An action brought by Spring, the prize-fighter, whose real name

is Winter, against the proprietor of the Son, fora libel, was tried on Satur- rimy in the Court of King's Bench. The alleged libel was contained in an article copied into the Sun from time United Service Journal. The rase was stated as follows by Mr. Follett, the plaintiff's counsel—

The writer of the article thought fit to assert that most of the individuals who had been connected with the ring llad shown themselves to be worthless characters, and from theime he argued that prize.fighting was in itself debasing, and did not promote any noble feelings in the mind. In the course of the article, the writer mentioned nit:tierce's instances of men who had been connected with "thieving," anal who had suffered the penalties of the law for various descrip- tions of crime. Among those was Thurtell, who had been hanged at Hertford or the molder of lVeate; and of him it was said that he associated with prize-

s and attended prize-fights, and to have his mind so thoroughly imbued with the feelings of "the Ting," that even on the scaffold he inquired how a light between Spring and the Iiish Champion had terminated ; and on being told that Spring had won it, he expressed his satisfaction, and said that Spring was a good fellow. It was added too, that he was the bosom friend of Spring. The names of the prize-fightere anal of their supporters were given in a list with references from one to the other. lu one part of the list the name of Spring was mention el, and the writer classed him as one of the worthless characters which It was the object of that article to prove were so numerous in the prize-ring. The plaintiff was alluded to in the following manner—" Spring, Tom, alias Booms Winter, fright a nototious cross with Langan (vide Thurtell)." In this manner, by cotinecting the name of the plaintiff with that of a notorious Mon, the publication had endeavoured to injure him.

Sir John Campbell addressed the Jury for the defendant. In the course of his speech, he argued, that to cortueet the name of an honest man with that of a felon, was not necessarily a libel on the former— A person of the name of Donolan, some years ago, murdered his uncle, and was executed ; and a peat friend of Doted:as was Mr. Jekyll, a most honour- Ale member of the profeseion of the law ; but would any oue say that the eir- winstmee of Mr. Jekyll having been a friend of Donolau was an imputation ,apun Mr. Jekyll's character ? This article, it was said, was to be considered athellons bee uuse it said ‘•life Thurtell ;" hut in Vesey's Reports, iu the index, thee were these worols—" Lunatic —we Lord Chancellor." Upon looking to LI you Itiond that Lord Erskine had contended th it the meon had no effect on mimics ; hat this did 110t mean to insinuate that the Lord Chancellor was mad.

Lord Denman, in summing up, mentioned another circumstance con. netted with Mr. Jekyll's arquaintance with the murderer— Ile remembered having heard that Mr. Jekyll was abroad at the time of the lad; and that on his retUr11 tat Engilild Shaittly afterwards, he found two cards with the names of Mr. Donolan and Sir Theodosius Broughton upon them. Ile L,uked his servant where they resided ; and watt surprised to receive for an answer ilit neither of them was alive, that one had been hung for the murder of the The Jury, after a few minutes' consultation, found a verdict for the dtjeadant.

On the same duty, Mr. Breslin, an assistant surgeon in the Otis Lancers, (Teamed a verdict, with 42000i. damages, against Captain Carnegie, 'el of Sir James Carnegie, for criminal conversation with his wife. The trial occupied a eoneiderable time, but possesses little public inter. 8r. It appeared that Mr. Brandin lived in the barracks at Gort, in Ireland, with his wife, the only lady in the barracks ; that she seats very laueg, handsome, and engeging in her manners ; that she was permitted fehave very free interceurse with the officers of the regiment, especially 'rah Captaio Carnegie, with whom she eloped; they lived in lodgings

%yea Street, trader the immure of Captain and Mrs. Campbell. Mr. weblin's treatment of his wife appeared to have been uniformly kind.

On Mundity, Mr. Ramsbottom, Member for laVindsor, and a banker *that town, and one Donlan, at tailor, were tried on an indictment for rosspiring to defeated the Reverend Thumeas Brett of 5001., obtained u4er a promise to eseocure from Lord Eldon, then Lord Chancellor,

• elturech preferrneot for Brett, through Mr. Ramsbottom's interest. Prioeipal evidence Cue the prosecution was Brett himself; who or that he had depoeiteei 4.00/. in Mr. Rantsbottom's bank, on the

le of the Later to got isitnaeppointed to a living. It was, however, eltt"d by this Brett, that he .fiaei frequented gatnbling-houses; that had fee ensue ;steers beeet lissitte Iv time King's Bench, and that he

had drawn the money out of Mr. Ramsbottont's hank ill elar

way of business. It WitS evident, it) "'hurt, diet it was a mere 1:I: esa transaction on the part of Mr. Ratitsbottorn, not at all dis.eceitabie him. Sir John Campbell, in speaking for the defendaut, thus accounted for Brett's motive in prosecuting so respectable a man— There had now elapsed eight years since this transaction had taken place ; aud it was probable that this proceediug was adopted to make Donlan pay a sum of money, which it was found impossible to recover by an action against hitn. The reason for joining Ramsbottom with time defendant Donlan was this—that an indictment for a conspiracy could not he preferred against one man. The object of the proceeding was to alarm Dendan ; and consequently Mr. Reinstitute torn was joined in the indictment, not because he had had any thing to do with the transactinn between time prosecutor and Donlan, but because money had been deposited in his hands, which hall been subsequently drawn out by bills of exchange, in the regular coutse of busioess. Grand Juries should always be cautious of receiving evidence in cases of this description. They should pay attention to the evidence brought before thew in causes of calasidracy, as causes of that kind were frequently preferred without the possibility of their being main- tained, when brought before the Court. Mr. Ilamshottom had allowed tide money to be deposited in his hands, hut be was quite ignorant of the purpose fer which it was placed there, and paid it ma again the moment he was required to do so. To suppose him guilty of this conspiracy, the Jury would infer he was the must foolish, as well as the most wicked of men; for Ile was charged with nothing less than undertaking to obtain preferment from a Lord Chancellor to whom he was opposed in politics; and with promising to get it for motley, which money he had given up when it was properly demanded.

Mr. Platt relied upon the bad character of the prosecutor for the defence of Donlan. Mr. Patteson, the Bank Director, and ;mother gentleman, spoke to Mr. Ilanishottom's irreproachable character. The Jury stopped time case, and acquitted the defendants.

On Wednesday, eight persons, called in the report Ford and ether% were convicted of an assault in resisting the officer employed in Jeneary last, to levy a distress on time premises of Ford, a baker in Suite, eh° had refused to pay the King's taxes.

On Thursday, Captain Robison was tried on an indite:melt for a libel on Lieutenant-General Darling, contained in a pamphlet published first in Sydney, New South Welles, by Mr. Hall, the editor oaf the Sydney Monitor, and subsequeutly in London by Captain Robison. The readers of time Spectator are already familiar with the uature of the charges against General Darlitig. Evidence of the publication was given. From the mode of proceeding adopted by General Darling, the truth or fuleehood of the libel of couree remains undecided. 'Ibis point was insisted on by Mr. Erb., Captain Robison's atomise!. After stating that there were three modes of proceediog open to those who compludned of being libelled, and that Governor Dillies': had chosen that which rendered it unnecessary for him to conic fortvald and meet the charge like a man of truth and honour, he went on to say— The habit of oppression was familiar to almost all colonial goveowee from Governor Vall's time down to the present day ; all were often guilty of gi kaolin oppression, tyranny, and misrule. The defetalant took his stand oil this broad ground, that wheu the matter complained of as libel related to the public eon- duct of a public officer, unless that °direr ...bowed that tlw charges were false, no offence was committed. 'flue prowentor here did not allow the t a tith of the charges to he pone into. Ile took a course that prevented the possibility of all inquiry. Yet inquiry was proper in a ,'use like the present ; anol it WA., for the Jury to say whether, all other modes of inquiry being denied, the imptiry by a public appeal of this situ t was not tat be permitted. All public offieers were pro- perly liable to have their cooduct questioned, and sometimes it was que-tioned in no %rely ceremonious manner. At the time the Catholic Entancipatioo was conceded, a nobleman of this country had distinctly stated that the Prime Minister had rendered himself liable to impeachment. In the same manner the Ministry that had just locen dismissed had been perpetually accused of mis- conduct, and hardly a da, ausscd without their motives bei rig i•opugneol. What check could there be lip s, the conduct au i a governor of a distant eadony, but the fear of a public in ;• ? Unless the Jury were satisfied that the state- ments were false, they tieze it rout to pronounce a verdict of guilty.

Lord Denman told the Jury that there could be no doubt of the charge being libellous ; amid the deferultint was found guilty.

The Court of Excheroter was occupied several hours on Wednesday, with the trial of an te•reem for damages brought by Dimes the attorney against the publisher of the Times. 'lime Ii el was said to be cot:rained in a leading article on the law of libel, and in a report of the timid " Dietes versus Harmer." The proceedings of Divas Wen alluded to as

the " buceaneering adventare of a notorious eolieitor," &e. After a very long speech for time defendant from Sir John Campbell, in. which he took occasion to state his opinions on time law of libel, Baron Alderson charged the jury.

It was not necessary to go itou tile Ebel law ;is it might he hereafter, hut as it now stood ; and, in refereoce to the existing state of the Law, he dotillol liLel to be " any writirtg or !edification which directly or indirectly tended Ca) hajau re the reputation and character of another individual." He we+ note speaking only of private nig al public I d,nis. 'rile Jury would consider, in the first

place, whetlwr the defendant had published soniethiag of Mr. Dims ; awl of

that fact, which indeed Was admitted by the defendant, thete could he no doubt. Then it was for then, to say if the rube-atm ion, taking it altogether, had a ten-

dency to injure the character or reputation of the plaintiff; and if so, they were to deride what damages he ought to receive as a compensation. With the question of costs the Jury bad nothing, to do. By the law as it sued, a farthing damages carried costs, !unless it appeared to the Judge that the mitten should not

have been brought, ant he certified to that effect. The Jury wouhl take first one and theu the other of the two articles set forth on the recoil, considering each publication 11,4 a whole, and say whether the immediate effect was to injure the character of Mr. Dices ; but they were not to make a strummed applicatio* of the articles, the plaintiff beteg bound to show fairly that they applied.

After a short consultation, the Jury found a verdict for the de- fendant.

In the Court of Common Pleas, on Saturday, the trial of an action for damages occupied many hours. It was brought by Mr.

Sibley, a tradesman in Oxford Street, against a butcher 1111111Cli Ferule%

for adultery with Mrs. Sibley. The plaintiff seemed to have been actuated by some unaccuuntahle whim ofjeulousy, as throe was no proof whatever of any illicit intercourse having taken place between the sus- pected parties, nor did it appear that there was any partiality enter- tained by the lady for the butcher. The plaintiff was nonsulte d.

A true bill •*as found on Wednesday by the Grand Jtay of Sarrye against the Bishop of Winchester and lane others, among whom are three clergynien and two magistrates, on indictment, for an tiesault con -

'witted upon the Reverend Cornelius Griffin, at a public meeting, recently held at Epsom, on behalf of the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts. •