On this page

• Departments (1)
  • 
• Text (5)

  Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

  • 

    ^8^23,48150. ^ll Rlfl^ _-_~_-___^^ •— 7

  • 

    • YC05K0R v. BRADSHAW

  • 

    CHARGE OF THE LORD CHIEF BARON. «L Lobd ...

  • 

    neg BRITISH COLLEGE OF HEALTH, New Road,...

  • 

    Pirates' Head Money.—A parliamentary pa*...

• Transcript

  • Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

    Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.

    ^8^23,48150. ^Ll Rlfl^ _-_~_-___^^ •— 7

    _^ 8 _^ 23 , 48150 . _^ ll _Rlfl _^ _ - __~_ _- ____^^ _•— 7

    • Yc05k0r V. Bradshaw

    • YC 05 K 0 R v . BRADSHAW

    Charge Of The Lord Chief Baron. «L Lobd ...

    CHARGE OF THE LORD CHIEF BARON . « _L Lobd ChbpBabos then proceeded to sum np . _^ _„;^_ _This is an action brought by the _plain-% _^ ir O'Connor , against the defendant , Mr . _ir' _^ w The latter imputes to the _phun--S * _%£ » t he is a political impostor , and he _** i _« that imputation with a reference to _^ _fSrd " honesty . " upon which _^ _there will be _** _-Tforvonr _consideraUon as to how far and * f l _P-rfent you suppose the imputation couched _^ _IS _-SSIS . * _" _* _defendant pleaded first **! _ThZ - snot jniilty , and then he puts in several _*•? ' _« li _" _ifsubstancoof which is , that he jus-* _-frSiT called ) the libel . I looked with con-•*• ¦ _£ care and attention to a point to which I first attracted bv the marked manner in which _^ i . « nied Counsel for the defendant put it for-J n _amelv that the imputation of dishonesty is _nmitea tne

    * 7 " _. _orefolly guarded antt m piea 191 _£ _iini-s in reference toacerfcunLand Scheme , _P _^ _fSed to no other . The plaintiff replies , ht the defendant had no right to publish what he 1 nbh ' sbed . and these are all the issues before *¦ * 1 think you will have to consider the . extent J imputation made . I think that is one of the i « nent 5 of your inquiry , and the one to which your _^ Mention must be Jirst directed . Then there are _SL » e points of view in which the case is to be _con-Sjered—first , is this a malignant libel , proceeding % 0 m bad motives , false in _fact and malicious in intention ? If it be , the plaintiff is no doubt entitled to recover heavy damages . There is another point of view . Is thc * defence made out ,. assuming that the imputation did not go beyond that to which the _defendant has pleaded ? If so , the defendant is

    entitled to a verdict , having proved his justification That , however , is as extreme a _Tiew as the other . But there is a third and an intermediate view ; viz ., assuming that Mr . O'Connor was actuated by no feelintr but that of patriotism—supposing that he had no < fes _" re or intention but to assist the poor—and yet he so conducted the scheme and managed its details _ssfairlv to give rise ( although , in fact , he might be five from reproach ) to the comments that have heen _Z ade on him so as to justify to a certain extent the _wneral character of the imputation , the plaintiff _Irtiuld be entitled to a -verdict , but that _circumstance would properly reduce the damages- accordin ? to the view vou took of the extent of the 1 montation . If tou think that it _isnot a political _imposition , the " plaintiff is intitled to your verdict ; W if von think that the scheme was of such a _chatne

    raeter that any reasonable-person , looking at _manner in which it was conducted , might come to the conclusion that it was an imposition—and I prefer to call the scheme an imposition rather than to call the plaintiff an impostor—if you think that it _-ffas so contacted as that any fair person , conversant wit h public matters as placed before the public by a journalist , would consider it to be an 1 mnosition , and eould honestly ana fairly say ( although you have no rig ht to . impute against , an individual anythhigthat you cannot make out to be true " _t-that as all persons must _taketheconsequence of their own acts , and that a fan : criticism of the acts of Jlr . O'Connor , as the proponnder of the scheme—Company , I cannot call it , for it never has been' a

    Company—fairly raises so much doubt and suspicion as to make it subject to editorial or other comment that will reduce the damages from the largest -amount given to a person malignantly defamed , down to the smallest sum which is given to a man -who , however much he may have been mistaken , or however pure his motives , can only be represented by those who look at his scheme and its developments , as an impostor . I do not think that I can lay it down that if any person , looking at what has occurred , might reasonably conclude the scheme --as an imposition , he has a right to -publish his opinion ; bnt I am rather inclined to think tbat if vou publish of any person , or of any part of his conduct an imputation , it must be made out in fact .

    If tou think the defendant has failed in point of feet , but that he has made out to your entire satisfaction that the imputation , although not true is perfectly reasonable , thequestion of damages is also redneed ' from the largest amount given to a paintiff who is malignantly libelled , to the smallest sum given to a man who has so conducted himself as fairly to give rise to acensations and who has no right to bring a complaint into a Court of Justice -which is the result of his own mal-administration . "The whole question , however , is entirely for you io decide—my duty is only to present to you a fair view of all the points at issue . I am happily relieved from an expression of an opinion of any kind except

    upon matters of law ; but nevertheless , I should ill discharge my publie duty if I shrunk from expressing my opinion wherever it might assist in aiding you to form a correct opinion . I mean in respect to questions of law upon which lam more peculiarly capable _fromnvy situation , of giving a true interpretation , if it occurs to me to be my duty to express an opinion , I shall fearlessly do so ; leaving , however , every part of the question entirely to be decided by yourselves . An action for lible is a case in which the law is not of such importance as it is in any other question that can arise in a court of justice . If aman be charged with a crime , the jury has to determine whether his motives render the act

    criminal or not . The rights of property in civil cases cannot be determined by the motive . To do that would be to unsettle everything and to shake tiie foundations of society if in civil questions we did not always , sitting here to admister justice , draw -oar inferences from the conduct before us . If a man be guilty of that which appears to be folly , we are bound to impute folly to him . If a man does that which imports any particular motive , we are not only justified , hut bound to impute to him that mot ive to which his conduct seems to give rise . But in a case of libel it is for the defendant to make

    -out , to the reasonable satisfaction of the jury , the grounds on which he says he is entitled to publish the matter in question , and ic is for you to say in this case if the pleas of the defendant arc made out , and if not , what are the damages to which the plaintiff is entitled . The libel you have heard read repeatedly . The plaintiff is editor of a newspaper of very extensive circulation . The defendant is the editor ofthe Nottingham Journal , and although it is not without example , and on other occasions actions have been brought by the editor of one newspaper against the editor of another in respect ofa libel , it is certainly not of frequent occurrence . And observing as I do that the defendant is spoken of in terms of disparagement by the plaintiff in his paper , one might have supposed these editors wonld have settled their ovm differences rather than bring us here three davs

    to determine them , whether they be political or personal . If they were political , their best way would lave been for the complainant to have published some more of that disparaging matter of which he had published some , and the dispute wou'd have been settled much readier at least than hy an action for libel . If yon think it is nothing hut _' a political imputation , you will also think it might have been well left to public discussion . "Whether it contains any personal imputation beyond that which is political , it is for yon to determine ; bnt even then it wonld have been better for these parties to have settled the matter in their newspapers , and the plaintiff having explained the matter to the satisfaction of his readers , the question would hare been settled . The libel relates to the formation ofthe land Company , and I must read , once , and for all I hope , what the libel is .

    Tne _subscribers to the 'Safional land Companv * and the _aOniirers of Fear ** us O'Connor , Esq ., 31 . " ? , for Hotting-5 _^* . wheedled the people of England out of -100 , 000 , with which he ha 3 hought estates and conveyed them to his « wn and benefit , and aU who are desirous to witness the final overthrow of this great political impostor , should order the Nottingham Journal , in which Ills _tt "* save honesty , in connexion with the Land Plan , has " _** n . ana will continue to be , fearlessly exposed . The _^ ottoigiamJmimd is the largest _newspaper allowed bv Wi _*?* the ,, est " _* e _* _- ' m _this country and _neighbourr ! _£ _t _**^ _** * Bemei * t 5 f _htjj-mess information , and general ** f « . Delivered everywhere every Friday morning , price ** o . * per annum , ISs . in advance ; credit , 20 s . That this is a libel—that it is disparaging matter—I must

    say I Lare no doubt , and the law says that you have no right , except on lawful grounds to pubusn disparaging matter of anybody . It has not been ¦ " - """" ai ior public men moving in public spheres , such _^ . ePbers of parliament , who can set themselves « got by getting np in their place in the house , and _casing a statement which appears the next morn-« gin the papers—it has not beenusual for such men W DWng actions except for some atrocious imputation , which requires a man to come forward , to put - ™ nself on oath to declare his innocence , and then <* y a criminal information challenge the opposite party to prove their allegations , and he proceeds to clear himself from the imputation hy his answer , and in that wav . It has not been the custom in late times to " make

    an appeal to a jury for damages by way of reparation . The general course is , as I said , for a member of parliament to set himself right by a _state-*^ _ent which appears in the public papers , and every-5 % is satisfied . On the present occasion , Mr . _^ Connor has been advised to bring tbe matter of " _* hi chhe complains before you , that you may form ** J * _" " r ' opinion , whether he is entitled to a verdict , or and ;* tne _lea J _astification has been proved , " _T ~ 7 _* ot , to what damages he is entitled . It _apg _^ tbua for the . plaintiff . They simply called r _^ hardDorman -who bought the paper , and another

    | _* _« ontp prove thatthe defendant is the proprietor . 7 _** L _^?^ c ase was established at once . The learned _wunsei for tie plaintiff said fairly enough that he did * _*? . «""»» to go into this matter at first . He chose _hiJ n ? _Hha _7 e thelastword » a- 11 ** therefore , he kept an (' rfe bac _-i _"ontil the other side had proved theirs , - _^ of conr ee was entitled to the reply . Brother _„ f _^ is rather disparaged nisi prius tactics ; bnt _^ _S 1 J _J tactics of _r _isipriu * of which he _^• afatied f _^ y to avail MmseU At tbe same j * ueat was fairly open to the remark , which was J _* * ue onthe other Bide , that if they were anxious «* show that all was right , why did t & ey not do so _JjJJJL notioweve * think that much twas

    Charge Of The Lord Chief Baron. «L Lobd ...

    Sergeant Wn _^ s ; My lord . I remembered that _yok had once said the accused party ought always to have the last word . The Loud Chief Baeok : I think Brother "Wilkins you had a perfect right to do that ; but I think you should not disparage those nisi prius tactics , of whioh you are yourself ready to take advantage . The defendant then is driven to make but his case in justification of the . libel . Thefirst witness they called was from the stamp office , to preve the pror prietorship of the Northern Star . That was at once admitted , and then they called witnesses to produce the copies ofthe Star from the stamp office for the last two years , and for an earlier period from the British Museum . Then various newspapers were

    read , to the date of some of which I shall have to call your attention . Then George Taylor from the stamp office showed what registration of the Land Company had taken place , and I thiDk it necessary tb call your attention to this evidence , especially with reference to the dates of registration , and to what was registered and what was not registered . As for instance , the act especially requires that any change of officers shall be registered . That is positively required , and yet in 1847 , it being tben under provisional registration , a change took place in the treasurership ( Mr . O'Connor being substituted for Mr . Koberts ) , andyet from that time to the present the change has not been published in the rules , nor was it registered . They then called a number of

    allottees who told you their grievances . They tben called Mr . Revans to express an opinion as to spade husbandry , which is not necessary for me to go into . Intermediately they had called a solicitor from Gloucester who acted for Dewhirst , and proved certain communications with 0 " Connor . They then proved that there never bad been a return made of the Land and Labour Bank , and they tben called a clerk in the London Joint Stock Bank , who was ignorant of country accounts , and tbat Mr . Roberts had an account . He however disclosed the fact that Mn O'Connor had the largest account in his own name personally , and that there was a B . A . account of which Mr . M'Gowan afterwards appeared to be ignorant . They then called James Knight , who

    mentioned a fact of which there has certainly been no explanation , namely , that he had been iii vited to become manager—whether he spoke the truth or not is for-you to judge—that he never -did " accept the office , thatthe moment he went there and found out the character of the place , he instantly said he would have nothing to do with it- ; and yet James Knight is mentioned publicly by Mr . O'Connor as being at the bank superintending the bank . The object of calling Knight-was to prove that circumstance . Charles Ansell , was then called , most unnecessarily I think , to inform you , gentlemen , of that which you must be perfectly competent to

    decide for yourselves—that the scheme of locating the whole of the persons who became subscribers was impossible with the amount of their subscriptions —that they never could he-located in such a number orin anything like it under a copse of years which would probably run beyond the ' lives of the greater part of them . ' And so far there is ho doubt there was some mistake in the scheme , if . it were held out that all would sooner or later be partakers of its alleged benefits . That is the whole case on the part of the defendant . _# . " A Juryman : Mr . O'Connor said I think , that they should all be located in less than six years . "

    Sergeant "Wilkins : That was in an election speech at Nottingham . % The Loud Cme _*? _Binos : Brother "Wilkins , I wish you would not interfere . It has been well said that tbe judge shonld nofc interfere with the counsel so as to _pre-occupy their remarks , and the counsel I think shonld not interfere with the judge and preoccupy his remarks . I was about to state that it was an election speech , and certainl y I do not require prompting . Gentlemen of thejury , —I do not think you ought to attach to election speeches the same degree ' of importance which you might attach to a quiet , calm announcement ; made irrespective of a general election . I think that is fair . But certainly there are other instances , not on the occasion of the election , in which he at least hinted that

    all would be located within a very short time . He slso said that if he were elected the location would be effected in a short time ; hot if he were not elected it would be effected in longer time , the latter being certainly a short term for the purpose . But the question really is not tb be determined by small criticisms like that npon expressions occurring here and there . Ifyou believe Knight , he refused to be clerk ; but somebody put forth that he was the clerk . Now that might simply be a misunderstanding , and you are to judge rather from the whole effect the whole matter produces on your minds , and endeavour , rather than dwelling upon single and isolated circumstances , to form a general and comprehensive judgment . * VYe then had the

    witnesses in reply . Philip M'Grath , the director and secretary ; D . M'Gowan , the printer of the Northern Star , who expressly disavowed any connexion with the society whatever ; Thomas Price , the manager of the bank ; Chinery , the managing clerk of Mr . Roberts ( to whose evidence I shall have to call your attention ;) "W " . H . Grey and John Finlayson , two persons who stated that they were sent by the Chairman of a Committee of the House of Commons to make some investigation of some accounts with reference to some inquiry then going on in the House of Commons . Those proceedings and the report of that Committee have not been given in evidence , but the fact of there being such a report has been presented to your attention—paraded I

    was about to say before you , but I abstain from using an expression which may indicate an opinion beyond the plain statement of the facts . But there has been mentioned a Committee of the House of Commons and its report , and I am somewhat actuated by a spirit which induces me to vindicate the proceedings of tbe court of justice . As a lawyer I have expressed my opinion on the privileges of the House of Commons in the house and out of it ( and I hold the privileges of that house in as high estimation as any man ever bas done , ) as to their legitimate extent , and I give my advice as to how they ought to be treated ; and as a judge I have never seen reason to alter those opinions then and there expressed . But I should he very sorry to see

    the day . when any Committee ofthe House of Commons or any report of such a Committee is to be held up as the model on which to form our proceedings , or as any authority on which you are to found your verdict . Committees of the House of Commons are appointed for specific purposes ; they examine no one on oath—a thing which I still regard as a matter of importance , and which creates a wide distinction between them and our judicial proceedings . I know not how they are constituted—I know not the object for which they are appointed—neither do I know , nor does any one know , the result of their report on the members of the House of Commons . What if you were to ask the six hundred individuals , which brother Wilkins calls a collection

    of gentlemen , separately , how they view the result . ? some would probably say " it is in a blue book , and I never meddle with blue books at all" ( a laugh ); but whatever those might say who did read it , I must , in vindication of the proceedings of our courts of justice , exclude their testimony—I must , in vindication of your independence , of your correct" and upright discharge of duty , exclude all such reports —and beg you earnestly to think nothing of it , to pay no attention to the suggestion made in reference io it , to forget it . I hope you have not read it , but ifyou have dismiss it as far as possible from your consideration . It is not evidence , and you must form your opinion from the evidence before you . Sergeant Wilkins here offered some remark .

    The Lobb Chikf _Babox . —I have not for forty years practised in these courts— -I have not for nearly half a century attended these . courts without knowing this perfectly well . The learned connsel is quite right in warning you against prejudice . It is to be lamented that so many cases are decided on prejudice rather than from the facts . And ifyou watch the speeches of counsel you will be surprised to find how little is addressed to the merits ofthe case , and how much to the prejudices which surround it—you will be surprised to find the larger part given to the accessories ofthe case rather than to its real subject . Brother Wilkins said that this was not given in evidence on the other side ; but I should have resisted it on any side . I could not

    allow to be given in evidence that which is not evidence . I sit here to protect that which belongs to you , as well as to see justice done between the parties . We cannot receive that as evidence which would raise issues not on the record , and which is not evidence allowed by the law . I cannot allow parties to make that evidence lawful which is unlawful even by consent . I cannot allow therules of law to be altered by the caprice of counsel , nor , if they are taunted into cowardice of giving up that which is a solid and legal objection , can I permit it to be abandoned . That report I therefore beg you will dismiss from your memories . Messrs . Grey and Finlavsou then were to prove their statements , and what were the results of their inquiries as far as they recollected . They proved that they wero occupied nine days in __ London and four in the country . They then said that all the documents they required to thembut

    were produced ; on cross-examination they admitted that no original documents were forthcoming . They came to some conclusion on some documents , which conclusion I could not allow to be given here . Ifc was just as absurd in an action between -John Noahs and Tom Stiles for a debt , to call an accountant to saythat he had looked over tbe defendant ' s books to show that the defendant was not indebted to tbe plaintiff , as to call those two accountants to give the evidence that it was proposed they should give . You , as men of business and knowing something of the world , are surely not to be imposed npon by such evidence . Where is tbe opposite side at such an examination ? Where is tbe man to cross-examine the witnesses ? Where is the man who could test the documents ? -Where is the man who would represent Mr . Bradshaw ? To admit sucb evidence would be a gr *« departure from the first principles of justice , Sirir the price cf ihe estates bas been

    Charge Of The Lord Chief Baron. «L Lobd ...

    ¦ hown . to be £ 58 , 000 ,, and the learned Counsel has stated _^ the 1 . coat , of tho "houses to be £ 58 , 000 . If , instead of bringing these two _accountahts , they had sent down some surveyor to examine the houses , and who would take upon himself to say ' that having so examined them-J . do hot _sayeveiy . one , but one m twenty or thirty—they must have cost about so much , that would have been far moro satisfactory . , Sergeant WiLKiNs . -One of their own , witnesses , my Lord , said they cost £ 100 each . . _-N " . P ? _D Chih _\ _Babon ..-. I am aware what he f _f X but it would have been much better to bave had tho opinion of a surveyor as to the outlay , after an examination , instead of what a person , who is not a surveyor says from merely lookin-r at the '

    outsioe . _-yearned Counsel says the roads and cropping cost £ i , _tG 0 ; some proof on that point would also have been satisfactory . " The learned Counsel says he accounts for £ 92 , 660 in this" way , and says that clearing the soil , making the roads , paying the delegates , printing , ' and other expenses , would more than fill up the remainder . I own it would have been satisfactory to me if we had somebody who ' could have said " I have been on the estates , and on such a lot there was so and so , and looking at what would have ! . been necessary , the 1 cost of these things must have been about so and so . " The _' evidence of one or two witnesses of that descri ption would have been of far greater weight . than the testimony of two persons sent by the House of Commons , or continual allusions to the report upon their

    evidence-Sergeant Wilkins . —I conducted my case with reference to the . allegations on the other side . The Lord Chief _Bauon . —I' am coinmehting on that whichocciiVred in the course of tho evidence , and , unless to correct a . ; _mistakb , I must beg , brother WilkinS , you . will not again interrupt inc . Sergeant _WiLjiivs . _^ -A' mistake in inference is often more fatarthah . a mistaken fact . The Lord Cnik _^ BAnON . —I cannot allow you to sit in judgment upon what I say , and proclaim the results of your judgment to the jury . I sit here only for the administration . of justice . This , " g entlemen of the jury , is I a general outline of _theicyidence ; itis now my duty to present to you some part of the history of the Company . After the

    passing of an Act which received the Royal Assent on _theSth of August , 1844 , and took effect on the 1 st of November following ( I _Jbelieye it was in April , 1845 , )' this Society began . I mention that , because the tiniejpf the commencement of the Society was after thepassing of this act . There is no doubt of the fact ' thai" it was formed in . April , l 8 io . because that fact _is-sworn to , although there may ho somo doubt as to . the real date . That act was passed for objects which overy well-wisher of his country must see were of the utmost importance . Ifc was to prevent tbe formation of schemes which were in their nature delusive , although they might be sincere , which were calculated to mislead ; however honest might be the intention ofthe persons who had

    started them . At that time the increasing prosperity of tho country and the accumulation of capital had given rise to a great * variety of schemes which had turned out delusive and erroneous , and this act was introduced and passed in 1 S 44 to check those speculations , the scheme propounded by Mr . O'Connor being commenced in April , 1845 . There was a . meeting which is called a Conference . Ifc is of very slight importance what they chose to call ifc . If it had been called a convention—although- that is a term not generally popular , ifc would have been of no signification whatever . At this meeting there were , at any rate , a number of persons who professed to represent several districts , and they agreed to form a society .

    The result of that was , the book of . rule 3 which I have now before me , Kb . 1 . It was then called the ' " ' Chartist Co-operative Land Society . " I must request you to pay attention to what I am about to say . Every person is expected to know the law , as every one is bound to obey it . Kb doubt that is difficult from the multiplicity of statutes which are enacted in modern times , and even the judges require the aid of a book like this ( laying his hand upon a volume ) , containing statutes which are only one or two years old . Ifc does not follow , therefore , that although certain parts of these rules are illegal , Mr . O'Connor was aware of it . The objects of the Society are here stated : ifc was to consist of an unlimited number of members—shares ,

    . £ 2 10 s . eaeh , paid by instalments . Then the objects are stated—the means by whieh they are to be carried out—the conditions of membership—the mode of government—the choice of officers—their duties —the investment of the funds—the selection of occupants—and the disposal of shares . It states , that members wishing to dispose of thoir shares shall give notice , & c . The Act of Parliament in question is especially levied against societies that admit of a transfer of shares without the consent of the whole of tho members , its object being to prevent bubble schemes . There is no doubt , therefore , that Mr . O'Connor ' s scheme was within this Act of Parliament . It commend d after the passing of the Act , and clearly falls within its meaning . I do

    nofc , however , find anything in this book of rules about dividing the land by allotment . The Act provides , that before the promoters stir a step , they shall register who they are , what their object is , who are their officers , and where they do then * business . Until they do that , whatever else they do is utterly illegal . I believe , however , that the registration of this society was perfectly illegal . George Taylor says , tho provisional registration was first effected on . the 24 th of October , 1840 . They should have been , registered before that . The society was formed in April , 1845 , and it was not registered until October , 1846 . This is an important matter . It is stated in the provisional registration , that the capital is to be £ 130 , 000 shares ,

    in 100 , 000 shares of £ 1 Cs . each . ' In order particularly to guard against all suspicion—against not merely mischief , but the danger of it—the Act has this provision , " That on the provisional registration of any company , it shall be lawful to do certain acts for twelve months only , unless that registration be renewed . " The original registration took place in October , 1846 , it was renewed in 1847 , and it expired in 1848 , One of the provisions ( the 23 rd section ) is this : they are allowed to allot shares , and to receive deposits by way of earnest thereon , at a rate not exceeding 10 s . for every £ 100 on the amount of their " capital . They could , then , only receive , at this rate , on £ 130 , 000 , £ 050 ,- and they had no right , in-point of law , to receive one

    penny beyond ; and every farthing they did receive beyond _£ 650 , was received in violation of this Act of Parliament , which , it is stated in the preamble , is to guard against not only mischief , but th _« danger or suspicion of mischief . But what have they done ? They haye received no less than £ 112 , 000 . Ifc is quite possible that Mr . O'Connor might be ignorant ofthe application of this statute to _^ _his Company , and that he may have been actuated by perfectly honest intentions ; but such is the fact . It is also in evidence that they received money after tbe question was raised of their legality ; and every lawyer , even Mr . Chinery himself , would have said , " You cannot now receive any money at all ; you may be right finally ; you may be entitled

    to _registration ; but , till you get it , you have no right to receive money—and if you do receive it , it is in defiance of the law . " The registration having taken place , the society goes onj and O'Connor , Doyle , and Clark , are then the directors , and Knight and Cuffey auditors . I __ do not know that anything turns on the station in life of the officers . I entirely agree with what the learned counsel said about the individuals who assembled at these meetings . No doubt there were many men of intelligence and education amongst them . I have myself heard abundance of eloquence in times past from persons of this class . There are , no doubt , amongst them , men of powerful minds , well armed with instruction sufficient to enable them to

    discharge what they conceived to bo their duty to society . The treasurer is here represented to be Roberts , the secretaries Wheeler and M'Grath , and the concern went en in this way . In the third book they do not register Mr . O'Connor as treasurer in thc place of Mr . Roberts ; and that , lam bound to say is a violation of the law . On the 12 th October , 1847 , there was a return ofthe withdrawal of Wheeler , and the _substitution of Dixon in the directory ; and then there was an application for a renewal ofthe registration , which lasted till October , 1848 . There" was an application in 1848 ; but it appears to have been refused , on tbe ground that the concern was in _itselfillecal . You are to judge ofthe facts . lean

    only state the law . How far the parties here were cognisant ofit , and wilfully disregarded it , it is for you to judge . How far this neglect may reasonably justify the libel , it is for you to determine ; and it is for you also to consider how far ifc will justify you in reducing the damages to a nominal amount . 1 most unquestionably and fearlessly lay it down as the law that it could not be a bank without its being registered as _' a bank ; and that it could not be legally registered , because it provides ior the purchase of land , and the division of that land amongst the subscribers by a lottery . If it becomes a question as to this being a legal society , 1 at once pronounce , that , in my opinion as a Judge , it is not a legal society , and the attempt to collect large sums of money , and lay them out in lands , to be divided far back

    by a lottery , is perfectly unjustifiable . So as the reign ef William and Mary , all lotteries , or anything having the shape of a lottery , is declared by Act of Parliament to be a public nuisance ; but although , during the period of a great national depression , public lotteries were allowed , the good sense of the country soon put down that nuisancethat public disgrace ; but they were then only allowed to exist under special Acts of Parliament ; and without such Acts they did not exist at all . This is a matter of serious consideration . Mr . O'Connor might have been perfectly uninformed either ofthe law or of its consequences , but , it leads to this result : every man , jpoor or rich , talented or otherwise , educated or ignorant , who subscribed his money for the purposes of this society , was _betrayed into that which had beeu hold for 100 years

    Charge Of The Lord Chief Baron. «L Lobd ...

    to be a public nuisance , ' and it is not only a matter ofconsiderable . doubt whether , any redress of any sort could _havebeen obtained in a Court of Law or Equity , but I _beheye that in no . Court , would they have been able to call Mr . , O'Connor to account if he . hadappropriated the funds to his own private purposes . It maybe said he has not the remotest idea-and as far as I know , he may , be quite incapable—of doing anything of the kind ; hut that is for you to say Brother Wilkins alleges that in case anything should happen to Mr . O ' Connor , he iento

    nas n trustees _^; . but supposing I have thc greatest confidence in my own honour and integrity , howcan I pledge myself f the honour and intogrity oi _thoae who come after me . It is said that the , _-storhas contained announcements to the public ,. tliat Mr 0 Connor holds these estates in _S ' ,, f _» , _Su ° _^ i ' heir-at-law might not be content with that , and say , .. You nre panies to an illegal transaction , and can . havo no claim upon me . _Andiiewould'havo thelawon his side , for the question has been decided over and over _asain _, both in Courts oflaw and of equity . Sergeant Wilkins

    . Mr- - , who repeatedly manifested his dissatisfaction with the , learned Judge ' s charge by the uneasiness of his manner and his . anxiety to interrupt , here observed that the only question at issue was . thebona fides of Mr . O'Connor . The _CniEF B . \ nos \ begse ' d _. of his brother Wilkins to repress his dis position . to mako a commentary on the charge . . It was not seemly , that thereshould he a contention between the Bench and the Bar .. No doubt it . was a question of bona fides as regarded Mr . O Connor , but it v _/ _as : equally a question of bona fides as regarded Mr . Bradshaw . Mr . Sergean t Wilkins turned round to his junior , and requested him to make a , note . , Mr . Keaiiso remonstrated with the learned Sergeant . Mr . Sergeant Wilkins declared that ho was doing nothing wrong , and would not be dictated to by Mr . Keating . - _, .. ¦

    Mr . Keating ( warmly ) .-Then I . will appeal to the Bench . My Lord , I must protest against the learned Sergeant making observations , during your Lordship ' s charge , which are audible throughout the court , and which cannot but reach the ears of thejury . Tho learned Sergeant ought to learn to conduct himself with respect , and to maintain silence as we do . Mr , Sergeant Wilkins ( with vehemence ) . —I know my duty to myself and my client , and I will Dot he deterred from discharging it by you or any one else . I do not require to be schooled in my duty by you , Mr . ; Keating-, nor will I permit it . Your emotion is like a fstovm in a teapot . The CniEF Baron remonstrated in a severo tone , and begged that the . learned Sergeant would not again interrupt the Court .

    , Mr . Sergeant Wilkins . —My Lord , I cannot sit by aiid keep my mouth closed in a case of this kind . I merely turned round to request my junior to take a note of an observation made by your Lordship . , The Loud Chief _Baium * . —Yes ; but it was in such a tone of voico as to import an appeal to thejury . Sergeant _Wilkin-s . —I had no such intention , my Lord : , The LoitD CniEF Bahon . —A person may have good intentions , but he has a right to conduct himself in such a way that his conduct cannot be mistaken by others , and that is the question we have to decide here . In your judgment did Mr . O'Connor act with bona fides through the whole of his transactions ? And even if that wero so , did Mr , " Bradshaw act with bona fides in calling him a political

    impostor ? Brother Wilkins told you , you were to decide this case without prejudice , and without fear ; and he told you that ( which he had much better not have said ) that many poisons were looking to the result of this inquiry . I think that observation would better have been spared . It is very true that he might not , as he said he did not , mean this by way oi a threat , but it had very much the aspect of it . And after tho expression of feeling which was manifested in this Court , and whioh I was obliged to repress , ho might to have been particularly careful not to address you in any language which could be construed into intimidation . Ko doubt you arc to decide without prejudice against either the one party or the other , and ' whatever you think of the case , you are to pronounce

    that decision with fearless courage . The learned Counsel mado some observations upon the press ; but ifc must nofc be forgotten that both parties wielded that formidable instrument—the one being proprietor of the Northern Star , and the other ofthe Nottingham Journal . The whole decision rests upon you , and you must nofc only endeavour nofc to be actuated by prejudices , but not to be acted upon by any fear whatever . Whatever you think , as men , ef that deliver yourselves—and thus do that justice between the parties which belongs to your office . I have a few observations to make upon the rules ; they are broughtoutby M'Grath , the secretary , and one of the directors of this society . He produced No . 3 as tho rules settled at the conference prior

    to October , 1847 . But there is an important change from the second set of rules . They contain the first statement about the bank , which , it is said , is founded for a two-fold purpose , and that the depotors will have the security of the Company's property . At this time an opinion was apparently entertained that the two companies could go on together , and the ono being a bank of deposit , and theother a society for thc purchase and distribution of land , they could each assist the other , and that the connexion would thus lead to prosperous results . The bank of deposit was recommended to the working men , because it gave a higher rate of interest , Ac , and a better security than any other bank . It is nofc necessary to follow this through its

    whole history . Mr . O'Connor may bo a man of sanguine temperament ; he may have contemplated all the benefits to tho working classes which the learned Counsel has described * , he may have engaged with ardour in a pursuit so delightful to contemplate—that of benefitting his fellow-men ; and he may have been carried away by the earnestness of his desires . These considerations may justify the remark , that it must not be supposed his accounts were kept with the regularity of a merchant ' s clerk ; but it is still a question to be decided —in whatever way the irregularities may have occurred , however enthusiastic the pursuit of his objects , whatever his oversights or his ignoranceshow far all these things go to justify the

    assumptions of Mr . Bradshaw , The two institutions ., were to go on together . Tho Company sent its money to the bank , and the money of the depositors was applied to thc purposes of the Company , and then they find out that such a Company could not legally have a bank ; At that time , and at all times , the bank did not pay its way ; at the best of times it is certain that the loss must have been -5100 per year , and at others near upon £ 1 , 000 per year . Who was to pay this loss ? While the Land Company was connected with it , of course ifc would bo tho sufferer ; and it is difficult to see what benefit could possibly arise to the Company from its connexion with an institution which was going on fast for bankruptcy . When the separation took place , who was to go on

    paying the depositors four per cent , out of his own pocket ? They wore told that Mr . O'Connor did this ; and the defendant would probably consider such an unusual generosity a symptom that something was wrong . I havo now to call your attention to rule-book Ko . i . M'Grath , who put them in , said they were agreed to at the August conference , held in 1847 , at the school room on the estate at Lowbands , while tlio Company was still provisionall y registered . His attention having been drawn to the fact that Mr . O'Connor ' s name waa not introduced as treasurer , but that Mr . Roberts still appeared in that capacity , he said that it arose from the necessity that the rules should correspond with the deed . Thero was nofc any necessity for

    that . It is always best to represent matters as they really aro . It might have said "treasurer at present , Mr . O'Connor ; treasurer when completely registered , Mr . Roberts . " There is , however , in this set of rules , a very important change in the announcement about the bank ; all that related to the hank having a _two-fold purpose is omitted , and this is what we have substituted in its place . The introduction contains tho usualstatement of the objects of the Company , and a sort of medley of political economy and _agriculturo , wliich it is not necessary to road . This is a question of bona fides , always coupling the 6 ona fides of Mr . Bradshaw with those of the plaintiff ; and I shall therfore read you a few paragraphs from the introduction : —

    The National Land Company has heen called into existence to pioneer the way in the glorious work of social emancipation . Its particular ohject is tho henefit of its members ; its general object , to point out tho means of rendering permanently prosperous the condition of the industrious millions . The Company aims at the realisation of its purpose by the location of its members upon the land , and by aiding them with funds for the cultivation of their farms . I do not profess to seo how , if all England were cut up into cottage allotments of two and three acres , tho objects of all society ; viz ., the happiness

    oi man ana tne glory of God , would be promoted . Thero would , at any rate , naturally arise a somewhat difficult question—what would be the result to those which would be consequent to tho command " increase and multiply V- If the second generation could be provided for , the third would be rather inoonvenient . I do not , however , throw the slightest discredit upon the bona fides of this scheme . It may have been entertained with perfect honesty , but that is a question for you to deoide . It then goes on * . —

    The Board of Directors , in presenting to the public the following prospectus of the objects , principles , means , rules andrfegulations of the National Laud Company , trust that everything therein contained will be found clear and definite . Their ardent hope ia that these regulations will exhibit the land plan , comprehensive as its bjeets are in such simplicity of detail as shall make it thoroughly understood by every capacity . The Board of Directors feel it their duty to thc public tOBtate that the number of shareholders in the National Land Company is "imlted , and , judging from the celerity with which it now advances , much time _wuU not elapse before the number'is completed . It must be _remembered that aU this tine _^ the Com-

    Charge Of The Lord Chief Baron. «L Lobd ...

    Pany was going on collecting subscri ptions and enrolling shareholders , whioh ifc had no _rir _* W _todoJ— b A very natural question sugggests _itselfto the mind of every individual about to become a shareholder in this Company / namely , ' When will it be likely that i shall be in possession of my land , Ac' To such Inquiry , the Directors have to reply , that the term-of location will depend entirely upon the facility with wliich the capital of the Company can be reproduced . Then comes the scheme for the reproduction © f capital , it is as follows : —

    Suppose the Company make a purchase of 300 acres of land , at 40 * . per acre ( 12 , 000 * . ) , and build 100 cottages at 1001 : each ( 10 , 000 " . ) , besides advancing aid money to one hundred allottees at 221 . 10 s . each Cl _. ' _lWl . ); the aggregate cost of location , including land , building , and aid money , would amount to 24 _. 250 _J . In order to locate a second hundred ofthe members , the Company purposo to re-produce , the . sura of 24 , 250 * . by _making the land , building , _&« ,, liable to the National Land and Labour Bunk ; At this time Mr . O'Connor owned the bank . Ic had ceased to have any connexion with the Land Company , and that fact had been announced to all connected with the bank ;— .

    Liable to the National Land and Labour Bank , for deposits to ' that amount ; the depositors in the bank having a legal claim' upon the property of the Company for the amounts advanced by theni . In this " way the Company intend to reproduce the capital spent upon each estate , and if the industrious classes ot the United Kingdom give the Company that support which their noble and ph lanthropic _objec s deserve , in a very few years a great and . beneficial change wm be effected in the condition of the toiling millions of England ; through the meritorious efforts of the Company . ' It has been asserted , that the' above Classes have not the means of aiding the bank to the extent requisite to locating the thousands ivho belong to the Company , and > yho are yearning to get possession of a . ' little land , which they righ tly look to as their only hope of comfort or independence . Nothing can be more _fiilae _, as the statistics ot the _« Savings' Bank' will amply testify . Do not theso same classes deposit , annually , in such bank more than twenty millions of pounds sterling .

    Certainly , at that time , if Mr . O'Connor was tho sole proprietor of tho bank , the depositors had no security on the land , and it is for _yoiTto decide whether the whole was not completely illusory ; and in deciding upon that it must be remembered that in many places the security of tho land and Buildings is spoken of . It is for you to consider this ; , but , I must say that I cannot understand why , when that notice was given to the depositors in the bank , instead of publishing this document , that circular , or rather the substance of it , was not sent to each shareholder . We had , then , at this time Mr . O'Connor the actual treasurer . and Mr . Koberts the nominal ono . Wc had the bank put forward as one of the elements of this scheme , and yet tho bank had nothing to do with it , and no individual derived

    tbe slightest security from it . The . bank was Mr . O'Connor's own , and he alone was responsible to the depositors . It has teen g iven in evidence that before the rules were registered in 1847 , this separation-Sergeant Wilkins . —The date of the circular , my Lord , is 1848 . The Loud Chief " _Cauoj * . —It is very well to throw in that date , but when you find that change of language , and the omission of " the two-fold purpose , " and the chan _** ein the proprietorship kept in the background , it is for you to draw your own conclusions , but it is my duty to call your attention to the circumstance . I have now to call your attention to the pleas put in in justification . First , it says that it is a Company within the Act of Parliament .. I have quoted , and it appears to me that that statement is made out , supposing the testimony ofthe witnesses to be true . Then it states the scheme as it is propounded in No . 3 ; the rules whicli first contain ah account ofthe banking department :

    and after other matters in the plea '' the defendant further says that the introduction to the rules was false , in divers respects , as the plaintiff well knew . " Then it states in what it was false , " and especially it was false inasmuch as the land had not , as alleged in the introduction , fallen a prey to ruthless monopoly" and so on . But these are mere political matters , and have nothing to do with the issues . Ifc then says it was also false in this , that at the time of the publication of thc said books there was no banking department in the said Company , and certainly there was not ; neither was there a bank , for a bank could not be considered a bank until it was registered , and that was not done or attempted to be done , and I would here observe , as a matter of pleading that if the defendant had traversed the Company in the declaration , ho would have compelled the plaintiff to give evidence instead of having to take it upon himself . The plea then alleges that there was no bank . No doubt that is true .

    And the defendant further says that at tho time of the publication of the said hooks as aforesaid , the Raid Company had an _osl _' ce of business in a certain house , and that in the same house the plaintiff had at the timo last aforesaid an office for carrying on the business of a bank , called the National Land and Labour Bank , the same then heinu not the bank of the said Company , but the bank of him , the plaintiff , which two offices then immediately adjoined to and communicated with each other , thereby then rea . sonably creating in persons to whom the truth of the premises was unknown , the belief that money deposited in the said bank was deposited with the said Company ; and that the depositors thereof would thereby , certainly have as security for the repayment of such deposits the security of the said Company and of the property thereof ; whereas it was at the time ofthe publication of the said introduction exceedingly doubtful , as the plaintiff then well knew , whether such depositors would or could have a _& security for the repayment of such _depositSi the security of the said Company , or of any part of the property thereof .

    It appears to me that that is made out in point of fact if we are to believe the evidence . It is quite certain the depositors had no security on the land . It goes on then to state that " by reason of the premises , as aforesaid , the . plaintiff was dishonest in connexion with the said Land Plan . " They do not , you will see , impute personal dishonesty in tile way of actual '*/ appropriating the money , but with having acted with dishonesty in nofc making a proper and full disclosure of the real state of things . This is the question , and you are to put your own construction ( I can in that give you no assistance whatever ) on what the defendant meant by the word " dishonest . " If he meant to say that the scheme was a political imposition , inasmuch as all had not been statod that ou _^ hfc to have been stated ,

    then the plea is made out . But ifyou think he meant personal dishonesty , then you must decide whethei the plea he made out , but tho two propositions are by no means identical , Then it goes on to say that tho plaintiff , as the promoter of the Company , received from the subscribers sums of money exceeding 10 s . for every £ 100 on the amount of every share of the capital of the said Company , contrary to the provisions of the said act . " This part ; ofthe plea is certainly made out , * because thc Company being commenced after the passing of the Act , neither the most honest and upright man in the kingdom , with the most patriotic views , nor Mr . O'Connor , although ho was actuated with the purest views that ever filled the brest of Howard or Cartwright or any philanthropist , certainly has a right

    to collect - £ 112 , 000 contrary to an Act of Parliament , and keep ifc in his own hands or lay it out as he thought fit ; but over which tho subscribers had no direct control . Then he goes on to show ' that the plaintiff was dishonest in connexion with the Land Plan in falsely suggesting the existence of a banking department of the Company , and by holding out such expectations , and thereby inducing numbers of poor persons to pay their money , and in not taking reasonable care to ascertain whether there was any reasonable prospocfc of such expectations being fulfilled , -fcc . " That raises tho question with respect to tho ' meaning of tho word honest . Practically we should say that a careless person—careless of his own property and careless of the property of other persons—was dishonest . If you should

    think that it imports personal dishonesty , you must decide whether , in your judgment , Mr . O'Connor ' s conduct justifies this imputation ; but ifyou think by dishonesty is meant that he did not make those communications whicli ho ought to havo madethat he did not take pains to ascertain matters which ho ought to have ascertained with respect to the plan , you will then have to see whether , in this other sense of the word , the plea is not made out . The defendant then goes on to allege as a motive , the increase in tho sale of his newspaper . On this point I fully concur with the learned counsel * that if any man contemplates any great scheme of philanthropy , he is not bound * to turn away from it because it would increase tho valuo of some other undertaking in which ho was concerned . If Mr . F .

    O'Connor ' s scheme had been started solely forthe purpose of the sale of the newspaper , ifc would no doubt be open to what is here insinuated . I must say , however , that tho treasurer of a company , into whoso hands all the money passes , professing to _account for it only in his newspaper , does appear to be open to remark ; and of that you are to judge . Then it alleges that Mr . O'Connor received these monies , and purchased estates ; and , in substance , that tho monies and estates were at his own disposal . It has turned out , from the evidence , thatall tho monies of the company and of the _depositors wero placed in his own name at different banks . It was suggested that there was a different account kept at somo of them ; and it appears that the manager of tho bank , on his appointment , said , " This will not do ; you ought to have two different

    accounts ; and thereupon the "B . . A . account was kept separate from the private account . So far Mr . O'Connor followed tho suggestions of a prudent man in separating the two aooounts , which was the more necessary now that the bank was separated from the company . "No doubt there was the suggestion of Mr . "Roebuck that , whilo all these monies were in the name of Mr . O'Connor at a bank , had he been - unfortunately connected with trade , and become ; insolvent , every shilling would have been divided amongst his oreditors . That is the undoubted law of the oase . Had he failed , the accounts could not have been kept separate . It is for you to Bay whether anybody ought to bavejput so large a sum in such a position . That is » question for you , as men of business , and men of the world to i decide , and it is not an unreasonable one , tor Mr . ' O'Connor , as the . proprietor of a newspaper , is a trader witWtlra _swaning of tho Bankruptcy Act .

    Charge Of The Lord Chief Baron. «L Lobd ...

    There have lately been times of enormous specula tion , and men , and very wise . men too—learned in the various chances of life _^ -haye been tempted to lay out money ,. apparently with the certainty of it being returned with profit , but who , despite of every probability / 'have been mistaken , disappointed and ruined ; and I think I am bound to express an opinion that no man has a right to entertain such a confident opinion of his own honour and integrity , as to peril £ 100 , 000 belonging to others , whether poor or rich , andleave its re-payment to the chance of his remaining solvent or honest . There was no " f S 81 ty f or it . It is quite a fallacy to suppose that that money must have been placed in the name oi a single person . Nothing would have been more easy than to have placed it in tho hands of several parties , ( signing a paper tbat it was held by them in trust to he paid over to the treasurer of the contemplated society , when its _Ve-fistratinn bnrt hnnn

    completed , ) and then , if any accideut had happened to one ifc would nofc have affected the fund . The samo remarks apply to the next matter in the ' picas which is tho question of tho estates . The learned Sergeant is quite right that the declaration of Mr . O'Connor would , in caso of his death , he conclusive evidence that he was nothing but a trustee ; but in the meantime , as "Mr . ltoebuck truly remarks , no one can meddle ' with them , he being clearly the legal . _ownciv But these shareholders-, nofc being on » gaged in a legal transaction , could not file a bill in . reference to them for any purpose whatsoever .. And if it were legal , not without a very groat expense . What right , then , 1 ms any man to deal with the property of _othei-3 by putting it at tho risk of-his own honour and integrity , orinako ifc dependant on the extenfc . to which he has pledged himself on- the point of trusteeship one way , and in point of legal interest the other way . Those are the whole of the pleas , and it is for you to say to what extent ;

    Sergeant _. _Wiuass . —With reference to the- property it is stated to be conveyed to his own use and benefit in the libel . '< : * The Lord Chief Baron . —Well , g _entlom-n that is true , he did convey them " to his own use and benefit . " "No other person but him , in point of _faefcjhas a legal title to them . The libel is perfectly true —he did Convey them to his own use and benefit , and to that of nobody else' And when that attorney ' s clerk said they were eonveyed to Mr . O'Connor because ho did not think they ought to be conveyed to Mr , Roberts , you will remember that I asked him whether it would not be better that they should be conveyed neither to the one nor to the other , but to trustees , with the declaration of trust —Mr . Chinery , in the simplicity of a clerk not out of his articles , but certainly in his last year , and for whom , if that be an excuse , it certainly is no excuse for Mr . Roberts _leaving his town business to be

    conducted by such a person , amd , " Ifc never occurred to me that . there was any other mode of convey ing it , but either to Mr . Koberts or Mr . O'Connorj _' . ' as if no person under Heaven but one or the other was capable of such a trust . Mr . O'Connor is a per- ! son of some experience in the affairs of tho world . I should suppose , from his writings ( said the learned Judge , turning over a copy of the Northern Star ) , that he is a person of considerable information and great talent ; and it is a question for you whether or not all this was done , m ignorance—whether he was merely in error , without any bad intentionand thus you will perceive that throughout it is a question of bona fides . But then there . i 3 , also , another question , as to . how far a man may have fallen into errors—if errors they be—and into mistakes , if mistakes they be , and then como to ask for

    damages for comments upon those errors and mistakes . One of the answers given by M'Grath was very curious . When an inquiry was mado why Mr . O'Connor ' s name was not put into the books as treasurer , he said , that they thought ifc would look ill if Mr . O'Connor should appear to he the treasurer and also one of the directors . Well , I know " , that in hundreds of institutions no treasurer is allowed to be one of the directors ; but ifc is equally true that he is always compelled to give security _. However you have the fact ; before you , that because they thought that ifc would not look well to have Mr . O'Connor ' s name in that position , that of Mr . Roberts was continued , ifc heing understood aU the time that he was not the treasurer . I think it will be unnecessary for me again to recapitulate the evidence , unless you desire it .

    The Foreman ; after consulting with his brother jurors , said , I think it will not be necessary to trouble your lordship . The Lord CniEJ ? Baron . —If you do nofc wish to have the evidence again , I have a word or two to add , in order to bring you back precisely to what is the issue . You have had the whole history of tho concern . There was irregularity , and there was more than can be accounted for in that way . I was surprised to find that in the book purporting to be a minute of the proceedings of the Conference in 1817 , a detailed account of some immaterial and really unimportant matters , as , for instance , of some person moving an amendment , which he _afterwarns withdrew , while the appointment of the treasurer is not thero . Then again

    ifc said , the accounts were brought forward and apr proved , and that 50 , 000 copies were to be printed and circulated , but it turned out thatthi 3 did not mean that the accounts were to be circulated ; but a paper merely to saythat Mr . A . B . had examined such accounts as were laid before him , and they were correct . The reports were not forthcoming at all , and the original papers were asked for ia vain . The money , ifc appears ,, was sent to Mr ' O'Connor ' s agent , and every shilling passed into his own hands ; every acre of land was conveyed to him , and at this time no person has really a title to a single cottage or single acre except Mr . O'Connor himself . The issue is , and with that I will conclude , what are the & ona fides of the parties aye or no ? Every man , being responsible to society for tha obvious inference which may be drawn from his conduct , has no right to complain if those whoso duty ifc is to watch over the conduct of public men , censure him . If , then , you believe that the libel is

    utterly false and wicked , the plaintiff is entitled to such damage as shall be commensurate with th © sort of injury done . Ifyou do not take that view , do you take the other extreme one ? Do' you thiols cither justification , personal or political , is made out ? If the former the defendant is entitled to your verdict . Ifyou think the imputation is not personal , but political , and that Mr . Bradshaw did not mean to say that tho plaintiff put tho money into his pocket to spend to bis own concerns ; but that _^ ha did not take the right means to make his project truly known , and that the comments which are made are such as might be reasonably made by reasonable persons on the state of things they had before them ; it appears to me that the defendant will be entitled to your verdict . If you think the imputations are unfounded , but still that the comments mado by the defendant were not wholly unfair or uncalled for you shouldfind for the plaintiff , and the damages will be high ov nominal according to the view you take .

    Neg British College Of Health, New Road,...

    _neg BRITISH COLLEGE OF HEALTH , New Road , London . FALLACY OP ANATOMY AS REGARDS THE CURE OP DISEASES—THE BURKING SYSTEM—DOCTOnS BUYING DEAD BODIES WITH THEIU SHIRTS . ' !! ON !! As persons are continually disappearing no one _Itnows how , it may not he out of place to consider whether the burking system is not still carried on to a great extent Had it not beon for the terrible discoveries made on Burinsand Hare ' s trial , there can he no doubt that thousands would have heen sent into tho next world in order to feed ' doctors with human flesh , so that they ( the doctors ) might- _, fill their pockets , at the expense of _suftV-rinf * humanity . This dissection , our readers should know , forms one ofthevery lucrative emoluments proceeding from ' hospital practice ' . ' For instance , the professor of anatomy pays , * Ve will say , eight or ten guineas for a dead body , and then makes fifty or sixty out of it from the medical students who hava paid their money in ovdev to find out , as they are told , tha

    cause of disease in a dead body !! Was there ever a mora infamous fraud ? Where is the doctor who knows how to euro a disease from dissection ? They all know it to be a shameful piece oFhuijihug , and they are _notal-ltthe wiser from dissection , as for as regards the cure of diseases . It is nil to make money ! money !! money !!! tliat the rascality is kept up ; dust is thrown into the eyes of the public , the doctors tell the lie ( tho wicked lie !) that anatomy is requisite to understand thc cure of diseases . The -only anatomy really vequired is BONE SETTING , in caso of accidents , which might be learni by designs ; the Vegetable Universal Medicine will then do all that is necessary , hy keeping tho blood pure and healing the _pasts—operations for stone , cataract , _cancoi _% & _C-, are _perfectly useless , which is proved by the disease always coming again , because its seat is in the _kmod !!! Burke , the murderer , found' Bunking' tho best trade going—ho used to smother

    people , and then take tliem . ko the doctors almost hot , soma even with their _SHIUTS _^ _O-N , * and used ; without the least difficulty , to get his £ _& for each body . Now there can , be no doubt that the doctors must _uaveksow- * that tlie victims had not come fairly by their deaths , yet they Winked at the whole business- in order that they m ' ght fim . t _** e _» fockxts . Talk , _afteu this , about th * ' honourable' _profes , sioa , the _liberaV-pvofesssion , and such humbug . We say , read the confession of tlie _Burkors here given _^ and ifyou can believe thajt these doctors did not know at the time that the _partis had been murdered , why , then you must have more _wedulity _, than we give you credit for . Tha deadly chcraiBals of the doctors and their burkings are both on a ai \ only the first fa not so _easif djtcelem the public as the other ; but ihat a day of retribution will come we > _njako no doubt . We understand that poor peoplo will no longer allow their relatives , who die m tho hospitals , t » bo mangled by tha knife of the human butchers . No wonder . _^____—_________^____ * Read the official confessions of Burke , made in tb gaol ; to be had of all the Hygeian Agents . Oh ! oh ! _thu Guinea Trade !!

    Pirates' Head Money.—A Parliamentary Pa*...

    Pirates' Head Money . —A parliamentary pa * aer just printed , nt the instance of Mr . Hume , contain *} an account ofthe sums which have heen voted by parliament for the destruction of pirates from 182 ( 5 to the l ? th of " December , 1840 . The amount is - £ 57 , 255 . The payments were aa follows ( £ 20 an 4 £ 5 being allowed per head ) :-In 1826 , £ 4 , 745 ; 1827 , £ 1 , 955 * ; 1828 , 4 , 850 ; 1829 , 4 , 065 ; 1830 , £ 780 ; 1831 , £ 180 ; 1837 ; £ 7 , 865 ;; _m £ 1 , 6 * 85 1839 , £ 3 , 210 ; 1849 , £ 185 . ; 1843 , * W 8 J _» l IM * _* 795 j 1845 , £ 8 , 450 i 1848 , £ 120 j $ 49 , _mM _;

• Citation
  • Northern Star (1837-1852), March 23, 1850, page 7, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse-os.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/ns/issues/ns3_23031850/page/7/