Star. — London, England, 1802-12-02 00:00:00

threatened to horfewhip him ; he was then upon a manor of the Duke of Northumberland's ; he did not fee Rogers make or meddle with the chace. Mr. Slater is a gentleman of large property, and qua lifted ; the Defendant is the fon of farmer Rogers, who is likewife qualified. . . Mr. Gibtbn, who had been of the party, was next called, and Rated that Mr Slater had carried out only two dogs, and that they were joined by young Rogers, who brought another. They at tcrwards found and killed. The defence was, that the dog belonged to the Defendant's father, and that Slater, not be, was the perfon who, in the language of the Ad, had soled it. Mr. Ifaac Slater (wore, that as his father, ano ther gentleman and himfelf were going with two dogs to a place where they had heard there was a hare, they accidentally met the defendant riding along with a dot , . underftood to belong ro l Rogers. His father, who had heard a good cha raCter of this dog, afked to be allowed to run it againll one of his; the defendant confenting, they went and courted as above defcribed. Lord ELLENBOROUGH laid. that whatever opi nion might be entertained oldie Game Laws, they were undoubtedly to be adminißered according to their fair meaning, as others the moll palatable. The queftion was, whether the Defendant came within the penalty of the AEI? It could not be faid that every one tiled Jogs for the dearationof game, who participated in the chace. This would !neon'. pletely dearoying the diverlions of the country. In that cafe it would be impollible even for a gentle man to he attended on a thooting or hunting party by his fervant. Principals alcne were meant, not thole who were prefent.under the aufpices of others. The Jury would therefore confider whether Rogers bad boaape lent his dog to Slater,and parted with the controul over him, fo that he attended Slater afterwards only as his companion? or whether ibis tranfaetion was a mere colour to evade the law, and he acted during , the courfe when the hare was killed, as a principal ? Upon a review of the evidence, his Lordthip teemed pretty clearly of opinion that he was to be confidered in the former capacity, and the Jury, without hefitation, found for the defendant. In the courfe of the trial a very important point arofe, whether the penalty of Sol. attaches for not (hewing the certificate, or telling the name and abode attaches upon a man who refutes to thew a certificate, hut is not anted for his name and abode, thefe being futhciently known to the perfon enquir ing? Lord EL LENZOROUOR thought that it did not, as the object of the A& was not to compel every man to carry his certificate in his pocket, but to furnifh the means of profecuting him if he thould be found to be without a certificate. MOORHEAD V. EMMONS. This was an aition of the fame nature, by Lord Berkeley againft a fervant of Mr. Rogers. It ap peared that in 08. 1 Sor, Mr. Gains, fon of the Regiftrar of the Court of Admiralty, young Ro ws, and the defendant, were feen courting on Heitham Common by Molten, Lord Berkeley's game keeper. An aftion was brought againft Gof ling, which he compounded for 3IL The defence here was, that Simmons merely aged as a fervant; but the noble Judge was of opinion that where there is not Come one of the party with a certifi• Bate, all prefcnt are guilty. The Jury, however, gave only the penalty of sl. under the Ratute of Anne. In the neat cak e a Welch paviour recovered sol. for a beating given him by a carpenter's ap prentice in the ward at Deptford. DECEMBER 1. An application being made to his Lordfnip to put of the Trial of a Canfe which is not in the Pa per at prefent,his Lordfbip obfervcd,that he could not hear any application in any cafe which was not before him ; and defired that fuch motions might not be repeated ; for this was the fecond inflance in which be was under the neceffity of making this obfervation, and he was unwilling to treat any Gentleman at the Bar, othetwife than with per fea civility. lIIROWN 9. HART. Mr. Glass Rated, that this was an Altion brought by the Plaintiff, the father and admini firator of a perfon of the name of Alexander Brown, who is dead • he was a feaman, to whom confiderable fums o f had become due on account of a prize,captured by la Pique, onboard of which he was a failor ; againft the defendant, Mr. Hart, who had received this money by virtue of a Power of Attorney from Alexander Brown. The Action was for about 2501. The defendant had paid zBl. 16s. 6d. into Court, and Paid it was "all that was due to Alexander Brown : on the true Ratement of accounts between him. and the defendant, and out of his own mouth, would he make out the Cafe againft the defendant, then he fhonld wait to hear what argument was to be urged on his part in anfwer to it. Alexander Brown, as he had Paid already, was a Seaman, Who had ferved on board la Pique, and went af terwards on board le Tigre to Contlantinople.— The defendant, Mr. Hart, was a Member of the Jewith Perfuafion, and he was a Slop-feller reftchmt at Portimouth ; he was likewife, what moll Slop. fellers are, an Agent for Seamen to receive their phoney by virtue of Powers of Attorney, and upon the faith of which they fomctimes gave Sailors a little credit for Slips.—Such was the cardiac.— Ales:ander Drown, before he went on board the Tigie, was on board la Pique When the took a very valuable prize, in the year 1798. It was .iipnted whether the veffel was a prize or not? and it went before the proper Tribunal to decide it ; and it was not determined that the was lawful prize uhtil the year 1800 : and the queßion here to be fubraitted to the Jury, if a queftion it could be called, would be, whether there was any jußice in the demand which the defendant now fet up for money advanced to this Seaman in his lifetime, 'bile this claim for prize money was in the course -veftigatiob, and before it could be known -ran The • which Mr. Hart had rendered to the Father of this Sailor, after his death. When this Seaman went , on board the Tigre, he gave Mr: Hart a power of attorney to receive prize money for him, and in formed his Father, at Greenock, in Scotland, that he had done fo, and defired his Father to apply to Hart, from time to time, to learn whether he . , had received any prize money on his account? — The father did fo ; and Hart wrote to the Father at Greenock ; but then he had not the fagacity to: contemplate the poffible event of the death of Brown, the tailor, and that he was writing to a perfon with whom he might afterwards have to contend as an adminiftrator; and therefore he wrote to the Father a letter, dated the zBth of November, 1793, direded to John Brown, at a place near Greenock, and figned.David Hart, Gof port. " Your fon, Alexander Brown, on board the Tigre, is well: His prize money is not paid ; and as Won as it is paid, I have your fon's inftruc - firms to tranfmit it to you as foon as paid, which I will take care to remit as foon as paid, which will be.in about fix months.—P. S. There has been a trifle of prize money paid, of 305. a man, whieli has been advanced to your fon. The moment any prize money is paid, I will fend to you." This letter would prove that this was all that was ad vanced at this time by the defendant to the tailor, and would make the defendant accountable for every thing that he had received afterwards on ac count of this feaman, which was upwards of 24.01. But if any thing were wanting, there was another letter from Mr. Hart to the prefent plaintiff, dat ed. Gofport, sth of March, 1799 41... 64 I have re ccived yours, I am to inform you, that the Tigre man of war is fare arrived at Conftantinople, all well. The prize money is not yet paid for la Pique. I have paid your fon for five [hares, the fum of 61. 19s. which I have advanced your fon when he went to tea. As loon as the prize money is paid, I will write to you again. As foon as the prize money is paid I wilt let you know." So that it was clear, that all the money which the defendant had advanced to this feaman, on the sth of March, 1798, was 61. 195.. In the year 1890, there came accounts of the death of Alexander Brown ; and this news ope rated wonderfully on Mr. Hart, who was a gene ral adminiltrator of all feamen who die leaving powers of attorney in his hands. He was afraid it would turn out that nothing was due to this tea• man, or that if there was, there would be a great deal of difficulty in obtaining it • and here Mr. Hart entered into a great deal oelamentation on the hardfhips to which feamen were expofed, the difficulty of recovering what was due to them when they applied for it themfelves; and a great deal of very jolt reafoning came from Mr. Hart, on the advantages which were taken of their relatives after their death; fo that he, Mr. Hart, had upheld this diftreled man, Alexander Brown,with money and goods to the amount of t7ol. and that at a time when there was no certainty that he would ever be able to pay him, for hitherto it was not de led that he would be entitled to any ,erroini , prize money. It was wonderful that Mr. Hart should have been fo generous. Mr. Hart, however, gave in his account of the fums advanced by him, or rather raid to have been advanced by him, to Alex ander Brown, from the ad of ORober to the zad of Odober 1798; the Jury should fee it—ln the mean while he would read it as a curious article— Odtober 1, 1798, C 241 (at once) • • Ls* 0 ,-Silver Watch- - 6 6 Silver Chain and Key - - .. - oz 6 Silver Buckles - • - • 1 Z 7tb. Cath - - - - 20 0 So that here were about Sol. in five days, and the account was made up as it were by weeks.— Again, From the 7th of Od. to the t 4th—Callt - ‘2O t, • Check Shirts - - - - si i 6 Linen ditto - - - - 2 2 0 14th. EA - - . _ - . so 0 0 - . _ _ .4tn. This, with the addittion of 41. lofted - until the 22d, and then— Oa. 2%,—Caet Lso o o To this was added a mad( charge by Mr. Hart, in the true Jewifh ftyle, that was to fay the worft of it, for he fhould be lorry to fay any thing to the prejudice of the beft. The charge which Mr. Hart made was, to his own commiflion, 51.35. Now, to be Pure, this was model to charge a tailor this fum, by the defendant at Portfmouth, for receiving his own money. In a word, this defendant, after Rating in a letter of his own hand writing, that there was no money paid to this failor but 61. 95. and that he had received about 2501. as would appear by the evidence of his agent in town, there could be no doubt about the verdia. Mr. Glass faid, he could prove every word of this, for, as had been faid on a former occafion, he opened the circumfiances of this cafe with the veracity of a witnefs. On application to the defendant for a fettlement of thefe accounts, confcious of what he owed, but relying on the difficulty which might attend the proof of the Plaintiff's cafe, he a(ked, " What he would take Why," faid the Plaintiff," to get rid of you altogether, t501."—" I will confi der of it," laid the defendant, not fo much as fay ing, the fum is not due.—So much for the inte grity of paying 281. into Court. It then appeared in evidence that the defendant had fent letters to the plaintiff at Greenock, pre cifely as opened by Mr. Glees, which were read, and alto that he received, on account of Alexan der Brown, various lams of money on account of prizes, to the amount, in all of about 2501. and, therefore, the balance due to the Plaintiff (after taking the money out of Court, kc.) as admini firator of the deceafed Sailor, was 2241. Mr. GALROW, for the Defendant, faid, there was no perfon in that Court who would be more fatisfied than he fhould be that the Plaintiff fhould, have a Verdi& for every. (killing that was due so him, provided the cafe was clearly made out again% the Defendant, who was his client • but it was the chartiaerillic of the laws of this Country to have no regard for perfons, but have the fame meafere ' of jußice for the very worft as for the very belt of men. He had watched the proof, and found it was. fathifaitory in this cafe again( his Client, and thesi his linty soled ; tulle's his Lordlisip fhoiald _ __J 1111311 C 111 of invel wbethei Sailor t el embe ly prize looney co d ever belong to this to Cum is th laid he aci- thing by way Of OxhininiOn for the trouble he had, in the Wines. Lord Ett.vinoßcrucin• facia, he would advife the defendant not to prefs that point, becaufe if they did, he (hould fubmit to the Jury the propriety of allowing intereft on this money ever fince it had , been in his hands.—Verdid for the plaintiff—Da , mages 2241.• OLD BAILEi. Yefterday the Seffions commenced before the Right Hon. CHARLES PRICE, Lord Mayor, Mr. juitice GROSE, Mr. Baron GRAHAM, Mr. RECOIL. DER, &c. when fifteen prifoners were tried, three- of whom were capitally convieted, viz. Martha Smith, for uttering a bad {haling, know. ing it to be counterfeited. The circumftances, as dirclofed in evidence, were few and tlmple. The prifoner had, it appeared, gone to the (hop of a Mr. Cooper, where the purchafed feveral trilling articles, and prefented the (billing in queftion in payment. It was inflantly difcovered to be a co ;nterfeit, and the prifoner being rather a fufpi cious looking perfon, it was refolved that her per fon thould be fearched. This was done according. ly, and feven other pieces of a fimilar defcription were found in her poffeffion. This evidence of guilt was overwhelming, and the unhappy wretch did not offer any defence. On a former occafion the was found guilty . of the fame offence, but the had the advantage of her Clergy, and the punith !pent of death was commuted for a punithment of an arbitrary nature. On this occa fi on the has for feited her life to her obitinate attachment to fo frequent and fo infamous a praelice. It is much to be lamented that in thiS particular the morals, particularly of the lower orders, are more lax than on almoil any other fubjetl. Charles Burn and Thomas White, for affaulting John Eater on the 21ft of November laft, putting him in fear of his life, and robbing him of a fin'. ling, a tobacco box, and other articles, his proel6 - t y. The profecutor Rated, that he had.been drink ing on the day when the robbery took place, at a public houfe in the neighbourhoodof Whitechapel, with a party of friends. Soon after he left them, for the purpofe of returning home, ht was met by ' the two prifoners, with whom he entere d into ,con• verfation. As they walked along together, they became very gracious, and agreed to adjourn to another public houfe in Red Lion-ftreet. There they facrificed very freely to Bacchus, and did not ceafe their libations till the profecutor was completely intoxicated. In Lemon-ftreet they patted, and the profecutor thought that they were going to their refpetftive places of abode. In this, however, he found himfelf miftaken, for as he was turning the corner of a court the prifoner Burn rufhed on him, and knocked him down, while White thruft a handkerchief into his mouth to prevent him from giving the alarm. In this fituation they rifled him of the articles fpecified in the indittment. The prifoners Were very foon after fecured, but the booty was fo trifling that it was impoffible to identify it with certainty. The defence of the prifoners did noto beyond a mere denial, to which, of courfe , the Jury could pay no kind of attention. After mature delibera tion they brought in a verdict, finding the prifo ners Guilty, but hrongly recommending them to mercy. The ground of the recommendation was the intoxication of the profecutor, and the circum !lance that the prifoners had not been guilty of any particular violence. • Mr. Baron GRAHAM, who tried the prifoners, allured the jury that their recommendation thould be attended to. Six were convi&ed of felony, viz. H. Michael, for healing a filk handkerchief, the property of W. M. Evans. W. Draper, for healing a looking glafs, the pro perty of Elizabeth Weft Anne Blake, for healing a linen gown and other articles, the property of Ann Fres. G. Savage, for healing a dozen ink pots, the property of J. Williams and others. Goodge, for healing 201 b. weight of leaden (hot, the property of Meirrs. Addis and Co. BlGAMY.—lrilliam George Jones was tried upon an indietment for the crime of bigamy, committed by marrying Frances Maria Drought, in the church of Paddington, on the 2d of 06tober lag, while his lawful wife, Penelope Jones (formerly Bender) was hill alive. Richard Halloway, Clerk of the pariffi of St. Lawrence, Jewry, related in evidence, that he wit neffed the marriage of the prifoner on the 15th of July 1792, to Penelope Bender, fpinfter, the daughter of a refpettable tradefman refuting in Coleman -greet. He produced the record of their marriage, the authenticity of which was eftablith ed by Abe fignatures of Dr. Lucas, who performed the ceremony, and of Mr. Halloway himfelf. Mrs. Frances Maria Drought, the mother of Mifs Drought, related, that the prifoner at the 1 bar was introduced to her at Chelfea, in the month of July latt, as the honourable lover of her daugh ter. He fignified his profpeets of happinefs to ref on the probability of his obtaining the hand of Mifs Drought in marriage. He earnaly entreated the content of Mrs. D. to their immediate union. She did not abfolutely refuge her confent ; but de clined to give an explicit anfwer till the should have confulted a few of her friends. Her daugh ter's attachment to the prifoner appeared to cor retliond warmly to that which he profeffed for her.' Mrs. Drought, therefore, upon the advice of Ma- I jor and Mrs. Armilrong. and others of her confi dential friends, contented in a few weeks to tbeir marriage. On the very eve of the marriage, Mrs. Drought, upon enquiry, found that Jones, the prifonti, expelted to earn by his bu fi nefs, as a broth-maker, not more than 1501. a year. Mrs. Drought and her friends ) therefore, agreed to of fig him and her daughter upon their union, -with an annual allowance of t 001. more. On the ad of Oaober, after every difficulty had been fur mounted, every enquiry made, and every conic nience adjufted. the marriage was celebrated be tween the prifoner and Mifs Drought at the parith Church of Paddington, by the Rev. Mr. Pickering, the prefence of hiss. Drought and Mrs. Major ___ A C....*.jestithid 1110 t Mad from the day of this marriage, when Mrs. broliglit 1 anti ,;,t• friends received certain informatio n that j„ ne, h. : a former wife yet alive. It became the defire of thole who were concerned f m . welfare of Mils Drought, to detach her fro m Man who had betrayed her fit badly. Jo nes, n.) ; content with his firft crime, haratfA Mrs. and her friends with virus and letters, cioufly claiming Mifs D. as his wife. Mifs herfelf, entertaining an affedion the moil ;; ;1 , cere and ardent for the prifoner, was afiliacd by the difcovery of his perfidy and impoilure, tvca to the entire alienation of her mi n d, I t b ecame netelfary to commit her to the ca re o f a keep er o f a private madlionfe, for the receptio n or perfi,s in that unhappy fituation. Even a f ter t hi s eveilt the prifoner had the inhumanity to fr'll ow h er t : the place of her retreat, where he, with ontra7e again demanded her as his wife. Thus harit(lli her friends had no choice 'but to commence ti prefent profecution. • The Rev. Mr. Pickeriag produced the record s of the church of Paddington, in which the mu.. ii.tge of the prifoner with Mils Drought was re. pittered. lie law the prifoner at lac bar fr:r th e tint time, on the id of o‘clOher lad, when he per formed the niarriage ceremony hettl; ee n - i l i m ap d the lady in Paddington church. Mils Drought lie had leen on a former day, on which be had corn . e to meet Jones, f or t h e purport: of their matriata at the fame church, but had been difelppointa his attendance. o o r a t p b p e re P l t i ° ei l l c e n d i fl'hne 'r pr a ' t a c4 c h o e n r ft7;b i t l n e r ‘ li v Ne T w h h e ou ° l n ? e l loner at a piiblic-houfe, in. jewry.ltre-t Al ' ugate, in the city. The prifoner,, mielifted by Counfel, labourer hard tb make good his defence. By crnfs quel tun‘ to Mr. Halloway, he endeavoured, but umucett% fully, to dract , out evidence that he was unde r at tbs time of his firil marriage. He acknow6t.,'"," that misfortunes in bufinefs had thrown hi m riiit 18 months confinement in thear l 11el 11 ea pri..l l , He becattle there intimately connected with Mrs. Drought, who came into confinement for a debt to a mantra-maker. She was for a month his fel; low prifoner. He joined her in a not e to t h, mantra maker, upon the fecurity of which ih was !cleated. He was, within a month after, f. at liberty himfelf. Mifs D.'s infinuations and fol citations extorted from hint, when he was fear, in his right fenfes, an unwary promife of ir..o riage. He wilhed to recede from it, and told h that he had already a wife. * Her another an friends were, by his account, inf,Wited. of his mat riagc, as well as Mils Dronglif berfelf. haunted and threatenel, and fOlicited, till be w drawn, exceedingly againft his rs-1;1, into the fern; folemn engagement. It was an engagement, at of which he has thought tl e . leis ferioufly, as Mi Drought had before been notorioutiv.a woman the town. His defence was made with very inch cent forwardnefs acrd prefumption. The Jul found him—Guilty. And fix were acquitted. , gobs Blake and his wife, and a woman of the name of Mary Robiebn, were tried for burglariouf ly entering the dwelling houfe of—.,- Fletcher, of Btthaal Green, on the tSth of September, and (leafing therefrom fume plate, a cloak belonging . to Mrs. Fletcher, and feveral other articles, his . property. The profecutor and his wife fully proved that tile houfe was properly fecured on the morning wiun the burglary was committed, and both lwo:e to the loci of the articles fpeci•fied in the indintlient,. feveral of which, found in Blake's lodginzs, were identified in Court. The officers employed in fearching the houftrr the prifoner Robinfon, with whom Blake 1 fea t proved that Blake claimed thefe articles as pfo perty, but this Blake denied in his defence: - thing in the evidence brought home guilt tp, Blake's wife, or to the prifoner Robinfon. Muck ground of fufpicion there ceitainly was again Blake, inafmuch as the articles fpecified in the in. di&ment were found in his lodgings. As there was, however, flu a poflibility that he might cr.l3 - have been the receiver, and not aaually f;uatr at the burglary, the Jury found all the three prai ners Not Guilty. Blake was tried on another inditirernt; for ilea, ing 181 b. of mutton, the property of john Cooper. On this charge he was a,lfil aenlkilAL. "AIR'II - IS. On the 29th ult. at. her father's houre, FaHvg !Wave., :be Right Hon. Lady Annig.‘l4.Maeleodrof a fon. - 4 .- • " • Is4ARRIED. • Yetterday, at the Parifh- Church of SI. Ceorge4Se Qp . een-fquare, the ReV. GeOrge Francis Hewing, of Chichefler, to Mifs Elizabeth Payne; eldcft diSghter of John Payne,Lici• ofilcasniein;'Hahst: •= •• . • • On the 22d ult. at Ayr, Dr. James CP IT )11, Orr!:715111:tt Liverpool„ • .Mifs Anna M'Nelght, dauzhter of l'Y Al•Ncight, Efq. of 13;rns. Friday laft, at Portfmouth, Mr. William Ficyletr:'l•;- afth: Bland of St. Crcix, to Mifs H. St. Barhe, of Ei.,cle"e.,.th. • t. On the 17th ult. at Liverpool, Unchho!:ii. 1.12 V's Fletcher, daughter of Mr. Jaen) Fletchoct. DIED. : - Saturday left, at Tottenham., Mrs. M u nro, relia of t1;c1:.. 2 Robert Duncan Munro. Efq. of Madras. Tuefday evening, at his honk in Boar's-he-IA -court, Gra:c ehurch-ftreet, Mr. John Lightfoot , Stock Erolitr, af:2r a ile painful diners. . . On the cub July laft, on the mit of Africa. C..ptain Jail BonfA, of the chip Merfey, in the 26th year of :::-; Friday morning laft, :it his houfe , Low!.in, Mr. \\" 1 :11:J:ct , • aged 62, jcrquer in hi 11,1ajeity's Cultoitis, i.iv , rrol. upwards Aosantmetiied On the t 7th ult. fuddenly, aged Bz. the h, V. 1:i t u;:el 1-111!!n ofia Stockbridge,t i t x h ty u i y t. e a ll‘, r oi s hr c .n u ti r n a eu t n e crky o e f ti t ; h a, r t i._; * f l :l o o. .: : o r f:k .ft ral , ;:y, I.X: car:. teacher of the FrenchMrp Danie l language 1 ge in Liverpool Friday, at her houfe in Lancaller, at an advanced :ote. 'NT!' 1.11, relict o f M r . William Bell, of Dumfriei. S:te bor. a I 4'7 a native of 5..v?...te11:.., and fevere inners with the greateft fortitude and truly Chttt:r rel Sa ignation. me slay and place, aged 45, Thomas Ingilhy, Fig. of AL:fl, wick, near Settle, Yorkiltire. HI OH WATER Al LONDON BR IDG-17: 7 1 6 - - - MORR' i"c Morning • • Afternoon ' --- ---; - - LONDON: Printed for thc Proprietors, by JOHN D.INIC:: (of Maiden-lane, Covetst-Garden) at the Si AR P R I' ! , :il Orrice, No. 1, Carey - ftrect ; a nd publithed Ir• I.' e . KF.NT,of Canterbury - place , Lamb eth ) atN o. I : Carry •!..• sittd at the 9Tna-O7 mit, Temple-Bar. •to Iv hi,..h 0•%•... • "•,! . ' /. 46010sualtaltiostar thejsur *a arc rive:N(llo le ' ---- _ .ii :t • ). 141,1 1 of 1,3 3.04 t ( , h P Teel P 4 ds 'Th 11 it, re. Devi of tb he er. bog nd he Dl ee - 1 1 1 in staff alto ras Sri. Silt as tte, o Tl tioni red • •11 le ns Di link tti. ./Eol ige Vol • A rtoA sti cliOf its. let day' eon the at 11)i . -- ft . At ace dt 11::r and . two nat. A 'hey pone was elm :int 3- go& all t' mid eAle Mi f 3 Or n of year . n de- It Jury C pl Atte Calk AttC WC I Ati vii H xi as