The Statesman.
London, England, 1823-07-07 00:00:00

COURT OF KING'S BENCH..-.SITURPAT.

MAY V. BERTRAND.—This was an action by the late
Vestry Clerk of St. Matthew's, Bethnal-green, for a libel
published of and concerning his conduct in that office, by
the defendant. In its circumstances this case was similar
to that tried yesterday against a Mr. Brown, in which
the plaintiff recovered 1001. damages. On both sides it
was ndw-egreed that the defendant in'this action should
submit to a verdict against him for nominal damages,
which should carry costs. A verdict was accordingly en-
tered far plaintiff—Datnays, 40s.
MK KING V. FREDERICK CURSTRADI MORTLOCKE.
This was an indictment for perjury, assigned upon an
answer to a hill in the Exchequer; filed by a Mr. John
Eirlcby, againit the defendant and two other persons,
'gamed 'slofitt Mortlocke,andJohn Cheethaus Mort lecke.
Theileigoments of perjury were, first, That the defendants
bad faliely sworn that person named Docra eras not the
agent of himself and partners ; and second, that after the
decease of Doers, he did not carry on the business of a
coachenaster on behalf of the widow of the latter.
Mr. GURNEY (with vshcint. ass Mr. Walford) stated the
case for the prosecution,. The defendant bad been part-
ner in a banking-firm. ateambridge; and, having retired
from business for some years, now lived in the county of
Rutland. • The prosecutor, Mr. Kirkby, bad been a re-
.spectable fartner in the county of Cambridge, and
occupied about one thousand acres of land of his
own. The transaction which gave rise to this prose-
cution took place in the year 1815. TO account for the
lateness of this prosecution, after ep long a lapse of time,
it wets only necessary to observe, that since then, Mr. ,1
Kirkby had been in ulfficulties, and was not able to pos-,
sess biassed( of the necessary documents until last yeas.
The case he had to lay heroic the Jury was in substance
this :—Mr. Docra, who had carried on business as a cat, le
dealer, &was also a coach proprietor at St Ives,being desirous
of becoming agent of the Cambridge bank,of which thede-
fendavit was a member, applied to the house io 1814, and
they said they had no objection, provided be could give
security for such money as they• should entrust in his
hands as their agent at St. Ives. Mr. Docra accordinglyapplied to Mr: Kirkby, who then lived at March, in tae
tale of Ely, and to several other respectable farmers, who
agreed to become his iaretlits, W the extent of um.,
and a surety-660d to that Ito Pointed notion,
cuted. Notes to ,the amoupt.o)-1901K. tr‘re transmitted
to Deere al St. Ives, urfsero be apl4ased to 011ie world
as agent, and acted ae sapb, • rot m 4 on bohalf. of the de-
fendant. la the.beginniartif Docra.fell into diffi-
culties, std•diedscOnaitterabli in debt to the defendant's
house. 'The defeildhat 'andertook-ltrinnelge ikera'•.

- -
coach -business. for the widow's benefit, and also with a
view ro pay orthe debt which Ise had incoreed,snd lava
harmless his suedes.. In the mean time appliearito, wok
mate to the imeeties..who each paid the 'defendant
house the sum of 3081. ,their,rateable proportion, accort4...
int to the extent of theie Gability. Application was also
made to Mr.Kirkhv.the prosecutor, who gave the defend-
ants' house hie bill of exchange to the anfount of 5004
which included a sum of 21101. which be owed theta on a
!sinking acount. When this bill became due it was not
paid, and Mr. Kirkby being seed upon it, the defendant
and big partners obtained judgment. In order to preve. t
I their suing out execution, Me. Kirkby filed a bill of it -
•junction in the Court of Excherpor. suggesting that the
defendant and his partners had funds in their hands or
Doers sufficient to discharge the amount of the te-write.
,That hill was however dismissed, and Mr. Kirkby, after
receiving some indulgence from the firm, was ultimately
.compelled to pay the money. The defendant. in his an-
swer to the bill filed in the Exrhequer. had steed. that.
I'Ducra had never acted air agent for Messrs. Mortlake,
and that be, the defendant, had oot carried on Decries
coach business for the benefit of his widow; Whereat in
tenth and in fact (esdlie indictment charged) both slat, -
ments were false. The question for the Jury was. whe-
ther these statements hat been male %%Wally. -If they
were, they were hound to find the defendant guilty: hot
if they entertained any doubt upon the subject, they
ought to give the defendant, in so serious a case; the be-
nefit of it sill acquit him.
' Mr. Kirkby. and I other witnesses, were then.
called,•and proved the facts of the case in substance, as
they were opened.
ScaturrT, for the defendant, submittel, that upon;
the/production of the book of accounts, it woula appear
there was neither an agency nor a fraud.
Mr. Itobinson was called, and Ise identified the ac-
count produced in the'ledger as being that beta's° the
parties.
The LORD Crate JUSTICE, afiee examining the eel
count, submitted to the Counsel for the prosezutioi,,,
• be:her they could sustain so serious a charge upsn thin
evidence. He admitted that greet irregularity was appa-
rent on the Itee cf the accounts; hut there tees nothing
snfficiently strong, in his opinion. 'o establish an agency,
or to support the indictment.
Mr. GURNEY, after a few'remarks upon the irrega'tr
complexion, to say the least of it, of the case, soh: n t-
ted to the opinion of the C.mrt, and the Jury immediate-
ly found the defendant --Iyor ttoihe.