Clarkson v Lawson
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 19 May 1830 |
| Date | 19 May 1830 |
| Court | Court of Common Pleas |
English Reports Citation: 130 E.R. 1283
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, AND OTHER COURTS
S. C. 3 Moo. & P. 605; 8 L. J. C. P. (O. S.) 36. For subsequent proceedings see 6 Bing. 587.
[266] clarkson v. lawson. Nov. 20, 1829. [S. C. 3 Moo. & P. 605; 8 L. J. 0. P. (0. S.) 36. For subsequent proceedings see 6 Bing. 587.] Libel. Defendant published that Plaintiff, a proctor, had been suspended three times, per quod his neighbours were led to think he had been guilty of extortion. Plea, that ha had been suspended once for extortion : Held ill. The declaration stated, that, whereas the Plaintiff at the time of the committing the several grievances by the Defendant, as thereinafter mentioned, had been and was and still is one of the proctors general exercent of the Arches Court of Canterbury, and other ecclesiastical and maritime courts in Doctor's Commons, and had, used, exercised, and carried on the profession and the business of a proctor with great credit and reputation, and had thereby acquired great gains, profits, and advantages, and as such proctor had always conducted himself with great honesty and integrity; yet the Defendant well knowing the premises, but greatly envying the happy state and condition of the Plaintiff, and contriving and wickedly and maliciously intending to injure the Plaintiff in hia said good name, fame, and credit, and in his said profession or business, and to bring him into public scandal, infamy, and disgrace with and amongst all hia neighbours and other good and worthy subjects of this kingdom, and to vex, harass, oppress, impoverish, and wholly ruin him the Plaintiff, theretofore, to wit, on, &e. at, &c., falsely, wickedly, and maliciously did publish and cause and procure to ba published of and concerning the Plaintiff, and of and concerning him in his said profession or business, a certain false, scandalous, malicious, and defamatory libel, containing, amongst other things, the false, scandalous, malicious, defamatory, and libellous matter following, of and concerning the Plaintiff, and of and concerning him in his said profession or [267] business, that ia to say,-" With respect to the employment of proctors, it was strange that Mr. Peddle, who now changed his proctor, should have gone from Mr. Toller to Mr. W. Geery junior, (thereby meaning the said Plaintiff), who had been suspended three times, once by Lord Stowell, and twice by Sir John Nicholl; he was anxious to particularize his (thereby meaning the said Plaintiffs) name, in order to distinguish him from others who did not wish to be confounded with him:" and that the Defendant, further contriving and intending as aloresaid, theretofore, to wit, on, &c. at, &o. falsely, wickedly, and maliciously did publish a certain other false, scandalous, malicious, and defamatory libel of and concerning the Plaintiff, and of and concerning him in his said profession or business, in the form of and; as a letter addressed to the editor of the Times newspaper, in which said letter was and ia contained, amongst other things, the false, scandalous, defamatory, and libellous matter following, that is to say,-"Sir,-Common justice will, I am satisfied, induce you to correct a misprint in your paper of this day in your report of Dr. Lushington's speech upon the subject of the charge against Sir John Nicholl, in which you represent him as stating, that Mr. W. Geery junior was the proctor who had been thrice suspended from practice for extortion; that person, Sir, was William Geering Clarkson, (meaning the said Plaintiff), and not, Sir, your humble servant, William Geary junior:" By means of the committing of which said several grievancea by the Defendant as aforesaid,; the Plaintiff had been greatly injured in his said good name, fame, and credit, and brought into public scandal, infamy, and disgrace with and amongst all his neighbours and other good and worthy subjects of thia realm, in so much that divers of those neighbours, to whom the innocence and [268] integrity of the Plaintiff 1284 CLARKSON V. LAWSON 6 BIN a 269. in the premises, were unknown, had, on account of the committing of the said grievances by the Defendant as aforesaid, from thence hitherto suspected and believed, and still did suspect and believe the Plaintiff to have been and to be a person guilty of extortion, and had, by reason of the committing of tha said grievances by the Defendant as aforesaid, from thence hitherto wholly refused and still did refuse to have any transaction, acquaintance, or discourse with the Plaintiff, as they were before used and accustomed to have, and otherwise would have had; and also by reason thereof the Plaintiff had been and was greatly prejudiced in his credit and reputation aforesaid, and had been greatly vexed, harassed, and oppressed and impoverished, and had also lost and been deprived of divers great gains or profits which would otherwise have arisen and accrued to him in his said profession or business, and had been and was otherwise much injured and damnified therein, to wit, at, &c. The Defendant pleaded-as to the publishing the said several supposed libellous matters in the said declaration mentioned, actio non, because the Plaintiff before the said several times when, &c. in the said declaration mentioned, to wit, on, &e. had been employed in the way of his aforesaid profession and business of a proctor by one Thomas Gillart, and afterwards and before the said several times when, &c. to wit, on, &c. falsely, fraudulently, and extortionately demanded of and from the said Thomas Gillart, as and for the sum of money justly due to him the Plaintiff from the said Thomas Gillart for the work and labour of him the Plaintiff, as such proctor, doue, performed, and bestowed in and about the business of the said Thomas Gillart in pursuance of the aforesaid employment, and for the fees and disbursements due and. made to and by him, as such proctor, in [269] respect thereof, a certain large sura of money, to wit, the sum of 191. 14s. 4d., whereas in truth and in fact, the sum of money then aud there justly due to him in that behalf, then and there amounted to a ranch less sum of money, to wit, the sum of 91. 19s. 8d.; and the Defendant further said, that afterwards, and before the said several times when, &c. to wit, on, &c. Sir J. Nicholl Knight, then being Judge of the Prerogative Court of Canterbury, caused the aforesaid false, fraudulent, and extortionate demand to be taxed by the proper officers of the said court in that behalf, to wit, the Rev. George Moore, Charles Moore Esquire, and the Eev. Eobert Moore, registrars of the said court, and that the said officers by their deputy in that behalf, did afterwards, and before the said several times when, &c. to wit, on, &c. report in the said court to the said Sir J. Nicholl as and being such Judge as aforesaid...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Speidel v Plato Films Ltd
...words meant that he had been convicted twice, they were true and thus bring the two convictions before the jury. In Clarkson v. Lawson (1830) 6 Bing 587 Serjeant Wilde put the very case: If the defendant charges the plaintiff with stealing three horses, can he not justify as to one?, and Pa......
-
The Earl of Manchester and Others against Vale
...Duthy. Pout, 296, note (1). 1 Chitty's Rep. 132, Wilcox v. Newman. [2 B. & C. 477, Thomas v. Heathorn. Iliil. 220, St. Germain* v. Wilkin. 6 Bing. 266, 587, CUtrkson v. Lawxon. 2 Or. Mees. & R. 719, Cmnop v. Holmes. 1 C. & M. 618, M'Cunlay v. Driscoll. Ibid. 362, Gmmp v. Adnei/. 2 Mees. & \......
-
Barilaro v Shanks-Markovina (No 2)
...words meant that he had been convicted twice, they were true and thus bring the two convictions before the jury. In Clarkson v. Lawson [(1830) 6 Bing. 587, 591] Sergeant Wilde put the very case: “If [the defendant] had charged the plaintiff with stealing three horses, he might have justifie......
-
Gleaner Company Ltd v Wright
...Weaver v. Lloyd (1824) 2 B. & C. 678; 107 E.R. 535 (The case of the cruel horseman); Clarkson v. Lawson (1829) 6 Bing 266 and 587; 130 E. R. 1283 and 1407 (The case of the extortionate proctor (bailiff); Goodbourne v. Bowman (1833) 9 Bing 532; 131 E.R. 712 (The case of the corrupt or pecula......
-
Cases referred to in 1983
...14 W.A.C.A. 59. 86 City Property Development Ltd v. Attorney-General of Lagos State & ors (1976) 1 All N L R 28 399 Clarkson v. Lawson (1829) 6 Bing 266; 3 Moo & P. 23 Clement lwuanyanwu v. The State (1964) 1 All N.L.R. 413. 281 Clerical etc. Assurance Co. v. Carter (1889) 22 Q.B.E. 444 at ......
-
DUMBO & ORS V. IDUGBOE
...996 (PC). 18. Wernher Bert v. Markham (1901) 18 T.L.R. 143, 763. 19.Johns v. Gittings (159) Cro. Eliz 239. 20. Clarkson v. Lawson (1829) 6 Bing 266; 3 Moo & P. 21. Cooper v. Lawson (1938) 8 A & E 746. 50 22.Sutherland v. Stopes (1925) A.C. at 62, 63, 75. 23. Tai Hing Cotton Mill Ltd. v. Mam......