Star. — London, England, 1802-07-02 00:00:00

MOW I , LAW INTEL LIG.EnCE. HOME CUR r Before the CIID F 1.3.1140 N Mid Mr. 'Conn HOTTIAM. ii,lttor,llhire--!.lor,tlay, July 26, A liertFltd• Firer.—Wetilnef,lay, lulv C....!lulitned. • 4t4:111t 2, at Lew A. K, nt—Weihnf•!3y. 4 molt 4, at Maidllorte. Surrey—h lesulay, Augutt ), .t dforcl. READER V. ARMITAGE. COURT OF KiNo's BENCH, jUNF. see Mr.ERSKI (hewed cattle a gainll a Rule obtain ' ed by Mr. GI nes, for a Manduntts to the Town Clerk of B , sitoo to fwear in a Mr. John Sheef to the office of Common Councilman of that Borough. It may be reeollaed by our Readers that we ! Rated the affidavits upon which this Rule wan granted on a tot mer day. They were in fitbtlance as Follow : That the Corporation confined of a Mayor, twelve Aldermen, and a Common Coun cil. The Mayor and Aldermen eleacd the Com mon Council in the following manner: each Alder man propoftd whom he thought to be a fit Candi date. The Aldermen then eleatd, by ballot, fix nut of the whole number. Tilde fix, by a (Are. quent ballot w:re again reduced t.) two, and by the L La ballot one of thele two was eleeted to the office. It WAS a fingolar pats sif the coonitution of this 80. rough, that the Mayor had twit votes, which, with the twelve Aldermen, made fourteen voices, fit that ponibly there might be an equality of votes, which, in WI, took place in the cafe before the : Court. There being a vacancy in the Common Council, the Mayor and Al lermen on the tfith of March !an proceeded to fill it tip in the ulna' man.; ner. The two Candidates to be chol'en by the ulti mate ballot were a Mr. Sheef, on whole behalf the application was made, and a Mr. Clarke. Upon a ballot, they were liven and feven the Mayor and five Aldctmen on one tide, and (even Aldermen on the other. This ballot-was repeated twenty-two times, and dill the ballot was equal. At lan a Mr. Darner, one of the Aldermen,loß his balloting-ball, and requefied to have another. He was a friend of Mr. Sheef, and the other party infilled, that b% lofing his ball he had 101 l his vote. The Mayor, on the contrary, Witted that lit ought to have another ball given to him. This produced a great diffen tion in the meeting. The Mayor and his friends refuted to ballot, but the others perfilled, and raid Ml. Clarke was duly eleaed. On the igth of March another affembly was held by the Mayor, which was adjourned until the Both. The Mayor then infifted that he had diffolved the former affembly of the 16th of March, and that the prettnt one was the only one competent to the elation. Mr. Clarke's friendsinfifted on the contrary-,and moved the previous question. The Town-Clerk read his oath of office, by which he was dirated to obey the majority; he therefore refilled to officiate, upon which the Mayor appointed another pro 'ampere, and proceeded to a new eleOinn. And as the balloting. boxes were inverted by the oppofite party, he polled the Alderman, and declared Slieef eleaed ; Clarke's friends denied the legality of the meeting, and re futed so vote. The quettion now came before the Court, which of the two was duly eleacd ? and a Mandamus was applies', for to fwear in Sheef. Mr. ERSKINE and Mr. Wimp, on the part of the prior eleaion, contended that the affertion of Mr. Darner that he had 101 l his ball, was a mere pretext to get another, and give a majority to his favoured Candidate. They then went through an • immenfe mars of affidavits, to (hew, that by the bye laws of the Corporation, the Mayor could not diffolve the meeting, and that he could not put, nor propofe any queflion without a content from the ma jority, which, in the prefent cafe, was againft him. Mr. Glass and M. DAMPI ERB argued on the other fide at confiderable length. The Court at l i ttt decided it upon a very Pimple point. They raid, it appeared from the affidavits on both fides, that an eleflion, by the constitution of the Borough, mutt be by ballet. The election ender which Shea claimed was not fit, fince it was Paid, that as the balloting-boxes were inverted, the Mayor called upon the Aldermen openly for their fuffrages. It was certain that he could not change the conititution of the Borough, which required a fecret eleelion, and therefore one in any other mode was a void one. As they were called upon merely to grant a-Mandamus to fwear in Sheet*, and his eleaion maidenly not being regular, they mutt of courfe difcharge the Rule.—Rule dif charged. This was a cafe from the Northern Circuit. It • arofe upon a draft for the p..iment of moncy under the following circumflances : Mr. Armitage, the Defendant, had been in the habit of taking with him to Leeds market drafts for the payment of tradefmen. There drafts were engraved copper plates, in ail the formal parts, with blanks for the names, dates, and fums. The draft in quer tior, with others, wasfigned by him, ready to fill up the blanks, and wasl o ft out of his pocket. The pct fon who found it filled up the blanks, and made it payable to a James Smith, and elitionnted it with the Plaintiffs under that name. The Plaintiff did not know the perlon who difcounted it with him, but as lie' knew the hand-writing of Mr. Ar mitage. and Aft) knew the copper-plate of his draft be readily dilcounted it. The Defendant, however, refuted payment on the ground that the body of the draft was a forgery. The Court were clearly of opinion that it was a forgery, o f as the Connie . ' for the Plaintiff Mailed -that there was no proof the draft was not in the fame late when Mr. Armitage 101 l it from his pocket, Lord LLLEsaosoucw (Arlo-veil, it was a mif chievoit thing that perfons Ihould carry blank drafts, ready iigned, in the manner the Defendant ILO done—if they happened to be loft, it was a temptation to the finder to commit forgery. He fltotild not he lorry if the _Pry, in afubfequent trial, should End for the Plaiatiff.—New trial granted. THUASDAY, JULY 1. , • THS RING V. THORN AND OTHERS. Mr. ERsIC I% F. laid, he was to (hew cattle againft a rule obtained by Mr. Garrow, calling on Peter Thorn. Thomas Kentiflt, and Robert Walter, to Peter Thorn, was the Churchwarden of the parilh of Ealing, in the county of Middlefex ; the other wo were mere officers, acting as conflables under him ; for which condua, if it had been truly Rated, it would have been impoilible for him to Wily, or indeed to addrefs the Coon on behalf of the de fend.trits. for it was Rated to be brutal and inhu man. They were charged with this inhumanity in their eoliths.% in the removal of a pauper of the name of Norris, vein was removed by the order of .he Jollices, from the parilh of Ealing to the parilh of Dunmow, in the county of Mex. The statement of this cafe to the Court, when this rule was moved for, was made by his Learned Friend, Mr. Garrow, and when he moved for this rule, every body who heard him, and Mr. Erfkine faid, himeelf not lets than .others, was very much af feded, and the fads Rated in the affidavit were unquestionably filch as called tor the invelligation of the Court, and called on the defendants for a very particular anfwer, and an explicit juilification . of their conduct. This rule was obtained on the affidavits of feveral perfons, Rating, that the un fortunate perfiln, the pauper, removed in this cafe, was alto a lunatic; a vagrant in the parilli of Eal ing. The affidavits were thofe of Samuel Taylor, and Edmund Bingham, and others. They Rated, that in the evening of the 3oth of March lag, this unfortunate perfon was removed; that they put him into a cart covered with a blanket, in a mile rabic condition, with ulcers, and fo difeafed as that he could not be removed without danger to his life; and then the affidavits Rated, that when the de fendants had taken the pauper to Well Ham, about ten miles from Ealing, it was need:try to take him out, and that he had alma expired before he was lodged in the poor honk; that though he had recovered considerably , Rill he was fo ill as not to he able to be carried on to Dunmow, and that the Beadle who brought him being asked why he had been removed in fuch a flocking fituation, replied, that the expences then amounted to 191.85. and that the parilh was anxious to get quit of him before they came up to 201. when there would be an ap. peal to the parilh. There was alto the affidavit of one John Norris, who was the, brother of the pau per : his affidavit preffed chiefly againft the defen dant Thorn, the Churchwarden. This deponent defeat(' the condition of his brother, who was removed from the parilh of Ealing in the county of Middlefex, to Dunmow, in the county of Ef fex, the diflance of 5o miles. He Rated in his affidavit, that he applied to the defendant Peter Thorn, Rating the deplorable condition of the pauper, and laying to him, that he had no idea of that condition. and could not have it, without Peeing him ; but that the faid Peter Thorn refuted to do fo, faying, " that Wis not necelfary," &c. and then, for the purpofe of affeding the other two defendants, he Rated feveral expreffions made' ufe of by Kentifh, as if they all wanted to get rid of the pauper, without any care for the inhuma nity with which that purpofe was to be accom plilhed. Now,before he proceeded further,he would admit, that this was cafe enough to call on the Court to grant this information, unlefs it appeared' that the criminality of the defendants was well denied ; but if the Court faw, on the face of the matter as it Rood before them, on the whole of the affidavits, that if the information was granted, and the parties were to come before a Jury upon it, that then a Judge would be bound to advife a Jury to acquit the defendants, then the Court would refute to grant this information, becaufe, in firth a cafe, it would be only putting the party,. unneceirarily, upon trial. He faid, he did not know that he fhould injure his client, if he lament ed that this unfortunate man was removed at all, and that the purpofes of humanity might have been better anfwered,by letting him remain where he was; but he trailed the Court would fee that the defendant Thorn had not been inattentive to his duty in this refped. In the &II place, he had din affidavit of Frederic Afhton, who gave an ac count of the manner in which the lunatic pauper came under the care of Thorn, and Rated alto that Thorn had given directions that the pauper fhould be treated with all poffible humanity. Then came the affidavit of a perfon of the name of Thomas Julian, who was Vary Clerk of the parilh of Ealing, and alfo Clerk to the Jußices, who made the order of removal, who met every Monday at the Star and Garter, in that parilh, for the pur pofes of public bulinefs. This perfon wrote a let ter on behalf of the parilh of Ealing to the Parifh Veftry Clerk of Dunmow, in Effex, Rating, " that they had a vagrant, who was to be removed to that parish, and wishing to know if they would receive him, or if they thought it better that, as he was a lunatic, they would take him to tome fit place in London, defiring direhions, in this refped, from the parilh of Dunmow ?" upon which the anfwer was, " that they apprehended the pauper did not belong to Dunmow, and that, therefore, they would not have any thing to do with that pauper." Julian wrote anothet letter to the offi cers of Dunmow, defiring to know the grounds on which they contended the pauper did not be long to them? upon which the anfwer was, "that they declined making any communication in that particular ;" and therefore it was refolved to re move the pauper by order of the Juftices. Mr. Erikine faid, it was to be lamented that this fort of coquetry fhould be obferved between parithes on thefe solemn occasion:, and wished that in fu ture parilh Officers would drop this nonfenfe, and attend to the fair dealing and fubflance of things, for that was the courfe which was bell adapted to the purpofes of humanity; but the queftion here was, whether there was any criminality in theft defendants? or, whether there was that fufpicion which made the matterextremely doubtfulwhether there was criminality or not? that is, whether they knew that this pauper was too ill to be re moved? Now it appeared, that the pauper was then, and had long before been, attended by a Surgeon appointed by the Veßry for that purpofe, and that this Surgeon had given it as his opinion, that the pauper was improved in health, and that, at the time of his removal, he was fit to be re moved, and that he gave that opinion to the De fendant Thorn, and wrote that opinion out, and A.Cswarl ;e ho (Avon tn the Maviarates, he not bufinefs. which called him, at this time, to anoth , r place. On which it was refolved by Thorn, that the Pauper thnuld be removed. Mr. Rickards, the Surgeon and Apothecary. who was thus alluded to, and on whole opinion of the Rate of the Paupee:health, he was removed, confirmed all thefe fads as to his appointment, his attendance on the Pauper, &c. and of his being of opinion then, and of his being of opinion now, that the pauper was in a Rate of health which made him fit to be removed, and of his having given that opinion to the defendant Thorn, and allot having written the fame opinion to the Juftices. That his chief diforder was a Mania, which was not at all fuch a complaint as to make a removal of him dangerous, &c. All the Defendants politively denied any evil motives whatever, in what they did, and declared themfelves to have been guided only by a fenfe of their duty ; and it was pofitively fworn by Thorn, that he was guided entirely by the opinion of the Surgeon, as to the Rate of the pauper, and of his bein t o fit to be removed. Mr. Desoto c then fail, he knew that mere denial of wicked motives would not do, whilft fads from whence fuch motives Inull be inferred were left (landing, but here all the fads whence wicked motives could be inferred, were either de nied, or fo explained as to leave no criminality attaching to them. He knew how ready the Judges mutt be to lend attention to cafes which involved queaions rt humanity ; but he fubmitted, that tales of this kind might be exaggerated, and that, fometimes, froth the bell motives, fince men't judgments might be overpowered by their feeling. and by which they were led to over•colour thofe things which brought with them charges of •inlitt. moony. Such, he fubmitted, had been the cafe here, althnoph he did not . complain of it. He really withed to know what the defendant Thorn could do, more than to troll to the judgment of the Medical Man who attended this pauper (a man appointed by the parifh, and not by the defendant, and upon whole condo& there was no imputation). Suppole any one of their Lorditips was to enter one of our Hofpitals, might he not be deceived in the appearances of the patients ? Molt undoubtedly he might, for there were many difeafes the appearance of which reminded us of death, which neverthelefs were not dangerous : there were others, in which the appearance :o any but a medical perfon, was fafe, and yet would loon be terminated by death— in all which cafes, mankind in general, public Offi cers in particular, could do no other than abide by the opinion of medical perfons. There were Tome other affidavits which gave the defendant Thorn an high charader for humanity in general, &c. as to the other Defendants, they were agents in this bufinefs, and only obeyed the orders of the Jullice, and aged under the authority of Thorn. For thefe reafons he fubmitted that the Court would dif. charge this Rule. Mr. °ARROW fubmitted to the Court, that in point of fad, this pauper was in the Rate defcribed by the affidavit for the profecution in this cafe.— That he could not have been removed without im minent danger of his life : that the defendant 'Thorn mull have known this, had he but conde- Ifcended to have looked at this unhappy and help- I lets fellow creature : that inftead of taking any body's word, this Church Warden ought to have gone to fee, and judge with his own fences of the Rate and condition of this poor creature, whom PROVIDENCE had put under his care. He regarded this as a meafure too much of courfe, underParith Regulations, where humanity, as well as food, is adminillered by contract ; and, he trufted, there would be a little more attention paid to thofe mat ters in future. _ _ Another Learned Gentleman (poke on the fame fide ; N.:tiled in high terms the humanity of the Eire: Magitlrates who had inftituted this profe cution, and erprek ed a hope that whatever might be the fate of it, it might have the happy effeEt to deter the Defendants from fimilar cruelties for the reit of their lives. Lord ELLENBOROUGN raid, that this was cer tainly a queftion in which Gentlemen were Perfectly jullified- in bringing it before the Court for confi• deration it was interefling to the feelings of hu manity, and involved matters connected with the interefts of the poor. Yet, admitting to the fulleft extent, thcfe points, and that the pauper ought nor to have been removed, the queftion, even then, would be, whether there Officers referred to the advice of the medical man who was appointed for the purpofe of attending to there cafes, and to give his opinion on them, and aged in conformity to that advice ? And it appeared that the Surgeon had given it as his opinion, the pauper was in a Rate fit to be removed ; and there was no charge that thefe Defendants and the Surgeon were in a con. 'fpiracy together. If, indeed, that should turn out to be the cafe, it would aggravate the guilt of all the parties,in the event of this matterbeing quaihed by an indictment ; but there was nothing before the Court to make that a matter of inference: here it appeared that Thorn aged Iwo fuk and accord ing to the advice of this medical man, and there fore his Lordfhip faid, that although he should have gone to fee the pauper himfelf, inflead of refling on the opinion of any other perfon, Rill there was nothing criminal in trolling to the opinion of another, appointed for the exprefs pur pofe of examining the cafe in fuch a way as to qualify hinifelf to form a cornet opinion. In the abfence of evidence of any confpiracy, or of any culpable negligence, and under an impreflion that another courfe was open to the Profecutors, his Lordthip was of opinion, that the Court was not called upon, in this cafe, to exercife its power in the extraordinary manner required by this motion, and that therefore, this Rnle ought to be dif charged. The other Judges were of the fame opinion, and therefore the Rule was difcharged. • ' JUDGMENTS. Mr. Spurling, of Tottenham, conviCted of an affitult on a Mr. Wyburd, was .brought up for judgment, but the prnfecutor demanded time to anfwer an affidavit he put in. The Court were about to impofe a fine of 6s. Bd. upon him. He was remanded. . . for having *franked Samuel ,Davey, an Officer o Excifc, in the cxecuzion ,of his duty, mar Pent. broke. The PTOrf CUM,' was em!eavom it gto t; i ze a quantity of falt, %%hick c refcrdart scat rt n . veying on a hoile alien was aflitilltcti 1 , 3 } , i n He now rut in an aff.davit, "cxr,,frEg Li s feet, for the offence, and flitting / is having 4 laye family dependent on his labours for fill rt. r t, promifing, that if the Cettrt it their mercy would pats a flight runiftn ent, he v.ould, rut fttirg an horell courfe of life, atrr.c ft r I.is ct The Court, after ,en-crifliin g the Pere' &tit on his ill conduct, and with tefpc& to his future war of life; 'ccnfented to take his own recogn;t3nce to appear when called on for judgment, and he was then difcharged. THE RING O. ATICFII. The defendant was found guilty at the lag fit. tings of felling a book fo fhockingly oblieue that the paffiages charged in the indiftment were not read to the Jury, his Counfel allowing that if the publication could be proved, be was certainly guilty. The gentleman whr. had bought it feid he paid a guinea for it to a little man cf the de fendant's appearance, but he Was, not fure that it was the defendant. He was induced to male the purchafe from having a few jlays hcfore been (hewn fome very obfcene fongs by Mrs. Aiken, Olen he went to buy a Plan of the Paddington Canal. The Jury were fatisfied with this evidence. Mr. PARKS now prayed for judgment, and de. livered a very becoming addrefs in aggravation of punifletnent. He reprefented it as a dream (lance greatly heightening the defendant's guilt that he employed his wife and children in (itch of. flees. This was not his Et ft offence. From the records of the Court it appeared that he had for merly been fined 2001.:ttpon a thnilar cnnvidion, and that through the mercy of the Crown the fine had been remitted. Mr. Parka concluded by in timating that it was the firm determination of the Society who carried on This proiecutinn, and of the Law Officers of the Crown, to ufe their tormoft en deavours to bring fuch offenders to plMilliTiltßt. Mr. Atken addreffed the Courthimfelf,and fevera/ times burtt out into tears. He.maintained he was as innocent as any of their Lordfhips. At the time the book was bought, he was lying in prifon, hay. "ing become bankrupt, and his Chop was under the management of his affigneea. No part of the price had ever come to him or his family, and he was not worth sl. in the world. Mr. ERSRINF regretted,that notwithflanding his deflitute circumftances, he had not applied for his aftittance. He proceeded to urge fome things to (hew the defendant's inoncence. But— Lord EL LEN BORO vat( Paid, thefe obfervationsr now came too late, as being found guilty he flood for judgment. 1 he Learned judges then held a confultation, and Mr. Jullice Lawasact (in the ablence of Mr. Jullice GROS e, who, we ate lorry to hear, is con fined by ficknefs) after a fuitable addrefs, pointing out the fatal effeds of fuch publications, and the enormity of thofe who were thus instrumental in corrupting the public morals, announced the fen. tence of the Court to be, that the defendant fhould be imprifoned fix months in Newgatc; that he fhould be fct in the pillory at the north-cat corner of Leicefter-fields, and that he fhould enter into a recognisance for bis good behaviour for fives years. POLIO?. BOW-STRIRT.—Laft Sunday morning, abate two o'clock. as Mr. Hope, of Chandos.ftreet, St. Martin's-lane, was returning home through Black. moor-beet, Drury-lane, he was ovet taken by two men, one of whom Aral him to treat them, which he refuted ; at the fame inftant they both fhoved againft him, and he felt his watch taken out of his fob ; the two men then ran away, but be purfued them, and called out ftop thief; he came up with them in Clare -court, Clare-market, and tecured one of them, but the other beat Mr. H. fo vio lently on the head, that he was forced to let gohis hold, and they both ran off; Mr. H. continued his purfuit till one was fecured by a watchman in Drury-lane. On Monday morning, the other robber was recognized by Mr. H. in Princesdlreet, Drury-lane, and he was fecured. They were com mitted for trial. Yeflerday Elizabeth Mary Hibbins, alias Kit. lins, the girl who a fhort time fince made a Life charge againft feveral gypfies, and was the cauk • of a number of others being apprehended, was brought from the Hoofe of Corredion, when be ing examined as to her fettlement, the was Faded to the parilh of Greenwich, as a rogue and va gabond. GUILDHALL.—Three young men, who were charged upon fufpicion of having Itolen a quanti ty of poultry a few days ago, underwent a final ex amination, when the owner of the property not attending, they were difcharged. Slf ADWaxe..—Yelterday Edw. Horn, his dangh. ter, and fon in law, were examined a fecond time, on a charge of high treafon, being deteded in the a& of coming counterfeit (billings and fixpences, at their houfe in Charlotte-place, Pentonviile. It being a clear cafe, all the prifoners were commit ted to Newgate for trial. Richard Vickers, a waterman, was fully com mitted for trial at the next Kent Affixes, beiag charged by Captain Reid, of the Prudentia hulk, lying at Woolwich, with having taken away Wnl- Smithot convid, from the 114, in his boat, %dole he was lying under her bows on Monday laR : he Rated , that he came up with them at Blackwall , where he fecured the convid, who had fawed of a pair of heavy irons, which he threw into the Ri ver. Vickers entreated forgivenels at that time, and promifed never more to offend. This being 2 new cafe, recourfe was had to feveral Ads of Parliament ; one in particular applied to t he prt. loner, which makes it a felony to aid or Aft in any way the efeape of a prifitner in the cafe of Smith. • • _ HIGH WATER Al' LONDON BRIDGE TO-A1OR 1 :O I Mandng 6 minutes after 4 Afternoon so minutes after 4 ---- LONDON: Printed for the Proprietors, by JOHN DANIEL, ilerCarnaby-ltreet) at the STAR PRIIRTING-Orticr, No t, -Erect; sod prbilthed by LEVEL KENT (of 1.,n -white y-place, Lambeth), at No I, Carey-Itreet, and at the tombiikoSoLial suagovai