The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1842-01-14 00:00:00

THE QUEEN V. THE REV. HENRY CLEVELAND

Mr. Erie (with whom was Mr. W. H. Watson) appeared
on behalf of the Earl of Fitzhardinge, to move for a rule to
show cause why a criminal information should not be filed
against the defendant, the rector of Barkstone, in the county
and diocese of Lincoln, for having written a libellous letter
of and concerning the applicant. The application arose out
of the following circumstances :--On the 13th of August last
the noble applicant was gazetted, according to the gracious
pleasure of the crown, as an earl, and six ether gentlemen
were with him advanced to the peerage. On the 27th of
Augusta letter apps aced in the Morning Herald, signed
" Junius," addressed to the Queen, and beginning with a
statement that the writer had read the announcement in the
Gazelle with pain, as among the persons thus advanced in
the peerage was one whom the writer charged with having
been guilty of a forcible abduction of a young lady from
Clifton, and of having thereby occasioned her de/Ith, and that
of her widowed mother. The letter went on to say, " This
is the person on whom your Majesty, an English lady and an
English mother, has been advised by the persons who sur-
round you to heap the honours of the British peerage." The:.
Earl Fitzhardinge being of opinion, from the circumstance of
the neighbourhood of the place selected as the scene of the
pretended abduction that the letter alluded to him, wrote e
letter to the editor, requiring the name of the author 0.
indigna-
tion libel. The noble earl expressed in strong terms his
tion at the charge which had thus been insinuated, " '
j sth of
was meant to apply to him he offered every facilittenle.
proof of it. The editor published this letter
°n r the
September, and accompanied it with some comments,
de-
claring that he was totally unable to comply
jir was that he
of the noble earl, and asking on what principle it
The noble
assumed to himself the application of the cbitiLse.;
If hut that
with the request
It t: advanced in the
earl wrote to say that he did not apply
he was one of seven peers who had be
near
that these circumstances
Of it. On the 10th
peerage ; that his residence. was
went had been quartered there ; and
application of the charge,
letter, addressed to
. Bristol; that his regi-
might induce others to make. that P
and therefore he pressed again fecreai proof' a
of September the noble earl rbeeer.ng
t the Grantham post-
him at Berkeley Castle, a
in infancy a cold, calculating
mark. The letter in
" My Lord,—Born and bred
crime, and destitute of every
' debauchee, consistent
only dare yt2u to presume so far upon
e being tarnished by the breath of
express virtuous indignation at the
semblance of principieq,nestionres in the following terms
:___.
by your modicum of worldly wisdom
i know you well, and if your urtparallelled
possibility public
forbearance
your faisi , f°B`"
e slander.ffronter y
,Aly lo,lndy,
unrestrained
vilest miscreant that ever breathed. Go
further overt acts, I will hold you up to,
isrly,t;'„er griefs into the sympathising bosoms of
public betray
scornit seolfu i n
(Jed and calumniated Compeers, Lords Mel-
/ dfort, and Palmerston. They will recommend
bourne,
be
quiet,
and rather bear those ills yon have than
you to fly
you to you know not of.
to others tahnods e pour lghient:
t 7 1841. '
99 Sep • 9 . " Pluto Jumics.
The affidavits went on to state that the noble earl believed
that this letter was addressed to him in consequence of his
letter, which had been printed in the Morning Herald. Ple
caused inquiries to be made at Grantham, which after some
time succeeded in discovering to him the writer, who was
found to be the reverend defendant. The noble earl declared
that he had no knowledge of this person, and as to the charge
itself contained in this last letter be could not give it a spe-
cific denial, because it was clothed in such ambiguous terms
as
to prevent any one from declaring to whom it did
posi-
tively refer ; but if the former charge was in this letter in-
tended to be repeated, then he denied in the most positive
terms that there was any foundation whatever for it. The
hand-writing of the author of this letter was distinctly sworn
to, and the identity of the writer established by the Afficlauts.
The Court granted a evils to show taus*.