Star. — London, England, 1802-07-14 00:00:00

or- I 11 L4II/ Di TEL 1,./GZNCE. CAFIZMARTIWN SUMMLA CIRCUIT. —11 . ...t1nt May, .%tif.litt. l'aermart:An. 3...•rn:,r o t,tt It, Way, Atiull ;.1, at :l vcr(oidwct2 Ctrtlizanlihin:—Monday, Strt:MINS 6, at CAr.lit.tn. COURT OF KlNG's BENCH. JI11.1" 12. DELANEY, ESQ, T. JONES. This was an a c t i on for a Libel, and is very im portant to the public, on various accounts, as ap peared from feveral parts of it, as they apply to the conthia of individuals towards each other; the right they have to make inquiries, &c. and parti cularly on account of the opinion deliverett by my Lord Chiet Ju:licc. Mr. Fats KIS r. opened the cafe on the part of the plaintiff. The defendant was a Ilariorer, living in D-k•_-fireet, St. James's -square. Mr. Delaney was a Gentleman of fortune, a man of him our and of liation, being the fon of a Gentleman of large pro perty in the WeR Indies, and altli an officer in the North Lincoln Militia, and as inch, jealous of his character, and hound to repel any attack that was made upon it, or the honourable perfons with whom he was conneaed would decline his future ac quaintance. He, therefore, complained ola Libel, which the defendant Mr. Jones had publilhed, re fleaing upon that character. This Gentleman was married to his prefent wife on the mth of Atigufl, 1799, from whom he had been Come time feparat• cd, in en; f. of a difference which fublified between them : they feparated upon terms that wete perfealy honourable to Mr. Del..ney, for he gave up to this Lady the whole of her fortune, re ferving to hirofell no advantage whatever. He went to the Well Indies to fettle his affairs there with his father, who was a planter. He camehome and it was then the feparation took place. Some time alter this, application, by means of Mrs. De laney, was made to the defendant, IVIr. Jones, who had a painter of the name of Yarrel, to publish an advertifenient,u hich was now complained of, intr. port:og to he an inquiry, on the part of the wife, concerning her hufband. He did not complain of this as an inquiry on the part of the wife, merely as fah, the had a right to make an inquiry. She had even a right to counsel with others on affairs that were interelling to her and her hufband ; but neither her, nor her Agent, had any right to flan der the raintiff, under pretence of making an in quiry. This lady reprefented that her hufband was married before, to a perfon who was living at the time of his fecund marriage with her—for which reprelentation there was not the leaft colour or foundation. She, however, for what reafon was ben known to herfelf, did make that reprefentation, and expreffed a delve to effahlifh that fitet, and to profccute her hufband for a felony—which bigamy is now declared by law to be. In confequence of which, the Defendant took upon himfelf, without any knowledge of the fail, and with perfea know ledge of the tendency of the Advertifement—al. though ignorance of it would be no excufe, to pub lifh this Libel in the Morning Poff, with a view of procering Evidence of Mr. Delaney's former mar riage. 'The Advcrtifement was this : « TEN GUINEAS REWARD. " Whereas, by a letter lately received from the Well Indies, an event is Rated to be announced by a NewfPaper, that can only be invelligated by thelc means :—This is to requeff, that if any Printer, or any other Perfon, can affert, that J. Delaney, FRI. of St. Kitt's, fince raiding at Cork, and bite Lieu tenant of the North Lincoln Militia, was married previous to nine o'clock on the toth of Augufl, 1799, they will give notice to Mclfrs. Yarrell and Jones, No. 14, Duke-Itreet, St. James'aquare." Now, Mr. ERSKINE fait!, the Plaintiff was an Officer, and a Man of Honour ; he was jullly jea lous of it ; and finding that this libel was likely to have a great effect on the opinion of thole with whom he was accultomed to live in happinef, lie publiflied another, to do away the circa of this publication, by offering hiniftif a reward of goof. to any one that would prove it, &c. He might have brought his Action agaiiilt the Printer and Publither of this Paper, but for that he had no de- Ere—for he difeovered that die Author, or the perfon who brought the Advertifemeat to the Pa per, was the Defendant, Mr. Jones. The Plaintiff was only dcfirous that the Defendant would put an end to the calumny, by Rating how he came to be employed to publilh it by the defile of Mrs. Delaney, and by retry ling it, and wrote to the Defendant a letter to that ace., upon which the Pia:ntitideclared he would be fatisfied ; to which Cie Defendant thought fit to return no anfwer, and ft here the parties came to hale this matter, the Defendant not fo much as admitting the Plaintiff's marriage, but putting him to she trouble and ex pence of bringing a Witnefs all the way from Li verpool to prove that fad. It would be wafting time before the Jury to enter farther into this bu. tines. This was an imputa,tion of a crime to this Gentleman, and the Defendant could have no ex. cure for it ; he could not be jußified by Lying that this was a publication which came from the anxi ety of Mrs. Delaney, and he did it to oblige her —he might fay, perhaps, " I really did not know any thing of the tendency of this Paragraph, al. though it appears to be lo fingular as that of offer- ' ing a reward for difcovering whether a man had been married or not before nine o'clock on the Loth of Augulf t 799—this would be no anfwer to the law in this Cafe, for every man was bound to know what the tendency was of all his anions ; and if it were otherwife, we fhould find that men might be ruined by thole who pleaded ignorance of what they did as an excufe for doing h."— Having illuftrated this propofition by familiar in fiances, he obterved that the Plaintiff in this cafe, did not reek large damages, but lie brought it for the vindication of his character, to thew that there was no foundation whatever for this calumny. The marriage was then pi •-ved to have taken place in the parifh of St. Nicholas, at Liverpool, on the loth of Auguil 1799, between nine and ten in the morning. It was between JamcsDclaney, Efq. and Eiiz. Welton, widow. Mr. Charles Foreman produced the Paper of the Morning Poft of the rad of January 11302.-He •. - e ......... ~ . ..,91 ec.—..--c-uk.- lisgi. • it came from the bottle of Mr. Jones : he had Tome dilliculty about infertin?, it, apprehending that the tendency of it might bc ; he had a con ye, ion with the Defendant, Mr. Jones, upon the lubjea, who aiked him why he did not int - en the Advertifement ? The witnefs told him, he appre hended it might be deemed libellous. He that he did not fee any realon it thcnild not be in ferted, particularly as the 'Morning Herald had in serted it—upon which thc witnels contented to in fen it. Mr. Jones was what was called a Newfman, and as foci, frequently brought Advertifements from pet lons whom he ferved with Newfpapers, to lave them trouble, &c. Mr. William Fletcher (hid, he was a friend of the Plaintiff. He law the Advei ticement in the paper, and he conceived it to allude to the Plain tiff from his knowledge of the Plaintiff and his concerns before—he thought, when he faw this Advertifement, that it imputed to the Plaintiff the crime of Bigamy. Lord ELLENBOROCCH laid, " there can be no doubt that this Paragraph (hews an anxiety in the mind of Mrs. Delaney to know whether the was a legal wife or a conctibine, and that if this was a bona fide proceeding in her behalf, it can be no libel." Mr. ERSKINE fail, that if it was a falfe Para. gral It, whatever might be the intention of the wife, that would be no defence for this Defendant againft this action, for that, whatever might be the purpofe of the svil; the injury was the fame to the Plaintiff. Lord ELLENROKOLIGH. I am quite of ano ther opinion. —The wife had a tight to learn whe ther the was legally married, or whether (he was a mere flrumpct ?" and on fuels an occallon, he Paid, he thould think that a great deal of allow ance ought to be made in the profecution of fuch an inquiry, before a publication by way of Adver tifement thould be deemed a libel. The witnefs then proceeded to fay, he did not precifely know the date of Mr. Delaney's mar riage. He never heard of his being formally mar ried : he knew that Mr. and Mrs. Delaney were then under articles of feparation. Thefe at titles of fepanaion wire in the polleffion of the witnefs, therefore he had means of particular information upon this fubjeft. Mr. Chellerman Paid, be faw the advertifement in queltion in the newfpaper. He laid, he knew Mr. Fletcher perfealy well. On reading the ad vertilement in the company of Mr. Fletcher, the witnefs laid, " Here is a man advertifed and de ferihed who has married two wives ; why don't they hang the rafcal i" This he mulct-flood to apply to the cafe of the Plaintiff. Mr. PARK addretfed the Jury on behalf of the Defendant. He Itid, that when he came into Court, he had really no idea that this cattle would have been tried ; and he contended that it was one of the cleareß cafes in favour of the Defendant, that ever came before a Court of Jußice. Indeed, he was not lure, in point of Ilrielnefs, whether he ought not to afk my Lord to nonluit the Plaintiff, but which he fhould not, fince his Lordfhip might tell him, it fhould go to the Jury to fay," whether the intention in this cafe was Inch as it was Rated in the Declaration i" Now, Mr. Park laid, that he, on the part of the Defendant, maintained this ' propofition, " That this Advertifement, of itfelf, was not a Libel on any human being. That if it I contained any libel whatever, that quality mull be borrowed from the inuendos that were attached to it by the Declaration.—He maintained alfo, that if a Publication was of itfelf no Libel, it could never be made a Libel by the inuendo put upon it by a Plaintiff in his Declaration. That it was not enough that one or two individuals thought it imputed Bigamy to the Plaintiff. Thefe indivi duals might be induced to apply it to the cafe of the Plaintiff, from their previous knowledge of his eircumflances, but that meaning mull appear to attach to it by the Jury, judging on the Cafe be• fore them. Now, be contended, it was impoffible that the Jury could put this meaning on this Ad vertilement. It imputed nothing to the Plaintiff that was not eonfitlent with the moll pet fed inno cence. It inquired, whether any body knew of 1. his marriage before nine o'clock on the Loth of Au ? Tilt 1799? How did this impute Bigamy to the ' Plaintiff ? Might it not happen that fomething Mould depend upon the birth of a child before or after that hour ? Might not a legacy be made to depend upon that fad, as it fhould be afcertained one way or the other ? In a wort: there were a thouland points to which this Advertifement might be made to apply, without need:46ly imputing Bigamy or any other crime to the Plaintiff, the confequcnce of which mull be, that the Defendant fhould hay& a verdid. He really thought it un neceffary for him to call any Witneffes, for that his Client was entitled to a Verdid upon the evi dence given on behalf of the Plaintiff ; but as he was not entitled, in this Rage of the Cafe, to afic the Jury what they thought of it, he fhould call a Withers to flew that the Defendant carried this Adveitiftment to the Office of this Newfpaper by the &fire of Mrs. Delaney, who informed him that fhe was advertifing this matter to afcertain the fad which was lo interelling to her, and that ! the employed an agent of the name of A/mot for this pm-pole. Upon all thefe grounds he maintained that the Defendant would be entitled to a Verdict. It then appeared, by the evidence of Mr.Almot, that he was employed by Mrs. Delaney for the pur pofe of getting this Advertifement inferted in the Newfpapers, and that he employed Mr. Jones, the Defendant, to take it to the Office, and to pay for its publication, but that the Defendant was not at all informed by him of the objea of that adver. tifement. Mr. EASICINE contended in reply, that in this cafe the defendant was anfwerable for this publi cation as a libel, upon all the rules which had hi. thcrto governed the adminiftration of the law upon that fubje&, and upon which prifons had been filled from time to time, with offenders of that clafs, &c. &c. Lord ELLENIOROUGH— , g Gentlemen of the Jury, this is an aaion for a libel, in which the plaintiff, Mr. Delaney, complains, and calls for damages againa a fiationer of the name of Jones ; a flattener, or a vender of Newfrapers, as he has which appeared in the Morning Poll of the 22d of January lea, which is as follows—[Here his Lore.- flip read the advertikment].—Now it is contended on the part of the e laintiff, that this advertifement 'neceilluily applies to him, and you muit be of that opinion hetore you can find a verdid for the plain. tiff, and that from the information which you have from the witneffes, as well as from what appears upon the face of the advertifement Melt*. Before you can fay that the plaintiff is entitled to your verdict, you muff be fatisficd that this advertife ment imputes to him a crime in this cafe, the crime of bigamy, that is, that he was married to another , woman, who was living at the time this marriage took place, on the loth of Augult 1;99. There are different meanings given to this paper, but unlefs you fee it imputes to the plaintiff; neceffa oily, the crime of bigamy, your verdid will be, becaufe it ought to be, for the defendant ; but it you think it was meant, and does mean, to infi nuate that fad to the prejudice of the plaintiff, then it would be neceffary for you to lee, whether any, and if any, what exude can be received for him in point of law, for his having been intlru , mental in this publication ? You have heard the way in which the Learned Counfel for the defen dant draws inferences from it. He fags it does not neceffarily imply bigamy in the plaintiff, but that it is, and may be taken in many cafes to be, confiffent with innocence in the plaintiff, and, therefore, no libel upon him. That it might he an important inquiry, with a view to afcertain the legitimacy of a child, or that a legacy might have depended upon that fact; and that many other cafes might have happened in which the afcertain. ment of that fad might become important. It will be for you to fay, whether in the terms of this advertifement, and under all the circumflances which attended it, the publication neceffarily im putes bigamy to the plaintiff, and was publilhed for the purpofe of fattening upon him that impu tation ; or whether it was publiffied in purfuit of a lawful purpofe, namely, that of afcertaining whether this lady was legally married or not ? Now, upon this fubjcit, I than lay down the law as it appears to me to have a bearing upon it.— " If, in the courfe of a necelfary inquiry into any fubjed, things appear, which publifhed by them fdves detachedly and without caufe, would be a libel upon any individual who is the object of that inquiry—if any thing Mould appear to trench on the charader of the perfon principally interefted in that inquiry, yet it (hall not be a libel, provided it arifes out of filch inquiry; and if this comes out, in this purfuit of neceffary information, it will make no difference whether it be by wordsfpoken or in writing, provided the inquiry be bona fide, and innituted for a legitimate purpofe—in all fuch purfuits panics (hall be proteded by the law. If ire) to elk the character of a fervant, and in receiv mg that charader words occur which trench upon that charader, I might a& either of you, whether you think a perfon would he guilty of a libel who fhould fay what he knew of that fervant, although 'that might communicate a fad which might de (troy the character of that fervant ? Suppofe he had I ebbed you, or that he was guilty of a fraud, and that you fay fo—or that you fhould fay that which you believe to be confiltent with truth, and upon further inquiry it fhould turn out that there was fome millake in the cafe, but that you acted bona . fide, is it for the convenience of mankind ycu fhould be deemed a flanderer ? This may apply to the cafe of merchants in their dealings abroad as wellias at home. If, therefore, this was an inquiry fet on foot by a wife anxious to know whether the was a legal wife, or was to be coafidered as a con cubine, I am of opinion that fuch wife, and all agents employed by fuch wife for that purpole, purfuing it bona Pe, arc proteded in that purfuit, in point of law, but then is iacumbent on the party to thew that he acted fairly in the purfuit of that object. It is therefore neceffary that it appear to you, Jones acted in furtherance of that object, and that is a fubjcet on which you will ufe yourown judgment upon the cafe, for all he knew you know by the evidence which has been laid before you, and the whole quellion is, Whether he meant to purfite a fair inquiry, or infinuate a crime againft the plaintiff? It will be for you to fay, whether the inquiry propofed by this advertifement, was or was not intended to be a legitimate inquiry ? If you find it was, you will not fix a man with a libel for purfuing it, merely becaufe it may turn out that the fufpicion was ill founded. But fuppofe you think this advertifement Itrong, you will then have to fay, whether you think the defendant Jones has the protedion of a perfon proceeding lona pe in a necelfary inquiry ? Now, upon that, it is obferva ble' that Jones did not know Mr. Delaney. He did not know that this seas an inquiry fet on foot to Ii ttisfy the anxiety c•fa wife. He knew nothing of her, but carried the advertifement to the office.— And it appears, that Jones is cautioned by the clerk, at the office of that morning paper, for the clerk told him, the reafon why it was not inferted was, that he thought it libellous ; and certainly the advertifement is capable of a double meaning at lealt. There is nothing of malice in the thing itfelf, but if wrong, and libellous, the law will imply malice fror • the aft, for whenever any thing is done which the law forbids, the law implies malice in the doing of it. You will therefore con• fider whether it was meant to impute the crime of bigamy ? if fit, you will find your verdid for the plaintiff, and in that cafe you will confider what circumltances there are in mitigation of damages. If you think it was not intended to impute bigamy to the plaintiff, in that cafe, the defendant will he entitled to a verdict. If, I fay, you think it was intended to impute bigamy to the plaintiff, and that the objed was not a fair inquiry, you will, in that cafe, find a verdid for the plaintiff, and will alfo proportion the damages to the injury. But, unlefs you think it is to be fairly concluded, by any indifferent perfon reading the paper, that the plaintiff was there accufed of bigamy, and that it was equal to an affertion that the plaintiff, at nine o'clock on the loth of Auguft, 1799, had a wite living, when •he married this lady; and that this advertifement was not publifhed for the purpofe of enquiring whether the cafe was fo or not, the '--• will be entitled to your verdid."—Vet- SPORTIWG LVTFLLIC,CA'CE, NEWMARKET Jrl.l' MEE'rlY—,, TU :rl/ AY, JULY 13. Fifty Pounds by Subccriinic:n, : - ;:r 3 yr cl,is cr,r7i'h ing 6 91b. 4-yr oh!, Slt. s.yr (,!„:.. 6-yr old, Ba. t 21b. and , J :t. 1). 1. Sir C. 411minfriN l'r. 1. Jura, 3-) r 041 D.oi Griffon', b. m. horn' , } 6-yrs old - 2 Nlr. J..mes I:dward...'s cit. If. , old . 3 Mr. ch. L. C.of.abt:ty, 6. (.1.1 - 4 Four tot agil Sir C. Bon'onry's ji:li.z.-2 to agll the 1). (,I(;rafton', b.rn. .tiby Ltis-61 0 Edward's di. h. Sl.tpLolg. F,•on: LONDON' CAZET la ; i;. BANKRUPT S. John Parn:x, of Holt. Norfolk, hookli.li , , , r, deal,T and chaprnr.”, to litirrenckr July 17, 21, and eleven, at :Le Feather, in I bolt. /It:or:ley, Mr. 11 , :e..itt, at John Formby, late of Newltal,h, w:tl,in I.:ithorn, Lancehir e , blaekfmith, dealer and clizint,n, (1111 W a prifoner it, L.,nca fler L'altic) July 21, at five, fuly 22., and At;ult 2J.21 ( - keen, at the Luck in the Vie.. Wigan. Attorni, Wirusd, Bar, hie% Buildings, liolbotn, London; or Mr. Dew y NVi ‘ ;an. Wiliiann Longfellow, of Ilorfeforth, parillt of Guifeley, York clothier, dealer and (ha; man, July 29, 50, and Asia 24, at ekTell, at the Bull and Mouth hat, Leeds, YorkiL.. Attornict, Nlr. Syk:s, New inn, I.4:::c‘ti, or Nlr. Lee, I, jamei Sunderland, of Samlal! Magna,Noaildre, corn-dwkr, dealer and chapman, Attruft IR, 19, and 24, at eleven, At the Black Bull Inn,'A'akciield. Atturnics, Mr. Richard Batts -4, in Chancery-lane, London ; or Mr. Scholeficid, in liurbta:, Yorkthire. Colin Forbes, of Chicht (ter-Rents, Chancery lane, Midc!lcfer, baker, July 20, 24, at eleven, and Auguft 24, at ten, at Ged hull. Attorney Mr. White, Millman-tin:et Bedford-row. Thomas Lambert, late of Rift Grinned, (hut now a prinnier in Horlham gaol,) Suffcx, ittopkeeper, dealer and chap.n.in, July 20, at one, July 27, and Awn. 24, at fiv,:, at Guildhall. London. Attorney, Mr : Thomas Phipps, Philpot-lane. DIVIDENDS. a a July 24. Eleanor Child, of South-itrect, St. i.uke, Middlefea dealer and chapwoman, at twelve, at tioildhalL July :7. William Ward, of zr.:cer, dealer and chapman, at eleven, at the Public Office, Eirmirgham. July 27. William Callon, or Pitifbigry-fv.trc, London, letter. founder, at five, at Guildhall. July 27. Thomas Taylor,ofliirmingliana, draper, dealer aid . . ehapntan, at ten, at Guildhall, 1,o:1.1w). July 27. Philip Turner, Lae .r Jewry-ftrcct, London, wine. merchant, at tcn, at Guildhall. MARRTED: Saturday laft, at Alderfgate Church, Rohm: Stewart, Erg. of Ciapton, to Nlifs Bound, of Chart.sr-houfe-fguare. Mr. Win. Irwin, of 111.1;:twatcr T wn, tiereliant. to Mils Walker, daughter of Thonia. of D.inDl Summers, Ely. of Abbey-art:et, Dublin, to Mics Ann Darlington, of Bithop-ttreet. Philip Hendrick, of Ras, Efq. to Mifi Eliza Jedge, of Muorc-arcet, 1);ED. On the rft init. Richard Bleumire, Erg. of Pcnrith, Cpm;)cr. land. in the 99th year of i is age, father of Mr. Elcantirc, ;Ix Police M..i s iffrate, of Hatton-Garden. At ilarry's town, county of Rol - con:mon, in the 83d year of her age, Mrs. Young, reliet of the lat..! John Young, . . HIGH WATER AT LONDON BRIDGE TO-MORROW Morning 8 Dlintlt 24 a.ter 2 Afternoon 35 minutes after IMPORTANT ADVICE 10 FAMILILS. COPY ()fa Letter from the Rev. Mr. CIIARLtS PRESTON, Redor of Balmer, Malton, Yorkthire, to CHINO and BUTLER, Cheakfide.—Gcnticonen, upon teeing fo nutty refpcdable fig atures to the Curer performed by your CHING's PATEN r WORM (parti cularly that of the Lord Either. of Carlifle, with whom I have the honour of being acquainted), induced me to try them upon a fon of mine, who had been very ill a long time, ana received little or no benefit from any Medicine he trick. 1 Mid: it a duty due to you, and a national advantage, to fay, that hr was pettedly reamed to good health, by only caking three doles of your incomparable Medicine, which I heve ttrorgly recom inends4 to many of my friend:. for them Ives and ehilslran, and they have never failed of fucccfs I :tti, (tenthnom, Your humble Servant, Bulmer, WIT 7, I SM. CHARLES PRESTON. Sold, Witold:lle and Retail, at Ching and Baler's, Clic-g -lide; and Rctail by Van B.Tgcn, Elfinore ; Bull, Duydle, and Callwell, Dublin; Davis, Cork ; and by moil reflieciable Venders in the U.:ited Kingdom, in Boxes at st. half Boxes as. yd. and FatMly Boxes, tic: 80t,.., at One Gni ica tack. Wki Yrtdelii.m.ll Men of euitcattori a.. 1 ct fpotih!,ility deviate from the general fyitem by the L - ledlon of a peculiar Branch, the fan:Atoll o: long continues Need's Is the belt criterion of fuperinriv. Eight yt ar. have I deyot tat my practice to the exclisfive treat ment of . I . IIREE DISORDEitti, ant the furcehtful ratter tf my plan gi:e.s me additional ardour to oprafe as far a. I em Able the ravages of thole complaints which are the molt tiny ).tc ant in the caraltigue of human inlirmit ics. After initiation into every branch Al an Army Surgeon, I formed a wills at an early period of Practice to re(est,. individe- Ms from the ignorance of undulated Men, or the equally claw genius precipitancy of general Pradlitioners The THRF.E. DISORDERS, to the cu. eof which I have dd voted my attention, comprise every species of VhSNERF.AL INFECTION, whether cf a recent or lug ! All kinds of DEDII.I . I*Y, whether arifing from the ta . I v at • Schoolboys, or the indulgence of mature age, and lutlly that de rangement of the fyftem in Womm which is cißed BARREN NESS or STERILITY. Numerous di:eat - es are the result of ignorance or hafte in the treatment of a Couple Gonorrhea, and it not unft..-quentiv hap pens that the feeds of life are poifoned by the indairetion ui an unguarded hour. By a loprior method lath C OMriislltS are eafdy cured, and even where others have failed, I trui that may prefunte to offer a ra.Lcal rc-eflahliihnient Few, however, are the cafes of etovelieareti dare's i t the liforder compared with the cairnittous fituations of Mai,who from indulrence ina !..OLITA R Y VIC t, or Car ptevalt ut )4 al.- ties of a faffiionable Life, acquire that Bate of itch-n:1 wt.M is the unavoidable conceit:epee tf inch peruteion , ha! :ts. Where the unhappy (offerer broods over his .'yet Cart Cully contents his misfortune, it may be- some ethr:oLtitn to him to know, that altlincgh it he an °Nazi of doubt or minty with mho Praditioners, the removal of theft D. - CIENCIF.S by the gradual progress of Renovation is the n^ p.',-e -ment of toy experience. If the rites of narchusor Ver.to t ase begun to reilnce manly vigour, much anxiety swim he rrewntsa by an early coenteraction of this languid data , art it) theft o cafes no great difficulties will occur. But where this Deficiency lias for years es*,:t profs r: feverance is ittffirpenftbly regni lite. to revive if, It .inns of Life, and to rc •ar Unit:: the Conilttefio”. MARRIED WOMEN, who have bee heat tli'appnerce In their expeaatinns of a rantily, may Lc I.tiorc,l, that in tiG 3 instances fuck defects are entable by 11 , 1etlieal The SECRECY which is fo etfential to my titaiertalting.ttd the- Qualifications which I fare ptefumed to Bate, torn: the Balls Cli my Pretenfiot ot, andrn coincidence with funh t1414.11:1. !nation is given, that Mr B may be eitufultedpeittaffir (nr by letters incloting a (mall woe) at Ll 4 home, No. Arc" del-fircet, Strand, near Temple.-liar. There is en additional entrstic.: in Water-Arcot ad:cha• e and the name is on both the doors. M. B Montle- c" the If.rteal Volle i tts cf Surgeon. LONDON - Printed for the eroprictors by JOHN (of Camaby-ft at the STAN PNINIINt:-Ortlei ,:slml. Cory-greet; and pablifbed by LEVEL A.t..NT (or Cc' terbury-piece, Lanibeth), at No z, Carey-arcet, ant STAR-OW/CR, Temple-Bar ; to whkh Office all runavti - —„