The Statesman.
London, England, 1809-11-10 00:00:00

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.

---- •
IN THE CASE OP KARL LEICESTER V. WALTER' AND
OTHERS, rttorairroas OF THE HORNING HE-
RALD. ,

Mr. Serjeant MA KLEY, on the part of the De-
fendants, moved for a Role to shew cause why the
verdict iu this case should not be act aside, and a
new trial granted. The Learned Serjeant obsed.
,ed, that the 'edict against his ei ts was for one
thousand pounds—a verdict, whtanli, he believed,
under all the circumstances of the •Que, and the
evidence 'adduced,. was totally without precedent.
blever was so strong* case of justification adduced
any Defendant ; nor could he conceive how it
was possible fur a Jury of rational men upon their
oaths to fiod such a verdict for the Noble Plaiu.
tiff ; for althutigh thee might consider themselves
bound to find a vctdtct against his Client, one
shilling w ;is the ntmost that could have been ex.
pected at timir hands. From the evidence cf his
Lordship's own Solicitor, and the testimony given
by several persons nLo well knew the Noble
Lord, it was impossible his character could have
been injured by the paragraph on which the action
was founded ; for the Solicitor acknowledged,
upon repeated interrogation, that it was the ge.
neral repurt of his Lordship's character which in.
duced him to believe the paragraph in question at.
luded to Lord Leicester.
Sir JAMES MANSFIELD admitted the force of the
arguments urged by the Learned Serjeant, and
said, that from what he recollected of tee circuit,.
Winces of the trial, no inconsiderable degree of
surprise had been excited in the Court, at the high
qeantuiii of damages awarded by the Jury. In his
own opinion, it was scarcely possible any ease
coul,l have been more palpauly rebutted; and if
he might venture to suggest a line of conduct for
the Noble Lord and his friends, he should think.
the wiser course for them to take would be to
avoid, if possible, ally further exposure of this
[ case in a public Court, and to remit the damages ;
•for he should regret the necessity imposed on him,
list ease of a new trial, of recapitulating the evi-
-1 dence in the case.

Mr. Serjeant MANLET urged a further ground
for his motion, of which he was not aware at the
time of trill, or he shOuld have then taken notice
r of lt; namely, that one of the Jury was sworn by
a wising name. Ile meant no imputation on either
igiltiry wan, her 13111eir off lbi Ctiu rt ;
the fact of itself was Sufficient ground for a new
trial.
Mr. Justice Ltwulact observed, that his
Learned Brother was mistaken. Indeed, such
objections were sometimes allowed hi criminal
buses, but in none other.
Mr. Serjeaut Bar said, if there was a new trials
he should entertairt no doubt of obtaining for his
'Noble Client a verdict for 20,0001.
Sir JADISSMANPFIELD said he recollected the
evidence fur the Plaintiff, and especially that of
Mr. Mills, his Attorney, who had fenced a good
deal; but ,at last admitted, that the prevalent re.
ports of his Lordship's character induced him to'
believe the pdragraph alluded to his Lordship.
Under such, circumstances, he could not see what
damages the character of. the Noble Lord could
sustain. Ile should be extremely glad, however,
to 'hear no more of the lnatter ; but lest his advice
should.be rejected, he should grant the rule.

Letters have been receivock Isom Sweden to the
3d inst, A report prevailed at Gotteuhurgh, on
the authority of communications from Stock-
ham, that the four principal powers of the Mi-
lk,. Russia, Sweden, Denntaik and Prus.si.i, mold
conic to a determination to close that sew•sgaittbt
ithishipping or eitry other nation, with the ex-
ception of the Ffench.