Star. — London, England, 1828-12-05 00:00:00

rentr,l 'nun: rith a Infra 'ared lent. e has ,ty ie. ,and )lea. wal'rued [prep! thati 1.-1 ahem, picce excel' .tros• evre he Tor" equat know!, iece ti age."' L clay, T. and WOOD d viso 1 61101, *gage Y were° e por ted rtt reel life ttlil death o f yie Lor vivo • et scm ana.! rate `" will be Pie in Ise i re i 1141 pa ipit e arty th r t to Pt bee aew afa t hi 1d ihic rin age COQ At aria :11 t (age. um' aS Star b e and :!uunt 1 old THE LATE EARL OF LIVERPOOL. The recovery of the Earl of LIVERPOOL from the melancholy malady into which he fell by a stroke of apop l e xy on the 17th of Fehr uary,lB27, being from the 6 , st h o peless, its termination in death was an object rather to be desired then deprecated; and now that the event has actually taken place, we should consider it as a relic', and net as a new affliction, to his surviving friends. The event took place yesterday morning, at an early hour, at Coombe Wood. His death was sud den and unexpected, as his Lordship had for some time pre,irrusly been in better health than usual. Since his severe attack in the spring of 1827. his Lordship's pub lic hie had ceased, and he had been the subject of inte rest only to his personal friends. These were, indeed, numerous and warm, but the nature of his malady de- D ied A ccess to his presence to all but his immediate at tendants and the members of his own family. The enoe vence has been, as it always is in such cases, no longer living to the world—the world ha I ceased to live es him. The account of that death, which would, two years ago, have created a great sensation, will be reed with less attention than that of many meaner, and l ess able, and less amiable m .n. His Lordship was very early introduced into Parlianseat, and, after pass in?, through several inferior offices, was made Home Secretary in 1807; he became Colonial Secretary in isio, on the retirement of Lord CASTLEREAGH; and Freign S c.etary in ISIO. In 1812, he was made F:rst Lord of the Treasury, on the death of Mr. PER cEyAL, which office he held for the long period of tom leCTI y e ar s . His Lordship was tv ice married. The present Countess is a sister of Sir Roar. CHESTER. The honours of the deceased Earl will descend to his Lordship's brother, the Honourable CECIL Jetaxtrasos. For the purity of his moral conduct, the rectitude of his mind, and the uniformity of hii political principles, his Lordship was much and deservedly respected. indeed be was never tempted to swerve from the course which was prescribed to him by his excellent . father. THE LATE DUCHESS OF RUTLAND. CONSECRATION oF THE MAUSOLEUM TO THE MEMORY OF THE LATE LUCHESS OF RUTLAND. This impressive ceremony took place on Friday last, the 28th of November. the day preceding the third sansversary fher Grace's ever to be lamented decease. _ About ten o'clock five carriages drew up to the valid front of Belrcir Castle, and convey yd the various prr• sonagea taking a part in the ceremonial the village of Kral t at, the evert,' y being within the patish, and attached to the church of that place. Here mr•r..ing prayers were read, and an address de livered by the Bishop of Lincoln's Chapl tin, which was one of the most eloquent and affecting orations we ever beard. On the conclusion of Divine Service, the procession returned to the Mausoleum, which, alter the aCCUS. timed f)1 n ulary being gone through, was consecrated by the Lord Bishop tit the Diocese, the Rev. Dr. Kaye, in the rest nce of His Grace the Duke of Rutland, the Duchess Isabella of Rut- Ladies Emmeline, Adelisa and Catherine Manners, Mr. and Liar K Norman, Lady E Drummond and Mr. Drummond, Sir W. E Welby, the Rev. Charles de Roos Thornton, Colonel Trench, slr. Wyatt, the Architect, Hee. Mr. Hamilton, Mr. Fame, Mr. Turner, &c. _ _ _ His Lordship afterwards delivered a discourse suited to the solemn occasion—a discourse admirable at once kr its eloque..ce, its pathos, and elegant simplicity. The ceremony being concluded, his Grace and the Noble gue.ts proceeded to the Castle, where they par took of a_suss►ptuous banquet, served in the great din ing room. The Bishop is expected to make some stay it the Castle. Tue KING'S New eALACIfiIiS extensive struc ture, notwithstanding the very great drawbacks upon its progress lately, such as the rebuilding of the two wings and the strike of the plumbers, is now likely to be finished in a reasonable time. The heavy scaffold.. ing which has obscured the view of the wings for a length of time, has been taken dawn within the last two or three days, and they now present a very pretty and even appearance. The large tarpaulin continues Wore the dome, and the conjectures concerning the motive for which it was placed there are still unsatisfactorily accounted tor. The most probable report is, that the top is to be heightened, and that the three figures will then resume their wonted stations. Very few labourers are at present employed upon the building. At Mr. Overy's, Watlington, near Battle, this season, one single hill of hops in his kitchen garden, consiwing of four poles, produced the extraordinary quantity of rs bushels and one gallon of bops! Friday night, as ts-e Rey. Mr. Willoughby was re turning on horseback from Weymouth to Dumbest -r, when within three miles of home, a villain sirdeenly sprang into the road and discharged a pistol ar,dom, shish wounded him severely just below the heart.— The horse, frightened at the report, started off at full 'Peed, and t'te Rev Gentleman was happily enabled to ktain his seat till be reached Dorchester, where- the wound was instantly examined, and a ball of sworn molt size extracted. The most sanguine hopes are of Mr. W.'s recovery, the ball having escaped a vital part. Wednesday an Inquest was held at the Star, in Castle -street, Buckingham -gate, on the body cf Moses Bones, aged 49. The deceased was in the employ of Mr. Cooper, dust contractor, Great Sl.Anr:s 7 lane. On Monday he was engaged placing a horse to a cast. when the horse started forward and knocked him.down, end a chain which was attached to the harness, becom reg entangled to the deceased's lee r dragged him *eve 'al yards, and his left foot was nearly torn off. The njuries he received caused his death. Verdict—Acci dental Death. Early on Friday morning, as Thomas Pearse was proceeding with one of Mr. Gooldeu's waggons, laden %/di flannels, from Pool to Shrewsbury, he fell under i . he waggon wheel, and was killed. He was found about mile on the other side of the Cross Gates, lying " 4 his face, an d t h e wheel upon his body ! It is con jectured that he had been asleep on the shafts of the *linen, and when he found himself falling, attempted 1 ° rt , p the horses. Peruse was about 60 years s f age, and h., left eight children. „ CORN-EXCHANGE, MARK-LANE , Dec. 5. na iing many country buyers at nsarket, the hlealing Trade was tther lively Liiis morning, and Monday's prices were fully sup- Ported. M.lthig Barley, although doll sale, is not cheaper; and in Pop, nion as the duty decreases, our supply from the country in tents. Oats fully support our tan currency. ir keat, En IMPUkTATIONS Ent MONDAY. plisb (qrs.) 2,000 Foreign •—••••• I Oats, &WWI krin Foreip 4 18,600 Irish Eng I h 1.050 Foreign Irish I Pluur (sacks) SMITHFIELD MARKET. Du. L CATTLII 4T MinXIET. &MS 446 I Sheep 4,410 J Pigs 150 I Calves 188 1 : 4 ”( • • • Si 6.1 to 4s 2d I Vral . . 45 83 to 51 4d w1;11 •4. 44 oil Pork . . Ss Od 61 Oil -.no Pyr 1044 , t 2 2...tu £4 Os. Clover £3 Se. to XS oe. -.no Ils. to .E 1 146. -1,300 5,600 4,050 7,700 LAW INTELLIGENCE. COURT OF KING'S BENCH, Wisrmuteras, DEC. 4. MACIDONALD.V. DALE. 'the defendant in this action is a cart.owner, and engaged with the plainttff carry twelve puncheons of turpentine from B.ittersea to the latter's warehouse in the Borough, on a cetta;n day. The de'endaut did not do so, and the plaintiff now brought his action for breach of contract. The witnesses for the plaintiff proved that part only of the puncheons arrived; and that if they had all come on the dsy the defendant promised, they could have been sold for ready money. A clerk of the plaintiff proved also that when he coin• plained to the defendant of the non-peif rmance of his engagement, the latter excused himself by saying that a cart that was to have brought the other puncheon's had been sent out in the moining, and had, contrary to his expectations, been detained and loaded back from the place he had sent it to. On behalf of the defendant, three witnesses proved that a waggon belonging to the defendant did arrive at the wharf where the plaintiff had directed him to fetch the turpentine from, time enough to have carried it to the plaintiff's warehouse on the day app inted ; but that the waggoner was obliged to he turned away, as the last puncheons were not ready for delivery. Lord TENTZIUMN told the Jury, that if they believed the defendant's witnesses, he would he entitled to their verdict ; but that if they believed the account given for the plaintiff to be correct, then they would find for him, with such dam sges as they might think fi•. The Jury, alter a short consultation, returned a ver dict for the defendant. WILSON N. JONES. The plaintiff in this case was a plumber and glazier, and the defendant WA$ a butcher. By the plaintiff's evidence it appealed that the defendant had engaged with the plaintiff to line a cistern with lead for 81. 10s the latter to take out part of the account in meat. The plaintiff performed the work he had undertaken, with some other work, which raised his bill to 15/. odd. A set off of 101. 17s. was aJmi ted, for meat furnished by the defendant, which reduced the plaintiff's demand to 41.165. Fir the defence witnesses were called, by whom it w4s attempted to be shown, that the defendant had made the contract with a person named Evans, a penter, who was to employ the plaintiff; but thi. was contraticted by Evans. That the plaintiff had performed the work was not denied. The Jury, srithot.t he,itation, found a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages, 41. 16s. L18E1......81L0WN V. BUDD AND wILLIr This action was brought by Samuel Brown, a chip and straw bonnet manufacturer in Old-stee . , St. Luke's, against Budd, who also carries on the stew. business in the same neighbourhood, and Mr. Willis, an attorney, to recover damages fur a libel published in the form of a liand•bill. The plaintiff, it appeased, had extensive deilings, and at the end of last year, a failure having tak-n place in the sale of the articles in which he dealt, he became embarrassed, and Budd sued out a commis lsion of bank' uptcy against him. Budd was then made assignse, and Mr. Willis the art uney under the commis. sion. Acting in those situations, they cw)sideted it their duty to publish ha..d-bills, cffering a reward of 201. to any person who might discover ant convict in dividuals supected rf having fraudulently obtained tie bankrupt's property. The hand-bills were circisl.ted in the east end f the metropolis, and posted near the residence of the plaintiff. The hand bill was described to be a serious and unjust i& able attack on the plaintiff's character, and it was contended Oil the Jury in such a CASA ought to give ample damages. Su JAMBS SCARLLTT put in the hand-bill, signed by Willis,Whlth was read in eviJence, and called witnesses in support of the case. Mr. Comm N SZI.OOANT, for the defendants, said his Learned Friend had not proved the publication to be a übel. The hand-bill had been published from the best motive, namely, to recover goods for the uenefit of the creditor s. Lord TENTIIRDEN said there must be a verdict for the plaintiff; but as Mr. Willis was acting in a profes bional character for ttie interest of the creditors under the assignees, the verdict might be alpinist Budd alone. The Jury found a verdict for the plaintiff, As against Budd. D.rniges, 501.1 COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, W/ITMUISTIN D. 4. LIPSCOMB V OBAMASI. - This was an action brought by the plaintiff,furmerly a labourer in the delendat.t's service, to recover com pensation in damages f,r an .riest and false imprison. mei t, on suspicion of having stolen lead and other arti cles from the defend4nt. Mr. Sergeant ANDREWS statel the Me. from which it appeared that the defendant was a Ger.tleman of pro perty, residing at Cranford. near Hounslow, and having been robbed of lead, his suspicion fell upon the plain tiff, he ning he had spoken to a man, Cheeseman, who ahsconded on the morning cf the robbery, and on that suspicion he gave the plainiff in charge to an officer named Vincent, representing lie suspected the plaintiff belonged to the Fushun gang; the offer of course thought he was a desperate cliaraittr, and to make his prisoner secure handcuffed him ; but after he had de tained him at the public-house three hours he discharged him, because the defendant would not pm sue the inquit y against the plaintiff It he proved these facts the plain tiff would be entitled t a verdict. Evidence was then called to prove the arrest and subs-quent disch age of the plaintiff. • Mr. Sergeant WILDE, for the defence, said she plain tiff must necessarily obtain a verdict, because the de fendant had not put a jurtifization on the record ; but still the damages ought to be very small, the defendant having mistaken the law on the subject, and having been misled by the offictr employed to discover the offenders. Yet there was a circumstance that would decrease the damages ; u hen the officer was putting on the handcuffs, the defendant said these was no occasion, and the officer said he should do as he pleased. Witnesses were called fir the defendant, but the CUM/ Jvsrice overruled their evidence as to the de fence that the defendant bad reasonable grounds of sus picion. Mr. Sergeant ANDREWS, in reply, observed it was a circumstance very much in aggravation, that the de fendant had represented the plaintiff belonged to the Fulham gang. The CHIEF Justice said he had not permitted the defendant is give evidence in justification, because there was not a plea to that effect ; but he was sure the defendant had not acted under vindictive or malicious feeling; nevertheless, be represented that the plaintiff belonged to a gang of desperate characters, and that justified the conduct of the officer in handcuffing his prisoner, he being responsible for his appearance. It the Jury thought thi : defendant had acted maliciously, I .r,te damages ought to be given ; but if under mis taken motives only, moderate damages would corn. [mate. The Jury, after deliberating for ten minutes, returned a verdict for the plaintiff—damages, 201. COURT OF EXCHEQURR. Dgc 4. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL V. MATHEW,. This was au intorniati.m filed against the defendant by his Majesty's Attorney General, for the recovery of certain penAltie, incur.eJ by reason of his having do hied certain of the Excise regulations for the nuking of malt. The Souctroa GENERAL. in stating the case, said, that it was rather a singolar feature in it that the defen dant had been at one time an insi ector of Exci e, and that in the discharge of his duty he had to inspect the vet y malt houses of which he sub , eqise tly became pro prietor, and in whic'i the alleged frauds were committed by him. The malt houses w eie situate at Western Hen died and Norwell, in Bei kshire. •1 he license for malting was taken nut by a man named Petit, who had since absconded, but the Jury, upon h..aring the evidence, would have no doubt on their minds that the defendant Nlathews had a share in the concern. The Learned Solicitor could not refrain (tom observing, that a retired Excise officer. and particu'arly one holding tl e high rank which the defendant did, was the most d mgerous description of persons to entrust with the making of malt. He knew the habits of the Excise officers, their times of visiting malt houses, their means of detecting frauds, and was therefore calculated to defeat their vigilance. Indeed, in the present instance, he had still further advantages, for he had been the inspector of, the very malt houses in which he afterwards conic& on the 1. autb. It would appear that the deft ndanr, after the detection to .1c place, begged the Excise officer by whom it was made not to press too heavily on h•nr Don't make," said he, " m.ite than three or four hun dred pounds, or that (pointing to Reading gaol) must be our portion." _ _ _ Several witnesses um called, for the purpose rf proving that the di.fenclabt was a propritor of the malt houses, after which, Mr. JEKvis, sets. addressed the Jury for the &fin dAt.t, and contended that the evidence was in , ufliciei.t to connect his client with the transaction rabid!, gave rise to the information. He admitted the frauds, but denied his client's participation, in the most remote degree, in them. The Cytei BARON summed up. and with reference to t' e demeanour of parties when detected in crime, said that it was not always s. fr to rely too much upon the conduct of men in such cases. A great modern Poet (Byron), in alluding to the cootie's c.f his hero upon a particular occasion, douLts whether it be the calmneAs of the good, Or vice grown bold by desin.rate hardihood." The Jury returned a ver-ict for the Crown. COURT OF THF. DEAN AND CHAPTER OF WESTMINSTER, Die. 4. Before Sir Minas JitiNFIL. Commissary. IB 111011 P V. 518THORP. This was a suit for eeparalion a mensa el Nro►o, by reason of adultety. promo ed by Ntrrin Sobthor pagain t her husband, Colo , el C. D %V. Sit,thorp, M.P. foe Lin coln. No uppositi •n was off red on behalf of tie hus band ; a few passages only of the evidenc.! were con e quently read, which established the marriage, cohabi tation, and identity of the par ties, and the adultery. Sir HIMBERT JENNICR gave sentence. The parties were married in Gloncesieishi-e, on the 20 h February, ! 1812, and c,h4bited till o,:tober, 1827. The issue of the matriage was t.wr sons. In 1826. Colonel Sibthorp formed an acquaint trice %%lib a woman named S r..h Ward ; and in May, 1827, Ve brru p a,ht her to Lindon. and vole apartments at Mrs. Fsrn.er's, in 1) sset strict, Portman square, where they c'snt nued for nine weelps, sleeping to?, tl,ev. There was no doubt as to the fact of adultery, and Vie evidence as to the identits of the parties was complete: there were letters from Colonel Sibthorp tr Mrs. Farmer, which ;loved Lis identity, and them was a witness to the fact that the person with whom hr cohabited was not Mts. S.bshoip lien the w hole, there was no doubt slut tie w ife was , entitled to the sentence of divorce which sic prayed. Dr. LISSIiINGTJN then, on behalf of M. Sibtltorp, applied for the allotment of permanent alimony, upon ' an Allegation of the f culties of Col eel Suthnrp, which set los th the amount of his tevenue, admi ting with. ut objection the deducti , ns he claimed.. Colvnel Sibthorp was possess. d of the estate at Calnwick, rear Lincoln, which he valued at 3501. per annum. The gross rental of his other property amounted to 14.817Lbut he cl timed detluctions ti various kinds, which redu:ed the net in come to 8,5361. per annum. Colonel Sibthorp admitted that he had in ready cash 10,000/. but alleged that bis debts egualltd that sum. lie also admitted the posses sion of other effects to the amount of 5,0001. Of the four sons, the eldest was 14 years a f age. the nest 12, the third 10, and the fourth 8. Mrs. Sibilios p possessed an annuity if 3001. for her separate use. The joint net income of the parties he took At 8,8001. Dr. A R NOL n, fur Colonel Sibthatip, observed, that he had no objection to admit that to be the amount, but he submitted t!'at there were a variety of circumstances in the case which the Court ought to consider in making this allotment of alimony. It appeared that Mrs. Sib. thorp had not brought any fortune to her husband, and he had now four sons to maintain and educate; and, from the age of those children, the expense was one which mu tbe constantly is creasing. It also appeared. that the estates were entailed ; and Colonel Sibthorp would, therefore, have to provide future frrtunes for those children, as well as to maintain and educate them. It was also most important that there was no cir cumstance of aggravation in the ease, and that Colonel Sibthorp was not charged with any personal ill-treatment of his wife. Dr. LUSHINGTON, in reply, urged that it was not to be assumed, even if Colonel Sibthorp had no powei to charge his real estate, or to fell timber, that out of so large an income he could not provide for his children. Aithough no aggravating circumstances were charged in this case, still the adult ry was not of a very venial nature. Colonel Sibthot p bad cohabite , l with his Wife from 1812 to 1816; and at a time of life shin he was not in the heyd,iy of youth, he forgot hi. duty to his w.fe, and fcrmed an adulterous connexion with a person of low character. Mt s. Sibthorp was not to sustain any Inns through the mi.feasancc of her husband. No ali mony had been allowed peudente lite. Sir H. JENNIIII took the amount of faculties as fol lows—Grass income, including the estate at Caltiwick, 14,3171. deductions 6,1301. leaving a net revenue of 8,1871. frttm real property ; adding the separate income and prospective property of the wife, the joint income of the patties was 8,8001. The allotment of permanent alimony was diffetently regulated from an allowance pentane lite, whilst it was doubtful whether the site could establish her charges. There vas no filed rule for the Court in these cases ; they always depended upon the particular circumstances of each. In cases where the circumstances were aggravated, the Conn had even allowed a moiety of the joint income. In the pre,ent case, although the wife had brought no fortune, she was still e• titled to be maintained in the same rank in which she had moved whilst she cohabited with het husband. Taking the joint it come at 8,8001. he thought the Court woulii act with liberality to the ono- pa•tr f and wish Able attention to the claims of the other, if it a hated the sum of 2,200 i. (including the separate in• come of the wile) fur pm minent alimony from the date of the sentence. HlOll COURT OP JUSTICTARY, goiascaari, Dec. t. This day Allan IPLean, late post i unner for con• veying letters between Oban and Tobermory, was ar raigned on the Statute of 53 Gen. 111. e. 143 (whin Imakes the crime capital). for having, on be 25th Aug. last, secreted And embezeed A letter. address d by 31r. John B ith, jun. merchant, Campbell -town, to M. James Nisbett, water, Tobermory, containing 501. in bank notes. The indictment contained an alteinine charge of theft of the above letter and content.. The pannel tot understanding English, Mr. M•Do• nald. of Staffs, was sworn to act as interpreter. Sonic conversation followed, as to the necessity of the libel being teed in English. Mr. M Donald stated he had made the pannel f ully aware of the nature of the charges preferred against him. The LORD Je3Tice CLERK ranirked, that in such cases he thought copies of the indictment in tile Gaelic language should be served upon pannels. *Lean, though the inter c reter, pleaded Guilty to the first charge as libelled; and the Lord Advocate I passed from the second change, testi icting the pains sf law as to the other to an arbitrary punishment. Mr. M'Donald of Staffa was about to address the Court, when— Mr. J. W. DICKSON, Counsel for M-Lean, said Mr. hl 4 Donald having communicated with the pannel in a language which he (Mr. Davin) did not understand. was able to make some explanations to the Court with more effect than he could Mire to do. Mr. Nl'Dowat.o then de-ctihed the manner in which the prisoner had conducted hinsselt after the commis sion of the clime- That he fist went r:o Neil Nl 4 Phail t.) count the money, and next to purchase horses and boats; that his own conduct led to his immediate de tection; and no sooner was lie taken tnto cusody, and made fully aware of the magnittide of the crime he had committed, than he expressed the nto‘t unfeigned contrition, candidly .nd openly confessing the full ex tent of his guilt. T e Learned Gentleman mod s-me certificates to show that the lad had, up to the commis• sion i f this offence, berne an excellent character, being always considt red a useful and holiest boy. Lord Gibucts, in proposing the sense. c., said this was one of the peculiar (,ffences to which the at 'ached the punishment of death. That being the case, Ice thou4lit all had been done which could be d• ne for tie poisoner by .the restriction of the public prosecutor, therefore he would say that he should be tians;:orted for the whole period of his natural We. Lord Pirmibbi concurred; and the LORD JCSTICII CLERIC, in expressing his opinion, remarke.r, that inde pendent of the satute, the offence was one of the most aggrava eJ nature. The pannel had be n urged as a servant of the Post-office, who had vitiated his trust, and pleaded guilty to that crime. Their I, , rdships, theiefne, were bound to inflict such punis'inoent as would show to all in the Post-office service that it was their sacred duty to discharge faithfully the trust re• posed in them. Semence of transportatCon for life was then pro neunced against the unfortunate lad, who dii not ap• pear to be Above 15 or 16 years i f age, and who seemed to feel very keenly his degraded situ.otion. SURREY SESSIONS,DEc. 4. Clarks Pitman was indicted for stealing a pair of trousers, and oil er articles of a eating. apparel, the pro. perty of John Yates Coop-r, Esq..i t Hackney. Clem the Bow-stre t pair I, plowed that having f wend the articles in question in the box of the prisoner, win tras servant to Colonel Todd, of Coady's, and u petting they were stolen, he ilquireJ t i the piose cut r, by whom they wete identified as his room ty. E:izahezh Btoniley, a servant a Mr. Coppees, stated that the gi,ols in question were her master's. Mr. BAC ))1, for the prisoner, cross ex +mined the wit ness, who admitted that she had kei t company with the prisoner, and had given him chain articles a wearing apparel. which her master tad given to her for the pur pose of being distributed to.pon people; she denied. however, that she had ever given him the articles men• tioned in the indictn.ent. . Edward S!repherd proved that the last witness had been in the habit of leaving parcels at his house fur the pri: &met. The pi honer, in his defence, said the clothes had been given him by thew liners Bromley. The Jury returned a vet dict of Not Guilty. The same prisoner was' a second time indicted for stealing a silver watch. The witnesses for the prosecution proved that in No. vember last a man s f the name of Greases, the gsrdener of Colonel Todd, hanged himself; that some time be f re his death he had been possessed of the watch in question. and that it appeased to be in his pocket after his body was discovered. By means of a letter ad. dressed by Bromley. the winless in the last case, to the prisoner, and found upon him, it bad been discovered the swatch was in his possession, and there the police officers found it. Mr. BACON, for the ()limner, objected that the indict• mensatMadoll not be sustained. It consisted of two counts. in die estri of which the property of the watch was laid to be in Amelia Greases (the deceased's widow), and in the second s to be in some person or persons unknown. The fit st, the Counsel insisted,was clearly wrot.g. Amo. lia Greaves not bring charged to be the administratrix of the deceased; and the second, because the property must be either that of the administratrix. or. if ao ad ministration had been granted, that of the Ordinary, in whom the deceased's estate vested by operation of law ; so that in no case it could by possibility be the property of a person unknown. The CIIAIRMAY allowed the validity niche 6r.t, but overruled the second objection. He then charged the Jury, and pointed out the di credibility of the witness Bromley, on whom the proof of the case depended, wheretion they retutnei a verdict of ,%04 Guilty. William Harper Was indicted for stealing several yards of linen from the shop door of a tradesman in Newington. The charge against the prisoner was fully established against him, and he was found Gadfly ; but it appearing, in the course of the testimony given by the *lames, that the article in question was exhibited for sale out side the prosecut u's door, the Chairman, on that con sideration, passed a milder sentence on the prisoner than he would otherwise have been disposed to extend to him, ' being an rld offender. Ile was therefore sentenced to six months imp: isonnsent, the Court expressing the im propriety tradesmen placing their goods outside their shops; it was a temptation for persons such as the prisoner to commit an offence; and In order to show their disapproval of such a cu tom, are Court would never grant the exi.enses to the prosecutors. The pro secutor in this case, on his application to be allowed the expenses, was refuted. • 11 1 .j ~.; M