The Sun. — 1840-06-30 (London, England)

DENNE.—LIBEL. (Before Lord DENMAN and a Special Jury.) This was an action brought by Mr. Stephen Sackett Chancellor, a gentleman holding several public situations in the town of Margate, against Mr. Donne, a printer residing in the town, for the publication of a handbill reflecting on his character. Mr. THESIGER stated the case to the Jury. The plaintiff bad been originally a baker, residing in the town of Margate, and now he held several public offices in that town. He was collector of Steam-boat and Harbour Dues, and of  Assessed Taxes. It appeared that as far back as the year 1816, the walls of the house of a Mr. Thomas John Taylor were painted with words imputing to Mr. Taylor the most horrible and disgusting crimes. This palatine- on the walls was repeated three several times, and the effect produced upon Mr. Taylor by these repeated anonymous attacks was such that at last Mr. Taylor had been driven to commit suicide. At that time Mr. Chancellor and another gentleman had been accused of having written these words on the walls of Taylor. An investigation had taken place, nothing was proved against them, and they bad denied the charge. The matter had subsequently rested until 1835, when it appeared that the plaintiff and a Mr. Waddington, of Margate, commenced a series of attacks on each other, and this accusation against Mr. Chancellor was revived. The hand-bill, which was the subject of the present action, repeated the charge by calling upon the plaintiff to clear himself from the charges brought against him by Mr. Waddington. The charge was reiterated in the Age newspaper, arid the defendant was also accused of peculation in the same paper, and in the month of December last Mr. Chancellor bad brought an action against the proprietor of that paper, and had recovered 1001. darnr.ges for the publication of the libel. The present action was brought against Mr. Denne, a printer, of Margate, who had printed and circulated these hand bills, having supplied 400 of them to one person, to recover compensation from him for the damages sustained by him in consequence of the publication of such hand-bill reflect ng on his character. The publication of the libel having been proved, Mr. F. KELLY addressed the Jury for the defendant, and said that this was not a case calling for considerable damages. Mr. Waddington had for years reiterated these charges, and yet Mr. Chancellor had net applied for any criminal information, or brought any action against him ; but when naked why he did not purge himself upon oath of the charges brought against him, by applying to the Court of Queen's Bench for a criminal information, he brought this action, not against Mr. Waddington, the person who had over amid over again brought these charges, but against the present defendant, who was merely the printer of the bill asking these questions; besides, he had already recovered 1001. damages from the Age newspaper, for the publication of these imputations on his character, and therefere the present could not be considered a case for very heavy damages. It was most extraordinary that the present action should have been brought in December, 1838, and not have ben kreught to trial until the pros-nt tine. The action against the Age had been commenced in October, 1838, and had not been brought to trial until December, 1839 ; that was a most extraordinary circumstance, and it was nonsense to attribute these delays to any ccunsel, or any special pleader, because the cases might easily have been brought to trial before. Lord