Star. — London, England, 1802-03-20 00:00:00

C John Bonner, An Infpeaor of Franks at the PoR-, office, Rated that he ''as, by habit, capable of a'certaining whether a hand.wiitihg was a natural eurr.4;cy, or :in imitation by rune other perfon, or an attempt by the writer to difguife his hand ; he hid looked at the letters carefully, they were certainly written in a diliTuifed hand, he had not the frnAlleil doubt a it. He was then anted whe ther, by comparing thefe letters with the other writing, admitted to be the defendant's, he cculd Rate with certainty, that the perfun who wrote the one wrote the other ? The ATTORNEY-GENERAL ohjeCled _to the evict tion—obferving that he had oppofed the admitlion of Inch evidence recently in the cafe of Folter and Mellifh; but in confequence of not being fully pre pared, he had not been able to urge thole real Ons which lie fhould now offer. He contended agairift the principle of evidence recognized by the modern practice, of compatifon of hand-writing by a wit nels who had never ken the party write—it was a praaice perilous and dangerous to the life and li b:rty of the cubic.% and never till lately admitted, even in the worft times and the worft Judges. He then reviewed the tales of Algernon Sydney, the Seven hilltops, and, in (hurt, every cafe upon the ftibjea down to the Lilt decilion of Mr. Juilice le Blanc, in Fuller and Mellilh. He infifted that the novel doelrine of evidence was in violation of that principle of evidence. by which the people of this country were fecured in the enjoyment of their rbltts, propzrty, liberty, and every thing dear to them. Ile was fvllow•ed on the fame fide by Mr.ADISI, Mr.Cossr, and Mr. I m ess , _ Mr. Serkz.int B:ST, Mi. MARRIOTT, &C. were htard in Anfwer. Sir I',FAumoNT Tiornam delivered his opinion at lcagth, and decided that loch evidence was not Mr. Hume, another of the Infpthors of Franks, &poti:d to the letters being written in a dilguifed Land. Mr. Greenwood, the Clerk of Meas. Lee and Co. Bankers, tail the dtfendant kept his cant at their honk. He well knew his hand-writing, having paid his drafts for the laft 2c years. He had looked over the letters, and had hardly any doubt as to their having been written by the de. fen.lant—there were many parts of them not dif. gaited at all, particularly the words "hypocritical villain," which were exa4lly his charafter. If a draft had been pref.:rued to him in fuch a hand % riling, he would have paid it without any re ference or hcfnation whatever. Wm. Fuller had lived -o years with Mr. Cator, know his hand-writing perfeltly ; believed the let ter to be his ; he had not the lean particle if doubt. • Samuel Heard, a Stationer at Bromley, Paid, the letters produced were all written upon paper of the fame manufafture : the maker's name was Taylor, and the date in the water-mark, 1796, it was called uncut fool's-c . He dealt in paper of that fort, and many other forts; he had not fold any of it to more than two perfons. Mr. Jack fon applied to him for form, but he had none left; he could not mention any perfon he had fold a tingle flieet to, except the defendant and the Bi. fhop of kochetter • their fervants ufually came for it and paid him ; ;he witnefs laid, he had teen the defendant lalt week at his own houfe ; he went there to t.tkc a little bill; the defendant Paid to him, " Yon never fold me any paper," to which he replied, " No, Sir, not direCtly to you ; it was not for me to know who the paper was for." He was not furprifed at the quefiton, becaufe the bu- Lnefs had been the fubjeCt of converfation. This was all the evidence for the Mr. ATTORNEY CENZRAL then acldreffed the Jury in behalf of the Defendant. He commenced his ob:ervations by congratulating the Court and the public upon the deci!ion cf the Learned Judge uFon the roint of law-refpteling the adrniflibility of the cride•lce—a decifion which, in his opinion, had relieved the country from one of the moll grievous oppretrions it ever had fuffered; for if fuch evi dence could have been received in the cafe of Mr. Cator for a mifdemeanor, the fame obfcure, dark proof, would he applicable in every cafe of felony. Men would be condemned and punithed with death upon the tellitnony of perfons, not who were fa- 1 mili.tr with their writing from having feen them write, but by lir-angers who had no other medium of proof than the bare comparifon of hand. writ ing. With regard to the cafe itfelf, it was of the deepeß importance, not only as it affected the De fendant but the public—it was a queftion whether a gentleman of fortune, charaCter, and hononr,had done an all which, if he was guilty of, Ramped him as one of the moil weak as Well as the moll wicked of mankind—an at which rendered it doubtful whether his folly or malignity moll pre dommatcd—an act aim-d at the clef:ration of the peace of a family. If he thought the Defendant was not perfectly innocent of the foul charges im puted to him, be fhould molt readily confign him to the criminatory obfervations of his Learned Friend, however fevere they might he. The Jury, before they could pronounce him guilty of fuch a crime, would reflect upon the character of the man . who was fuppofed capable of having committed it. The Defendant was a gentleman who had palled a life in the fervice oldie Fall India Company, un contamitated by the fufpicion of any vice. It was not the demerits of his brother John Cator, the Jury were to try, and therefore be was perfuadcd they would difcard from their minds any preju dice they might have entertained in confequence of their opinions with regard to any part of his con.luet. Could it be imagined that fo malignant j and vulgar a libel ceruld have proceeded from a man who& life had been characterized by quali ties of an oppofite nature He was a man uni formly fpoken of in terms of refpeet and kindncfs by thofe whole good opinion was moil valuable. He had, at an early period, gone to the Eaft In dies, where, by his indttary, he had gained a re fpeeable fortune, and had retired to Beckenham, near the refidenee of his brother, to enjoy it. He did not mean to infer that the profecutor, Mr. Jackfon, would have imputed Inch an offence as this was to the Defendant, if he had not perfuaded him- fell into a bdief that he was the author of the li bels : but it was peifeCtly natural for perfons when they had oi:ce adopted a notion, to perfevere in it, however miilaken it migi.t I e. He could not help thinking Mr. Jackfon would have acted with much more propriety, if he had inveftigated the ground of his fufpicion before he had attributed to the Defendant a decd of fo infamous a nature. The Learned Advi cate then proceeded to comment up on the evidence, and obferved, that the Defendant had never mixed in the controverlies of the pa rilh ; that he had never had any difference with the profecutor, except the trifling difpute in the carriage reljneting reformers never doing any good ; that he was a man of mild, good-natured, and inoffenfive manners, and of liberal education; and therefore that it was abililutely improbable he fhould have been the author of fuch infamous libels : he inferred, that the very circumllance of his having furnithed the profecutor with the means of fuhflantiating the charge in the manner he had done, by writing to him thofe letters which had been compared with the libels, were a proof that he was coulcious of his innocence, and was not aware of any potfible way in which thofe letters could be employed to his diftdvantage. He then Rated the nature of the evidence he meant to lay before the Jury, and concluded by trulling they would not by their verdict hold up the Defendant as an object for the finger of Icorn to point at for the remainder of his days. He proceeded to call his witneffes. The Bi(hop of Rochefter faid he had known the Defendant nearly eight years. The Defendant's family and his own were in habits of intimacy.— His opinion of him was, that he was a plain, ho goodnatuted gentleman, a very valuable neighbour, and he believed incapable acompofing the libels in queflion. His Lordfltip raid he was well acquainted with his hand writing, and he was of opinion the libels had not the leaft refemblance to it. Upon the eras-examination of the witnefs, it appeared his knowledge of the Defendant% hand-writing was derived from letters written fub fequent to the libel. Barwell, formerly of the Supreme Council of Bengal, laid, be was well acquainted with the Defendant's hand-writing : he was furprifed that any one fhould have fuppofed him the writer of the libels ; he had examined them narrowly, and the more he looked at them the more he was con vinced they were not the produ&ion of his pen ; from his long knowledge of him he did not think him a man likely to have done a thing of the kind: he had been in fituations of confidential truft in India, and he believed incapable of a dilbonourable anion.—On his crofs-examination, he admitted he had, as one of the Members of the Council, figned an order for the difinifTal of the Defendant, in confe quence of an imputation of perjury, in having fworn that a debt, which he well knew was due from the houfe in which he was a partner, was not owing from the firm, and for endeavouring to fhift the debt upon another houfe. The witnefs attempted to explain this, by laying that he was adverfe to the difmiffal of the Defendant, but that he was compelled to fign the order becaufe the majority of the Council were againft him. He raid he was reftored after a fufpenfion of feveral years. Mr. Smith Barwell, the brother to the lel wit nefs, raid, he had long been in the habit of corref ponding with the Defendant, and was perfedly acquainted with his manner of writing. The libel had not, in his opinion, the leaft refemblance to it. Mr. SPAR Is, the Defendant's Solicitor, depofed to the fame effect ; but, upon his crows-examina tion. admitted that the words hypocritical vil lain" did very much refemble his hand-writing. Mr. Farmer, a gentleman of Wickham, in Kent, I laid, the Defendant was an inn/fulfill man, and, totally incapable of writing the libels imputed to him. Mr. Grote, of Beckenham, Paid, the Defendant was not a man likely to have written anonymous letters—he was a quiet peaceable man, bringing up his family virtuoufly, and exerciling all tile pro per duties of a father. Mr. Jenner, of Dodoes Commons, fail, lie was intimately acquainted with the Defendant—lie teas a man of mutt inoffensive manners, fulfilling ail the duties of life—as far as his opinion went, he was a molt worthy member of Society. Mr. Fuller, of Beckenham, fail lie had known the Defendant- fixteea years ; he had a riling fa mily of his wan, and thought the Defcnd.ust and his family the littelt for them to affociate with ; his family was a pattern of domeltic harmony ; the Defendant was a peaceful,ftiecdly, inoffensive, and valuable neighbour ; lic conceived him the molt unlikely man in the word to have committed tb infamous an aCtion as the one invented to him. Mr. Lee, the Banker, flared that the li:)els had not the leaft refemblance to the defendant's hand writing. On his crofs.examiaation he faid the witnefs, Mr. Greenwood, had been his paying clerk twenty-five years. Mr. Hobart Rated, that the defendant was inca pable of writing letters of fo libellous a tendency. The Counfel for the profecution then entered upon his reply. He maintained that the evidence for the defendant, In far from controverting the filet of his guilt, eflablifhed and confirmed it. He laid he little thought when he ieleaed his ‘k it nefles from the tradetinen, whole means of exiltence in a great meaftne depended upon the defendant and his brother, that he fhould have been able to have ex miffed from them evidence of fo ftrong and un anfwerable a nature as they had given. They had, however, afforded a proof that English tradcfmen were as independent in fpirit as the higheß Peer or Prelate in the land. He animadverted upon the arguments ufed by the Attorney General, and obferved they only cached his pity, that lb great a man fhould have been driven by the weaknefs of his cafe to the neceffity of ufing them. He re ferred to the telEmony given by the different wit. neffes, which he contended amounted to next to nothing, compared with the decilive evidence on the part of the profecution. With regard to the argument, founded upon the improbability of a man of the defendant's character writing inch li bels, it was ridiculous. It was the conitant coin fe of perfens of education who depended to the in. famy of writing libels, to underwrite thernli ivee, and adopt a flyle Inked to the meridian of Grub area. The defendant had purpofcly alfurned that ftyle—he had purpofely mis-fpelt words, in order that it might not be inferred he was the author of the letters ; he had direCted the letters to Mr. Henry Jackfon, Efq. that they might have the ap pearance of having come from an illiterate writer. It was Carnival time with him ; he was going about nabbing with his Ililetto in the dark, and it was therefale neceffary he fhould difgnife ldmfeh with the mafk of vulgarity. lithe deferident wa , innocent, it was truly unfortunate that the libel, fhould have been written upon the identical paper which it had been proved had been fold only to him and the Bifhop of Rocheller ; the guilt was between them ; the letters could only have been written by him, or by that Reverend Prelate. Even the defendant's witneffes had admitted the libels bore a Itrong refemblance to his character of writing, but forfooth they could not believe a man of his character would have been guilty of writing them : whether he had written them, the Jury would determine. It was a quettion which emphatically belonged to them. Had the de fendanesfriends been ten times more numerous and refpedable than they were, their teftimony wi dd not have prevailed againft the unequivoc..l praof of the defendant's having in an evil and unguarded hour fuffered himfelf to deviate from the path of honour. The Learaed Advocate having further commented upon the evidence on both fides, finifh. ed his obtervations by expreffing his firm convic tion, that the Jury would not helitate in pronounc ing the defendant guilty, painful as it was to con fign a man who moved in an honourable and re. fpeetable fphcre of life, to infamy, contempt, and difgrace. Sir BEAUMONT HOTHAM laid, that after the laborious attention of the Jury for fo many hours, he fhould deem it extremely indifereet to occii py their time many minutes by his &Wei-ration, The cafe was reduced to a tingle queftion, nerve ly, whether the defendant, Mr. joreph Cator, had been guilty or not of the fcandalous aCtiun imput ed to him? there was no legal point to he con fidered, it was a plain matter of faR. The Lear n ed Judge recapitulated the evidence, and obi - creed upon it ; he Rated that thofe letters could not have been written by any perfon who was indifferent to, and unacquainted with, the politics of the parilh of Beckenham. If the defendant, as had beets just ly remarked, was innocent, it certainly was a very unfortunate coincidence of circumstances that the libels fhould have beets written upon the paper which had been fold only to him and the Bifhop of Rochefter. The Witnelles for the defendant had allowed there was a fining refemblance of character between the libels and the defendant's ordinary manner of writing, but they had at the fame time Rated their conviction that a man of his character was incapable of fo bale an amticn. It was a queltion which emphatically belonged to the Jury. Numerous and relpeaable as the de fendant's friends were, yet if' they were ten times more numerous and refpeaable, their evidence ought not to weigh a moment, if the Jury were fatasfied, and felt no difficulty in determining as to the fad of his being the author of the letters. If they were not pofitive as to his guilt, then cer tainly it was a cafe in which they were bound to take into their ferious confideration the very high character the defendant had received. 'Mt their verdict would be conformable to the jullice of the cafe, and fatisfaaory to the public, who were ma terially concerned in the queftion, was what he entertained no manner of doubt of—they would weigls the evidence on both fides, compare the let ters, and give that opinion, which, as honclt men, would juffify them to the world. The Jury retired for about a quarter of an hour and returned aVadia, pronouncing the DS:ndant Guitrv. _ This interefling Trial occupied nearly elegy a hours, and excited a (!gree of curiosity' hard:y ever paralleled with reference to the pruceedir%s of a Court of Jut . lice. The Era of THANI:T, and many ditlirtguifited Characters in the County of Ktr.t, were prefent. The general approbttion of the auditors at the Verdi& was cxprelf:d t manner the raoft . un equivocal. LONDON 112.11?,VETS. CORN-FXCHANGI 1 - 121 DAY, M R 19. A Reim of the PRICL.S of FLOUR, (rum thc Ltla ut Mardi to the 12t14 of NIA-ch Total 13.611 fi•Cits.—Aver•tv 65!+. ss. 4;tl.llirb•:r than hit reran. SRUTHI lIU.U, March 19. T o fi n k o. e offal --r,r It me ci Slb. _ _ llcef 4s 8d w6s cd Veal - 5s 8d to 7s e Miatrin - 5s 8d to 6s 8d - 5s 44 to 6c 8d Scork 2! Market this morvin, MAR % ;sc, Sitecp 9co. NEWG ATE :tad LEADENHALI. March ti. Pc. floor of M. by tit:: cacAt. _ _ _ _ Beef 3s 8,1 to 5s od Veal 4s 8d to 6. RI Mutton 43 Od to c , !;.1 Pork so 44 to 66 84 RAW I IIDES, March r;,. Bites (per acne) 3s 4.1 to 3s 6d Heavy Calf 93 od each Mid-Bing as sod to 33 ad Hinfe Skins 125 to iGs Ordinary as 2d to as 64 Sheep Skins 4 0450 itsi PRICE OF LEATHLR, per lb. AT LEADEMIALLs Butts, 50 to 36I't each, - -18 d to sad Ditto, 60 to 6tylb - - - 226 to 24d Merchants Backs - Dreffing Hides - - rizie Coach Hides • Crop I :ides for Cutting - 1 „ d I4d d tto o to ir r i, d to 1.,t, Hat Ordinary - - ted to rid Calf Skins, 35 In 4cll. per dozen, - 2id to 274 Ditto 5o to -01 S - -26 d to 20 Ditto, 7o to ' Rolls - . - 254 to 274 Small Seals (Greenland) per lb. 24 6d to 21 yd Large ditto - - Zoos to 1405 per doz. Tanned Horfe Hides - tfis to 303 each Goat Skins - - 203 to 643 per dozes PRICE OF TALLOW IV LON[)ON. St. James's market 43 2d Yown d'alove 705 6d to gas Clare market Ss 21d R ulna ditto(ea.) 66s ~.al to of Whiter hapel market 45 1.1 Rullia ditto (ioap) 63s to eas (per name of 81b.) White Candle Ru Ilia 63 , to 65s Miltiti . z Stuff 544 06 t 05 65 116 543 Ditto ROUgII 4010 d to as Average Price 4 1 . 2i,i GrcillftS . 1)5 Od to 01 1:00:1 Dregs 1:6 to os Yellow Soap, 725. to cs—Nlweed, Boi.—C•ard,B43; candln, 1110. 64 1 ---‘111111(:., I a s . 611 PRICE OF HAY AND STRAW, M.a•ch 19. SmitliLell Et. Tattles's. Whitechaprl. o.llay 3t0t0c51213 c to 5 12 01 4 0 0to S 14 0 Straw 2ibto 2 y i 2, j C, tr, 2 11 o I t 8 oto 2 3 3 • Clover 5 15 to o 4 I ~.... .. — 7 . 5 1J oto b 12 o COAI S. :%:.ircit 19.. - Bert Coal. in :Le l'oo:, Li. ic. Cd leer ClwlJrnn. Delivered 2). mi. V. Stinderlzild, I. 16s. , :d. 13 , 1;vered 21. cs. C.. in London, to he fore, are not very fond of di:- couating hi: notes, fOr if he has a bill of foci. to pay, he gives them a bill fur 2:01. and makes them pay him the difference. This he boalls of in the coffee-honfes, and brags how he makes all the par ilh to do jug as he pleales. He tires law bet ter than he loves me: and in truth, I mutt fay, he is a very hypwritical villain." The next letter was' to this purport—" What a mean clown my huf. hand is, for he does not pay his deists. For an inch or two taken from the church-yard, he goes bellowing to the Bilhop with his information. In fhort, he is defpifed by every body—all good men hate the tight of him." The next letter rims thus —" Although my husband bounces and fings, • 0 be joyful;' and tells me filch pr °Whir (tones, I begin to lufpea he deceives me—and I am perfoaded every body defpiles him for entertain ing the company with his foolifh nonfenfe about himfeif. Then that poor girl he turned away. I tegin to furpelt there was fornething wrong going forward while I watot Brighton. His credit is fn bad, for he pays nobody—he has borrowed of my father till he won't lend him any more. He neglals his own bufinefs to trouble himfeif about other people's. What is it to him, whether the parfon has grit an inch or two more than his neigh. boors. 1 airs lure the Billion ckfpiles him for an informer. He is a foolith fellow, and never can b: refpteled be he where he will. How we were refpeacel when firft we came to Beckenham, and now how we are defpifed ! but it is not my fault. / lc is AS fit to be a Miniaer of State as a Manager cf 4 Parifh. He Ihould try to make himfelfrcfpeeted I by the rich as wsll as the poor; but that is im podible. The parish went on quietly enough till he came. lir his fst every body together by the ears. IL: is noify alsd overhearing in his manner, and only Et to be a conflible or a runner at Bow-areet." Thomas Day fail he was an oilroan, and had known the defendant many years; lie ferved his fami!y, and. was perfealy acrprainted with his writing ; the writing produced did not, upon the whole, look like his, but there were certain letters extremely like it : if he could think him capable of difguifing his band-writing, he should believe tilde letters were written by him; he had no liefitation in fayinr; there were fcme parts very like. On his crofs-examination he laid, the more minutely he looked at the letters, the more he was convinced; there were many of them exaftly like ; if he had recerved an order in fuck a hand-writing, he Ihould have executed it; he fhould have fuppofed he might hive the g.)ort in his hand, or that he might have been unwell when he wrote it. i 01 ;LC 7til at Ho VAIL, !....I.!y of Lord Hol :and, 6f a fan. Thurfd.ty, the Lady of capt-ain the Royal Nan, .1 a fm. 1)!!" At Margate, on the t3th ica.t J.:ricsi!u:ni!ton, Erg. on?. fun uY Col , rd Jame: 1 - 1.1::a.t ,n, t.te of tLe 4:o:dart:am nient or Foot Guards. On the tali init. in Great Portiand-Rrert, the R ev. Wawa Iliatop, M. A. Vicar c.tf W,dniort., and Kt of Mup,:rto.t, :iumerf.rfhirc, and one of Lis Maielly'a ri the hace. On Tudday, in Greville-Rrett, :n the etit ycir of his ale, of a typhus lever. I hones Archibald Mut ray, M. D. Licen tiate of the Royal College of Phyticlars of I (4:14n er4 I'llyfi- Ci3tl to the Public Difccitfary in Coq-113..i, and to ;he 13,,u:c al Kccorerv. NAVIGABLE CANAL SHARKS.-MONTHLY SALE. To BE SOI.D BY AUCTION.--By On Fri;lay, April 2, at 12 o'clock, at Gallaway's, Change- A Bey. London. SHARES in the following' Navigatkins, viz. ► the Soto: if(hire mid Worcrfterfliire:C..rid. Two Shares in this long-atablillied arelpiofperous Na;Aga:ion ; the Pratt at at th... Rate of 4cl. per Shut per Atinuul, with incrsafir.g rr. 'fin& The. ;:land Junes ion and Paddington Canal original Sub fcription Sinlres, 3hlres, and Optional !Ann, brarir g 5 per Ccnt. laterdt, payable half yearly, convertible i n to Whale Or Half SlEires. The Kennet and Avon Canal. original Shares and new Shares s payable by Inftalinents; 4110 Shares in the Monmouth. Roth dale, and the .Abby de h Zoach Navigations. Partin;lars at Kitchen's Hotel, Piccadilly ; at Garroway's and of Mr. Scott, Ludiate-hill,, who is commit:Boned to cell part of the above. and Shares in various Casio:rat' and Efiates t•' Pi ivAte Contra t. I b41'061 I lON never b Aviv% been In general as at the prcfent Crifss, it is a duty incumbent nn every perfon who is in pnailfion of a Medicine of cllahlifbed repot: Lion to adopt the molt certain mess of preventing the poffiliiity of a Ipurimis Compofltion being ruined on the Public, to the oh v.oufly endangering the lives of the Afflietcd, and undefervedly hri,,ging an invaluable ' , reparation into dif-tlkem. It is th , fe cur fideration, that induce the prefent Proprietors of the known ANTISCORI3UTIC DROPS, firit prerartx? by tie Lite FRANCIS 'FPI! SPIVII I', at his Difpoofary. Nu. So! ~ fquare to 4cquaint Nervous. Scorbutic, Gouty, and Rhen ,ti.itic Patients, that the vs .s* the only place where they :_re prepared genuine, and that, I y permiMon of the Cnntrniffinncrs of the Stamp-Office, a Stamp printed in black;nk, is affixed to each bottle, with the words—" Spifibury and Co. No. ti,Soho fguare," alfo "By the King's Patent,' on the Bottle, Bi I, ant Wrapper, that the purchafer may be convinced of being fup pled with the genuine Medicine, which is fold in bottles, at ss. and if. 2s. each, ditty included, by the general Venders of Patent Medicines in Town and Country. DisLAsi.s ut dic URINAKY CANAL and 1 / 1 .:Nt.b.t....1. COMPLAINTS. MR. DUFOUR informs the Public,that he may daily be confulted gratis, from 9 to 3, at his hook, hi., 3, Frith-itreet, 'Soho London, in all cafts of Obitrudiions l'fltridtures, Glects, S eminal Weaknefs, Incontinency of Urine Finula‘, Impotence, anti debility in either S. tc, Stc. From mature Practice in Ibis dcpartrucut, to v - hich he has con fined himfeif for many years, he oth rs a rt.thod of etre, t:ti.J, efficacious, and which prevents a Mr. DUFOUR, role Proprietor of Daran', eelsbrated (.le. (Lcated) Bougie., has ultimately fu inipruved them, by diy(it ing them of the irritating effects of common noughts, that tiv.y fucceed where mull ics and other violent means have failed. For the Vent neat Difeafe, Mr. DUFOUR is in par.:llion at Daran's Remedies, lo mild that they render confinement or reftraint in diet iniNeceffary. To enable him to attend pati:nts at their own houfes, he has provided the affiftance of a Gentle ntr.n of the Faculty. Perforr. in the country may he cured by tt,eir cafes in letters, poll paid. Jult publithed, price as. Gd. Fifth Edition, etilarged.—A Treatife on the above Complaints, illuitratt'd with the various femptoms and Cafes Chewing the painful and dangerous el feet. of Cauftic Bowies; an iniprovod method of treating go norrheaa, &c. &c. Printed for J. Callow, Crown-cost, Soho; and 11. D. Symonds, Paternolter-row ; alfo to be had at M•Quecn's, Tatter-Change. and at the Author's. LONDON: Yenta' for the Vroprictors, by JOT - IN DANIEL, (of Carnahy-ftreet) at the STAR P , INTING-OFFICC, No. z, Carey-ftreet ; and pablifheit by LEVEL IV? NT, (of Can t:•rbury-place, Lambeth), at No. t, Carey-Erect, and at the Symt-Orrca, Tctnple-Ear ; to which Office all continual clone for the EDITOR are repelled tsabt addreffed.