Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1822-01-17
l3,6O5 Oh
IssEzIsafas--t--e, ,-sis1es.nsss..-----


New ORLEANS, December I2.-'Phc Unit
ed States District Court was occupied sever
al days during the last and preceding week,
in the trial OF 4 cause, alike novel in It's nature
aud importan; in its consequences. This was
suit instituted by Peter Dcrbigny, Esq. as
agent or attorney for the heirs OF Bertrand
Gravirr. now residing III France, against Brr-
nard Marlgny, member OF the Senate of this
State from the .city OF New Orraus, for SIAN
deFing the title 0t said heirs To- the iSatturc by
the publication of a speech delivered i'm the
Scnh,e previous to thcit-oduc;un of a bill,
amcndatOry ola former l,w, prescribing Ger
tain dulles to the attorney general, and cnloin-
in5 INN 20 prosecute such persons as under the
pretext ola title thereto, held, or attempted
10 hold possession of said Baturc. The dam
ages claimed bythn plaintiffs were one hundred
thousand dollars. MIR. Z. livingston, Mr.. Work
man, and Mr.. D'rbiSny, appeared as counsel
for the plaintiffs, Mr.. a. l.. Duncan and MIR.
| D. IL. hawkins for the defendant.
The principal ground relied on by the coun-
sci for the plaintiffs, was, that although Mr.
Marigny had right, rs il member of the
Legislature, 10 make the speech complained
OF, Yet he had no right to publish it. The
cause was opened by Judge w orkman on the
part of the plaintiffs. Fne counsel for the
defendant declIned to reply, decming the
principles involved too Well settled TO need
illustration or argument. Mr.. Margmy, how.
ever, spoke in his own defence, with al ability
i highly creditable. He was answered by Mr.
Dcrbigny and Mr.. Livingston, the latter o
whom displayed considerable ingenuity, in al
tempting - To make the worse appear the bet
! ter reason"
Judge Dick delivered a short, but pertinent
and impressive charge to The jury. The prIn
ciples which he laid dawn were in perfrc
consOnance with those ofOur government, ant
such as we should maintain witt our Fortunes
and lives. He decided that the right to sneak
was necessarily accompanied by the right {,
| publish, and very correctly remarked, that i
was not merely the right, hut frequently thu
duty OF a Legislator III our country, To- max
known TO his constituents the course whicl
he has pursued in his representative capacity
The verdict of the jury was in coufornit,
with these principles, and we feel cOniideu
that their decision in favor of the dcfrndan
will receive The entire appreciation of ever
man of correct views ADD enlightened under
standing. II different decision had bee
given, weak and timid mcn wouId have Pre-
nounccd il tn be- iBspropey, hut men 81 yig0ror
minds and generous feelings would have pr,
claimed it 20 be treason against The cOnSiit,
tor.
At present VIC shall f,rbear to say more
relation to this interesting subject. but on son
future occasion we will, probably, revert to
for the purpose ofcnabIi1g our readers mo-
fully to comprehend It's Importance and boa
ings. Thus much we have considered it ot
duty to publish in relation tn the origin, N
grounds, and result of this singular aciiu
which, whatever may he thought of il her
will be regarded abroad as an epoch in juiici
ecccnticiheS.
1t is doubtless known to many of our re-
drrs, that, contempOrancOusly with the i
stitutiOn of the suit against Mr. MariEny,
similar action was commenced against loser
II. Hawkins, Esq. by the same parties, clair
ing S 10000 in damages, in consequence of
. having given notice in the public prints Of Il
- city, that he designed TO prosecute suits to
~ tabsh the right of the public to the undistur
: ed use Of the Batturc. Since the decision
Aarsny's case, this suit against Mr. II. Il
been dismissed by the plaintiffs. The put
are already apprized by n Law Rrport pt
llshcd in our paper a short time since, Il
MIR Hawkins couformcd tO the plal-e given
his notice and that the legal pdiDis Submit
p. TO the Supreme Court have Been decided
- his favor but rs this c1Isr hae brcn ,tmm