The Statesman.
London, England, 1818-08-12 00:00:00

PA RTNERSH I PS DISCOLVF D.

J. Moser, W. Edwards. and W. Wharton. Manchester,iron-
founders—J., J. B . and A. K nworthy, and M.. 11.. and S.
E. Buckley, Carbrook-in-Stayley, t heshire, roller-tankers—
W. Gibbons. sets. Liverpool, and W. 'Madrell. Isle of Mae,
fish-curers—J. llul►hert and J. H. Miller, lslingt n, mop yarn-
manufacturers—J. Hulford and C. Bache. West Bromwich,
Stittro.dshire. iron.masters—R Eon and B. Hewitt-IMT,
Derbyshire, hosiers -.1. Langton and .1. Bretherion, Prr on,
laneu•hire. aitiornies—J Gleave, Ni•essoii, and .1. tarter,
Mere, Cheshire, malts er•—d. and C. Raven. and R. Lloyd,
Loudon, warehousemen.

ALLEGh:D LIBEL.

CORNWALL ASSIZES, 400. 4.
THE KING V. MARY ANN TnCKER.

[We gave in our Paper of Saturday last, a brief
Report of this interesting trial for en alleged Libel.
The case in itself is so important, the abuses animad-
verted upon so flagrant, the liberty in qoestion so
necessary to the Public, and the speech of the Lady,
who so nobly acted the patriot's part, so able 4nd '
valuable, that we deem it necessary to subjoin a
fuller account of it. We likewise mention with
pleasure the names of the respectable Jury, elm on
this occasion so honourably Maintained the privileges
of British iebjects, and the character of English Ju-
rymen.]
The following Jury were sworn :
Thomas Trrluvr, Jame.: hlirhell. Richard Arthur. Nahnth
Randall, I' .rnard Ruttier. Henry Collier. .l•tlin Wilton John
Steven-, John Evans, Edward Blake. Buddy linty, and John
'Choi:.

The Counsel for the prosecution having stated
that this was their case, the Defendant rose to ad-
dress the Jury, whic' she OA wish much force and
animation, from a Dauer wlich she held in her hand.
She said, her appratat.ce there that day arose nei-
ther from levity not presumption, but from a melon-
choly'netessity —it was her inability to fee Counsel
that forced her no her own defence ; and that ina-
Wily was occasioned by a heavy debt due from her
:oros,cotor to her brother, the payment of which he
'ad hitherto avoided by secreting himself. Even the
inavoidable PX pence:. attendant on this prosecution
rl greatly injured her family ; and she did whet
nth principle and feeling dictated in not farther en-
•-, oactiing• on the comforts of a widowed parent, by
thus defending herself in an action which might have
been cauard by indiscretion, but had no part of its
origin in crime. She threw herself upon the indul-,
Onee of the Court. nod hoped any irrelevant matter
she might bring forward would be attributed to ig-
norance and not to intention. She came before
them wholly ignorant of the rqnivocstions of law,
unpractised in the arrangement of argument, and
th.stitute of the graces of oratory ; possessing only
the rude weapons of reason, sod the untutored dip-
quorice of nature, to oppose tried talents and pro-
fessional skill She was not qualified to discuss the
question but on the ground of moral tight and wrong,
and on this it must finally rest. The indictment
charged her with publishing, from malicious motives,
a false and injurious statement of the conduct of Mr.
Richard Gurney, whilst Vice-Warden of Devon.—
Every part of the statement she had made, she was
prepared to prove ; as well as to repel the imputation
of malice. She should state* passage from Lorrl• Ellen-
borough's Charge to the Jury on the trial of Cobbett
fora libel on the Administration. His Lordship said—
" It has been observed, that it is the right of every
British subject to exhibit the folly and imbecility of
the Members of the Government. But we must con-
fine ourselves within limits :—if, by so doing. indi-
vidual feelings are violated, there the Fine of inter-
diction begins, and this offence becomes the subject
of penal visitation." On this it had been well ob-
served :—" How can the Members of Government
be blamed without an injury to their feelings ?"-Ale
who undertook to act in a public capaCity, made
himself, in some sort, public property; and had no
right to complain of any personal inconvenience,
arising from a fair comment on his conduct in the
execution of his duty. The Prosecutor held a pub-
lic office, and was responsible for the due perform-
ance of its duties. The letter for which she was in-
dicted treated only of his misconduct in his official
capacity; and she was able to prove that all the
charges are incontrovertible.—Here his Lordship in-
terposed, and said: I cannot allow you to make
these statements ; what had you to do with exposing
his bribery and corruption ? Why did you not state
these facts to the Attoniez•Geaeral ?--_ Toil' CSIIRQL

I_

iv•urcugnil 4, pm balsam', • wa arm ws• metstras,o•
•
•
. - •