Star. — London, England, 1804-12-28 00:00:00

INTELLIGENCE. COURT' 07 ICING% BENCH, DECEMBER 14, SOLOMON LI7IN ISAACS O • HARRIS. Mr. Glass laid. that the l'iatntiff was a merchant at Coningibury, the Defendant was in the fame oc cupation In London, and was introduced by Mars. Dav:d Samuel and Son to correpondence with the Defendant. In confequence of this introdation, the If:v.4l6ff fent a quantity of linen goods to the De fesdant. who. inltead of accepting the Bill drawn for the amount, fent a letter to the Plaintiff. dated At 35th September, in what is called the Hebrew German onech, by the tranflation of Bernard Wan-Sendon. of the witneffes, appeared to be as fellows 4 Ire reetlyed your dimmed &veer of the r7th of July, leitlralMsofyr and hilt of lading of two bales of linen, arneunt- FrliM riet-tos. I am ferry to fay Metres. David Samutl and hare r atidwd sour prope r ty In my hands cache caster of it 'A. 4%. rue, ball be obliged to pay dim uncle; legal mixers. Mari. amok Uwe fent we a demmeot to this effeet, and tliey appear =emended to all due regularity in the affair. Fur the final! showy the amount of tied. aa rail may draw at fight, and ime4 In wet am awoor. (Signed) i. Rituals, nl6ll Learned Counfel raid he did not underhand tielmeatrGerman.but he fhould produce anlfraelitith *lnk who was competent to explain the language to.tbe jury. He Paid it was entirely a colluli n be tween Samuel and the Defendant, to defraud the Plaintiff, which would in a moment appear by a comparifirn of dates, the letter read being of the 25th of September, and, the .affidavit on which the sunbeam* was founded, being on the soh of °e mber. Mr. Gibbs Paid, be did not difpote that if the Defendant's debt, being within the jurifdiftion of the citr,isad been attached according to the ellablithed and at the proper time, the Plaintiff would have Ss riglitof union. • , Mr. Gaaeow Paid the Defendant was a refpe &able Inweltant, and that be had afted to the be of his trt fierier the circumflances. He did n ot con t;uks:t the attachment was regular; eighteen gni, erme.had been paid Mao Court, and . die Jury mull difpufe of the reft as they tho u proper.—Vcrdia for the Plaintiff, 961. sae. is SMITH O. G. Cats. die. Ga mow.. for the Plaintiff, fisted, that hit idlest was a hop-faitor ; and that the Defendant, after many viciffitudes of fortune, had, in partnerthip with a idr. Gatkin, entered into the fame line of bufinefs, hoe this claim was wholly unconneaed with his new oreaweinent. The Defendant, in conjanftion with Mr- Lillian and Mr. Stone, had made large pur r darks of tobacco of a Mr. Brandon. The patient Silfion originated ins bill, dated the 2401% of March, slot, at two months, for sox al. xs. of which Edward beat= was the drawer, William Stone the acceptor, sad she Defendant an indorfee. The bill was not loused at its maturity. The Defendant, from this deed (peculation, retired to the condition of pri weee clerk m Meffrs. Price and Smith. While he was ip this filtration. Brandon peeled the Defendant for the payment ofthis large bill. Cafe was wholly in- anallpetem to Satisfy it, and the Plaintiff, is the Frio oppioneflis imare. paid Brandon one hundred and fifty 'anus, fur which the latter agreed to relinquillr all dieneants on She Defendant for this bill. Cafe, al thouh cow perfectly competent to return the money, Wed the demand, and therefore this attain was V l 't• . Solomon Davis depored to the receipt of Mr. ressitb's check for 1571. los. Mr. Richard Green, the book-keeper of the Plain are tellimonv to the fum of 1 57 1 . to s s havin g bees paid, and paled to the private account of Mr. Smith, in conkquence oldie iffue of fuch check ; and the tellimony for the Plaintiff further ellablithcd, that the 1571. toe. was given in fatisfarition 64 the bill in. dorfed by the Defendant. Mr. Easels!, on the other tide, Paid, he (hould 'Drew on the clearcll evidence, that the tso guineas were paid for beta of that amount, in which the Plain tiff was a Infer to Mr. William Stone, and that Stone, and not the Plaintiff, is die gostrAy of his heart. ap plied this fum to exonerate the Defendant from any' further profecution on account of this bill. Mr. V.'rllitm Stone was then called. Q .. „" On whom was this bill drawn ?"—A. u I was the acceptor, and ought to have provided fur ir." Q . _" Had yotf any tranfaaions with the Plaintiff r A. o. I made different bets with him, and the fum due trs me from thefe, was 1571. los." a Were you under any misfortunes ?"—A. " I became bankrupt in sBOl, and on that account the Plaintiff would not pay me the produce of the bet." " you know why the check of 1571. los. wax given t' the Plaintiff r —A. " Yes : I had the memorandum rf the PI rintiff, for the bets due to me of guineas ; and I apreed t' deliver up me pancandums, if the Plaiirtiff would pay the fame sum, sot to put it into my own pocket, but to aptly it to the diftreffe. of Cal's ; to this he contented, and Mr. Brendan agreed to exonerate Cali, in conic quence of receiving this amount, from all liability, under his in -I dorfewicnt, to the bill of 10511 as. The wins& ants-examined by Mr. Gas cow. So, Sir, this was a gamblirl aff.tir ; how many bets had you ?"—A. " Two, 1 belies:: one kw one hundred guinea, the other fur fifty." Q_" Pray, Sir, how many times have you become banklupt r—A. " Never but once, and that is earangh for you." " That is not enorryls for me. There gamSling matters make little itnpretfion upon Gentlemen of a certain defetipti in ; fa tee 4101 r urfelt. Sir, and tell oh it you were more than once irculvent ; or, in other word'. cir, Low many perfnns, whether in the form of bankrn.ey, or ftibleq it tt encv, you have ruined ?"—A. " I have ruined none under my irsfolvency ; no tiau. towd. acd as you ir.tt• mate, the iinpreillon was so tritlay, I .1u r.at lea the &fiance of time between my bat.it:u:tey and my infrrlvency, upon my :ionour" Your honour m..y do very well vs;t:t your gamlslin7 debt.. but aIA not pal, here ; t <•.; me / h• time r —A• " I c annot i..y the pat titi.lAr 11 had only fi.e or or cred:•••ns ; •ind ,li• was tlivolous, that it di zs n',: p: el. t, i n:y tscr 1- lee: in." Wan y" , IT 4. I 21`;`(..1 1 to io; Carr[ t 0 iffier Q": 441,4 • .r!e a v.t.r. , :fb. tbr.. cvndecy.r..l to a o :.i_. and Btnad were my Attornies before I failed, were Attornies to the Comcniffion, and to the deed of corn potition." Mr. GAIIROW, in reply, commented with much fe verity on the manner in which the lafi witnefs had given his evidence, and fait', that no credit at all ought to be given to his depotition. Lord E LLLLL OSOUGN laid, that the cafe was com pletely Made out, on the part of the Plaintiff, if the teffimony of Mr. Stone had not been introduced. — The docifion of the Jury would, therefore, wholly depend upon the credence they gave to the lan wit• nefs ; and by this they would determine whether the payment of tso guineas by the Plaintiff, were to Stone, or to. the Defendant ? There was a fort of, Ilippacy in the manner in which this witnefs (poke of 'the mieforrones in which numerous per fons mutt have been material fufferers, that•in Come degree moil be confidered to affea his taitnony. If the Jury thought him correft in his memory, and faithful in his narra tive, they would live their verdia for the Defendant ; if deficient either in accuracy or integrity, they would find for the Plaintiff.—Verdi& for the Defendant. DICEEISSI 15. GODWIN V. SANCTI'S. STOWS, MOD TOO?. This was an ili'ue direded from tlroCourt of Chan cery. on a fecurity in the nature of a mortgage, for sooel. on an elate, the property of Meths. Gevers • land Villa) ke,'at Bet bite. Mr. ERIK I E 'laid, it appeared to the Lord Chan cellor, that the evidence refpeaing this etlate, merely on affidavits, was not fufficiently fatisfatiory p.—he had; therefore, direlted the matter to be tried in a Court of Law (by the depofition of winches public ly etamlned), whether this elate was alienated to the Defendant., by Mars Gevers and Vandyke, (or a fpeciie loan, or if it were a fertility in the hands of the Defendants, on the general floating account ? Meas. Martin and Co. were bankers to Gems and Vandyke. Gevers and Vandyke had faded, and Mr. , Godwin Rood to them in the relation of aflignee.— 'On the sill of November, 18c. r._ or thereabouts, this [m arsurky was depolited with M. Martin and Co. and in confcquence, thefe bark's" advanced to their endomers, Mars. Gevers and Vandyke, the fum Rated. The Learned 'Counfel Paid, be had'to con l'tasel for Molts. Martin and Co. that this was not ex ' elufively a depofit for the soool. fo advanced, but fat :a the fnhfeepsent revolutions in the account: On the other fide it was argnel, that the depofit was maga ' tory with refpelt to all the Itffifequent tranfaaions, and even all anterior ones, and alone was to be ap plicable to a particular advance of school made mediately after the depofir. The lath were theft : Previous to the bankruptcy adverted to, this most gage had been depofited with' the bankers by Mars. Gevers and Vandyke, and pool. was advanced upon it, which fum was paid off by Gevers and Vandyke, in thre!: iCIRAIMSDIS. After this return of the loan, the papers refpeaing the mortgage continued with Me fps. Martin and Co. At the time of the failure, the bankrupts were indebted to their bankers between 3 and accol. and the true quetlion was, whether this 'fecurity remained by accident, not being returned Ifrom fome carclefs minion, or whether rt Rill cau -1 tinned a depofit or warranty in the general account between the parties ? The refult mull depend on the sanderdanding between them, and to refolve this doubt, a very ftngular provifion was made in the or der from the Conn of Equity ; that the parties themfelvea, Meffrs. Martin and Stone, fhould be per mitted to be examined in their own carafe. (Mr. Et fkine laid, in a fucceeding caufe, that fo (insular was this direCtion, that no intiance hadoccurred o ith • in his long experience at the bar, or within that of any of hi. brethren prefent, nor ' he might add, with in the recolledion of his Lordfhip.) He lhould, therefore, calf Mars. Martin and Stone, from whom the jury would coital fufficient materials for their detn mination. (We are ferry our limits will not permit us to give the long and ditilna evidence by Meffis. Martin and Stone, on this occafion.) Mr. GARIOW, in his reply, contended, that the elate was alone applicable to the &ft loan, paid off by three infialments ; and although he felt the high eft refpea for the witnaes, and received in petfea confidence their depofitions, yet Rill he 'Tufted the Jury would fee, that it was exclufively referable to that fpecific loan ; but if they did not agree with him in this, he hoped they would at leall find, that it could not be confidered as a fecurity for any fum exiling in the accounts between the parties, prior to November, IRot, when the depofit was made. Lord E LLLLL °ROUGH commented on all the pro minent features of the evidence, and in the conclu- Ron fubmitted to the judgment of the Jury, the ver dict in the following form : " The intirument was depofited as a collateral fecurity for the Mtn of five thonfand pounds, and was afterwards famed, by the content of both parties, to become a several fe eurity on the exiling account." The Jury fignified their immediate concurrence, and the verdia was entered accordingly. WADDINGTON V. FRANCIS. Mr. ERSKIIIR Rated that this was an Orion to re cover from the defendant the difference in value be tween the price agreed by the plaintiff to be given for a qumtity of hops, the produce of 33 acres of ground, in the Canterbury division of the county of Kent, which, in December, 1799, the Defendant had by c, ntraa fold to the plaintiff, for the following crop, and the price which thole hops had *dually broog'it. He flyiuld prove the contraft,and that the produce was cat. which fold far 171. t as. per cwt. being an Cure . , ( , i 'l. c :•. more than the fun) ftipulated in the plaintid's con.rita. For thi, fum, therefore, amounting, on the whole croduces to about 7501. the iaintiff would fall to have a verdia. The Learned Loirofel fail, 'liar his client hasingjime years ago, made corif.sleraiuz purchafes of hops, both c n his own ae-miint and t.ir r t:..:7 ha,l had the misfortune to be ind;:t-...1 be:iae C ,t.rt of finch, for a con fpiracy to m0n•ip,,h....: and eril.sti.ce the price of that !L st a m 4 now at liberty in fry that intuiceo: of that charge. for he hest 1:y by •:re v:rdia of a Jury, and had t the Court. But he was hit eff.:6l that circuity- By the old ~ 1.1n44; If c;icrt w keen cn • ...c1 tLe rti; :it a 1 prektit cAte etc inipofeil on t.:. ; but lie Ap ptertitt J .. y it ...mid b,edly be rurcl-itc a growing CUT n, &L. I , ,re fold va Ll4e ac r .Al mow ~Mr. swab i ti m er teas. h *fed aiket - for th• many a Mr. bt4 d or O. Ms. i , theta Wass • slot, Rao wd ti boo . soak log thi time serif Bete dew thee bees . M bees Smii the I the dlrf *thee !ter' tiff and fi los the ( A. due bee Pia wa me of Pn sot i the ik Tee do Sal I' • ec of et hg in IT le to , • ti I ,t lg 7 grottud every day, withnut even a formife that there VIAI any thing unlawful in fuch al purchale ; and he could not figure that hops Rood in any different fitu- ation. Lord Estmotoun it laid that it flood in the de• elaration that the contract was for the purebafe of the crop on the ground ; it was, therefore, unnecelTary to argue the legality of fuch a purchaCe. Had the legality of the aa been difputed , and the Court been of opinion that it was unlawful, fuch an allegation would not have been allowed to nand on the face of the declaration. Mr. EasalNa thanked his Lordfhip for the obfer vation he had made. if then there was nothing it• legal in the purchafe of a tingle inclofure of hops, `did it become illegal when fuch purchafe was exten ded to two, three, joir or lye different inclofores ?- 7 Puffrifing a large capital, and in the way of a fair and honelt trade, his client might have occafion for a large fupply. If there was nothing unlawful in purchafing twenty or thirty acres, was there any law which raid that when extended to 100 acres,fuch purchafe became illegal ? He apprehended there was not. It could only be on the ground of a general and ertentive fyftetn of foretelling having been fuc cefsfully adopted and carried into praftice, chat any condua of the kind could be impunged. lent bargain mutt Rand on its own half, It 4r* n contra& for the produce of tivesty-three acres In* county of Kent. The *hotter mat 'thc • bartaht made by the plaintiff, in theesli tt etbtriAt,fion of 'that county, at the cpntral, !fa! en tered into, was for ninety Tale irsik s 'a Fa& well known, that in the county of Kent the n'utedifer if acres of hops amounted to ahontlinreadiarfassitt Cid in the Canterbury div l fion alone about to inlet or ask tiorfiaul. To argue, therefore, that the; platedff in poirchafing ninety acres of this immenfe quantity, either had foreftalled, or could have had in yew to forettal the market, was the height of folly. - The execution of the contra& was proved by the attefling witnefs ; and the produce .of the twenty three acres and the price obtained for the hops were iinftrufted to have been as Mr. Plkitie reprefented. , Mr. Daet.as, for the defendant, maintained, that !the prefent cafe was one of the greatat !public im portance ; as every cafe mnft be where 'the qneftion was, whether the produce of the foil Of this cenistry ' was to be allowed to find its way fairly into the mar ket, and there bring a reafonabla and equitable price ; or if, even before it had beets-planted. or be fore the feed had been thrown into the round, it might be purchafed up by mnaolsolizers and fore-j Rafters, who would thereby have it in their posse to fit on it any price however exttavagant, and to get the markets entirely under their contrail!? He was aware, in confequence of whit had fallen from the Learned Lord, that he was dotat prefent esti-• t ied to argue that the contrail on which this aaion was brought was in itfelf illegal. He mould, how ever, be able to thew that it was part of a deliberate and premeditated fyltem of monopolizing which the plaintiff in this aaion had adopted. by which he had got into his poffeffion a great portion of the hops growing in this country ; and. in confequence of which be had been indifted before this Court, and had been convined. The grounds of aecufation then urged againft him were, having confpired to mono polize into his own hands, the hops rowing in this country ; for the purpofe of enhancing the price of that commodity ; having mauled into' the minds of the growers of hops, that they were too low in price and that by keeping them back from the market, they would quickly life ; and, as an inducement, having informed them that a great proportion of the crop was in his hands, and that he would contri bute to effeft this `end. The plaintiff had the very bell affillance on that trial, and every endeavour was ufed to make him refort to any legal plea in arrelt of judgment which he might have been able to adduce. No flep, however, to this effeft was taken by him, and he fubmitted to the judgment of the Court.— He afterwards brought two feveral anions on the contracs for growing crops, whir he had then en tered into. One was tried before Mr. Juilice Rook, and the other before Lurd Alvanley, and the decifsons were alike in both. The plaintiff was found to have no right to recover. The Learned Counfel faid lie Ihould he able to thew that the prefent cafe flood exaftly in the fame fituation.— The contra& now foligl-t to be enforced. had been en tered into in the end of December. The hop grow ers of Kent were then affernhled to pay their compo. fition for tythes, and the Plaintiff, availing himfclf of the eircumitance, got himfelf introduced after din ner, and had not been long in the company, when he role and made a fpeech to the meeting, informing them how much they were impofed upon by the hop dealers—that he was come there more for their ad vantage than his own; that the price of hops was greatly too low ; and, in conclution, purchafed from fevetal of them their et rrps then on the iron-d. A conduit, every part of which, the Learned Counfel contended, WAS inconfillent with the chara.Fter of a real and taco fide hop purchafcr. and could only he. long to a monopolizer and foreflaller. In profecu tion of the fame fcheme, the Plaintiff was afterwards' found at Worceller, in June, 18w, where his conduit was equally indicative of his intentions. There he gave inttruflions to the landlord to call together, to A dinner to he given by the Plaintiff, all the perfoni• concerned in the growing of hops in that part of the country. Not wetly comprehending the Plaintiff's wills, the landlord invited not the grt veers only. but the dealers in hops. This was the farthell bug from the PlaintifPs meaning, which he foot, made known to the landlord, who, in confequence of the more ex plicit inftruAions which he had received, ciicitlated a hand hill intimating that none hut 7 ,mwt:•l of hops were to he admitted to the d.ru.t.r. tf:is mt:.tinz the Plaintiff put in prial.ce cc tie I Me lire of proceeding he had adopted at Canterbury, rur.l ma ny c. , ntraets for the th..n trr.ovr:g cr , r. wCie con cluded. Fm this fvflent .1 mon.prdiviuct I .tc. balling the PlainutT, as h, e mentione d. Lad been in.:heed : and the contra.:,, fl far .1; then endea voured to he reirdemd effe , toal, h.,d biro lc! .11'21% A great deal of addu, cd t.• Liam tiate their tans. and :he 1.4 the &feud:nuts were proceeding wail other evidence o 1 t h e lonic kind, when 1. , .rd ELI iNllo ,, st: , l:l f.. 1 it was nr.-:er. fr.ry re t 11.tt c 1 tnigL p t! . .c r..co L. ac , •a l (! t.tl it h Ju:y. adduce ..nv nwr evcr CA nt the cicitr. wl mit to ct.alitichitt ut t here fought to he fupported was entered into in Pe eember 1799, and wa. for the pr:ghtee nt Acre! ni hop ground in the Canterbury diviiiou of Kent, in which, from the evidence adduced. it appealed there were Seven ot Eight TN:Wand acres, Even were the anion brought on the total cotitta& made by the plaintiff at Canterbury in December t 799. be could not think that the guellion would be materially alter ed, or that that eircumilance could warrant x charge of monopolizing to fuch a degree as to vacate the cnotraa. • The cnndue of the plaintiff, fix months afterwards, at Worceeer; might be fuch as to evi dence his having adopted a fylem of mcnoprliaing and forenalling which both called for punitbment frowthe Court, and rendered void the cnotraet, then entered into with him. But it mutt OM remain a giteßion for the confidetation oldie Jury, whether they were fatisied, that, in Decetnhor 1799, (lie months before that period) the plaintiff had formed fuch a &Rem, and, in prolecution of it, had entered into the contra.% in quettion. Of this the Jury mutt .be fatisfied before they denied effee to the contraft in quettion. The Jury found a verdi4 She plaintiff. The gueltion of law belie referred for the confideratiop of the Ginn. . As two philoforphic gentlemen, beltMeng to si dub at the well end of the town, were rallcing.:rcm learn edly, the other evening, about the news* idle and the centre of gravky, a humoutous not a little difcompofed them by Acing, Irbi die mag netic needle pointed due north, and ral4; lay the cen tre of gravity ?' A (dance enfued. Moe," ad ded the member, " I knew • magnetic needle in the aritilb Metropolis , that points due WI, and to a centre of gravity too." " Ay, ays" replied one of the philofrphers farcaflically. " your centre of gra vity lies in Leaden-HAI Street." " No, no," cried his airailant, " but, in a llreet where there is a pais hall, called Cooper: Nally —there Fortune's magnetic needle points!—there a centre, nf cavity, of 'lsms and TWENTY THOUSANDS Of POUtnIS Sterling! The glorious LOTTrItY I in thoik, wfiiclt now proves fo kmiverfally itttaatve, Eta fo weiihly in "Capital Prises I" 10111143. .—_ • Oathe 13d inftant, at Dawllll6 la DermaAlm, the Lady of Sr Owego Dallis, But. of a fro. Lardy, the wife of Bryaa Maly" et Malliot-Breet, Dorsey of three font, who arc likdy to do well. Thorlday the seek inflect, at Ma hook Wimpalo • firer, the Lauy of Fredrick Doverin,ll4. bl 4 Miter. MARRIED. Richard Spooner, Efq. fon of !Lao Spotio&r, Eft of Ehndon Houk, Warwielabir.:, to Mils Charlotte Wetherell, dabititer sfr the Rev. Dr. Wetherell, Data of Hereford, hed Maas= of MI. verfity College, Girard. In Athlone, Lloatenatit Stanton, of the Feet. to Mifs Marie Mills, Seth daughter of the late Edward Mills, Efq. of Mount Profpoft, county Rofeernmon. Co the 4th 'agent, at St. BrUtol the Rev. jam Rainer, of Wareham, Docfst, to Mitt Mary Baker, of B, On the 13th loft. at Roberto/4 Pembrokelltire, Owen Phillippa s Efq. lksitenant.Eolonel Commandant of the ROTA Pembroke Stalkers, toblits Scourfteld, cldeft daughter et Henry Scourfteld, lA, of Reherton-ball, is the fame county. At St. Botolph, Aldgatc, H. R. Goodwyn, lfq, of Lower Eat Stnithfi.l I, to Mire Laura Larkias, youula daughter of the late Themes Larkin, Efq. of Blackheath. At Newhall. on the that hatant, the Rey. Ludovick Grant minifter at Niels - tick, to Milk Barbara Brown, daughter of the La; Rcv. Dr. John Rsown, of Nter . hlas. The Rev. Giles Harworth Peel, fon of J. Peek, Efq. of Aberleg. tOr. Houle. Lancalltirc, to Milk Halle, daughter of Mr. Jima I Halle, of Oxford. Saturday ,at Lambeth Church, Richard Wood, Efq. of Scot's. yard, to Mas Wi/foo, niece to James Wood, Efq. of Lambent. Preen. DIED. On the aoth loft at Dr. W. Curdy's, of Hmtidedon, Hants. aced 73, Mrs. Cuppage, raid . of the Tate Stephen Ceppage, Bhp ..t the county of Annim, Ireland, and mother of Lieutenant Co ' loud John Cuppage, of the Hon. Left India Company's ferrite. 01 the freer, at G.lwaltar. Mrs Brown wife of Captain Brown of Use I;th regisnr.at, and daughter of the late Lieutenant General Spry. At Ediebnrgh, on the Bth hattant, Mifs Charlotte Angufta Colquhoun, daughter of the late Sir George Colquitoun, Rotor Tillyquhoun. After a ibOrt. Math, Mr. Peters, of the Theatre Royal, Dtahtin. At Fdiaburgh, on the 13th MR. Mr. Robert Smith, writer is Edinburgh, late in Elgin. At Cultinagh Houk, queen's County, Samuel Jena Bernard Aederfon, Efq. Friday morning left. at Brampton. Mrs. reward, wife of Captain James Lusard, of the We timelier Volunteer Cavalry. On Saturday evaAng. ar Lee motha's, In Great George.ftredt. Liverpool. in her 15th year, Mis Harriet Freeland, daughter of t. e Lae Peter l'reeLand,l.fq. Oa board the Swififure. on his paffage to Gibraltar, la the 38th year of his age, Dr. Henry Bowles. TO-MORROW. Sun Was I Sues fete Mona riles 7 tuniutulafter 8I 33 minutes slier 3 1 44 arra MUM WATER. AT LONDON RIUDOF TO-MORROW. Maroing • •• • o sas• is Arrcrn. so •• • • mg suLaw...z war is H AVING dedicated m yfelf to the Iludy. and been ti the msil nalkkrable pradlice in that bnack irt4ek I 16.4.0:a eeoper art- I .'l butt that I have nm more mil am," •tnte than Mole who, is ISZ - LITLITITVC - m t. 4 arm "o n, re occafionally it:metre( in untxrcatnty, end canoae al...apt-Wu that fucdcfs which (*.acquired by eeiseeetradee IRIS iatelLtdtual o. , wcr to ace date of &emirs. _ _ - TI •e kllfrain of DEBILITY arc reeollarty Tor et 7 :ring wi:4 th,zn swam of coneonthant (rummers arid, by do. 111C.L.1 ...ulaaerey, hicti locorne.mobt WiL,tl.4r eirif,: fem.; the prcitaleiic‘ .if etssople, thee-Arse rho: habits c f t . .....14.1.bcy5, or the i itll:4;encts nt mant-ty, mtift• wire the moll afedonus prof flan ; 1 , 1.1 t by .1:e i,norance of ur.edi. - 3ircd run, the fyinrarne arc aggravated, coca. radon i. icaroyel. dF a NtElk: halt of the ROYAL COLLrOltri S' FRG 1! )N3, I sr:_ end my yretcriflons nu, fr..6.l.titr, akcazian: cve7y to otaetler . I le.: nit: 1,1 t .; in 6 !root with ork.tA I have !itherto hem fet!•:-T-2:1 In the brit fon!ationa of local a.l ~ rrvent the calarxty 11 a .1r: t;:n, •r..im a carecioufne'. n' le Syr ^it .tt 4•i:~•r. trestcnetit 1 , ..r ' re.:o.t Vu.. Octr -!4; ••,, • aan-t crs!lab;:'Sn 04 1 .1 N-i fht-3rn t ~;,11,-,•:n1 will !Ile (1. a- ce wticb ure o! wlch care!ul ern tK ,Liored tort ml. of :I.lo:abte feerrev. rrr•tr , F •te, tk • • In tt:. row •.! I tu I h. a t o a rec, cuulS •! cither fa who tJ :-at I of moo. P., 1 rec. lad I. , . in ' ,ne6oa. 1,• • .! 4 ' l it:tzt at :b. .i• Al tt r:. r \ I% tot Cap Carer i: Dar 1/...1/ ....... NUMbE ITH I! wi lltitrirrl. 9 lAN IA MA lody Tow Tx S Om I) OD T ON, Attar 1 The A ?mil •e T the TOO Ma Saari Aloe bf k 4 bp 1 , 7 rfc