Dr. Thomas deposed that the prisoner had originally come to him as groom and butler, but, hearing that he had been in a dispensary in England, he was promoted to the charge of the surgery. H e yvas competent and trustworthy. T h e jury, after twenty minutes' deliberation, brought in a verdict of " Manslaughter." The Croyvn Prosecutor said he knew a good deal about the prisoner, and a better conducted m a n there could not be. The prisoner yvas remanded for sentence. T h e case yvas called on for judgment on the 18th, yvhen his Honor Judge A'Beckett inflicted afineof forty shillings. FIRST LIBEL ACTION AGAINST THE "ARGUS"—14TH MARCH, 1848.
Moor v. Kerr. There never yvas a cause tried before the Supreme Court yvhich excited more public interest than this, and most persons looked for the result yvith some degree of expectation. T h e plaintiff yvas Mr. Henry Moor, twice Mayor of Melbourne, once very popular; and the defendant yvas Mr. William Kerr, equally well known as the proprietor and Editor of the Melbourne Argus. T h e trial took place before Judge A'Beckett and a Special Jury of Twelve. Messrs. Williams and Stawell yvere Counsel for the plaintiff; Messrs. Pohlman and Stephen for defendant. In the course of the jury panel Mr. George Cavenagh answered, but yvas challenged by the defendant, because he was the Editor and proprietor of the Port Phillip Herald, not only a rival newspaper, but ahvays at war with the Argus, personally and editorially. After some legal arguments, Alderman Bell and Mr. Dalmahoy Campbell were sworn as triers, to determine the issue whether Cavenagh stood indifferent between the parties in the suit. Cavenagh yvas sworn, and admitted having expressed opinions upon the merits of the case; but he could not say that his mind was made up, and he did not knoyv anything of the evidence to be adduced. H e certainly had formed a very decided opinion as to the party who ought to succeed. After a few remarks from the Judge, the triers found that Mr. Cavenagh did not stand indifferent betyveen the parties. So he was put by. Mr. Skene Craig, a merchant, was challenged by the plaintiff for a similar reason, and a similar process of testing yvas resorted to. H e admitted the expression of an opinion on the subject, but he put the case hypothetically. The triers declared him to be indifferent. Mr. John Bullen, a member of the City Council, yvas objected to by the defendant, and acknowledged that he had jocularly remarked to the defendant that, if on the jury, he should find against him. Objection disallowed. Mr. D. S. Campbell was next challenged, and informed the Court that it was his intention, if on the jury, to appeal to the Judge to strike him out, " because he, and all connected yvith him, had been so repeatedly libelled by the Argus that it yvas not in human nature that he could go into the box and find an unprejudiced verdict." H e was declared " not indifferent," and shelved. T h e next impeachment was as regarded Mr. Ebden, M . L . C , yvho stated that he had expressed opinions about the defendant, but it yvas only private spleen that prompted the course now taken. Mr. Ebden was pronounced indifferent. The pleas yvere the general issue, and a special plea of justification. T h e statement for the plaintiff disclosed that the parties had been for years connected with separate Political, Municipal, and National cliques, and yvere unfriendly disposed to each other. Moor had already been Mayor, and Kerr wanted to be; but the other thwarted him in his desire; and took an opposing side at the November Municipal Elections, the pivot upon yvhich the Mayoralty annually turned. Moor yvas a solicitor in large and lucrative practice, and professed to be a staunch Episcopalian, whilst Kerr lived in a continuous state of partial impecuniosity, and was an unflinching Presbyterian. T h e Episcopalian Bishop arrived in Melbourne in January, and shortly after it was announced that he had appointed Moor his Chancellor of the Diocese. This yvas a chance which Kerr was not disposed to let slip unutilised, and accordingly one morning during the month of February an issue of the Argus appeared with the following paragraph, yvhich constituted the libel complained o f : — " T h e English C h u r c h — H e r Majesty's Letters Patent, ordaining Melbourne to be a City, and appointing the Right Rev. Dr. PerryfirstLord Bishop of this Diocese, which were missing when the time was appointed for the installation of the Bishop, have at length turned up, and
