Star. — London, England, 1816-12-25 00:00:00

Wr" Ot)E TO eIIitiSTMAS. Old Chripsnas, hail! thy reverend form Comes dreneled and dripping with the storm Thy hoary locks are temper-rent; Thy m ilk.white beard' is ice besprent ; Wind, sleet, and snow, thy steps assail, Yet will I say to thee—Old Christmas, bail! for well 1 love thy ancient sway; Aty jocund, jovial, festive day ; thy geoerous sports and calm delight, Thu gild the dreary hours of n'ght,— nunsport the Will to summer's cline, • And fledge with plumes the leaden wings of time Let not, to damp the general joy, X)ull care obtrude his dread alloy, Igor recollections sad create Of friends, who've met the stroke of Fate Ere the revalving yea r went round, For ever In thy train should tusrtis be found! Thee, Christmas, hail ! a welcome guest, Then enm'st to ev'ry social breast ; Oval cheer shall thaw thy frozen veins, Blythe sports expel thy shivering pains, And pleasure strew thy torrent way With flowers, as binomial as the lap of May! Tbe Mike of DEVONSHIRE will entertain a large / wry of afiatinction, during the holidays, at his seat, Chatsworth, Derby shire. The Marquis of SALISBURY left town yesterd ty, for Li; seat, antield. , "he Earl and CO/01TM of-Dmtaisav Isritscuwa sk r en jay, for their mat, Cobham Hall, where they ' elp l ett a large on Offashionables during the holidays. Lerd and Lady NITRE have left tow.. for their seat,Thorndoni Essex, for the holidays. The Theatres being closed yesterday evening, ac cording to annual custom, on Christmas Eve, gave e Managers of bah Houses an opportunity of a gall rehearsal of their new Pantomimes, of which Green-room report speaks highly. Mrs. Courrs, (with her usual benevolence of lean) has transmitted to Mr. 'WILLIAM WHITEHRSO, g Woodham Walter. Esser. ‘BO, together with 20 pair of blankets, and ten dozen of various articles of i ir gmelothing, for the relief of the poor of that pa rnh, ordering that 200 pounds of good beef, and 100 quartern loaves, together with the blankets, warm c lothing, and a supply of coals, should be distributed amongst 100 poor families, after Church Service, on Christmas Day ; and further, she has ordered a weekly allowance to 30 of the most necessitous fa- I a g e s, according to the.r circumstances, during the three winter months, many of whom receive 6s. 3d. per week. The Earl of LIVERPOOL, as Warden of the Cinque hats, as First Lord of the Treasury, as a Commis sioner 4f tfe India Board, and as Clerk of the Fells is Ireland, has re 13,100 a year accruing , from the Public. His Lordship has also two official houses. Of the latter sinecure office, the value of which is it3SUO a-year, the reversion was granted tome years since to Viscount Boet.z, son of the Earl of SHANNON. We are happy to hear a rumour, and, as it is said, aeon pretty good authority, that the office of Third Secretary of State is to be abolished ; a measure of this kind will give weight to professions of economy, We should be among the last to recommend the oppression of any establishment of real utility ; but lithe Third Secretatimtp - grew up wan tne•seari ao , with the termination of the war, or at least after I finding up the arrear of war business, it seems :la teral that the office and its emoluments should cease. PARISIAN FASHIONS, Dec- 21.—We have observed, Suing several days past, toque: of dark velvet, high 'sad flat at top, without any rim whatever. The orna ment to each is a range of jet grain: at the bottom.— AMA of black velvet have bands like a man's hat, sod scarcely any rim. They are ornamented with clasps of jet and black feathers ; rose and white silk plash hits are still fashionable.. The Ladies wear, with these hats, walking and pilgrim dresses trimmed with plush. The collars of spencers and walking Goats Are high. if Ifrni so Christrior Psrtie:—A fashionable Duchess, highly ipprovingof the present State Lottery Scheme (ia'shich it will be seen that the smaller Prizes are -4.1 t increased'in value, there heing 800 of 25 Gui - lowest being 17 Pounds), recommended :d party to play for Tickets or Shares money ; very aptly observing, although _for small stakes, they might gain Twenty Guineas 1. _ _ _ the 3AND tstk- :aria., Ludial 1811. AstieJ mouth fier: glop nct jight, 1 days. &imam - er,Mi AT, 1111 V ape I nience perbai Id n ot I S ShiPS and foes cc tried in adol d a t WI afford el enandJ last 4 ninl oo relief' :w rite! We APP"! rub of 7 •ly this morning an alarming fire broke lisle Arms public house, Caslisle-place, ip's Walk, Lambeth, which consumed the premises ; fortunately no lives were add to the calamity, the landlord was , Bill of all the Christenings and Burials Iher 12,1815, to December 10, 1816: the 97 parishes within the wails, 983—Buried, the 17 parishes without. the walls, s,46l—Burled, the 23 out-parishes in Middlesex and Surrey, 10,104. the 10 parishes in the City and Liberties of ,027—Buried, 5,136. 'IINID. WRITE , . Males 10,105/ Wan 20,316 j i in all 2 3 , 581 1 Females 10,211 WUERILOT 11AVII I:USD. . UDdtt two years of age 5,400 Sixty and seventy . . . • 1,720 letween two and five • • 1,960 Seventy and eighty . . . 1,108 alve and ten tat and twenty 675 Ninety and a hundred . . 168 Nulty and thirty . . ilin s___ t and forty •• • • 1 . 912 A hundred and one .• . 0 MI and fifty 'Eland sixty increased in the Burials tills year 756. HUNTING. ,Tke Prince Regimes Stag Hounds meet on Friday at Harley- Isis sear Walton Brldge.at eh yea, if bunting weather. The tlatEeld Hounds 'meet on hursday at Latchwortb ; 4117 day, at No Man's land; at half past ten. Tin Understood Harriers meet every day at fennel, at half Maberley's, Esq.'s. Fox Monads meet oo Thursday 'Worms Heath; Sa urday, at the Fox, Keaton. 1 knife, Est's, Fox Hounds meet on Thursday at Nudistd "ma ; Saturday, at Chipstead Church. Cenyer's Hounds meet to-morrow at Thoydon Park; March; at Danmow High Wood. The Eat Essex Fox Hounds meet to-morrow at Woodham Common; Saturdty, at the Mack Boy, Chelmsford. 21 tomorrow Duke of Grafton's Hounds meet tm a r r o w atWood cad ..7,L* Saturday, at Ash keys, at half past 10 each day. Quaradon Hounds meet to-morrow at Wldsserpool lon ; 14 2 HUAS ; Saud ty at Mudding Wood, at ball-past lid, 67. !e o f nub increase( 3to leas, and the lo ;) th st ber last cars 3d. instead of rno ne ma they played.fos aced. Monad !wiser, osed Fnm.—Earl n e f nit at the Carl ;cassis near the Bishdl dvisa the whole of tt D aher! lost ; but, to ; weld lot insured. nplor . A General ga P from Decesnbs gatnit • Christened In I les— 1 1 10 7. esirab s2ltrisiesed i n 0 Gover 49 Christened in d toe 11,510—Buried, Christened In moot Westminster, 5,0 from t males c 1 n 2 7 1 5 3 7 2 4 90ve r* Females 11,449 LAW INTOLLICENCE. COURT 1:1 CiffAWDER 4 t, DECEMBER f 4. .WILIAIUGHBY.O. JIWDwINE4 Id this Ea* Mr. WETRERALL moved hit Lordship to continue an injdnctioa, granted under the foliow. ing circumstances. The plaintiff in August, IBM took a Parr in .Epsom o Surrey, from the defendant, at the rent of €lB5 per annum, and engaged to pay a stipulated sum for the sheer, farming utensils; crops, , Etc. on the premises, which were described as con sisting of twenty acres of meadow land, and 110 of arable land.' The ground on being measured, was found very far short of this description. No doubt, the acres were said to be computed acres, and the immense quantity they fell short of what they were said to be, was, in itself; sufficient to nullify the agreement. The defendant was well known to be a litigious character, scarcely a Surrey Sessions occur ring in 1N hick he was not a party in some cause. — The plaintiff further objected to the validity of his agreement, on the ground of the defendant's not being able to give him a proper title to the premises, as in fact, two persons had two parcels of the ground distinct from him, one of which parcels surrounded the dwelling; house, and by building on which, ac cess to the house would be totally impossible, in ad dition to the house being completely darkened by such buildings. LORD CDANCELLOR-+-And yet, I dare say, though darkened, it was described as a farm hcuse with a delightful prospect. Mr. WETtleitatt. said a balance etisted between his client and defendant of sES(X), though it was al itged by the opposite -side to amount to £6OO i and : for the reasons above-mentioned, his Lordship had formerly graiited the injunction to prevent the defen dant raising an action for the debt due. It was also notorious, that the defendant, assured of the defi ciency in the quantity of land, had agreed to an abatement, which the plaintiff declined, considering himself nct bound by the agreement, which had not been adhered to on the part of the defendant. Mr. BLAKE followed on the same side. Mr. LEACH said, his Lot dship had been told the defendant WAS a litigious character, but how this had any bearing on the question now before the Court he was at a loss to determine. With respect to the first objection, viz. the deficiency in point of the quantity of land—he had no objection to admit there was a deficiency in measuring, but it was nut to such an extent as to .soil the object of the plaintiff in taking the farm. Had it been so, then indeed the lease might have been given up for the best of all reasons. But the fact was, the lease was contracted on tt.c ground of there being so many computed acres, not statute acres, and in fact there was the full quan tity of such computed acres. With respect to the second objection, viz. the want of a proper thic— k was true two individuals were owners of part of the land, but vie one had agreed and declared him self periectly willing to second the lease. Morris, the owner of that part which surrounded the house, had acceded to the proposal of the defendant, so Lac on this head there could be no objection, tor Morris had agreed to take other land for it. With respect' to the other parcel of ground, it was impossible for the plaintiff to say that the possession of that was material to his enjoyment of the whole. He was re peatedly informed by the defendant, that two indivi duals had a share in the ground, and could not there fore pretend ignorance of it There was no doubt of the other proprietor (a Mr. Forth) having agreed to do as Mr. Morris had done, had not the plaintiff gone to him for the purpose of dissuading hiln from acceding to any such agreement, oliviously to get rid of the lease. Taking the case as a whole ne thought impossible his Lordship could continue the in- junction. Mr. DOWDESDALE followed on the same side. Mr. WETHERALL, in reply, seid the defendant had stated very strung facts, but how had he supported these facts ? Wi►y, by stating them as matters of bs lief. Was it consonant to his Lordship's usual prac tice, was it at all consonant to the practiceot any Court to place credit in any statement when that statement rested merely on belie! ? The fact was; there was nothing tangible in what the defendant had said, and it was imposs►ble to make his assertions or his belief the foundation of any order or any judicial proceeding. The date was particularly worthy of his Lordship s attention, the agreement being formed in August, 1815, the plaint►ff waiting on the defendant in De cember following, and filing the bill in January, which certainly were no indications of his desire to get rid of the lease on the ground of the times being so bad. The LORD CHANCELLOR considered this case of some importance, and thought the best way he could possibly act would be to dissolve the injunction, with liberty for the parties to go to trial. 'they might, after the trial, move for the revtval of the injunction, but in that case his Lordship expected they would inform him particularly in what circumstances of their case both parties had respectively tailed or suc ceeded, specifying most minutely these circumstances. In another case, where his Lordship was moved to restore a bill to the Court which bad been dismissed for want of prosecution, he observed that when a defendant allowed a bill to lie so long as the one before him had done (two years and tour months) it shewed some evidence of his wish that it should always lie in that state. Substantial grounds might no doubt be shewn, where be might restore such a bill, but he confessed he was not aware of a single precedent where a bill had been restored, merely for the purpose of discussing what the amount of.costs would have been had ,the action proceeded. He could not therefore accede to the bill being restored, and refused the motion. COURT OF KING'S BENCH, DECEMBER 44. TUX KING u. JOHN CRESWELL. This was an indictment against the defendant for perjury, in falsely swearing that a young woman named Susannah Quills was of the age of 2t, in order to obtain a licence for his marriage with her, from the Surrogate of the Vicar-General of the Arcl shop of Canterbur y. Mr. CuawooD stated the case to the Jury. The defendant was a young man of distinguished family and-connections, and bad been bred up for the navy, but his education having been neglected, he was placed under the care of a gentleman residing in Sloane-street. During his continuance in this linte -1 don ha became acquainted with the proaccutrix, a young woman of bunt*, but envious pannier. He paid his addresiet to het; and at rust titnpoSed that ate Shotild.rield to his embraces ) and live with hint in a state of controbinage; this the rejected with disdain, He then ofered het marriage, to which she consented s dud in • ordet to effect his purpose, he ap plied at Doctors' Commons for a licence whit!) he olrtaltiA upon an affidavit, stating that his intended wife was df the age of 21, and that he knew of nn,aw ful impediment to their union; whilst at the • same time be was well aware that she was only 17, and that she had not the consent of her parents for the min-, riage.. The licence having been obtained upon this Olciavit, the marriage was solemnized; but at the end of three days he abandoned his wife, anclthe mar.' riage was afterwards dissolved in the Consistory , Court, upon the very ground that the wife was not of full age to enter into a contract of matrimony. This being an outline of the case the following witnesses• were called s Mr. Charles Charlton, Record Keeper of the Vicar- General, produced an affidavit, purporting to be sworn by the defendant before Dr. Adam. Dr. Adam deposed that he was Surrogate of Sir, Scot, the Vicar-General, and acted as such. The Arronnsv.Ggriattal. asked Dr: Adam, if his appointment was in writing, to which he replied, ti:at he really did not know in what manner he had been appoiated ; be had received his subparaa only last night, end he was not prepared to answer the ques tion satisfactorily. , • The ATTORNEY-0014%AL Sdbrifittea, that the sp.; pointment being nototibu'lly in writing, it ought to be profluced, tb Ott* the, competency of the witness, Lut ritqlord'ELLssannouoo held that it was enough to that tits witness had acted in the office, of Stir rogate. An Act of Parliament had passed tei 'make] such evidence sufficient in some cases to prove that she officer was lawiully.appointed. The ATTORNIY-GIDIsmAL contended that the case of Mrs. Verelst was an authority upon this point, for there it appeared that the appointment of the Surro gate had been defective ; but Lord Et.i.matostotrou said, that case was distin guishable froni this, as the appointment here was not offered in evidence. _ Dr. Adam's examination then proceeded. He said that he acted as Surrogate to Sir William Scot, the Vicar• General of the Archbishop of Canterbury, and he recognized his signature to the affidavit, signed by the defendant. . _ Cross-ezamined•—The proceeding was merely for mal. The blanks of the affidavit were filled up be- fore it was signed by the deponent. Witness never had any communication with the person making •the affidavit. No particular attention was paid to cases of this description in general, unless there was some thing suspicious in the appearance of the party apply ing for the licence, as being under age, or the atten daft of the Surrogate was specially drawn to the per son applying. Mr. Anthony Mann, who bad known the defen dant for nine years, proved his signature to the affidavit, which being put in ,and read, appeared to be dated 11th June, 1814, and stated that the deponent, John Creswell, was about to intermarry with Susannah Cosins, spinster, of the age of '2l and upwards; and that the deponent knew of no lawful impediment to their union. Upon his crosssxamination, svtness said that the defendant had been in the Navy, and his education•having been neglected, he had been sent to witness fur improvement. At the time of the mar riage defendant was residing in witness's house, but he could not state whether the defendant was or was not more than 21 years of age. • Mr. Chariton again examined, said that the licence was delivered to the party asking for it. The Rev. John Rush, Curate of St. Loke's, Chel sea, prOduced the Registry of marriage lu.tween the defendant and Sossnnah Cosins, which appeared to be to this effect John Creswell, of this parish, batchelor, and Susannah Colitis, of St. Mary-le.bonne, spinster, were married in this church by licence on the ISth day of Jude, in the year 1814, by me, J. Rush, Curate." To this were added the signature of the parties and the names of the witnesses. Mr. Rush did not recollect the parties at all. The wit- fusses present at the marriage were the deputy clerk and his daughter. He did not recollect any thing 'suspicious in the appearance of the parties as to their age. If there bad he must have noticed it and acted accordingly. Miss Anne Cosins, sister of the prosecutrix, knew the defendant. He married her sister. She was pre sent at the marriage and remembered the Clergyman. Defendant only lived with her sister three days when she returned home, to her mother. Susannah was only 17 years of age at the time of her marriage. Crost-examined.—Witness was christened by the name of Anne, and always went by that name. Lived with her mother at No. 20, Croydon -street, Edgware-road ; they werelodgers and had one room. Witness bad never gone by the name of Smith— never answered to it, nor had represented herself to have married a man of that name. Mad been in service for two years, but now worked at dress-niak , cog. Defendant never came to the house where wit ness's mother lived. Had never seen the defendant in any house ; always met him by accident in the street. She never asked him only how he did, or so. Saw defendant about two days before the marriage, between six and seven in the evening. . Had not signed the registry. Did not know any body of the name of Smith; had not seen him for ten years; he lived in a gentleman's family, and she lived at that time a few doors off. Never . went by the name of Smith ; and being asked if she 9r her pptheOrd ever represented that she had passed by the name of Smith, she hesitated for some time, hut finally an swered in the negative. The third day after the mar riage, Mr. Simkins came to inquire about the family ; he saw her sister, and mother, and herself. Mrs. Ann Cusins, mother of the prowcutrix, stated that her daughter,, Susannah, attained the age of twenty on the 26th of November last. Cross-ezatnined.—Had never known of the court ship between herlaughter and the defendant. Her daughter lived at home, and when witness was not charing or nursing, they all slept in one room. She never allowed an male visitors to hei daughter ; de fendant was never in her apartments: Witness heard of the marriage on the del following, and three or four days afterwards the clergyman, came to make inquiries. Had another daughter in the' country. Did aot.know any body , of the name of Smith, and her daughter Anne never Went by that name : if any one called kyr by that name; witness did not know of . . - ... 1 This was the grit tithe witness knew of it. If a young man named Smith kept company with bet daughter, witness could not tell. She did once say that her daughter went by the name of Smith she called her so hetself once in joke. Witness had not seen the young man for above two years. and did not know what he was; never said that her daughter Anne lived with a young man, named Sznith, for • twelve months, and passed by his name; she had said that her daughter had kept his company for some tittle; no man ever kept her daughter's company; probably she might have met with Smith in the streets; had heard of young Creswell before the marriage, and she had seen him ride up and down the streets, and had been informed that be was Su san's intended ; did not know ttf the correspondence between them, and had never made any inquiry about him ; witness was seldom at home, but had beesd them joking about it. Mr. Henry Williams produced the registry of the birth of Susannah Cosine, f the 26th Nov. 1796. •Mrs. Bridget Vaughan !weed, that the defendant . lodged at her house, and paid SOs. per week. He said that he was go'ng to be married to a poor girl with no' fortis e, who was under irgC. I-11 added, that he was with his tutor in Sloane -street, and wit. . ness.advised him to consider well of it. Defendant and his wife came on the Monday morning after *the Marriage, and remained until the Wedi.esday fhb lowing. • Mr. John Thompson, Cerk of the Registrar of the Consistorial Court, produced the senteuce.of divorce bet weenthe defendant and the prosecutrix, .the ground of which appeared to be that the latter was underage. The, ATTORKEY-GENEtIAL. addressed the Jory 03 the part of the defendant, and contended, that it did • not appear from the Affidavit in question,, that he had sworn affirmatively that the prosecutrii was of the age of 21, but only spoke of her as being Of .tge, and that ;. he knew of no lawful impediment to their marriage— • and consequently, that the evidence did not sustain • • the assignment relied upon in the indictment. The defendant was certainly the son of respectable pa. rents t and this prosecution was the result of an un successful attempt to extort money from the friends of the defendant. There were several ways of ex torting money. One was by putting a pistol to a man's head, and another was by holding out the ter rors of a criminal prosecution. The present proceed. ing WAS of the latter description of extortion. Lord ELLIENBOROUIiII charged the Jury, that this was the worst description of perjury which could come under the consideration of the Court. His Lordship animadverted in strong terms upon the im proper conduct of the defendant, who had entailed upon the prosecutrix the most cruel of injuries. He had debauched her person under the colour cf lawful matrimony, effected by the crime nf perjury, and afterwards abandoned her to her credulity. If the Jury believed the evidence, they must find the defen dant Guilty. • The Jury immediately found the defendant guilty. COUR r OF COMMON PLEAS, DECEMBER 23. DRCISION 11APECTIN6 REV MINCE TOR CIIMIACTER, AND GUA• RANTZI[TO Rt VALID] Tu 6E IN WRIIING. ASHLEY p. WHIM This was an action to recover froM she defendant a comperitatitei for having given a false chArac:er to a person of the name of Blisset. By means ef the de fendant's represent aim% that he " Blisset WAS a good man, and had paid three hundred guineas for the Tithe-rniil at Deptford ;" ahe plaintiff was induced to credit him to the amount of XIES, v.sticli he *as defrauded of by Blisset having shortly abscond:it and never since been heard of. It appeared in evidence, that Blisset, the defaulter, had Soff.e years before ts 'tea the bens:.it of an Insolvent Act, and that so far from being a responsible person, or a purcheser ~1 the Tutee-mill, he had never completed 11;s plirchase, hat had there likewise become a defaulter. Mr. Ashlie, junior, proved the recommendation of the defernta-a: in Favour of Blisset, by means of which his father had given that person credit as above ststed. Mr. Serjeant BEST, for the defendant, contended that here was no fraud ra which the evidence went to prove the privity of the defendant, or that he had lent himself in any way .to the fraudulent intentions 'of Blisset. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL contended that here Was evidently a fraudulent representation, by which 'the defendant had made himself liable for the loss the plaintiff had thereby incurred. Chief-Justice Gians here remarked : " No man lay a statement of such facts as these, can, in point of law, be rendered liable for the debt, or default, of another, unless he undertakes by a guarantee, and. which guarantee must be in writing, to be answerable. This case was different from that where an action' might be maintained Mr fraud, wherein ? person had rendered himself liable, without any guarantee is, . writing, by means of a wilfully false and Trauduleitt representation of fact, and not merely because he has given a better character to a man than what. he; deserved. It would have been better; perhaps, that the law had remained as it formerly was, than that , the late alteration should have been introduced, snak ing the party liable, where the credit had been 0a..: rained under a reference ; because upon that alteta don there followed a flood of actions, until the law was restored to its ancient limits. In ." Ilaycroft v. Creasy,", the Court of King's Benet held that an ac tion-cannot be maintained unless the character of the party was falsely, fraudulen.ly, and deceitfully repro sewed, in order to obtain credit, and this withia the perfect knowledge of the person recommending hiin to such credit." The Jury, under his Lordalip's direction, found a Verdict for the Defendant. A young man, of the name of idward Marshall, a corfi.ler tial servant in the employ of Messrs. Crowther and l•s!a)ne7, watch manor:film - cm Ironmonger-street, 'Old-street, was yester day hrouglil to Hatton-Garden Office, charged by his emp!oyers with Laving robbed them of a quantity of watches, eases , it . ^- ,•tauts, gold hands...andother articles, to a grea: amount, Ivhich he Was tha better enabled to do front the great trust repro.4 in hint,. he having free accuus to the goods in thc.factory ; and in rotas - quence of the number of articles missing from time so time, several men who worked in the factory were discharged, ro sus picion faking on the prisoner, who represented t s Lis eittyloye•• that some of the men were dishonor. In o. l e irirrairre, a poor man, who had a wife and four eh ldren, was discharge,:, on ?v. picion of baying stdlen alsair of pistols, entrusted so the prisoner, t 01; the purpose of protecting the factory at night, as be dept there; • the poor man has been ouesif employ ever si nce. Several of tie • atolun articles Were traced to th e prisoner.—TEcw were A ve charges made tit, and the prisoner was committed to Migrate for trial: • .