swear. those I have referred to, might conduct conduct of Mr. Wellesley towards make such an observation as is Mrs. Bligh, towards his children, sworn to by Dr. Bulkeley. Then, and with reference to other points, am I to pay no attention to the which shew the tenor and bent of other witnesses who speak to the his mind upon certain subjects, and swearing? Under these circum- the nature of his sentiments, I say stances, I cannot withdraw myself that, if the House of Lords think from the perfect conviction, that proper to restore these children to Mr. Wellesley was in the habit of Mr. Wellesley, let them do so; it constantly swearing himself, and shall not be done by my act. I that he encouraged his children to therefore refer it to the Master to consider under whose care and As to the result of the whole custody these children should be case, I must now say, I have no placed. I know not whether there difficulty whatever-none with be any body who will accept this respect to the circumstances that guardianship; but they who do actook place towards the close of the cept it will deserve the thanks of business at Florence ; none as to this family so long as there are what was the nature of Mr. Wel- any members of it able to render lesley's conduct to Mrs. Wellesley thanks. The office which the on their way to Paris ; none with individual may have to take is not respect to what took place at Paris; an enviable one. Into whatsoever nor have I any difficulty whatever hands these children may fall, it in respect to any thing that took will be their duty to consult the place from the time of their going interest and happiness of the chilto Paris to the moment when this dren, by allowing filial affection matter was brought before me. In and duty to their father to operate addition to all that belongs to the to the utmost. nature of the connection with Mrs. Bligh-to that course of adultery between her and Mr. Wellesley, COURT OF King's Bench, Nov. 1. which has been carried on through Beaumont v. Thwaites. all this length of time under the most disgraceful circumstances This was an action to recover there has been, in my judgment, damages for a libel. The declaramost grossly improper conduct on tion stated, that, before, and at the the part of Mr. Wellesley towards publication of, the libels, the plainhis children. Under these cir- tiff (J. T. Barber Beaumont) was cumstances, I can never suffer the the treasurer and director of the daughter to go under the care and County Fire-office, and that the custody of Mr. Wellesley, so long defendant published in the “Mornas there is any connection between ing Herald” newspaper the libel him and a woman so abandoned as complained of. The defendant Mrs. Bligh appears to be. I cannot pleaded the general issue. consent to separate the boys from Mr. Brougham.--The libel prethe daughter; and, upon this tends to be extracts from the fourpoint, I have the authority of Mr. teenth Report of the Revenue ComWellesley himself to say, that that missioners. It does not pretend to is a thing which ought not to be be the whole of the report, nor done. When I look at the whole to give what it does give in regular order all the extracts are on one side. It is no justification of a libel that it is the print of a speech in the House of Commons, but none can deny that it is a mitigation. The defendant, however, has not pleaded that he has copied the report. There are two ways of copying a document; one is, to copy the whole of it, the good and the bad, both sides together, the antidote with the bane, the evidence of all the witnesses, the calumny with the contradiction. This the defendant has not done. The publications in the "Morning Herald" were put in and read. One of the libels consisted of a letter from a Mr. Lye. The Attorney-general stated, that he had been considering what could have been Mr. Beaumont's object in bringing the action, for very little had been said about damages. It was not the conduct of the commissioners, nor the conduct of Mr. Beaumont, that the jury were to try; they were not now called upon to do reparation to Mr. Beaumont for any imputation that might have been made upon him in the course of that inquiry; but their business was, to see if there were any thing in the present publication, of which he had a right to complain. The proceedings in question were published by the House of Commons; would his learned friend say, that when he presented a petition to the House, containing imputations upon the conduct of some individual, an action could be maintained against the editor? Mr. Brougham said, he conceived that the publication of a libellous proceeding would be treated as a gross breach of privilege; and referred to the cases of lord Abingdon and. Mr. Creevey. Lord Tenterden. -I am of opinion an action would lie. The Attorney-general proceeded. The publication before the court was not intended by the defendant to cast the slightest reflection on Mr. Beaumont. Mr. Lye's letter would have been a libellous publication, if it had not been in answer to Mr. Beaumont's own letters. His three letters to the commissioners and to the lords of the Treasury appeared in the first paper they reflected in the strongest manner upon Mr. Lye, who was justified in answering them; and the editor, who had inserted those letters, was bound to insert the answer. But that answer clearly showed, that there was a controversy depending between the writer and Mr. Beaumont ; it therefore could not do Mr. Beaumont's character any injury; as every man, who read the letter, would plainly see, there was a dispute between the parties; and therefore would not credit any thing that might appear to Mr. Beaumont's disadvantage. Lord Tenterden said, that, when a person published any thing for his own profit, he ought first to ascertain its truth. A part of the first publication was certainly highly injurious to the plaintiff's character. His lordship was sorry that the commissioners had let it pass from them, for it was beside the subject of their inquiries. The letters that had been supposed to have been written by the plaintiff, had been published by the defendant without his consentan answer from Lye might have been expected. In that letter the words "foul falsehoods" occurred again and again, and he advised Mr. Beaumont to behave with Christian charity, and to lay aside all malice. The question was, whether there was any justification for publishing that letter. The defendant had, without the plaintiff's authority, published something which he took to be letters written by the plaintiff; and because he thought fit to publish those letters, he therefore published the answer. Had the plaintiff authorized the publication of the first letters, it would have been a very different thing. If the jury could say they were such publications as they would be willing themselves to have published, they would find for the defendant; but if they did not think so, then they were bound to find for the plaintiff, with such damages as they 'would deem to be a proper compensation. The Jury retired for about threequarters of an hour, and then returned with a verdict for the plaintiff-Damages 18. COURT OF KING'S-BENCH, GUILDHALL, FEB. 9. 66 East v. Chapman. This was an action by Wm. Thos. East, a horse-dealer, to recover from the proprietor of the Sunday Times" newspaper, a compensation in damages for a libel, which the defendant had published on him in his paper of the 22nd of October last, imputing to the plaintiff the commission of offences of the grossest nature. The defendant had originally pleaded a justification, which he had subsequently expunged from the record, and he now relied on his plea of the general issue. Mr. Scarlett stated, that the complaint, which gave rise to the present proceedings, was occasioned by the publication of a paragraph, professing to be a report of what it was alleged had taken place at a coroner's inquest. He (Mr. Scarlett) did not mean to discuss whether the editor of a newspaper was justified in publishing whatever might take place at coroners' inquests, because the right to publish such reports formed no part of the object of their present inquiry; for if a man ventured to publish that which affected the moral character and conduct of an individual, let it be in whatever form it might, he must be answerable for the consequences, even supposing it was true; but when he ventured to publish that which was false, no damages could be a sufficient compensation to the suffering party. He then read the libel complained of, which was as follows: Alleged Rape-Death, and Coroner's Inquest.-On Wednesday, an inquest was held before Thos. Stirling, esq. one of the coroners for Middlesex, at the sign of the Sovereign, in Taunton-place, Regent's-park, on the body of Maria Webb, only sixteen years of age. The deceased was a remarkably fine and handsome girl, and to her personal attractions were added great vivacity and a good disposition. She was the daughter of very respectable persons residing in the country, and was in the service of John Henry Buckingham, esq., of Park-street, Marylebone. The evidence first taken was that of the brother of the deceased, "Mr. W. Webb, a cheesemonger, residing in Boston-street, who stated that the deceased was unmarried. She had been in good health previous to that day week, Her mistress sent for witness-he went to Park-street, and found а deceased very poorly, complaining she make any disclosure of what of violent pains in her back. Be- had passed. She quitted her place lieving that she had caught cold, in consequence. and that she did not require me- “ John Hoskins Shearman, of dical assistance, he returned home. 20 Dorset-place, Marylebone, surIn the evening deceased came to geon, and Mrs. Buckingham, corwitness's house, and repeated her roborated the evidence of the first complaint, and witness's wife gave witness. . her a few drops of turpentine, and “The Jury after a short delibe- some gruel--the latter she took ration, returned a verdict-That home with her. Witness was she died, having miscarried. again sent for by Mrs. Bucking- “ The Jury warmly declared ham, at ten o'clock at night. Wit- their sentiments as to the conduct ness found deceased sitting by the of Mr. East, and expressed their fire, still complaining. A surgeon readiness to assist, as far as possiwas sent for, he took a little blood ble, in any measures that might from her, and she was put to bed. be pursued for the bringing him It was suspected that she was with to justice." child and going to miscarry, but The Common Sergeant (with on being questioned she denied it. whom was Mr. Brougham), adWitness took her to his own house dressed the jury for the defendnext morning, where the doctor ant. continued his attendances, and she Mr. Thomas Bell, clerk to one - miscarried on Saturday morning, of the coroners for the county of and died in witness's arms on Sun- Middlesex, on the 11th of October day evening. Some hours before last, officiated as clerk at an inshe expired she was sensible of her quest, held on the body of Maria danger and witness closely ques- Webb; was present when the tioned her. She then said that jury returned their verdict of William East had been taking “ died by the visitation of God.” liberties with her, and had com- The witness here produced the mitted the act with violence. It record of the inquisition, which appeared that a short time the was put in by the witness and deceased lived as servant to Mrs. read. East, who keeps livery stables By Mr. Brougham.-Did you near Finsbury-square, and that hear the foreman of that jury acWilliam East, who is her nephew, company the verdict with any manages the business for her. The observation touching the subject deceased further informed her bro- matter of the inquisition, and ther, that during the absence one touching the present plaintiff? day of Mrs. East, William East Mr. Scarlett observed, that the rudely attacked her, and she lock- plaintiff ' was placed in a most pain, ed herself in a room whither she ful situation by the mode in which had fled for refuge; after remain- the defendant had conducted his ing there some time, she opened defence. He (Mr. Scarlett) was the door, thinking East was gone, not about to object to the quesbut - he instantly rushed into the tion, because the plaintiff was rooni, and being unable to protect anxious for the most ample in, herself he accomplished his pur- quiry ; but hy law the defendant pose, i He threatened her, should was unable to plead a justification, а ago unless it was placed on the record, her, and accomplished his purpose ; say whether the manuscript was passed of the girl having told her Examination continued. --I heard mistress that her brother gave her the foreman of the jury accompany some pills. The coroner refused the verdict with an observation to send for Mr. East, as his conrelative to the supposed conduct duct formed no part of the inquiry. of the plaintiff. The jury offered Wm. Webb, the brother of to assist Webb in any way to bring Maria Webb, on whom the inquest East to justice, for the conduct was held, stated, that he attended imputed to him by the evidence of the inquest, and that the report in Webb. Several of the jury ob- the “Sunday Times” contained a served they would contribute to- correct report of what he said in wards the expense. every respect, except that he did Webb stated, that his sister not say his sister died in his arms. Maria, when sensible of her danger, Mr. Shearman, the surgeon who told him, that while residing with attended Maria Webb, had seen the plaintiff's mother, in conse- the account published by the de. quence of the conduct of the plain- fendant. It was correct as far as tiff, she locked herself up in her related to his evidence. room ; after waiting there some Cross-examined.-I did not hear time, believing he was gone, she Webb examined. I did not tell opened the door, when the plain the coroner that I heard Maria tiff rushed in, and being unable to tell her brother that East had raa protect herself, he overpowered vished her. 1 |