Star. — London, England, 1820-01-20 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE. COURT OF CHANCERY, JANUARY 19. GOLDING nt:LLETT. This case related to the supposed illegitimacy of a child ; and the motion before his Lo-xlship was to set aside the vcrtl.ct. the Jury, who had, ten years ago, found a verdict in favour of the child, and to g.-ant a new issue. lire care was tried before the late Lord ELLENDORDUOII ; hut the Jury, in opposi tion to the charge oithat. Nohle and Learned Judge, gave a verdict for the leg,i:imacy of the chill. On the points of the case Co;msel were heard for two days, at very great len:;th ; after which his Lord,hip recapitulated Al the facts of the case, and ordered the motion to be dismissed with full co;ts.— His decided opinion wis in favour of the verdict of the Jul-y ; and he certainly could not too strongly reprobate th. 2 motive which could stimulate either of the parties to bring it forward now ; but in saying so, he meant theyarzy who wished for a ne•.v trial. — Motion rel'u,ett Al ith coits. TILE ATTORNEY GENERAL V. HAP-TLEY. The LORD CHANCELLOR intimated that he- had been prevented from looking over the voluminous depositions in this case, and that, therefore, it would not be in his power to give judgment in it till Sa• turday morning. THE MARQUIS TOWNSIIENI) V. ME IslsHor OF NORWICH AND OTHERS. This suit has been instituted for the purpose of determining in whom the right of presentation to the benefice of West Itaynam, in the Diocese of Nor wich, is vested. The advowson is claimed by three parties :—by the Marquis Townshend, as heir-at law of the late Marquis, in whom it was vested ; by Lord Charles Townshend, as Lord of the Manor of West Itaynam ; and by Lord John Townshend and Mr. Blake; the Trustees under the wilt of the late Marquis. There are also two cross bills, in which Lord John 'l'ownsbend, and the Trustees severally, are plaintifs. Tho' LORD CHANCELLOR left the Court at three o'clock, soon after the case had been opened. Farther hearing postponed to Tuesday next. VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COITIMJANCARY 19. ST. JOHN'S HOII'ITAL. THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL. F. •I'IHE MAYOR AND COR PORATION OF HCNTI`GDON. Some further discussion took place this morning, on the subject of this Charity, his floNoun having ex pressed a wish to have fuller information on sonic points, before the order was drawn op. Mr. Herten said, there was at present a Petition from Sir John Arundel helm e the Court, praying that he might be paid his costs in a suit which lie had conducted, on behalf of the Charity, against a Mr. Apreece, respecting the possession of some . lands be longing to the Charity. The relaters vete anxious to have that suit in their own hands, as they did not repose the same confidence in Sir John Arundel as the Corporation of Huntingdon seemed to do. The Vic E-CIIANCELLOR.—If Sir John Arundel comes here for costs, I shall certainly put the suit into your hands, but otherwise I cannot do it. Mr. BELL said, he was sorry, if the conducting of that suit was thought so easy a matter, that the Learne4 Gentleman, who had sat down, had not had the management of it. He (Mr. Bell) had been con cerned in it from the beginning, and he had no hesi tation in saying, that during trse whole course of his loug professional, life he had never met u ith any case more complicated and difficult, owing to the' want of recut-di, and proper evidence. Before any general allevertion of misconduct was made, the Learned Gentleman should point out some part ef the proceedings that had been improperly managed. The VICE-CHANCELLOR thought it should be re ferred to the Master, to inquire what reasonable charges Sir John Arundel had sustained in conduct ing that suit? and let it be made a matter of account. In future, however, he could not give him any charge in the direction of the suit. Ile also observed, that it would be necessary to suspend the removal of Sir John Arundel from the office of Master of the Hos pital. lie was anxious to know whether the pro perty of ►he Charity was in the hands of the Corpora tion, or of Sir J. Arundel. because if he was the per son responsible, the Court would get rid of the diffi culty of making. the Corporation pay for the loss which the Charity had sustained. Mr. BELL said, that in 1808, Sir John Arundel had been nominated Master for life by the Corps)- ! ation, and that solely tor managing the suit against I\ Apreece. The present information stated nothing against him ; it prayed that it might be declared by the Court, that no member of the 'Corporation should be eligible to the office of Master, and that Sir John Arundel might be removed from that office; and also, that the Master might be ordered to inquire what sums, but-for the neglect of the Corporation, might have been obtained for the use of the Charity? Here the question which the relaters put in issue, was not the liability of Sir John Arundel, nor did the information charge him at all with personal responsibility. It was the Corporation of Hunting don that was charged. Sir John Arundel said, rn his answer, that since he had ceased to be Mayor, the Mayor for the time being had, in his name, ac counted to the Corporation for the rents of the es tates; but that circumstance could not make him personally responsible. The Corporation was, to all intents and purposes, the only party that could be charged NV; . ..11 liability, and he had only lenehis name for what he considered a very useful purpose. That Court was not in the habit of charging persons who were secondarily liable, till it had first charged those who were so primarily. The VICE-CHANCELLOR thought that Sir John Arundel could not be made personally responsible for these lands, under the presentinformation, which merely prayed that he, being Master of the Hospital, aad at the same time a member of the Corporation, 'slight be removed. Mr. HEALD said he wes instructed, by the relaters, nut to press that point, but to leave it entirely to the discretion of the Court. If the Court thought, that by his an Aver he was not personally responsible, that opinion accorded fully with the private feelings of This client-. Vre e-Cit A NCELLOR thought, that in justice he could not be made responsible; but if the relaters had amended their 1:01, and given him an oppor tunity of defenelhr, himself against the charge of the Court would undoubtedly have sustained the charge, for he (the Vice-Chancellor) bad no he sitation in saying, that he was personally liable. His Honour then amended his former decree, as follows: " That it be referred to the Master, to inquire and suite wife is the convitution of the Hospital of St. John the Baptist ; who are the Masti.rrs or Trustees therecf ; in whoM the appointment of Master of the Hospital and Schoolmaster, severally resides; and in whom the lands of the Hospital are legally vested, or capable of being vested ; and let the Master, in consi dering a scheme for the future management of the Cha rity, approve of the proper qualifications for the offices of Master of the Hospital, and Schoolmaster, respec tively ; that the office of Master of the Hospital, and also that of schoolmaster, be declared incompatible with the character of corporator ; that Sir John Arundel be removed from the o ffi ce a Master, and that the farther consideration of his removal he re served till the Master shall have made his report on the matter ; that the Master inquire what reasonable charges itnd expenses are due to Sir John Arundel, tor conducting the suit against Mr. Apreece ; and that the sum found to be due, form an item in the account between the defendants, the Corporation, and the relaters; that the Master be at l ibert y to make a separate report' as to the question of common, respecting the new pasture; and that he inquire whe• they the new pasture land has been duly 'set out by the defendants, the Corporation ; and, if it has not, let him inquire, and state what ought to be the land set out to the Charity in that behalf. COURT OF ICING'S BENCH, JANUARY 19. PARTON V. WILLIAMS. This was an action of trespass, for taking the goods of the plaintiff. The goods were taken by the de ' fendant, an Overseer, under a warrant of a Justice of Peace, to take the goods of the plaintiff's son, who lived in the same house with the plaintiff, and the defendant took them, mistaking them for the plain iff's son's. The action was brought more than six months after the taking of the goods. The question dis cussed was, whether the defendant was within the Bth section of the Act of 1.!.1 , Geo. 111. cap. 44, which requires six months notice to be given to justices and! constables, and other officers, before an action is brought against elem. Mr. JERVIS, Mr. W. E. Tittnrrom, and Mr. Put.- LEN, contended that the officer was only entitled to this notice in cases where he had acted in strict con formity to the warrant. .I‘ll. CANIPBELL argued contra. The Court decided, that the constable, or other officer, is entitled to such notice in cases where he acts as an officer, fairly in what he believes to be the execution of his authority, although from mistake he exceeds it. The sixth section of the above Act has, in cases where the officer acts in strict confor mity to the warrant, given him an absolute protec tion and indemnity ; it would be therefore nugatory to extend the limitation of action to cases of that sort. Consequently this action was commenced too late. OLD BAILEY SESSIONS. Yesterday, James Hicks and Richard Hicks, father and son, were capitally indicted for stealing three heifers; the property of Charles Thomas Mahon. The prosecutor is a farmer, living at Laleham, about twenty miles from London. He stated, that on Saturday, December 4, at noon, the heifers were safe in his field, and he missed them on the Tuesday followeng. The three stolen had been feeding toge ther, and were worth about £lO each. The prisoner James was a pauper, living in the Workhouse at Laleham, and his son Richard lived at Staines. There was also a son William, who was supposed to be concerned in this transaction, but who was not yet apprehended, who lived at Laleham in the ca pacity of a labourer. William Morley, 'a salesman, proved that on the 6th of December three heifers were brought to him, at Smithfield-market, by a man of the name of Cle ment, but who gave the fictitious name of Taylor. It was market day, and the heifers were sold for £26 Bs. When asked for payment, after they were sold, he said he should not pay until he (Clement) brought some document to stew by whom he was authorised to sell the beasts. At twelve o'clock the next day, Clement, accompanied by another man, whom witness did not know, came to his counting house, and produced a paper. with these words, writ ten in a very ignorant hand : " Si::—This is to inform you, that Thomas Taylor, of Cran ford-bridge, knows this , property to be his own. " Dec. 6, 1519. " JOSEPH NEwmiN, Cranford-bridge." James Milner, clerk to Mr. Morley, paid the £26 Ss. under the direction of his master. At first he re fused, until he received his master's orders, and then gave to Clement a £2O note, a £5 note, a £1 note and Bs. in silver. Richard Clement is a labourer, and lives at Brent ford : on the morning of the .sth of December, about half-past four o'clock, the prisoner Richard called witness out of bed, and told hiM if he would take three things to town, he should be satisfied for his trouble. Prisoner had not the heifers in his posses sion at the time ; witness's house is nine miles distant from Laleham ; witness said to prisoner, " Go on, and I will overtake you." Witness, in about half an hour after, followed prisoner, overtook, and saw him 'driving before him three heifers; witness assisted the Prisoner .in driving the cattle until they came to Fleet-market, when prisoner proposed that witness should take two of the heifers to the market, and that he (prisoner) should take the other, but the beasts, could riot be separated. Witness then, at the request', of the prisoner Richard, who. staid behind, took the cattle to Mr. Morley, whom he desired to dispose of them ; in two hours afterwards witness returned, and told the prisoner Richard what was offered for the cattle ; about two o'clock the beasts were sold, but Mr. Morley relived payment until witness should produce a voucher. Witness then said his name was' Thomas Taylor, of Cranford ; prisoner did not tell witness how he came by the cattle; prisoner is bro ther-in-law to witness ; on tin. next day, Tuesday, witness and prisoner met his brother William, who asked witness where he was going to? witnest re plied, that he was going to gather mushrooms; Wil liam said that he had got a letter, and that every ening was right, and asked witness to go with Rich ard and him to town ; no conversation took place about the heif.rs on the road. Witness presented the letter to Mr. Morley, who ordered his clerk to pay him 1.:26 Bs. William was present when the money was paid ; the payment was made in a £2O note, a note,,a £1 note, and Bs. in silver. Witness then . . . . . went to the Bank, and changed the £2O note i hd desired a Gentleman at the Bank to write on the note, Thomas Taylor, of Crinfoid." Witness - then ac companied prisoner and his brother William to - a public-house near Hyde Park-corner, where he paid them £2l, and kept the other £5, at their desire, for his trouble. William then said the money should be divided into three parts, hut did not say who was to . receive the thud part. The prisoner Ric hard then told witness that he arid hi 4 brother William stole the heifers out of Mr. Mahou's field, and that during that time the prisoner James stood watching on the road. Th.!! prisoner James was not present at this conversation. The rest of the testimony produced went in corro bofation of the statement of the accomplice. By the evidence of the officer, by wlipm the accomplice and' , the prisoners were apprehended, it was proved, that nine of the notes given i changeat the Bank, for the £2O. were found, tour upon Clement, and five upon Richard Hicks. The account Richard gave of the notes being in his possession was, first, that he had taken them in change for a £5 note ; and, after wards, that he had received ten new £1 notes of his . brother William, at Hyde Park-corner, and that these were part of them. The Mistress of the Poorhouse, where the elder prisoner slept, proved, that on the night of the .sth of December the prisoner did not sleep there, but added, that he had often about that period missed sleeping there. One of the notes taken in change for the £2O, was also discovered to have been changed by the old man. The CONINION SERJEANT, in summing up, re marked upon the weakness of the testimony against the elder prisoner.—The Jury found James IliCks— Not Guilty, and Richard Hicks—Guilty. The accomplice, Clement, - received a severe repri mand from the Court, and was told that he was now a marked character, and had better have a strict guard upon his future condtict. Mr. ARABIN, on the part of the piosecution, ap plied to the Court, tinder the late Act abolishing re-I wards to officers, for an additional allowance to the witnesses, under the peculiar circumstances of the case : but the Curt refused, and the point was saved fur the consideration of the Judges. John Charles Cuthbert, who kept the Bell, in St. James s-market, but now of the Goat, in Pall-mall, was placed at the inner Bar, upon an indictment, which charged him with wilful and corrupt perjury. After the trial had gone on for some time, the COMNION SERJEANT submitted to the Jury, whether they were anxious it should proceed any further, upon such testimony as had been adduced ? The Jury instantly said, they were completely satisfied of the innocence of the defendant, and pro nounced him so by the verdict of—Not Guilty. UNION HALL.—DRURY-LANE AND COBURG IHR- AntEs.—Yesterday, being the day appointed for hearing the information which has been laid by Mr. Ward, on the part of the Proprietors of Drury-Lane Theatre, against Mr. Glossop, the Proprietor of the Coburg Theatre, for enacting at his house, contrary to his licence, the Tragedy of " King Richard the Third," a great number of persons interested in the decision of the question, attended at this Office. The hour originally appointed for entering on the subject 'was eleven o'clock, and the Magistrates (Sir JOHN PINHORN and Mr. CHAMBERS) were in attendance at that time, to hear the arguments on both sides. By an arrangement proposed on the part of the Counsel for Drury-Lane Theatre, however, this appointment was abandoned, and the hour of two fixed. Soon after one, the worthy Magistrates, having completed the ordinary business of the day, called on the case, when Mr. Burgess, Solicitor for Mr. Ward, stated, that his Counsel had not yet arrived, and that he did not feel he should be justified in conducting the mat•• ter himself. Sir JOHN PINHORN said, that as the question at issue was one which would, in all probability, oc cupy a considerable portion of time, and as he had business elsewhere, he could not, with convenience, give it the attention which it would require. He was ready then to proceed in the information, if the parties desired it. Mr. Burgess repeated his wish, that the matter might be conducted by Counsel. Mr. Rogers, Solicitor for Mr. Glossop, said that he felt himself absolved from all blame, as to the de lay which might take place. The postponement of the hour, in the first instance fixed, arose entirely With the plaintiff. He agreed in the impolicy of entering on a question involving so many nice points, at so late an hour of the day. Under these circumstances, it was agreed that the case should stand over till that day se'nnight, at one o'clocli p when all parties are to be in attendance. A number of poor Irit.h labourers having, on Tues day, represented their distress to the Magistrates at this Office, it was suggested, that they might find tempo rary bmployment in cleaning the foot-pavement, in the Borough, of ice and snow; for which each of the inhabitants would, no doubt, willingly remunerate them with a trifle. They were accordingly supplied with shovels, and sallied out, under the guidance of one of the Officers. So few of the inhabitants, how, ever, shewed any inclination to accept their services, that, in the course of the day, no less than one hun dred informations were laid, for not keeping the foot , ways clear, and seventy-eight of the parties were yesterday convicted in penalties of ten shillings each, with costs. A woman, named Martin, a servant at the King's Head, Albemarle-street, was remanded, on a charge of having, on Monday night, left her illegitimate child, about three years old, exposed to the incle mency of the weather, with intent to deprive it of life. Martinumouon-STREET.—A question of import ance to Parishes, and particularly to that of Padding ton, came on io be heard at this Office, yesterday, at. the suit of Mr. Thatcher, a respectable parishioner, and another Gentleman, against Messrs. Shill and Grubb, Surveyors, relative to their yearly returns. Mr. Thatcher made objections to overcharges in their yearly returns: first, .that an item of £8 6s. 9d. for collecting the rates, was an overcharge, not sanctioied by Act of Parliament; secondly, that a sum of money had been charged for painting names of streets, Bcc. and, thirdly, that thirty-three days had been charged for labour, in wheeling mud from the Harrow-road, which, in fact, it was the duty of the Harrow Trust to perform, as they were paid £lO5 a year to exone- tate the Parish from wry expenses on that head. Mr. Thatcher stated, that it had been usual for the Sur veyors to charge for collecting, until list year, and it was then retuned to the person who filled that situation.—Mr. CONANT would not give a decision until he had consulted his brother Magistrates, and the case stands over till Friday. BOW-STREET. —Yesterday, two men, named Giles and Somerville, were brought before Mr. FAnn.A.;:T, the Sitting Magistrate, by the Constables Donaldson and Perry, charged with stealing an immense quan tity of journals, log-books, dispatches, returns, and Other papers, the property of his Majesty, from the Admiralty. Neither of the prisoners attempted the slightest defence before the Magistrate, and they we:6 committed for further ex.amination on Friday. HATTON GARDEN. —Yesterday .I. Coates, the sor 4 of Mr. Coates, of Leather-lane, who had been pre: viously examined upon a number of charges, of hay: ing uttered forged ; 1 25 Bank of England notes, under! Went an examination on a charge of having also ut-1 tered a forged £5 note at the White Swan Taverr under the pretence of having been sent by a MN: Waters, of Peartrce-court, to get it changed. Mrr. Waters deposA, that she had never seen the prisoner until that moment,-The pr'isoner was fully commit ted for trial. QUEEN -Sgt ARE.—Peter .4ralietes was remanded, charged with uttering a forged El note, at the shop of a tinman, in Strutton-ground, Westminster, to whom he gave a false address. PITOSITION ON THE CHARITABLE.—We have to record, as a, caution to the humane and benevolent against similar frauds, the case of WiWant Henson, who was convicted, last Friday, at Hicks's Hall, for a fraud on the Bishop of Durham, in endeavouring to obt:!in money under false pretences. 'He repre sented himself to be the brother of a poor woman, 'named Arden, whose husband had been killed in the iron-mill belonging to Messrs. Wilkinson . and Co. at Rotherhithe. Henson incla:.ed a petition to the Bishop of Durham, with the names of several Noble Fami lies, and a certificate, signed by the Rector and Churchwardens of the Parish of Rotherhithe. He was convicted on the evidence of James Price, ser vant to the Bishop, who suspected it was .not a true case, and accordingly applied to the Rector and Churchwardens of that Parish, when he found the certificate to be a forgery; and on Henson applying for his answer, be had him secured by a Constable, and taken before a Magistrate at Marlborough -street, who committed him. Price received the thanks of the whole Coutt, for having taken so much pains to send such a character out of the country. INouEs - rs.—Yesterday, an Inquest was held at the Rose, Ratcliffe, on the body of It. L. Della, Mate a the Achilles \Vest lndiaman, who was found dead in the cabin. It appearing that he was subject to fits, and their being no marks of violence on the body, the Jury returned a Verdict—Died by Apoplexy: An Inquest was yesterday held at the Triumphant Chariot, Pembroke-mews, on the body of S. Grange, a coal-potter, who on Friday, while in a state of in toxication, was driving awaggon from Scotland-yard to Kensington, and in attempting to get on the shaft he fell, when he wheel passed over his thigh, and in jured him so much that he died in the Hospital ow Sunday evening. Verdict—Accidental Death. Another Inquest was held at the same place, on the - body of J. Meadow: The deceased, eight years old, had been on a visit_ to his uncle, in Queen-street, Pimlico, and was left to mind the shop while the family were at tea, when his pin-a-fore _caught the flames, and he was burned so dreadfully that he ex pired in a short time. Verdict—Accidental Death. . An Inquest was also held at the King's Head, James-street, Buckingham-gate, on the body of J. Mills, a painter, who died in consequence of his trowsers, on which a quantity of turpentine had been spilled, catching the blaze, on approaching the fire-place. Verdict—Accidental Death. An Inquest was - held at the King's Head, Ply mouth, on Saturday last, ou the body of W. Memo: y, the Mate of the vessel belonging to- Brixham, who died in consequence of a stab received in an affray last week, in Castle-street. The Jury, after a long and minute investigation, returned a verdict of Wil ful Murder against the Dutch seaman who inflicted the wound. Last week, a young man of the name of Arnold, belonging to the Company of Dredgers, of Faver sham, went with three others, in a boat, for the pur pose of shooting wild fowl in the Swale. The de ceased was in the act of steering the boat, when a sudden heel causing one of the ,guns to move froin its place, it unfortunately went off, and lodged the whole contents in his body. ':'he charge, (which was two pipes of swan shot), entered just above the right groin, and passing through the body, was only ::- tamed by the skin on the opposite side. The de ceased languished in great pain for about twenty four hours before he expired.—Accidental Death. A few days since, as some workmen were employed on the roof of a house in the Kent-road, they acci dentally , t fall a roll of sheet lead between the rafters. The immense weight of the lead forced a passage through the ceiling of the room beneath, and it fell on a desk at which Mr. Williams (the master of thehouse) was seated writing ; in its fall it knocked off his hat, hut without doing him any injury. The desk was entirely demolished. MURDER.—A shocking circumstance occurred on Monday in Angel-street, Manchester: An Irishrnan, who, resided in the neighbourhood, went out of his house with a loaded pistol, saying,.he was determined to shoot some oxe before he returned. In Angel street, a woman was looking through an upstairs window ; he deliberately took aim at her, and lodged the contents of bis pistol in the head of the unfortu nate woman. She did not survive five mamns. Ca the Police Officers arriving, he surrendered hitr.e without any resistance, and is now in the New . No motive has been stated for this inhuman mtirdt;. COAL MARKET, JANVAMILY 19. Ships at Market. Ships Sold. Price. 6'2 Newcastle 2 i 41s 041 to 45s rd 2 Sunderland 0 • • OA Cd to Co 61 HIGH-WATER at LONDON BRIDGE TO:MORROW. Dft:rning - - - 59 minutes afar 5 Afternoon - • - . 41 --- --.- 6 LONDON : Printed and published by Lam Kaor, Plohett- Place, Ternpk-Bar. I l~ S l It