LORD COLERIDOE ON INDICTMENTS FOR LIBEL.At the Borka \mult;i ou February 11, the Lord Chief J nature made some important remarks uq the question of indict meat for Ii»h-' in charging tho grand jury. Mr. Chsrafev, lorincrly coroner for South Hucla, had indicted a Mr. W. Duvenll for libel, arising ou* lt;4 a letter which appeared in the tViiuImr ami Eton Ex/Jim on the subject of altering the name of Slough. Mr. Charalejr had now left plough, and hia hordahip remarked that hu diachar^vtl a (wrung ahot at Slough iu tlm aliapu «*f a lanje handbill, in which he loll foul of a gentleman named tiifiuiau. Ti.ia drew from Mr. Dvvurill the letter Complained of. Lord Coleridge aalt;d hu was txiuud to tell the jury that the question of libel had been very carefully considered *f late, and ho did not bufioVe there was a Judyo on the bench who wua not of the (pinion —he himaulf held it very ationgly —that the ptsuticv of indicting for libel had grown to a very miachevioua eitenb If they baiked bock to tbe old law book*. when there ana not particular favour for the liberties of the preaa, and alien many a thing now pavaed ovei would have been made the subject of ex ulticio rnd otlier informaliuii. ihvy would lind llntl all the grtat authorities laid «t down strongly, and, a* lie believed, ailh ylt;«*l aouud reason, that, while everyone might bring an acrum for libel, there ought to be aouiethiiiq of a public nature about it to justify the Interfering nf the Crown aa representing the public by pneeeding by Indictment. The Clown was the proarcuior hi s casu uf indictment, and therefore an indictment for libel ought to be something which interested the Crown, something which concurned tho general inturrats of the public, and likely to crento a breach of the peace If a libel was repeated, and was infamous and likely to caiiso tlc effect ho had indicatod, tho person ahouId bo indicted { but whoM there was nothing of tho sort, when it was dearly an individual auuabble between two persona, he trusted they would ayrvo with him that, in hia judgment, it was well-aettled law tliat it ought not to be and was not in point of law a proper subject of indictment. The person libelled had hia remedy br bring, mg an action. lilac katoue had aaid a jury ought not to find a bill, nor ought one to bo presented whore there was r.e matur of a public nature involved. Tbe grand jury threw out the bill.