rain, the price of that article must
be considerably reduced in price.—( Bath Chro.
nicle.)

.4..
The wheat crops, we have the authority of an
experieweed Agriimittirist fur stating, have now,
with the exception of a few districts, .a very pro.
raising appearance. In Norfolk, Suffolk, Essex,
and part of Hertfordshire, a fell average produce
may be reasonably expected ; and in Keut, and
the Weald of this county, the plants have stocked
wonderfully, and promise well. Harley has seldom
looked better; and the late genial showers have
much improved the appearance of oats, anti
creased the backward hay crops. The hay al.
ready carried has proved verii light ; but it has
been got up well, and at trilling espence ; and
the after.grass will probably pinta abundant.—
( Leave Journal.) _

A shocking murder was committed on the per-
son of Mr. baac Prows, a farmer, at Ball's
Hundred, near' hepstowe, Soinersetshire, on Sun-
day night lasi; by two rubbers, who indexed the
house at midnight, rani alarmed Mr. P. and his
wife in bet!. They demanded to know where any'
property wild be found, and on being informed
there was none in the house, one of the villains
stabbed Mr. P. and then racked the house of plate
and other, articles, and ilicans,:ped. A labourer is io
custody on suspicion of the murtler. Mrs. 1)..16;
nut expected to survive the shuck.