Star. — London, England, 1818-12-11 00:00:00

.; • • LA i VICIACHANCI DECEMBER 9. TITHES OF ST. DUNSTAN'S IN TAE WEST. BARNES R. ABRAHAM. This was a suit instituted by Jonathan Barnes, who is the Lay-impropriator of the Rectory of St. Dun stairs in the West, against the Rev. Richard Lloydd, the' Vicar of that parish, and Mr. Abraham, stationer, in Temple-lane; calling upon the former to give an account of all profits accruing to and received by him as tithes, oblations, &c. from the said parish since 1812, at which time he (plaintiff) became seized of tließectory, and compelling the latter to pay the two and nine-pences, as decreed by stat. 37 Hen. VIII. cap: -12. The bill also alleged a collusion between theisarties to prevent the payment of the said tithes. This was a very important question to the parties and to the &Wit. It was also an intricate one, from the mixture and combination of the interests of two parties (the Vicar and the Parishioners) against the I.ze-impropriate Rector, and from the voluminious Masses of ancient documents to which all parties found it necessary to refer. The object of the plaintiff, as stated by Mr. Spence, who opened the case, was as we have given above. Mr. J. Sreen ENS, as unior Counsel for defendants, stated the nature of t he answers : the first answer was by defendant Abraham, who stated, that in the year 1539, the Abbot of the Convent of Alnwick, se Northumberland, was seised of the Rectory; there was then a Vitae who received all the amount of the tithes, oblations, Easter-offerings, and donations aris eig from the parish : that he paid to the Abbot of ithreick the sum of £lB per annum, not as a pro portion of the tithes, but in lieu of all his claims as rector. This sum the successors of the said Vicar continued to pay for a considerable time. At length, one Vicar becoming impoverished, applied to the Abbot for an abatement of the sum usually paid, and it was abated to the sum-of £lO per annum, which the Abbot continued to receive in full of all the de mands. By the 30th Hen. VIII. Monasteries being abolished, the Rectory of St. Dunstan's became vested in the King, who, as well as his successor, Edward VI. died seized of it. During the life of both these overeigns, after the 30drof Henry, they, as invested with the Rectory, received the £lO per annum, which before bad -been paid to the Abbot of Alnwick. In the year - 1,'.31, the l'icasage was possessed by a per tar. named Richard List, who, as was done before, paid the annual pension of £lO to the King. In his the a suit was brought inta the Court of Augmen tations respecting the Rectory, and Chancellor Sack ville decreed, that he should have all the profits and *molst:mots of it,. upon his giving up.a certain cha ritable do:satioa left by a person named Delahay, and contiauieg the annual sum of £lO as before. The answerthen went on to state, that the Rectory came is succession from Edw. VI. to Queen Mary, and from her to Elizabeth. That on the 14th of September, 1599, letters-pa - ent passed the seal, by which it was esstel in two persons, named Foster and Haughten.. TrOrn these, by eubsequent deed, it was. vested in several persons deriving by deed, or succession frorn the previous possessor, until it came, in 1662, into the posseision of Richard IV. Earl of Dorset ; but down to that time, the £lO per year had been regularly paid to the patentees under Elizabeth, or to those de riving from them. In 1669, the Earl of Dorset con veyed it to a person named Coe, from whom it was soon after passed by a similar process, to a man named 'Thompson. Between this Thompson and Coe, there arose a dispute respecting some claims, which the latter put in for part of the tithes ; and the former being threatened with legal process, con sented to resign a certain portion of the tithes. In 166 e, a deed was executed between Cox and Thomp son, and a third person named Scudansore, by which he gave up the tithes and all other profits of the Ike. tory for his life, on consideration of receiving a cer tain sum. By this the Lay-impropriator received snore than the usual £lO per annum ; but the answer added, that the Lay-rector never collected or received a of the tithes; further, that the said deed was fraudulent, and therefore could not hold : . besides. these allegations against the claim of the plaintiff; there was a plea of prescriptive right, and a further one, that the plaintiff was not leg.dly seized of this Rectory ; that he bought it ih 1812 from a Mrs. Mary whose title to it the respondent did net kieliv. With respect to the chiim of the 4 2.5. 9d. in -the pound, tithe, the answer set forth that it could not held, as the decree was not enrolled, and wai therefore void. It then went on to state, that the defendant had paid certain sums as tithes, Which he now asserted were illegally claimed, and that such payment could not bar his present right : it further ;added, that his (Abraham's) house was upon part of the scite where a tavern, called the Devil 1 ityern, fore' merly stood, and now known by the name of Child's place: that he had paid 21s. per year tithes for it ; that .that sum was the legal sum, and that the de s:Fiend of 15s e per:quarter was, of course, more than aught to have been paid.; that he had not paid any tithe, Since 1812, though he was at all times willing , tb . kry ,thetn to the pioper authority; but that he domed el the plaintiff, 'eh" if he were the Lay-rector, as alleged, to collect or receive them. To this there was added a sufpplsmentay answer, winch itated, that defendent; by filing a cross bill, had,itStaierect theinspeictiOh occertaltedhcieht hooks and.docunients in the possession of the plaintiff, from wllith'it alipeared, 'that he had been mistaken in the erhohet df 'titltes 'which he had a right to pay; for that the 'Devil Tavirp, on the 'ancient scite of which his house and three others at present stood, had nevi's. paid more than. £ l / 4 2. 13s. 4d. and that plaintiff had nq right to demand more than the one-fourth, and feeieore t i ltat the peiment. of 21's. was madein mis take of. what yras his right, for which that right ought pot now to be barred. 'The answer of'the Rev. efreLlOyd, the Vicar, was. efstease as that Of the other 'defendant, as far es the Vecet age wa,`ecesncern ed. *Mr. Wsestearee, for the plaintiff, was about to st tee his ileitis. to the Court, and had said, that he was at a toss to 'know the particular defence which, was intended to be set up, when The Vice-CttelkirCP,LLOß said, that as he took it, the only question for the present was, to whom the payment should be made. Mr. HART submitted, that that was not the.right view of the case. It sans, he conceived, whether the plaintiff, if sector, had a right to receive the tithes Sovereign! r • • • quits Rictor. His defence to that was dmple. Let • the plaintiff but prove his title Rector, and then let him establish his ellen to receive more thartlo. After some further coeveriation between the Court sd on both sides. The Viot-CataWczuma Observed, that the Rector, if plaintiffs chullkto that title were admitted, had a prima facie right to the ti thes, unless the contrary wait proved. T* Mr. HART observed was the case at common law,t here it was different o The present case was' one where a peculiar species of compensation was payable to the Rector, by the Vicar, or other person performing the duty. • The VICE-CmAnoer.t.ort replied, that by the statute, the Rector had a pritnti facie right to the tithes, or the 2s. 9d. allowed in lieu of them. Mr. HART then consented to admit the plaintiff's title as lay-impropriatcrr, and go on to prove his client's right to the tithes, as if a plaintiff. He ob served, that the proposition of the plaintiff (Barnes) was, that as impropriate Rector, he had•a right to have all the tithes. This was answered by defendant, who admitted the impropriate title, but who claimed the tithes as an endowment, on Condition of certain services to be performed, and of a certain sum to be paid to the Rector. The Learned Gentleman then went on to shew, that from the first grant of the Rectory to the Abbey of Alnwick, in 1361, down to the abolition of monasteries and since, the nature of the grant, and the several subsequent acts, rendered this Vicarage an endowment, as if it had been so from the first. In support of his argument, lie cited seve ral Acts of Parliament, particularly the 9th and 15th of Richard H. and 4th of Henry 111. by which itwas enacted, that all impropriate Rectories should have a priest, who was to be permanently endowed with the mansion and glebe-house, and a competent pOrtion of the tithes. This was evidently to guard against im propriators absorbing the profits and neglecting the care of the people, as was the case in many instances. He also cited an extract from the institution of the Rev. John Plowgar into the Vicarage of St. Dunstan's, in 1437, from which he contended that the Vicar had a right to the tithes. He was proceeding with other, proofs,.when it being three o'clock, the Vice-Chancel-! for observed, be would not go further till to-monow; but he begged of the:gentremen concerned on both' . sides to consider before to-Morrow whether he could decide the question, without sending an issue to be tried by a Jury. He doubted whether he had juris diction to decide without such a proceeding: The' case of the House of Lords having decided that the Church had a right to claim an issue at law, he doubted whether a Vicar being concerned had not the same right. He would, however, hear. the gen: tiemen concerned upon it to-morrow, and if they could she* that he had jurisdiction, fie wouldso.oul with the case.—Defer-red till to-morrow •• THURSDAY, DEC. in.—TaitNES V. ABRAHAM. Mr."HART was further heard for the defendant, or rather for the rigl.t. of the Vicar to tLe tithes of St. Dunstan-in-the-West, his Honour having in vain re commended to Messrs. Wetherell and Home to take. an issue. By Statute 4th of Henry IV. " impropriation, however made, were cancelled, and a secular Cler,gy man, or Priest, was ordered to be competently en— dowed, at die discretion of the Ordinary, to 'give in structions to the people and to keep hocpitality." By authority of the 26th Henry VIII. the vahr ecclesiasticus, or ecclesiastical survey was made. Its object was to ascertain the revenue arising from the, King's tenths, .which had been transferred from the' Pope to the King, and more exclusively front spiri tual or uuimpropriated property. In this survey was this entry, " Thomas GTeen, clerk, Rector of St. Dunsum-in-the-West, £35. lls. 9kd. with farm of Mansion-house, and tithes; 71-11 tfie tenths thereof." The survey appeared to have been finished in the 94th of Henry VIII. (151.1). Now in the above en try there must have been aliclerical error. Mr. Green must necessarily have • been Vicar, and not Rector, the rectory being in the Abbey of Ainwick. The inference therefore was, that Mr. Green must have rendered something to the Abbey of Alnwick for the rectory, and was himself Vicar, and in possession of all the tithes. Mr. WETHERELL admitted that he was Vicar and not hector. The monastery of Alew;ck . was suppressed in the 31st Cl Henry VIII. But the monastery had previ ously granted a r:rozuratioa to Dr. Layton, to demise their interest in the rectory. The lease granted by him in consequence to Mr. Brooke, citizen and mer-' chant of London, is dated 18th January, 29 Henry VIII. It demises 6 , the church and parsonage of St. Dunstan-in-the-West, with the mansion-house thereto . pertaining wherein the Vicar 310 W dwells, together ' with all tithes, oblations, tights, and all other profits• and advantages to the said parsonage in any way pertaining or belonging; the gift and patronage of the vicarage excepted and reserved to the said con vent." The lease was for threescore and ten years, ' for £6. 13s. 4d. to be paid to the Abbey. Vica-CnaNcettoa.—The lease used those expres sions as words of form. They were, however, most improperly used in a lease which evidently meant no, thing of the Lind, for it merely demised the rectory - possessed by the Abbey of - Alnwick. The Crown Ministers' accounts were the next im portant part of she evidence ; they extended from the 31st of Henry VIII. to the 41st of EFiabeth. They all charged £lB for the rectory, but left a deduction undetermined every year of El 1. Bs. Bd. thus taking payment. of Pi. I Is. 4d. as in the lease. It ap peared that the rectory had been of the value of ClO before the lease, and that the Abbey took, in lieu of that sum, £6. 1 ls. 4d. on account of the difficulty of getting the money at such a distance. As many monasteries had made demises at very in. adequate rents, on the prospect of their suppression, this demise was suspected to have been fracduleet. like 'others ; hence the continuance of the cliatge of ClB for so many years. In the sth of Edtvard . W., 6ir Richard Goodwick, 'Attorney-General, sued in the Court of Augmentation, and Mr. Richard - List, successor to Mr. Green, answered, that he was Vicar, that he had paid yearly rent and pension ftir posses sion of the rectory and parsonage belonging to the Abbey of Alnwick ; that he now paid that rent to the King, to whom the rectory had reverted; and that he Zajoyed all the tithes, oblations, and other profits. There was a decree of the Mutt of Aug mentation, whereupon Sir .Richard fltodwieles suit was disputed, dated arty 1, Edward VI. This decree stated, that the rent of fl Et had been de creased to £lO, in consideation of the decay qf the rectory ; it decreed a, pensiorl of £8 to the Vicar, which was the mode of reducing die £lB to £lO ; and it cUscharged all the arrears charged above 61. 11s. 4d. Vici-Ors-i-This is a most important do cument'. If the £lB or the RIG had been fixed by private contract, no d‘ret could be required to re duce it, This clearly proves that there was an en dowment. It was for the Rector to consider whether he would go on to-get his opinion, or take an issue now. However insignificant the Court that has given a decision, its opinion may have some influence. He only threw out this for their consideration ; he was far from wishing to prejudice the case ; but he men tioned the impregion which such a dcicunient must make on his mind. By the 4th Henry VI. the ordi nary was to give a competent endowment. The or dinary, or diocesan, must have done so here, as a de cree was necessary from the Court of Augmentation. M. WErnineLL still declined to take the issue.— In 1566, the advowson was granted by the Crowa to Lord Dudley and to Glazier. Glazier, the survi vor, sold it to Sir Richard Siaville Chancellor of the Court of Augmentatioii, when The decree men tioned above was made. In 1599, the. Crown granted the rectory to Foster and Haughten, the grant de scribed it as "ever heretofore usually returning £10." They sold it in 1603' to Thomas Lord Buckhu st, lineal descendant of Sir Richard Sackville. The Earl of Dorset (Lord I3uckhurst) thus possessed of, the advowson, and the rectory, filed a bill in Febru ary, 1619, against White, the Vicar, praying to have his lease set aside, under a pretence of which he ex acted tithes as Vicar while there was no vicarage.-- the answer of White set forth, that he and all his I lpredecessors had quietly enjoyed the tithes as Vicars; himself had been instituted as perpetual Curate by . the Earl of Dorset's predecessor. The Dorset family sold both rectory and advowson to Richard Cox in 1(62. CO% presented Joseph Thompson. Cox arid 'llompson appeared to have entered into a simonia cal agreement. For ThoMpion's itemory it ought to be stated, however, that he had been coMpeilcd into it by fear of suits and vexations. They demised the rectory and vicarage to Roger Scudamore, for 50 years, if the Vicar should live so long; theTicar to have the mansion-house and £lOO a year. Cox would never have entered even into this agreement, if he could claim any right to the vicarage indepen dently of Thompson. A suit was instituted in 1673 against these men and others, br several of the pa rishioners, for fraud in imposing tithes. The suit [failed ; but the evidence was of considerable impor ' Once. amonF the witnesses was Mr. Praise- . God Barebones. 'lhe remaining history cif the vicarage, ' down to the present period, was immaterial ; fot the mother was found presenting her son, and the aunt her nephew, afterwards himself patron . ff the inte rest of the family induced the Vicar to merge his rights in the patron's, that could Ent affect a successor. The Vier-truaxent.on asked Mr.Wethereil if he would now take an issue or reply ? It was impos sible to decide the case without trying the issue whe ther the vicar was entitled to the tithes? Ile must prove his exemption from the common law, which gives all tidies to the Rector, and he had therefore a "right to be plaintiff in the issue. HMr. WWIIIERLI.I. acquiesced; and thought the *eclair of Exchequer was the fittest Court. Vroz-CuAncELcon.—My rule always is, to let the ained' go to what court he pleases. I cannot say .that one Court in . Westminster is fitter than another. Mr. WETIISREiL thought the importance and in tricqcy of the rase entitled it to be tried at bar. The VICE-CUANCELLOR did not think it possessed 'either importance or difficulty to require that., 01.13 BAILEY SESSIONS. Yesterday John Burke was indicted for stealing £4O M Bank of England notes,, and a gold brooch, the property of Peter White. The prisoner was ap prehended, and upoh his person was found £29, but which, however, the prosecutor could not swear to, and he had neglected to subpcena the banker's clerk ; the prisoner was, consequently, Acquitted. torah Gregory, a wretched looking woman, was fund guilty of stealing a bed, an old coat, and se veral other articles. _ lf4lliain Smith, a lad of colour ' was indicted ca pitally for stealing two watches, the property of J. Plaster. Guilty—Death. John Fellows was capitally indicted for a burglary in the dwelling-house of Thomas Morgan, and steal ing therein 51 yards of carpet, .74 yards of printed turniture, value £lO, two lookinrglasses, a tea caddy, and a variety of other articles, his property. Guilty—Death. A person, who stated himself to be the father-in law of the prisoner, said he knew him to be a very bad young man ; but a person who had just left the Court had purchased of him duplicates of articles worth 19 guineas, for a mere trifle, which she must have known to have been stolen.—Mr. ANDREWS said, any infor mation of receivers must be given upon oath ; if thit was done, he would pledgehunself that the person al luded to should be prosecuted. Walter 'Damn, a boy, was capitally indicted for privately stealing, in the shop of George Frankland, four cut salts, his property. Verdict—Guilty of stealing, but not privately. J. Beedham was convicted of stealing a till, con taining money amounting to £2 lls. the property of Lucy Wheeler. The Jury recommended him to mercy, conceiving it to be his first offence, and on account of his youth (18 years). RECORDKR'S COURT, CORK, NOV. so. The entire of this day was occupied in hearing a trial, which, from the nature of the charge, as Well as the parties, had excited much interest. Mr. Thomas Sullivan, an extensive grocer, flour flictor, and spirit dealer, stood indicted for an assault upon Jane, the wife of Mr. John Gregory, with in. tent to commit a Rape; and, in a second count, for a common assault. *Mr. CdnNELL stated the case on the part of the prosecution. The prosecutrix, he said, was the wife of a Mr. .7qlin Gregory, a chandler, and they were both persons of respectability. The traverser, Mr. Thomas Sullivan, resided in Market-smet, where, almost in the neighbourhood of his own house, he had another to let. The husband of the present prosecutrix and his brother•in.law, a person of the name of Cooke, called, en the 29thcif October last, at Mr. Sullivan's. Sul- 1 ' livan• did not happen to be at home, and it was agreed that Mrs. Gregory should go rtnd examine the house. Accordingly on the next day (friday) between eletan .and twelve o'clock, she called at 'Went With her toahe empty-house. Afte r down o ,T e stair s, reter s, h a esug p g a ested n of it, coming g cLi ne n thr g u the -garrets, which she declined. Somethi evident, was then'brooding in his mind, of which may be inferred from a con, he commenced. He asked Mrs. Gregory children she had, which was merely a other questions, which ended in his pr to have a criminal connection with her. It necessary to repeat the language in which t position was made, or the circumstances whi -place, as the Lady herself would descrih the Jury, as fathers, husbands, and mom' , pronounce their detestation of so atrocious and consign him who could be guilty of it punishment of the law. He concluded to the prosecutrix, Jane Gregory, who* appearance was tractive, having very handsome features, • figure, being sworn, she deposed in sub' effect of Mr. Connell's statement. She star e d she was 21 years of age, and had been !married • and ten months. She knew the tr aveller was an infant; he had eight or nine children, wife now living. The witness then went to • conversation which, she alleged, took place, which ended in a proposition to her, conveyed ' grossest language, to have a criminal connexii him. He then asked her to go and-look at the which she declined, when he caught her, and h r violently. She asked him what he mw said he only wanted a kiss, but she said should kiss her, and struggled and got are , - the next flight of stairs as they deeended, , seised her, tore her bonnet off, pulled her hair her shoulders, and mode several attempts ' her down, in which, however, he failed. described her situation to be one of peat ngt the time. In answer to a ruestion from a Jur said, she did not thin sme.ih ; she rhtn stat-e she got away from him, ran down to the o ,:c rested her back against the counter, her (hie , . much disarranged in consequence of the with 'which she was treated. Ilere the tray newed his attempts; he endeavoured, she raise her clothes, she attempted to screed yin his hand on her• mouth, and kept it half a Minute. At length she opened which was all this time locked, and she ran her mother's at the other side of the strew., covered with the hood of her clo:tk. When tered the door, her sister, Miss Cooke, seeir situation, asked her what had happened to her' said that Sullivan had torn her to pieces. ' enquired for the servant, tc go to S'illivan's an umbrella she had left there, but the serve out, she was obliged to.go for it herself, and was there he came in, but iliey had no cons She went home from thence, and homed lately husband what had occurred, 'who made her' fOrmations. The wham undenvent a long I mination. She admitted that while she was house with Mr. Sullivan, he asked her 40' year for the house, and that she offered pounds, but while he was in the act of forth offered it to her at :30, or even 20 pounds, she would comply with his wishes. The case for the prosecution having closed, Mr. DRXIS addressed the Jury at much Yet behalf of the traverser, whose innocence of the thus brought against him, would be proved ' ral witnesses, whose evidence would complete) vett the testimony of the prosecutrix. Ellen NeVille, who sold apples at the door Unoccupied house; swore that she removed r way to'allow the prosecutrix and traverser the house—that he unlocked it and both wen; shortly after returned, and after that a coy went in to speak to . Mr. Sullivan about - straw he had to sell. She said the country' returned, and in about ten minutes after Mr, and Mrs. Gregory came out and parted. W not hear any noise in the house—nor pi Scream. She said Mrs. Gregory did not seem ed, nor did her clothes appear to be torn or John Ryan, the porter, swore that he s Gregory some steps above the second flight __ and his master some steps below her. He heard make no complaint whatever. Miss Sullivan, the niece of the traverser, - examined. She deposed to the prosecutrir about the house, and to the traverser going keya to shew it to her; that they remained minutes, and in about ten minutes more the trig came to the shop, where witness and Mrs. Sulli van were, in order to get an umbrella which she lia4 left there when'slie first entered ; that Mts. Gregory made no complaint of ill treatment, and that neither herself nor any part of her dress appeared any way discomposed.—The defence being here closed, Miss Elizabeth Cooke, sister of the prosecutrir, was examined on the part of the prosecution. She tented, that when her sister returned home after she ,4 .lrenn to see the house, her face was as red as could hey 'and she was quite agitated, and some parts of her -tress, and her hair, appeared torn and discomposed. The Ib:CORDER then charged the Jury. The Jury retifed for better than half= hour, when they returned a verdict of Guilty. • The Itaconosn, after expatiating fully on the na ture of the offence, of which the traverser had Uri convicted, concluded by sentencing the traverser to six months imprisonment, and to pay a penalty c: C5O, and to find security to keep the peace. MARRIED. On Tuesday, ath December, at Cheltenhatn, by the Rev. llle. Gordon, George Barclay, Es+ son c: Colonel Barclay, kis Mc jesty's Commissioner for the American Boundary, to y.e..14a, only daughter of Anthony Aufrere,Eaq. of lloyeton Ilan, Nor folk, and grand-daughter of the late General Count Leckhat. rf Lee and Carnwath. acqnai 1 ZIT The Vint-drawr Tkkets and S LUCK, and Co. the Gate of the THE LOI 1 - pointed of Drawing the /lowa, etc. ec: early Purchases sum of THllir; to bare the ptet tot only the VI 13,750„ the Las tal Prizes to Clem, No. 57, CO! 11, HOL And '4 . Z 12 0,000 end E Be* the day G" 8 • Ludg. to the near ii tbija h the onl Four Prizes X 6,000, fll3 in good vatic and 1/, Ludi Wise sel4 in Er AP Ai* • After th ey its as the/ • her • .. r . ing, rc mind, the inversation ! IT a .prelude Tit 9019. ProPO4ng 'SO • her. It Tea , n which this . 40111711ALT110% l iKeswhitl t ~ °TICE is here b y s od TERN mra! men, Wry rite T r ial of (*vac" cmT ttOciout an , Asisdietion of the Adt Y of it tote,, H z, is the d:111. laded be —ce ct' , asi of J anu ary next, ce was "err cores, with a C°Til rti Eat t substance to , 11 =flied a ,HE plapiclP A luta , vIE DN ES!): went to .!are will be ready to trcal took Place, ar. c o o:act for stIPPIY ir conveyed in 0 . eetwich, Chatham, Sh 11 connexion stst) and WH ITI3 te : m 'r e p le:9er t m s ast tahn e t edlit t o ed ; P t u ? :l4: h ;e - poste of the Testdae ed, h t enji f , e ;t h ; t l s e d . haihe , tia h A t o . p. l2s3ll7 : l :ll : l, :s : . dudt:::::afri.n'tdberinueu.4es:ntnP:seei ;tit 2r ar• rpt• unless the PM ErerY t er navy to er c;rest :teltatiln • WORWICII I'OM a Juror, then stated, th ed, she, said, t t o h f e til tra e ve ' rst iclen : l 'eloek sl:tenE°ll , da : L or tna?t e eeh7it e ol::: P eutOehr i' te.Nc7tin: 'matinee will th e n be screech, but : The Chair veil kept it there b o rers are requestc petted the doer , • far the current she ran away t • • c street, her hea. When she . Torii Hotel, 9th IN ooke, seeing h. • GUI red to axes.? kl• '• THE COMMIT ,She th llivan's !mute f LANDS wilt m tl:e servant beir ki of rlec Ü be ßL ri l n C % . elf, and while e. E L I, " NI no con , Four O NION ant Deaner to m is, vactuclay the de lodre a°t ic...a.,a e tt etrt time u the Can particubrt as.. a her 40 gitine4, . offered so man FOR sf forcing her, I. i t t h e Caw 0m..11 , ,u5. ounds, provide December, 1815, si T HE UNDEF ng closed, .11. GOODS, win-. : much length i. h bin ikeeti's (3 ° . '" Abutlt ace of the charg • proved by see And artrae Dealt, completely su , Aire s four-oar' t. Tic Spirits, v:lncl the door th l st a D P - r t i s l -s " s e i movies' onto' In I V: above cosy b verses. to r int N. by of axle, by soth went in, and st a countrymm about a load ADDITICO countryman also fter Mr. Sullivan T HE postpot ted. Witness Aid kept tin! 'rid! -nor p r o t eent t i l longer upon s t ale ti, not seem agitat. s e a dra t to e W 3.41 torn or injured. an additional print sat he saw Mrs. T. WISH; the Cat flight Of stairs, MO dine in select!' , He heard her w r ap p ri x sod it it should, b verser, waS neat road with more secutrir coming bee Lotteries 21°' r going with the twabinai.—No. named about tee Lao ICLIA.RD: lore the prosecu- faUy s and M. Sulli- lhavo:4 NZIT DIED. Lieutenarrhesimel Charles Doke Deput7-Adjutant-Ciehe l d to the Forces me*, under the Maria Dalhousie, Nueagicett. PRICE OF STOC . Bk. Stock 2701 Reduced nit Cons. shut 31 per Ct.BS Sif 4 per Ct:96{ 96 Navy shut high-Water. K 8 YESTORDST. Long :inns. 20 3-T6 India Bonds 8482 pr. Exch. Bifls 20 IS Omn. pr. Cons. for Ac. 7910 1 Lottery Tickets tiiif4 morning, 2 iminutcs after 1 ' 4lANDWirtituted MAlubliebost by lamb /Oh Va.44o* Teapk•Bar. • -a•~ r