Welsh Newspapers

Search 15 million Welsh newspaper articles

Hide Articles List

8 articles on this Page

[No title]

News
Cite
Share

On Monday morning, Adolphus Bosenlwrg: was brought up from the gaol of Newgate for sentence. As during the hearing on Saturday, the Old Court was densely crowded while sentence was being pronounced. 1801 On the prisoner being placed in the dock, Mr. Montague Williams stated to the Court, m correction of a misapprehension of what had been said on Satur- day, that so far from the publication called Town Talk having stopped since the prisoner was in custody, it had been and still was in circulation. Mr. Justice Hawkins proceeded to pass sentence. He said Adolphus Rosenberg, you were convicted before me on Saturday, partly on your own confession and partly by the verdict of the jury, of having published a series of very atrocious libels in a scandalous, mischievous, and menda- cious production-I will not Insult the respectable portion of the Press of this country by calling it a newspaper -published by you under the name of Totm Talk. It was so published by you with the professed object of holding up to scorn and to suppress vice and immorality, but its real object was to pander to the depraved and prurient tastes of those who could be found weak enough and debased enough to buy and read your publication. For six conseoutlve weeks, with an audacity, to my mind, un- paralleled, you alleged that Mr. Langtry, a gentleman who was and Is living upon happy and affectionate terms with his wife, and moving in society, beloved and respected by his friends. had been obliged, in consequence of the infidelity of his wife, Mrs. Langtry, with an exalted personage and two other gentlemen, to seek for a divorce in the Divorce Court, and In more than one of the numbers In which you made these false and wicked announcements you alleged that the details of the adultery which was charged in that petition were of such a character as to be a national disgrace, alôd of so prurient a kind as to be unfit even to be discussed in a public Court of Justice In the ordinary way. You alleged, further, that such was the nntnlon of the learned president ot the Dlvoroe Court (Sir Tames flannen), and that acting upon that belief and that i™„r««sion he had ordered, contrary to the usual and ordinary custom, this particular case to be heard fe miner* ordinary t You were warned, and emphatically «™.ri l a number ol Truth that your statement as warned, in a dlTOrce having been presented had to a petition (0n,e French newspaper, and In the been reproduced Wwag polnted out that there was same paragraph in foundation for the charge you Had notone singtesyUable oiw^ yery next numbe| 0', Town Talk H in language which it la not neces- *hat r should here repeat—stated, glorying in the Frencb newapaper at all that oughli to have the credit of and that the Inan who wrote the article in wal blm..1f telling an untruth when he said there was no foundation for the charge which you had made against Mrs Langtry. You persisted In these libels, alleging that the case was to be heard early in the month 0f NovemOer-the moment that was to say. the Courts re-a^sembled-untU the first week to Oc'fjje*- Probably to that first week of October you knew perfectly weu that when November came you would be lntvitabiy detected It having falsely ♦here was such a petition on the file at all; how you could be«t escape from the exposure which then, of necessity, awatttd you, y"n invented this statr,ment,- that Mr. Langtry f):iod withdraw his petition. Moreover, you insinuated fna it was liot unlikely that he would obtain a diplomatic appolutixent abroad and that It was very un- certain, or unlikely, whether his wife would accompany him. No man who sead that, which was the final paragraph re- la«n<* to this soandal, oould for a single moment hesltaM tn <«*• to the conclusion that yon intended to insinuate that tiMvre was truth in the petition that it was filed by Mr Tjvngjry because he felt conscious of his wife's adultery with venoai of high standing; and that he had been in. duced dishonourably, shamefully, disgracefully to forgo his petition in consideration of an appointment being given to hlae abroad, leaving hie wife behind him to continue hr adulterous Intercourse with those who had beeu named as oo-respondents. For six consecutive weeks aid this series of libels appear In that production of yours. It was said by your learned and able counsel on Saturday-alld I was glad to hear him state it— that he bad received from your own lips authority, even your authority, for saying there was not one single syllable of truth to all this. Your learned counsel also said, how- ever, that persons in the position of Mr. and Mrs. Langtry might have rested quiet beoamse of the undoubtedly high character they possess, and because of the good feeling of those who are acquainted with them and who know that this scandal must of necessity be untrue. I agree with the learned counsel that they might have rested on their own character and position. But I think they were not only not bound to do so, but that their net doing so and their insisting upon bringing you to iuitloe reflects credit upon them. I think It was their bounden outy to take the steps they have taken—namely, to bring to justice a Person whom they found a wilful and scandalous libeller, and that they deserve the thanks of the country for the course they have pursued. Indicted for those libles, yen ba*e through the mouth ot/ our learned counsel, admUted that there is not a stogie syllable of foundation for them. You have admitted them to be fal*e, but you dflfed that you knew them to be false. That issue had, tbera»*e, to be submitted to the jury, and the jury who t°*i eTj" denoe that, to my mind, could leave no shadow ot doubt in the mind of any man of common sense, came to the con. elusion that when you published those Htels you P^ll«hed them knowing them to be false. I' y°u e^er. P? ? them to be true, you were guilty of a cruel and wicked act for the purpose of gratifying your own scrdld purposes and putting money Into your pccket by adding to the distress of the husband and the degradation of his wife. But you have now been found guilty of publishing them wlthlkn0^e{jfe that they were untrue. I repeat that you have been found guilty of puollsbing as atrocious a series of libel. as ever were brought before my notice with the knowledge that tbey were untrue, your sole purpose being that c«f putttngmo 7 *fhr pocket by pandering to the filthy appetites of those who take pleasure to reading productions of your*. I Jhave thought what sentence I ought to pass to'th^ have relected calmly upon it, and I have oom.s to this conclusion, that the time has arrived when such N^ls as those of which you have been found guilty ™]»t be su|p- pressed with the strong hand of the law. » *or the offence of which you have been found guilty, in publishing, knowing them to be false, t^w lib«lson Mr. and Mrs. Langtry, I sentence you to be for 18 calendar months, and I further direct that at the expiration of tbat time you enter into your own recognizances In the sum ot £ 1,000 to keep the peace and be of good behaviour towards Her Majesty and her liege subjeots for the farther term of IS calendar Months. So much for the indictment which is preferred at the suit of Mrs. Langtry. As regards the indictment preferred at the instance ot Lord Londesborough, the libel observ^I volved in the libel to which I have already made observa- tions to you; but, nevertheless, bearing in mind that 1 can- net pass that over without expressing my character ot the libel, events affecting Lord alone, I do so by sentencing you for that to be Imprisoned for six calendar months. That wUl run 1 come now to the case of Mr. and Mrs. Cornwailis West. Their case stands upon a very different fooJ^K- not charge in the libel to which you have they were guilty of actual immorality. Yiou did not make that charge, for you thought probaWy that having had six consecutive weeks of the divorce of vary the food you offered to your readers there/ore jou thought fit to hold Mrs. Cornwailis West ^P to ridlcule OT-j ennasf a ffftDtoSf foolUh, Md innDodeBt SET ton« Ufe^tlf'^ch'detalle^^rc^sta^tluS U^wo^d not he iurnrialnc if some persons were to say, can all this h«untrue?0^n "uymui have the impudence and the audacity to publish such libels as these? I^t tell you, and in wllto* you let me tell all those who may be interested a. t „ if that, it; li iust as much a libel to hold a man up to ridicule an to make jinputations against tbe moral cha- nf the individual. No man has a right to hold In^th«r nn to aooTD and if he does publish that which tends to briSg mother Into ridicule he is amenable to the criminal Uw of the country. For this I pass upon you the sentence ot slx months' imprisonment, to run concurrently with the JlrTfThA effect of my judgment is that for the libels of wMch'you have been convicted you will be Impri- loned for 18 calendar months, and I only regret that I have not the power to add bard labour. Messrs. William Wilfrid Head and Henry Robert Mark, printers, in Fleet-lane, then surrendered for sentence upon the charge to which they had pleaded Guilty," of printing the numbers of Tvum Talk IQ which the libels in question appeared. Mr. Besley and Mr. Avory were oounsel for the de. fendants. Mr. Justice Hawkins said I have considered the matter which was mentioned to me on Saturday (alluding to a suggestion that the defendants should be discharged on the payment of the oosts incurred by Mr. OorawaUls West). Of course I make no bargain with regard to these defendants, nor do I say anything as to that. I find that the libel upon Mr. and Mrs. Cornwailis West, to the printing of which the present defendants have pleaded Guilty," is contained in the same number of Town Talk as that in which the last libel upon Mr. and Mrs. Langtry ap- peared. I cannot help feeling, therefore, that the printers are iust as much responsible for this Utter libel upon Mr. and Mrs. Langtry, although they are not Indicted for itjas they are for the libel upon Mr. and Mra. Cornwailis West; and I would take this opportunity of saying, while I am not now going to pronouooe iudgm&ntu that ft would be well for those occupying a position audi as' that of the preseht de- fendant*, aa printers, to take great care (and I hope that in the future this may be a warning to all to take great care) as to the mode in which Journal, of this sort are conducted. Here we have six whole weeks of the most scurrilous, un- true, and libellous matter printed against the prosecutors; and as regards the printers, unquestionably it seems to me, looking at all the facts and at the existence of their In- difference and Mgugenoe-1 do not say wilful Indifference or negligence, as to what may have been In the paper-they might have been convicted of having published the libel upon Mr. and Mrs. Langtry in the same way as Rosenberg has been. Therefore, I repeat, it behoves persons in the position of the defendants to take great care with respect to the manner in which they conduct their business. I have no hesitation in sayln; that in the case of a journal of this character, which is published week after week and which contains such a mass of wicked and scurrilous matter, no printer can shelter himself behind the mere suggestion that he entrusted his business to another man, leaving It to him to say what should go In and be printed and what should not. It ought to be well known that the printer himself is responsible for the Issue which emanates from his establish- ment; and seeing, as I do, that the same paper which con- tained the libel en Mrs. West oontained abo the libel on MrtI. Langtry, I myself might have been prepared to take a course which I will not mention now. It has been sug- gested that I should liberate the present defendants upon their paying the oosts ef the prosecutions on the part of Mr. and Mrs. West. I am not disposed to say that I think that would be sufficient. I will say no more on that point; but to order that the defendants may have an opportunity of doing that which possibly may induoe me to take a dif- ferent view of their case than I might otherwise take In any sentence which I might think It right to pronounce, I shall postpone passing sentence upon them to-day upon tnetr entering into their own reoognltanoes to come up tor judg- ment when called upon and I shall require a report to be made to me as to the costs of these prosecutions, which, un- happily, by law, I have not the power to order to be paid, otherwise I would have taken my own oourse about it. I say I shall require a report to be made to me before the December Sessions as to what has been done. Mr. Bealey observed that it was a prevalent notion among the printing trade that where a paper was not edited, anb-edited, read, or corrected in the office of the printers whose name it bore they were not per- sonally responsible, but that their responsibility drifted to the proprietor. Mr. Justice Hawkins said it was a very erroneous notion and impression, and the sooner it was corrected the better. As for the defendants Messrs. Head and Mark, he had not a shadow of doubt that they had not the slightest notion of the sort of production they were printing week by week. If he had thought other- wise, he should not have been content to let them go, but should have punished them in another way. As it was, he should simply call upon them to enter into their own recognizances in £1,000 each to appear for judgment if called upon, which, of course, depended on circumstances. Mr Watkin Williams stated that the trade custom to which Mr. Besley alluded was in direct violation of the Act of Parliament (32 and 33 Via., cap. 2t, sec. 2). Mr. Justice Hawkins said they could not establish a custom to override an Act of Parliament or to absolve them from the consequences of printing a libel; at least he should require very strong authority from the House of Lords before assenting to such a doctrine. The defendants then formally entered into their re. cognizances, and the case ended. On Tuesday morning Adolphus Rosenberg was again placed at the bar at the Old Bailey, and Mr. Justloe Hawkins, address- Ing blm, said I find there has been some misapprehension with regard to the character of the sentence which I in- tended to pass upon yon, and that it Is supposed that you would be entitled to be treated as a first-class misdemean- ant, and that you would as such be entitled to aee your friends, and to maintain yourself as you desired. This was not my Intention, and the sentence you will really have to undergo will be that of eighteen moTithiC imprisonment, short only of hard labour, and in all other respecb Jon will be treated aa though you were convicted of felony."

THE INUNDATIONS IN SPAIN.

THE AFGHAN CAMPAIGN.

THE "TOWN TALK" LIBELS.

[No title]

AGRICULTURAL DEPRESSION.

Ipigffllmrarus Intelligence.

THE MARKETS.