636 Kidd V. Royal Agricultural Societi/ of England. 
if I did not do so ; hnt at the same time if any motive is to be imputed, I have 
a right to put the Defendants before j'ou in their true position as to what they 
have done on this occasion. Becnuse my learned friend has insinuated 
indirectly something as to their officers, and he referred to letters which he 
intends to refer to again, I dare sa^-, it therefore bt-comes my duty to place 
the exact and true position of the parties before you, in order that you may 
come to a fair and just conclusion on the merits of the issue which is raised 
between them. 
Now the state of things with regard to that is tliis : the libel having been 
published in the ' Mark Lane Express ' in the way I have told you, a corre- 
spondence takes place between Mr. Kidd and his lawyers, and the Defendants 
and their lawyers, and actions are brought, one against the ' Mark Lane Express,' 
one against the Agricultural Societ}% one against a newspaper in this county, 
which stands lower down in the list, one by Mr. Ayre against the preselit 
Defendants, and one by Mr. Wells against Mr. Ayre. All this has branched out 
into an enormous mass of litigation, which will have to be cleared away in some 
shape or other when we shall know the result of your verdict in this cause. 
Now let us see what occurs after that. The Society having been written 
to by Messrs. Roberts and Leak, who are the attorneys of the Plaintiff, at once 
accepted the responsibility, whicii I on their part now accept, of having been 
the authors of the article in question. But I am not going to trouble you now 
by going through the correspondence which passed between the professional 
men on both sides, because, although I know my friind is going to make a 
grievance of one or two joints connected with that, I cannot help thinking 
that the issue you will have to try will be very far removed t'rom those 
skirmishes and struggles on the one side and on the other, which take place 
between the attorneys before the trial. I am perfectly prepared to meet my 
friend on any observation he may make on the matter if the necessity should 
arise, but 1 will now simply deal with the two jwints he has made. I know 
if he were going to make any others he would have given me notice, because 
he knows I cannot s^seak again. Therefore I assume those will be the points 
he will address himself to. Now these points are matters of prejudice in two 
ways ; first of all, that the Society did not communicate with Mr. Kidd before 
they wTote the letter in question. Gentlemen, the very object of the Society, 
be it a good one or a bad one, is that if they come to the conclusion, as they 
honestly did, that the cake in question was such as they have described it, 
and as 1 hope you will believe it was their duty to describe it, looking to 
the interests vested in them, to see that the names of the purchasers and the 
makers of the cake should be given. Their functions would be of no value 
comparatively at all, unless that was done ; and as for calling upon Mr. Kidd 
to answer, or anything of that kind, they, having no jurisdiction, would be 
treated in the mode in which they were by the attorney's letter. Therefore, 
it was entirely out of the question in every respect. Another complaint has 
been made, which is, that during the course ot the negotiation between the 
attorne3's, we did not forward them a sample — a complaint which, now you 
have heard the case tried, 1 venture to say you will consider ftf the most 
unsubstantial character that am possibly be conceived. For, would you 
believe that my friend, who complains in his opening address to you that he 
has had no sample of the cake, has actually had in his possession eight tons 
of, as he says, the very same article; has been gi^'ing it to cattle by way of 
exixiriments for food, and has actually himself (I mean Mr. Kidd, his client), 
indirectly, under the guise of putting Mr. Knowlcs forward, obtained from 
Dr. Voeicker, unknown to that gentleman, an analysis of the very cake in 
question ? 
Mr. Seymour : That is not so. 
Mr. Field : It is what Mr. Kidd said. 
