Star. — London, England, 1807-05-29 00:00:00

11 LilW INTELLIGENCE. COURT OF KING'S BENCH, MAY 26. Pf)TTkR V. KAY. This was an adion fnr 561. 145. the price of t 8 1 1 • Steep, fold to the defendant. The plaintiff is a mer chant, and rents a (mall farm in the county of Mid• dlefex. The defendant is a butcher in the neighbour- hood of the farm. The contra& between the parties was for 18 fheep, at 3 guineas a head, with liberty of pafturage for a month. In the courfe of that pe riod two of the fheep were (Men, and the queftion was, who fhould be at the lois ? In the progrefs of the trial it appeared that another condition of the contract was, that at the expiration of the month's pafturage the defendant was to pay, with a bill at two months. The month expired on the 27th of November, confequently the debt did not commence till the 27'h of January, and on turning to the record the adir.n was entitled of Hilary Term, which com mences the 23d of January, fo that the plaintiff had brought his adion four days former than his right of anion accrued. He was therefore nonfuited. MOULDEN V. tIENSHAW. This was an affirm for 51. cos. for the price of 36 gallons of cyder furninted to defendant. It appeared that the defendant wrote to the plaintiff, Rating that Mr. Parry had recommended his cyder, and that he wifhed to talk it, and defired him to fend half a hog !head of it. The Plaintiff's flock being out, he fent in the quantity ordered from the Rock of a Mr. `Tozer, another dealer. The Defendant objeded to it, and refuted payment. Lord ELLFNBOROUGH held, that the contra& had not been fa;isfied, inafmuch as the Defendant or dered the Plaintiff's cyder, and not Toxer's, and that he ought not to recover. The Plaintiff was accor dingly nonfuited. UTTRILIDGE V HARRIS. This was an action for the him of a horfe and chaife for five days, at t zs. 6.1. a day. The Plain• tiff was fume time fence a publican in the neighbour hood of Richmond, and kept a bode and chaift, which he occafionally let to hire. The defendant's wife wifhing to attend her daughter to the Clerkenwell Seflions, the having indided her hufband for ill treat ment, aßced the plaintiff to drive her to London in his gig, which he did five days fudceffively, for which he now claimed to be paid. The defence let up was, that the plaintiff volunteered the ufe of his chaife, and, being a witnefs himielf in the cattle, he gave Mt s. Harris a feat betide him out of kindnefs, and as a cnur efey, for which, at the time, he candled no pecuniary town. It alfo appeared that Mr. Harris, the defendant,. was a lunatic, and it was contended, that what had paired between the plaintiff and Mrs. Harris, could not bin 3 the defendant. Lord Eto.selottotrou laid, there was a very ; t n. perfed evidence of a hiring ; and when the Rate of the hufband's mind at the time was confidered, it mull appear that the thing hired was neceffary,— Now it could not be Paid that a chaife was necefftry ' on the prefent cccafion, and therefore it would be too much to bind the hufband with that which appeared more like a courtefey than a letting to hire.—Verdid for defendant. COMET V. •NTO -MAY 27. This was an adion for board and lodging furnilhed to defendant and his friend for three weeks. The. plaintiff keeps a public bottle in Old Gravel lane, and the defendant is a Ruffian tailor, who took up his quarters, with his friend Williams, at the plaintiff's bottle. A witnefs of the name of Hawes was called to prove the debt, but he could only fpeak to five days maintenance for defendant and his friend. And it being proved that the plaintiff had received 41. cos. for wages due to defendant, the Jury gave a verdid for the defendant. ALLFYN V. HEYJELL. This was an adinn againft the drawer of a bill of exchange for 491. and a fradion, drawn on one Agat t, at a month, dated the zoth of January, 1806. Mr. PARE. in opening the cafe, admit!ed that the Plaintiff had received a dividend, in part, of the dime of Agatt, who was deceafed, and that the bill ap peared to have been once dated the loth, but to have been altered to the zoth of January. If this were dune after the hill xras completed and ifined forth into the world, it would certainly defeat the Plain tiff's claim, as a new (lamp was neceffary ; but it muff be proved its him to have been done after, and not before it was campleted ; and it would be difficult to thew that a party had pnlipnned the payment of a bill ten days which had been fo completed ; the bill being proved, and the Defendant's hand-writing, Mr. Geattow, for the Defendant, endeavoured to' fhew that there was nothing fo extraordinary, where the cafe was of an accommodation bill, that finding the party drawing it would not be able to provide for it at the time, ten days further fhould be given by altering the bill after it was completely manufaCtured. That this was the cafe he fhould prove, not by any living teftimony, becaufe the acceptor was dead, but by a written memorandum of the acceptor, by which it appeared that it was an accommodation bill, and was drawn op the toth of January. The paper when put in appeared to be an acknowledgment between the parties to the bill, that a bill dated loth January, between the fame parties, and for the fame fum, was an accommodation bill. I.lld ELLENBOROUGH, C. J. however, refuted to receive this in evidence. It could not be tolerated, he fait', that the declarations of the party to the bill thioad be received as to this point, to deliat the in. ittument which he had put in negotiation. MAY 28. 90SEINS AND °TITERS, ASSIGNEES OF DIGHTON, V• DUPEROY• We mention this cafe merely to notice a point of confiaerable importance on the flat ute of bankruptcy, which is referved for the opinion of the Court. The defendant fold to the bankrupt goods to the amount of 2001. for which he had a promiffory note, dated the i9th of March, at two months, falling due, with three days grace, on the 22d of May. The day be fore the maturity of the note, viz. on the 21R of May, the commiflion was iffued againft the vendee, to which the vendor, the defendant, was the peti tioning creditor, and the queflinn was, if fuch a debt c-nflitured a competent claim for the petitioning creditor under the flatute ? A cafe of a fimilar nature occurred in the Ccm. mon Pleas, a (bort time Nice, which was acknow ledged to be perfeElly new to the praftice of the Court; in that inflance, goods ware fold to be paid for at the end of three !moths, the vendor was the petitioning creditor, before the expiration of that term, and it was decided that no fuch claim was fuf fictent to enable the vendor to become the petitioning creditor. The only difference in the two cafes was, that in the one, a promiffory note was given, and in the other it was a mere book debt ; but this was ad mitted to be a difference without any legal difi:ndion. sorTgucHem. The Gaol Keeper from Nottingham brought up a ptifnner, who had been fubpcenaed on a trial, ap• pointed for this day. As the perfon was getting into a poll chaifr, in obedience to the fubpcena, he was arrefled, and he now applied for his 6ifcharge. The faas of the cafe having been dated to his Lr.rdlhip, and the nature of the writ having been ex plained, the Chief Juftice obfet ved, that if what was reprefented lbould be confirmed by affidavit, the prifoner mull be releafed. Before the riling of the Court the affidavit was exhibited to his Lordiliip, and the gaol keeper was direaed to difcharge the pillow. GORDON V. SECRETAN. This was an aelion on a policy of infurance, on a whale (hip called the Tom. The total infurance was for 80001. on the fbip and cargo. The veffel was captured. The Defendant's name was on the policy for 2001. The value of the whole cargo was 87721. of which two-thirds, 58481. was for account of the owners, one third, 29241. for account of the Captain and mariners. Eighty-five per cent. had been paid into Court ; and the queftion was, whether the infur ance fo made could comprife, not only the fum loft by the owners, but alto the (hare of the Captain and mariners, fofar as not to make the total lofs exceed the fum of 80001. infured ? Or, in other words, whether the fhare of the latter was , or was not an infurable interelt ? The point was referved for the opinion of the Court. CUFFED. CHRISTIE. This was alfo an aflion upon a policy of infurance upon goods, brought to recover a total lofs and pre• mium agair;fl the underwriters. The Plaintiffs, Neils. Cuffe and Dickinfon, were confiderable merchants, and importers of butter and cheefe from the Continent, and the Defendant a Gen• tleman of molt relpellable chargter. The policy in quetlion was underwrote for 15001. upon goods which appeared to be of the value of 2271. ifs. and had been (hipped by the agent of the Plaintiffs, Mr. Ebegg. at Emden, configned to the Plaintiffs by the (hip called Der Freundfchaft (the Friendfhip) which had cleared the Cullom Houle of Emden en the loth of November, 1803: She remained in that river, owing to contrary winds, until the 6th of December then following, and had never fince been heard o f. On the part of the Defendant, it was contended, that, at the time of effeeing the policy in quellion, which was done on the 23d of December, there was a concealment of documents, which the underwriters fhould have been made acquainted with. The letter upon which the policy had been effected, was dated the 2d of December, and received the 22d, from which it appeared, that the flip in quellion was then ready to fail ; whereas the Plaintiffs being very ex tenfively engaged in this trade, had received feveral letters from their agent, Mr. Ebegg, antecedent to that date, by. Die Drei Schwaren (the Three Sif tab). Der Konig von Pruiffen (the King of Prudia) and other (hips, with confignments from that place, in moll of which it appeared that the Frenndfcbaft was fuppofed to have failed for England long before any of them, and fume apprehenfions were' entertain ed as to her fafety. Some of the Captains and Mates of the above mentioned (hips were examined, from whole evidence it appeared, that they left the 1 7 , eundfchaft in Emden Roads, on the 6.h of De cember. Lord Ei.t.stiactournr left it to the Jury, upon the credibility of thefe witneffes, when compared with thefe documents, which his Lordthip conceived to be a concealment fufficient to void the policy, if the Jury difbelieved thefe witneffes. _ The Jury, after a !bort coolphation, found a ver. did of t5l. tss. for the Plaintiffs, being the Dem. dant's portion of the premium paid. OXINHAM V. GIBBS. The plaintiff had purchafed a (hip of the defen. dant, who is a fhip.builder at Dartmouth," in the county of Devon, which to all appearance was a found and 'well-built veffel, but upon examination, after the Blip was brought to the Thames, it was found that her out fide planks were wotked up of tim ber which had not fufficiently been cleared of the fappy part at the edges ; in confequence of which, when the Teams were afterwards caulked, the edges of the wood gave way and the water leaked in thruugh the apertures. The plaintiff, therefore, having paid for her as a found (hip, brought an adion of tort as for a deceit againft the defendant, for having fold him a (hip as a found and well built (hip, which WkS in fad, not found. On the part Of the plaintiff it was proved, by Mr. Treyludda, the captain, who purchafed the veffel for his owners,*that, at the time, the defendant laid it on" in praife of his veffel ; and, taking it for granted fhe was well-built and found, he purchafed her at a found price. To all immediate appearance, indeed, there was no defeet in her; but it afterwards being found that fome of her timbers got wet, Mr. S. Barbe was called in, who requefted that a regular Currey fhould be had; and upon examining the outer planks as far as the high-water mark, almoß all of them were bad and defeetive, fo that if (he had been fent to tea there would have been great danger of her finking. Mr. S. Barbe faid that it was not ufual with him, wben.he bought a new (hip in the River, to examine her very particularly; but that if he bought one at an outport, and did not know the builder well, he thould make a pat titular examination of her condi tion ; but feveral of the witneffes NJ it was a very unufnal thing to try the fufficiency of the caulking of a new Chip by inftrumetus and caulkirg irons, and the defe&s of this veffel could not well be difcovered without fuch a trial. Mr. PARK for the defendant at firft contended, that as the plaintiff had nut regitlered the (lip in his own name, there was not a complete tale, and he could not maintain this adion which went upon an aver ment of a Cale. • Lord Ecisissoftotrou thought this p• . na with the Defendant, but would not nonfuit the Plaintiff, on account of the expence of coming to trial again, and therefore referved the point. Mr. PARK addrefred the Tory, and contended that in this aftion exprers fraud mull be (hewn, for if it was - a latent defedt,then the masi;n of caveat emptor A pplied, and the Plaintiff mutt lofe by his own want of cau tion in not requiting a warranty. brd ELLKSBOROUGH directed the Jury, that if there was any reprefentatinn, and in language, or any fraudulent fitting up of the (hip to put her in fuch trim as either to lull the caution of the purchafer, or to conceal the defeets of the vein', the Defendant would be li,tble in this aelion for a deceit, and it was proved that every one concerned in , the building of the (hip mutt know of there defeets in her. At the fame time, he wilhed that in cafes of this kind owners would have the caution to require a warranty that the (hip was faithfully built, as the lives of fo many perfons depended upon it. The Jury found a verdia for the Plaintiff—da mages 550). which was the fum proved to be necef fary to put her iu a Elate of lea worthinefs. COURT OF CINNAMON PLEAS, MAY 26. HUNT V. ►ICKFORD. This was an anion to recover the value ofa pocket of hops fent by the plaintiff to the warehoufe of the defendant, for the purpofe of being conveyed to Lei. celter, and there to be delivered as dire&ed. The hops arrived fate at Leicerter ; but neither Mr. Ben ningtn, the defendant's clerk, nor the porter, could dilcover the refidence of the perfon to whom they were addicffed, and the hops were depofited in the warehoufe of the defendant, and remained there for f.me months before any inquiry was made after them. It appeared from the evidence adduced, that the , agents of Mr. Pickford had exerted themfelves to find the abode of Mr. Bellamy, in Leicelter, the per fon to whom the plaintiff had fent the hops, but to little purpofe, nor could they trace out fuch a name. The Conniel for the plaintiff infified that the defend. ant had not endeavoured, to his utmoll, to find the owner of the goods, and, to prove his alTertion, he called Mr. Bellamy, who fitted, that he nnt only lived in Leicelter, but kept a public houfe there. On his eras examination, he laid his name was not paint ed over the door, nor was there any external rum by which a perfon walking the lircet could know that a Mr. Bellamy lived there. Sir JAMES MANSFIELD, in addreffing the Jury, laid it was clearly probed that blame could not attach to the defendant ; his agents had made every reasonable inquiry, and if that inquiry was nnfuccefsful, the fault could only reft with the plaintiff; he Ihould have been more explicit in his direeions, and not have fent goods under fuch an addrefs as " IL Bella my, Leicelter," a name not even known at the Poa 0 ffice.—PlaintifF nonfuited. MAY 27. — MOORS AND CS. V. TUCK. The plaintiffs in this aCtion were Meffrs. Moore, Stanton, 'Popham, James, and Blorford, eminent ha berdathers, in the City of London ; and it was brought in order to recover from the defendant the value of a box of goods intrufled to his care as a carrier, and owner of waggons, at Lynn, in Norfolk ; which parcel of goods had been addreffed to Mr. Cooper, a retail haberdather, at Lynn, but it had never come to hand. It appeared from the evidence, that in the latter end of 1805, Mr. Cooper, who had been in the habit of dealing with the plaintiffs before, ordered the goods in queflion to be packed up in a box, and fent to Lynn, to his (hop, as ufual, via Norwich. The goods were accordingly looked out, and afforted, and fent off by Jennings, a petrol' employed by the plain tiffs, who directed the warehoufeman previoufly to pack them, and then to fend them by a porter to the waggon office. The delivery of the b'x to the de fendant was alt . () made out, and it was proved like wife, that it got fate to the city of Norwich, from Norwich it was to be conveyed by another waggon to King's Lynn. Mack, a Clerk in the waggon (Ace at N.irwich, dcpofed to the delivery of the box to Mr. Tuck, waggoner, in order to its conveyance to its final dellination ; but it appeared that the box was 101 l on the road between Norwich and Lynn. The proprietors of the goods thus had no alternative but the prefent ar9ion, for recovering the value of the articles they had fent off, which It was contended, had been 101 l through the negligence of the defendant. Sir J. MANSFIELD told the Jury, 'that the Counfel for the Plaintiffs had not brought forward the Warehonfeman, to prove that he actually had packed up the goods in the box ; and, for aught he knew himfelf, they might nut have been packed lip a' all ; on the contrary, the box might have been fent off empty ; he was, however, fatisfied that the goods were in the box at the time, but as there was not fuch proof of that fa&, as the law required, and as far as the evidence went, the Jury could only give a verdia for the value of the box merely. It would not be e.,nfiflent with jaw, were he to advife the Jury in the decifion they might adopt, to give a verdict for the goods, inafmuch as they had been fent by a very im proper and irreg ular fort of conveyance, liable to great infecurity from a change of vehicles, which ren dered the Defendant in a great meafure anSwerable for the various cafualties that happen to goods con ligned to his care as a carrier or waggoner, in the courfe of their tranfit from one place to another. The Jury, after a (port deliberation, fi•und a ver diet fur the Plaintiffs for sof. and ss. as the value of the box. FULLING V. KIIIIEWICK. The Plaintiff, a farmer at Eaft Ham, brought his aaion to recover a compenfation in damages for an injury don; to his child, by the negligence of the De fendant's fervant. It appeared that the Plaintiff's fervant had the care of two children, and (he was wal king out with them in the above neighbourhood in Oaob►r laft. .One of the children was in her arms, and the other was playing in the road, where the De fendant's cart ran over it, and broke its leg. The driver of the cart, inflead of minding his horfes, was a fleepon the (hafts, and the accident was attributed to his ne. gligence. The infant was afterwards attended by a fur. geon, whole bill amounted to 601. and the Learned Serjeant who conduaed the caufe, was initruaed to fay, that amputation of the child's limb was yet likely to take place. An application was made to the De fendant, who is alfo a farmer at Eall Ham, to corn penfate the plaintiff and his child, for the misfortune which had happened ; and the detendant was willing to pay the Surgeon's bill, but oblerved he cool l runt he anfwerable any further for the negligence of Lis man—the prefent aaion therefore commenced. Alter the evidence had proved the above fads, the Jury found a verdict for the plaintiff.--Damage• t6ol. BIRTHS. On Monday laft, to Goster-ftreet, the wire or Captain Jonathan Birch, of a daughter. Monday, at Briton Perry, the Lady of James Lumiden, Ef q . late Licutcnant•Coloud of the 3 sth regiment, of a fon and Istir. MARRIED. Saturday laft, at St. Nicholas, Worcefter, Mr. John Palmer, Hi Mif. E. Allies, daughter of Thos. Allies, Efq. Mayor of that city. At Stirling, on the sift inftant, Duncan Glasfurd, Efq. of Tani. coultry. to Mils Helen Rubertfoo, fecond daughter of the Colin. tor of Ftcife. Lately, at Fordhatn, Norfolk, Captain Junes Sadler, to Mira DIED. On the sth of February, between St. Jago and the Cape, EnGgn 7 hos. Jackfon, of the 88th Regiment ; a young man defervecuy efteemed for his amiable and mild qualities, and deeply regretted by all his brother officers. On the [4th inftant, at her houfe in Bath, in the Sift year of her age, lady Gibbons, relidt of the late Sir John Gibbons, Bu t , K B. and mother of the prcfcnt Sir William Gihhons. Ban. At liar houfe in Brunfwick place, Bath, Mics Frances Mnford s filter of the Right Hnn. Lord Redadale 1 salt week, the Rev Charles Ewe% Redor of Bringtnn cult Bythorn, Ham., and formerly of Clare -Hall, Cambridge, B. A; 1763, M. A. 1766. The rtdtory is in the gift of the Matters and Falows of Clare Hall At Hollingknowl, Derbyfhire, George Balzfhaw, aged 96: hie father died aged 93 ; grandfather aged 96; anti great graudfathee aged 99. On the sift ult. Mr. Alexander Lawrk, writer in Dunbar. At Eckford Maar, the Rev. William Paton, in the 87th year of his age, and sad of his minidry. Monday re:might, the Rev. Thomas Hatton, Reetor of Wateti Upton, in the coun:y of Salop. Hatt WATER AT LONDON BRIDGE TO-MORROW. Morning 8 minutes after 8 Afternoon • - ga minutes after 8 NIEDICAL AND CHEMICAL LECTURES. ON MONDAY, JUNE 1, a COURSE o f LEC TURES on PHYSIC and CHEMBTRY will re-com mcrce at the Lahorato-y, George-ftrect, Hanover-Nun; at the ufttat Morning Hours, viz. 1 he Ta ERA:EIJI les, at a Quarter before Eight. The Pa ACTIOE of Pity sic, at Half after Eight. And the ell r.M IS r al-, eta Q 2 artcr after Nine. By GEORGE PEARSON. M. D. F. R S. Senior Phyficiat; to St. George's Hulpital, of the College of Phyficians, &c Clinical Ledures are given as ufual on the Pa: ients of St George's Hospital, every S3tur.lay Morning, at Ninc o'Clock.. The Practice of Vaccination will be taoght at the Inftionion, Broad-Brett. TO THOMAS TAYLOR, Bfg. Dear Sir, No. 9, Bridge-ftreet, Leaden.. I FEEL it a duty incumbent upon me , to i n f. rm you of the very great and extraordinary Cure I have received le ,m your invaluable Mecliciiie—l.LAK E's PATENT PILLS, About two ycart ago I was att..ched with a Venereal r which l treated rather Ilightly for come nate, but the dift.afe at length f; reading all over my 11,,dy, I was obliged to apply to the molt enutientot the Faculty, but their aillitance afforded only tem porary relief. I went through various courfes of Salivation, and from being rather of a corpulent Habit was reduced to a mere Skeleton. The ulcers that fprcad all over my limbs, rendered me a complete object, fo that ray lei this defpaired of my rtc , .ery. When brought, to this fituatton, I conlidered death as inevitable, but a relatlno of mine commenting upon the many cafes in w;,ich year Pii' had lacerated, I was anducsd t , ) try a box o. them, which I thought rather relieved me, and by perteveranee for two or three months, and following yur dirretions I ..xpetten , ed the molt unaccountable relaxation from pair , the fore grad.:ally fubfiding ; I am now, thank GoD, perfectly recovered, and %ant i ing out daily : I doubt not hut one more box, which I think can. thus to take, will diablifla my health in its original ft etc. It is with the m ft heartfelt gratitude that I fubferibe myfelf, Sir, your muth obliged humble fcrrant. Was. PIMP SON. Deanlgate, Machelter, July 1, tgot. P.S. For the public benefit I do not objedt to the above being publithed, but leave you to aft as our owe, better judgment Mall didtate. Prepared and fold by the Lie Proprietor, Thomas Taylor Meryl. her of the Royal College of Surgeors, Loudon, at his Houfe No. 9, New Bridge ftreet. Where, afur a conflant relldence o, more than thirty fix years, in a pradlice particularly diredlad to the Cure of Venereal Compl,irts, with that inviolable fecrecy, which men of his prnfiflon thouid always ohfetve, he flatters himrelf, the advice and affiaance ke grataitoufly Pdminißers to wrfons taking this Medicine will be (Accrued by ernin?Pub lie, as an advatitaee feldom to be obtained, aril void of ambiguity. S 11 , by his kipoi , itment, fur the converiLnce of thole !Moot at a diftance., at the Perfumer's, N 0.35, St. Alban's ftreet, Pall Mall; the Shop, No. to 3, Oxford-ftreet; Mr. Dilbo. rough's. No. 7, rifh-ftreet Hill ; Mr. Steel's, Bookfeller, t. Union Rnw, !Attie Tower Hill ; Mr. Wation's, South• Bridge, kidiaburi h ; Mr. Calwell's, Dublin ; Mr Biltinge's, Liverpol; Mr. Arlin( n's, Alanchcfler ; aniny one Pertm in every con fiderahle Town in Great Brit an and Ireland, la Botes of only 2s. 9d. each. fealcii up with full and plain diredlions, whereby Perfons of either Sex E. ay Cure t bemfaves with Eafe, Speed, Se• vecy, and (afar. `THEN Prole(Enna' Alen of Education and Re- Iponfibilif y deviate from the general Syllem by the ftleaiors of a particular branch, the fandtion of long continued fucccffes is the belt criterion of fuperiorlty. Thirteen years have I devoted my pradice to the exelufi‘, .reats hunt of Tree Diforders, and the fixed:slut refult of my Ilan gives me additional ardour to oppore, as far a% I am able, the ravages of thofe Complaints which arc the mutt important in the Catalogue of Human Infirmities. After initiation into every Branch, as an Army Surgeon, formed a with at an early period of pradtice to retells Individuals. from the iguorance of uneducated men, or the equally dangerous• precipitancy of general Pradlitioncr9. he Three Diforders, to the cure of which I have devoted my attention, comprife every fperies of VENEREAL INFECTION, whether of a recent or long duration; idly, all kinds of debility, whether artling from the habits of fchool boys, or the indu'grnces of mature age ; and,lallly, that derangement of the fyftem in wo• men which is called BARRENNESS, or STERILITY. Numerous Difeafes arc the refute of ignorante, or hatte in the trea.ment of a fitnple Gonorrlicei ; and it not unfrequently hap• pens that the feeds of Life are poifuned by the indifcr.tion of an unguarded hour. By a fuperior method fuch Complaints are eaG►y cured; and, even where others have failed, I truft that I may prc fume to oar a radical re•eftablithment. Few, however, are the cafes of complicated &firers in this dif order, compared with the calamituto, fituations of men, who"...ronx an indulgence in a folitary vice, or the prevalent ga'eties of a fafhiana'Ale life, acquire that (late of debility which Is the una voidable confequence of filch pernicious habits. Where the unhappy (offerer broods o;:r his mifery, but care fitly conceals his misfqrtune, it may be lonic conflation for him to know. that although it he an objed of doubt or uncertainty with other praditioners, the removal of thefe deficiencies by the gradual progrcfs of renovation, is the acquirement of my experi ence. If the rites of Bacchus or Venus have begun to reduce manly vigour, much anxiety will be prevented by an early counteraction of this languid hate; and in thefe cafes no great difficulty will occur. But where this deficiency has for years Wiled, a proper perle verance is indi(penfably tequifite to revive the flunfoering (park, of life, and to re-animate the conflitution. MARRIED WOMEN, who have long been dif3ppointed their expeelations of a family, may he allured, that in roue ire. fiances, fuch dards are curable by Medical &ill. The fecrecy which is fo effeotial to my underta' and tha quallScatloris which I have prefumed to ttate, For,:: the hails of my pretenflons, and in coincidence with fuck this is given, that Mr. Bree may be conful'ed pufonaily, or by I.ct;rts (inclofing a (mall Note), at his book, No. a o , Arum!el-ilreet• Strand, near. Templie-yar. cr T here is au ad:litional Fntrance in Water firret adj , lnirt, and the name is on both the doors. MARTIN BREb, Member of t h e Royal College of Surgeons in London. A Caurto N.—Some Perfons, who flfcly affcrt themfelves ta be Mtst eras or -rat RnYat. Cot ccot,having for rtveral montltt paR copied my Advertifernentsalmoft word for wed, am! infertrd them as their own produdions, it is fill , duty to mention, that , thole Perfens are net Members of any College in londno. F4in• burgh, or elkuicrc; nor have they an, right to pradice in London N. B. A Lift of the Members is publifbect at the Houfc of at College in lizlds,whieh may be referred to. LONDON: Printed and publifbed by LEVPL KENT, (of Can terbury Pl. , re, Larnhrch),at the STAR °PPM' :in r, Carcy- Erect. Publiflitd alto at be Sr*% OETICE, Terrrir Ea. • I ,0