1791-11-07 (static/transcriptions/1791/11/067.jpg)

128.)

an advertisement, reciting certain orders made for collecting money on account of the distemper amonst the horned cattle, advertised by the clerk of the peace for the country of Suffolk; and it charged, that by the orders the money collected had been improperty applied. – The information charged this to be a libel on the justices of Suffolk. In the body of the libel, it was not said, “by order of the justices”, nor did the information in the introductory part say, that it was a libel “of and concerning the justices of Suffolk”. But when the information came to state any of the orders in the advertisement, it added this innuendo; meaning “An order of the justices of peace for the country of Suffolk.” But these innuendos could not supply the want of an averment in the introductory part, of its being written of an concerning the justices; because they were not explanatory of, but in addition to, the former matter; and the court were of opinion, that the information having omitted the words, “Of and concerning the justices” in the introductory part, such omission was fatal. And judgment was accordingly arrested.
The principal case in Cowper, where this case of The King v. Alderton is quoted, is the case of the King v [ILL] 17 Geo. 3. A. D. 1777.