The Statesman.
London, England, 1822-07-29 00:00:00

ASSIZE I.4I77ILLIGENCII.
YORK, TI3IIIIIOAT, JUL: 25. •

KIN* 0. nROOK AND 011111111.••••LIIIImp
was as indictment preferred spine Mr. JAB
solieiiev, eT the city of York, and sena abet
dikodsofs, proprietors and seeing mangers of •
wieldy mi.-tripper, called the " Yorkshire Duette,"
is that city, for a lihel upon Mr. W. Haw'
t edit" of the" York Herald." The seder►
log owe of the defendants, the pan ..1 for Disc
retarded by the high-sheriff is penes. Tai'
Jurors were in attendant, sad the two genies
complete the Jury were returned from the Orin*
The Ifni which formed the subject of this prone
was published so long ago Bathe 18th ofoel.lBlllll
'edietment was preferred at the July SeatisaNieg
of York, 1821. This prosecution woad preof
never have been Instituted, bad not as iodine
been preferred against Mr. Hargrove, fur a libel
some of the present defendants, of which he wail
a and fined fit
. DEOUGOAD addressed the Jury is support of the
prosecution in a very able speech. the object of which
was to establish the principle, that the Editor of a
Newspaper eras entitled to the same protection for his
character, sad- the same redress when it was traduced,
other individual; and the Learned Comet
ty ins:sted that the refusal of this protection
ban the effect of degrading the press, sad of
.ly throwing it entirely lido the hands of base
incipled awn. The libel in question was con-
.. a letter addressed to the editor of the " York-
Oasette," tad consisted of strictures on al aril-
deb bad appeared the preceding week In the
Herald," upon the proceedings at Manchester,
:is the editor of the " Herald" contended that
'Mk had a right to form and express their *pi-
llion that procedure on the 16th of August,
• waiting until it bad been investigated in a
Justice. The letter charged as libelloas eon.
quotation of considerable length from the pa-
s which formed the subject of its animadversion
licit oar limits will sot permit us to teas-
, The following is the passage which formed
'abject of the prosectitioa :—" Combating the opi-
,son that the Magistrate at Manchester should an be
condemned until their ease has been regularly beard.
'ee man of 'York, in his last week's vehicleof falsehood
fiction, thus scoffs at that hitherto boasted bulwark
- liberty, the trial by Jury." The whole ;4 the
'ter, including the quotation from the " York
' was read by the Clerk of the Court. These-
, proof having been riven that the defendants
were.proprietors of the .* Yorkshire Casette" evidence
- given to prove the insendoes, as they are called,
" man of York" end " the instant deer
meant Mr. Wm. Hargrove, the editor of the
Herald."
Sea addressed the Jury on behalf of the
defendants. The serious part of his argument was
this—that the strictures which- bad been made Upon
termer, in his editorial capacity, were not cal-
' to injure his character; that it was a species
oreeeology adopted by newsparer writers • and
t the expression. " treasonable", and " factions,"
es used by Ahem, meant so more, if applied by a
sisterial writer to one of opposite selstieseate, has
was an oppessitiee man. And if newspaper
, instead of writing against each other, as was
generally the present comsneodabk practice. were to
each other for libels, the whole time of
ofJ ustke would be occupied with their quarrels.
following are the names of the defending
. J. Brook, J. Grey. Daniel Take, J.l). Tweedy,
_Jbwith, Hewley Graham, James Russel. and J.
olstenholme.
"he Cuter JUISTICI, in charging the Jury, said it was
'sbtedly true that the editor of • newspaper bad the
right to have his character protected by the law as
other individual ; but he observed, that when a per-
•hlished his sentiments on any subject., be laid
open to reasonable and mod criticism; and
Oil be fur the Jury to determine whether in the
• case the publication complained of went beyond
writer attacks another by slander and calumny,
amenable to the law, which will not tot it. If
e Jury should be of opinion that the publication in
tnestion was confined within the bounds of reasonable
Id fair animadversion, they would find a verdict for
defendants: if they were of opinion that it was sisa-
ls sod calumnious. they ought to return a verdict
.ty under this indictment. His Lordship stated,
the evidence did not apply to either Mr. Tweedy.
Askwith, or Mr. Graham, who most at all events
tonitted. The Jury retired for about half an hour;
their return into court, found all the defendant.
eiUg.
CROWN COURT:FILIDAT, JOAN.
laslass Hodgson, of &holes, in the parish of Birstall,
'carded by an indictment with wilful and corrupt
5, in a deposition made before Thomas Horton,
tno of the Justices of the Peace of the West Riding.
hick Ise charged Robert Sellers with the commits-
of an unnatural crime with Joshua Hodgson, the
of the and for which offence R. Sellers
tied at the last assizes, when the perjury of the prie
was so apparent that he was committed to the
by the Court.
evidence in this easels so involved in the horrid
, which was charged against Sellert, that it is im-
ible to enter into any details of it without an offence
int public decorum. The prisoner was the nephew
heir at law of Joshua Hodgson of Scholes, who died
se latter end of December. leaving by will the greater
of his property to Robert Sellers, and leaving no
t of it to the prisoner, which was the probable motive
this act of diabolical revenge. The crime was stated
have been committed on the 6th of Dec.' and to have
en seen by himself and his son ; and the first Womb-
\ given of it was on the 13th of January. after the
,1 and f I of his uncle, and when the contents of
sill was known to the prisoner. The falsehood of
deposition in ide by the prisoner was made out by •
t variety of evidence, both positive and circuinstam
one saiking feature of which was, that the O-
f, on tile 16th of January, made a deposition, coa-
ts-sing, in the most important and essential partici'.
the statement he had made upon oath cm the pre.
..sz day.
The prisoner was defended by Mr. POLLOCK, who
•tglv insisted upon the Circumstance, that in the year
I, llobert Sellers was charged before Mr. Stuck',
a similar offence, in connexion with the same per-
which was somehow Compromised; and the Learn-
counsel insisted, that a person who had sat down
mder the imputation was utterly unworthy of credit,
migl.t be supposed capable of comtuitting the crime
sich had been imputed to him. The evidence of the
rgeon, who evinced great ignorance upon the subject,
se commented upon with great severity.
.I'he Learned Judge. in charging the Jury, made
every observation in favour of the prisoner WWI could

•;41

`4l

k~~

THE ST,

possibly Rise out of the cue. The Jury retired ti
consider AC their verdict, and after iemaming oat of
Court for a quarter of no hour, they returned with a
verdict ot—Goilty.
WESTERN CIRCCIT, Doses/oral, JULY 26. r
run RING O. PRIIIND.
The defendant who bolds the situation of Chinch-
warden of Wick Regis, in this county, was tried upon
an indictment. charging him with having written a
dibel against the Rev. Mr.-Chamberlain, the Rector of
the above-mentioned parish, which was published in
the Dorchester Gesette. In the alleged libel the de-
fendant stated, with respect to the distribution of the
sacrament money," that, for some years past, the
Rector had been is the habit of keeping it until the
Christmas, when be distributed it at his own house,
where it was considered his own private &natio...—
The defendant alleged that be had opposed this system
of distribution, and contended for the old and fair me,
shod of distributing the money impartially in the
vestry. amongst the deserving poor. It proceeded to
say, that, in consequence of his opposition to the Kee-
toes (the prosecutor's) manner of distributing the
charity of the parishioners to the poor, he (the de-
fendant), after having beim peaceably, in the posses-
sion of the pew for nice months, and expended 201. in
fitting it up, was dispossessed of it by violence, to make
room for the charity children. The alleged libel con-
cluded by charging the plaintiff with having stated in
a letter that which he not only knew to be untrue, but
which be knew to be a direct and positive falsehood.
After evidence was called and the Counsel had been
heard on both sides,
Jedge Busootmil explained to the Jury the operation
of the law, and said that, io his' opinion, the letter
written by the defendant was a gross libel.
The Jury immediately foupd the defendant Guilty.
Judge Buottouoe said that the same apology would
now be accepted as had been before offered, bat Mr.
Willies, refused to make any aeknowledgment.

....- -----
SATURDAY. JULY 27.
RODIIRRY OF TOR BRIDPORT BRANCH DANZ.
Henry Saffron was arraigned upon a charge of hav-
ing, on the night of the 2J of February, 1817, !Ingle.
rionsly broken open sad entered the dwelling-house of
Mary Daly, of Bridport. in the county of Dorset, and
stealing thirty promissory Dotes, of the value of 101. each
of the Dorchester Bask, and thirty notes, of the value
offif. each. and divers other notes and monies, to the
meson of between two sod three thousand puede, the
property of Messrs. Cox, Merle and Pattison.
that stated the case for the prosecution, which
was for a robbery committed so far back as 1817, and
which he understood to prove by a chain of facts. as ex-
traordinary as they were conclusive, when taken toge-
ther. The prosecutors, at the time of the robbery, were
the proprietors of the Dorchester Bank, and kept also a
Branch Bank at Bridport, where the business was tar-
ried on in two rooms of a bone occupied by Mrs. Daly.
On the 21st of February, 1817, the room where tbe
strong box was kept, was discovered to have been bets
glariously entered, the strong-box forced open, and pro-
perty to the amount stated in the indictment stolen.
Every pursuit and search was made after the robbers,
hat without •success. Amongst the notes stolen were
some of the Bridport Bank of Messrs. Oundry and Co.,
sad Of these and some other stolen notes a list was made,
and a printed one circulated, to caution tradesmen
against taking them. But no trace was obtained of the
robbers, and that whole dept until the lat r end of
April last, tete% ose" IT fie dolts notes des Tsaßrted
for payment, with a visible alteration of the number,
and others soon alter followed. Upon this circumstance
as Investigation was entered into, when they were all
traced to the prisoner, who bad paid them is the
manner that would be related by, the witnesses.
Search warrants were obtained to examine the house
where the prisoner lodged, alien. in the drawer of
a cabinet, money to a considerable amount had been
found. A one-pound note of the Bridport Bank was
found with the number perfectly altered, and evidently
altered for circulation. There was also this extraor-
dinary circumstance connected with the finding of the
altered note, that, in this private drawer, by the side
of it. was found one of the printed bills of the notes
stolen, with their numbers. There was another most
extraordinary fact, which would be proved in evidence,
which was, that a fortnight after the robbery had
been committed an anosymous letter was received by
the prosecutor, and which imputes the annieission of
the robbery to a family which resided is the neigh-
bourbood, of the name of 'Packet. This family there
was not the slightest grounds for chargieg with the
offence, which there was as little reason to believe
them guilty of as any Juryman in the box. This let.
ter, it was afterwards aseerta'ned, was in the hand.
writing of the defendant, ands' Jury would, when it
vL
was read, judge of its bear 14 upon the case, and
whether it, object was to throw the prosecutors upon a
wrong scent. The prisoner, when under examination,
in giving an account of his p ion of the money,
said he had received it of his brother who was dead,
and who had received it himself from the Dorchester
bank. But it would be proved that the notes stolen
were traced to the prisoner, and it would be for the
Jury to say whether under all the circumstances un-
explained by the prisoner, he must nut bare been con-
cerned Is the robber:. and to the proof of these cir-
cumstances be now ciaimed their attention.
The statement of the Counsel baring been confirmed
by evidence,
The prisoner was then called upon for his defence.
Sampson.—" I'll tenet all so my Counsel."
In his defence, to prove that the gold found belonged
to his mother. Sarah Massey, his sister, was called.—
She deposed that her mother had saved twenty-three
guineas. There was a cabinet which was aped by the
whole family.
Cross examined.—She did not kilt', that her mo-
ther saved any sovereigns.
A number of persons, farmers and tradesmen resid-
ing in the neighbourhood of the prisoner, and who
had known him, some from infancy, others for ten
years, and others for the last live years, gave him a
good character as a batd working and induetrious
man, of whom they bad never heard any imputatiolt.
He bad got forward since 181 7, but before that time
be worked with his father as a labourer.
Mr. Justice RICHARDSON charged the Jury atArreat
leng.b and with greet perspicuity. expliiiiing ths
bearings of the several points of evi.lencerwilich he
said were must extraorlivary. Ile left It( jo the Jury
to say, whether, from the possession of property nor,
such circumstances, they believed the ;slimmer HMI
have been concerned in the rubbery.
The Jury deliberated fur nearly a quirts( of an
hour, and then returned a verdict of Guilty.
The Jury and the prosecutor strongly recommended
the prisoner to mercy on at count of his former good
Omfatter.
The Ju nue then put on the black cap, and in a most
solemn and affecting manner, proceeded to pass seri
•enee upon the convict, who, he said, had been f mud
guilty upon a chain of osimi•e circumeasces, which