The Washington union. [volume] (City of Washington [D.C.]) 1857-1859, 1858-05-16
A TEMPERANCE APOSTLE IN TROUBLE.

In the court OF Queens Bench London, on the goth
of April Mr.. John b. Cough, by his counsel moved for
criminal information against Frederick Richard Lees,
for series of ibes rejecting on the character OF the
former in letters which sent to gentleman named
Wilson, residing near Nottingham. Mr. Cough, who
well known temperance lecturer, stated in his aii
dav that he was entirely brought up in America, and
that having been addicted early in life to ntemperance
he reclaimed by society in that country about ff
teen years ago At the present time he devoted him
self entirely to the profession of temperance lecturer
and he had several times visited this country in that
pacity. The gentleman against whom he applied, MIR.
D. Lees resided Leeds and distinguished wri-
ter and lecturer in the temperance cause and the libel
consisted in several charges which he made against Mr.
Cough to the effect that he was notorious and habit
ual drunkard but that instead of drinking alcoholic H.
quors he took opium and other Intoxicating drugs This
serious charge could well be made against a
man in Mr.. Coughs position. While in America in 1857,
Mr. Cough wrote private letter to England lin which
he stated that he found that the Manequor law In
Massachusettsat least dead letter This letter
intended for publication butit found way into newspa
per- and excited dssenson between the two societies
On his return to England he found certain rumors injurious
to his character in circulation but he could not trace them
to any for time, but eventually he found
that they originated in letters which DR. Lees ad
dressed to Mr. Wilson, who was president of the League
Society. Lord Campbell--.Iet us hear the worst OF
them Mr. Quain then read several passages Of these
communications DR. Lees accused Mr. Cough of having
been narooticaly and hcpessly intoxicated in Glasgow,
Edinburgh and London, and said he was as rank hypo
er7tc anas wckfd man ~ any N the llefn COMM
ions He eso SAIL he had him chew tobacco, and
in several instances vomt In the street fr excess Of in
diligence in opium Mr.. Cough, in his afRdavits, denied
the charges scratm IN the most solemn and stringent
His wife, who accompanied him In oil his jour
neys, made affidavit to the effect and he had
also the adavits of medical to prove that the
ng arose from Mr.. Coughs exertons in lccturing at
public meetings, and other causes totally unconnected
with ntoxicaton in any shape. Lord Campbell said he
had no doubt Mr. Cough was most respectable gentle
man. and sincere advocate of temperance and that he
had set good example by the precepts which he incul
Gated but he did not think this in which the
court could interfere The gentleman against whom the
application made appeared to have acted from
malicious motive. He also a jealous propagation of
the doctrine of temperance and if in his zeal he had been
led make unfounded and unpopular charges against
Mr. Cough the latter clearly disproved them by his a
davits and the matter therefore might perhaps be allow
ed to rest there but at any rate this high court could
not interpose in of this description by criminal
information. The rest of the court being of the
opinion the rule refused.