1824—At the Midsummer Assizes, before Mr. Justice Littledale, was tried the cause of PIERPOINT _v._ SHAPLAND, in which Matthew Pierpoint, Esq., of Worcester, surgeon (and as it proved upon the trial, physician also), brought an action for slander against Miss Susanna Shapland, a lady then residing in College Green. The damages were laid at £5,000. Mr. Pierpoint had been called in to attend Mrs. Isaacs, Miss Shapland’s sister, shortly before her death, and administered an emetic: after that he ceased to attend her, and Miss Shapland afterwards told Mrs. Henry Clifton that Mr. P. had treated her sister improperly. Mr. Jervis was counsel for plaintiff, and Mr. Russell for defendant. A verdict was returned for plaintiff, with 39s. damages. This trial excited extraordinary interest—ladies, to make sure of places, going to the courts at five o’clock in the morning. 1825—At the Lent Assizes an action for libel, against CHALK AND HOLL, was tried before Mr. Justice Littledale. It was brought by a painter named Davis, who had, by mistake, been described in a paragraph in the _Worcester Herald_ as concerned in a street row and an assault upon a watchman. The party’s name _was_ Davis, but not the one pointed at in the paragraph, and defendants, finding their error, corrected it in the next paper and apologised; nevertheless Davis persisted in the action, urged thereto, as it came out in the trial, by his attorney, who had undertaken that it should cost him nothing. The counsel engaged were—for the plaintiff, Mr. Campbell (now Lord Chief Justice Campbell); and for defendant, Mr. Russell. The jury returned a verdict for plaintiff, as the judge told them they must to do so, with damages one farthing. 1827—Summer Assizes, before Mr. Justice Littledale. THE KING _v._ COOKE was an action against a draper, at Dudley, of the most Radical cast, for publishing libels on His Majesty’s Government. The libels were placards exhibited in the defendant’s window during a time of great disturbance amongst the colliers, in May, 1826. The case had been entered for trial at previous assizes, but put off from time to time. The alleged libel in the placards was the assertion that ministers were bringing starvation upon the people by their measures. Mr. Whateley was for the prosecution, and Mr. Campbell for the defence. The appearance of the placards in the defendant’s window having been proved, Mr. Andrew Gracewood, doorkeeper at the Foreign Office, was put in the box to prove that Earl Liverpool and others mentioned in the handbills were at the time of their publication ministers of state. Mr. Campbell, of course, ridiculed the whole prosecution, and said Cooke was being made the victim of private malice. The judge told the jury the handbills were libellous, so they returned a verdict of guilty. Cooke was only required to enter into sureties to appear when called up.