The Statesman.
London, England, 1818-10-31 00:00:00

•••

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

. • •
•COVIIT OF KING'S. 11F.NCH.'SKILISANTS' INN
HALL, OCT
BULLOCK V. D01)1)4.
This was o demurrer to the proceedings which
alma on to be argued.
the.Plairdiff appeared to be a person who soave
yea-rs_ago was tried at the Old Bailey, on a charge
/ tie was ofter%arda transported to New
spho h. Whirs. In toissoluenee of a Witrfent 0.11101.1
tv th.. Governor, the Plaintiff .received a Weer. to.
ret.i.rn to Bugland for en especial ,porposp; stal.sah.
JINUPItt to his release and pardon, be brought. alt-
utinn to recover the amonot of a bill of eschenge.—
The Defendant, in his p'ea. allegeti.teet the Plate!
tiff was a convict, deprived of his civil rights, aod
incapelile of sustaining so action. 'The replication
"as' that it wet trues the Plaintiff bad been trans.
ported, but his civil rights'were restored, as he was
et large from <a meritorious cause, and under the
sanction of ilusjoin. The rejoinder stated, that the
Plaintiff was .et large Without lawful cause. Thp
demurrer was. founded on several objections, but
ptiagpally that the Plaintiff did not stand iu the
siteatio4 of one who had been pardoned or reprieved,
Recording to the spirit and meaning of the Stb of

George 111.
Mr. M ANNING, in support of the objections, ,con-
tended that the circuntstauce of the Plaintiti's being
sent home by the Governor's licence, and afterwards
pardoned by the Great Seal, was not sufficient to re-
Ittore him to his civil rights. Wain been attainted of
felony, and sentenced to be transported for a term
or yews, his inability to rue in a civil action would
continue until the expiration of the term of histratts-
eortetiun, unless he were pardoned according to the
Statute.
Mr. POLLOCK, for the Plaintiff, contended, that
the, pardon reinstated the Plaintiff in his rights, and
enabled him to defend himself. Where persons un-
der attainder bad brought actions, they had always
teen allowed to sue, unless the Crown interfered.—
By the Bth of George 111,, he was clearly entitled
to the benefit of a free pardon under the Great Seal.
Whether the Court looked to the pleadings or the
Act of Parliament, it was clear, be said, that the
))Isitititi w•a entitled to recover in the action.
Mr. MweistoG was heard in reply.
The Counr, considering this a novel case, took
time for further deliberation: they consequently post-
poned judgment.
A question of some importance to trustees of roads
was discussed and decitlf.d. A county bridge being
in need of repair, atoms was scot f .or the purpose;
end the question was. whether the carts employed in
The conveyance of materials a the said rep4irs, were
liable to pay toll at a turnpike gate near the bridge?
,The Couur held that the county bad no right to
stEade the toll which was taken for att fast, which had
po concern with the bridgstundeurepair.

P. L E.COUST, liWil'EliilLL,Ocr. 30.

..-ter.+...

•
. ,
aatow a: aEvxn+ata.
.'This was sn action-to recover .a enutostaieliee in
"Ifervingtia" fro/1111a Dafendsnt, for hoviog - wilfully
end maliciously defamed the Plaintiff's character.—
The Defetulant pleaded the general issue.
. Mr. ADAMS read the declaration, and
Mr. Mans stated the Plaintiff's case. The Learn.
eta Counsel observed., that the present actinn was in-
Whited, not for . the purpose of recovering heasy
pea aviery damages, but for the sake of clearing the
Plaintiff's repotatioo from a most odious calumny,
.whkh deeply sod Materially affected his interests.— I
The Plaintiff, a respectable ypu:ig, Ins a, under articles
effeleittitiffp to a Gentleman of the Law, was paying ;
hia addressses to a Miss Adams, whose hither is one
of the King's tradesmen, sod sesides in the King's.
'mews, Charing-cross; and the Defendant was• an
Attorney'a clerk alao.r.-The libel, w constituted
the present action, was cetive)ed in a .lecer to 21r.
Adam,, iu the format of June fast, and wet to the
following effect:—" Sir, Fur your. fuforination, I
beg to state, that year dauibier keeps company with
a )(tong man of very bad character ; and should she
'so fortotiate as to e'pouse him, from recent con.
duct, will close her endless misery ; hides
cannot scarcely support
.hitnelt" —` This,' said the
Learnet; Counsel, t is had Er4;iish ;'—" and, into
.the bargaio,• he is a notorious D..tist."=The libel had
the effect of dissolriog a coonesiott of the most tcol.
der nature, for
.it was pet iota the 'beads of-Ve. i
Adams, who, its contequenCei
s refined do jay
!concern with such itc ne;, ,tog- seti thus Ma peace of
mind was. destroyed. end Ida.proapeit of being united
'to the yoti.tg laislyfilaalest. . . .
Mrs. Elizabeth.A4mwstiveted, that• she is the wife
:of I;ii.vts
.41010Ift; of 414.1Poitee-mews. About the
of.bsie ',letter came directed to bar husband,'
whlteli.she trend is 'permed' te-contatw the libel nn
• • •
Ptoio -
irr, w.bn 11!1:011' Inman to'bet;..attt.Paid.
• his addresses to her daeghter. jn coneeqoetice of
her hosband .hatin no eeey bieropinion ofPflr.
Birtow she did not show Mes 114 borer, bit gaielt•
'to her daughter, Jr ho itt Jai), eoclosed yF ceaty.if it.
Sn art etivelope, and. seat it to the Plaintitiforbidditie
him to. visit her any more. . ;
011. her crosatalamination- by•-:•Mr7lfShimen,ltbe
Defendant's Counsel, she admit*, .44.04tiftlibev•
' firs wddressea to -her daughter diat 'not- tette ire Ai
-alactian 10K.Actlitins, anti itnith, salsjtrd
three.eelse!Wmo44ohadb e.tetroliiiiAti* la him.
Mr, Joseph Cronin, an a tiotoey.!o cletkores called
to prove thsi hand-Wiiting of
.iiefelidoof; • oed
-said that he had do doubt but (be letter produced was
written by hire.. .
Miss Matilda Adenti, a handsome young woman,
' aged 19, stated that she sent a letter to Mr. Barlow,
furbitliking hilt. her presence, but it was not in con-
sequence of the libel, for she intended ..previously to
hit'llroppeg• his company, and only waited fur so'
, opportunity te, ten him so.
Cross.examined.—Sbe changed. the date of the
. Otter from June `29th' to July, because the Plain-
,74iffaliould not know aba'had it in her poesessiun so
along without sendiuglap him.
Th .c ruled the Plaintiff's case.
Mr. RE.toatt addressed the Jury on behalf of the
Defendant. Ile Was sure Opp would be told by the high
..et.thority fromiihich the.), wo'nld take the law, that
.a 4 there was no loss .proved, there was at once. an
t- d of the special dama;es.

.• -- JO- _