Star. — London, England, 1813-07-31 00:00:00

tIINDSO.7I, JULY so► Yesterday the Duke of CAMBRIDGE arrived at the Castle, and dined with the QUEEN, the Duke of CLA RIINCE, and Princesses. At six o'clock her MAJFsTY, the Royal bukess and all the Princesses, attended by Lord ARDEN, the Countess of RossLYN, Isady J. THYNNIt, Generals CARTWRIGHT and TAYLOR, went to Cumberland Lodge, where they drank tea, and re turned to the Castle a little after eight o'clock. This morning the Dukes of CLARENCE and ICAtt lameie accompanied their Royal Sisters, AuoustA An d SopHIA, in a ride on horseback for about two hours, in the Great Park. They were attended by the Countess of Rossmew, Lord ARDEN, Generals CARTWRIGHT and, TAYLOR, Colonel Desna° w, and Major MURRAY. The Lower Lodge is prepared for the reception of -1.. e Princess CHARLOTTE. The arrival of her Royal Hnzhness is expected to be to-morrow. Her horses ....m.! yesterday, preparatory to her arrival. Yesterday the Earl of LIVERPOOL came to town f r om Ins seat at Combe Wood, and had an audience of the PRINCE REGENT soon after 12 o'clock. His Roy.:l Highness afterwards gave an audience to Vis. C.:Unts CASTLEREAGH and MELVILLE. Yesterday the PRINCE RESENT took an airings on horseback. Princess CHARLOTTE returned to Warwick House about six o'clock yesterday evening, and afterwards, received a visit horn Miss ELPHINSTONR. Some of her Royal Highness's domestics and luggage left London on Thursday for Windsor. The remainder is expected to go to-day, and in the evening her Royal Highness will leave town for Windsor for about two months. The Earl and Countess of HARRINGTON entertain ed his Royal Highness the Duke of YORK, and a large party, at dinner, on Thursday, at their house in the Stable-yard, St. James's. Lord CASTLEREAGH gives a grand dinner to-mor row, to a large party, at his seat, North Cray, Kent. Dowager Lady Du CLIFFORD bad a select card party, yesterday evening, at her house, South Aud le y-stree t. The Earl and Countess of COWPER have a party' to dinner, to-morrow, at their house in Maddox street, Hanover-square. Thursday the Duke of CAMBRIDGE, the LORD CHANCELLOR, the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, and a select party dined with- the Earl of BUCKING HAMSHIRE, at Fitzroy-Farm, near Highgate. Yesterday Lord and Lady MELBOURNE gave a din ner to a select party, at Melbourne-House, White hall. The Duke of DavoNsmite, Lord and Lady HoLLAND, Earl and Countess CoWPER, and Mr. and Mrs. LAMB, were expected. Thursday night, the Hon. Mrs. VILLIERS enter tained a brilliant party, at her house in North Audley street, with a concert. In the course of the evening the company were well supplied with the choicest refreshments. The suite of drawing rooms were bril liantly illuminated, and the company did not retire until three o'clock. Mr. C. H. SHELTMN gave a grand dinner on Mon. day, at his house, Queen Anne -street, to the Duke De Berri. the ItasUan Ambassador, Duke of Argyle ' Maryti3 of L'ouglas, Co , tnt De Naarouille t . C ount Powell', De Polineek, 13,shop D'Angnukane, Hon. Mr. Burrell, Mr. Adair . , Mr. Fonsonby, and Nlr. J. Webb Weston. The dinner was excellent,. and served up on a very handsome service of plate. The wines were exqui site, particularly the Champagne and Burgundy. In the evening Mrs. SHELDON bed a select party, among whom were the following persons : Duchess De Coigny, Lady Acton, Count Faszi, Colonel Dillon Mrs. Elliott, and the Mob Slielk:,:ol. Colonel SHELDON, M. P. gave a grand dinner, on Wednesday, at his elegant house, Montague-place, Montague-square, to the Earl and Countess of Pesi 43ttOKE, Count WORONZW, Count MUNSTER, General FLoYo, and Mr. C. H. SHELDON. Tne dinner and wines were excellent, and served up in a very hand some manner. Mrs. ToostrsoN gave a very sumptuous dinner 011 Tuesday, at her elegant house in Grosvenor-square, to his Royal Highness the Duke of CLARENCE, Earl and Countess Mayo,- Earls of FIFE and BECTIVE, Lord and Lady &REWORD, bliss FITZCLARENCE, and Colonel Cooper. The dinner was excellent, and served up en a rich service of plate: -The wines were exquisite, particularly the Champaigne, Hermitage, and Claret. In the evening there was a Concert. The convervatnry was filled with choice and rare plants At one o'clock in the morning the company sat down to all excellent supper. The Nolnlity and Gentry, furnishing whose resi dences from the Metropolis sometimes renders it in c2tirthialt to choose their Furniture at the Warehouser, avc retTectfully informed, that Mr.A GLEN, Proprietor nf the Wiloies4le Furnitute Warehouse, Pall-mall, London, will stadlis pnterns for their approbation, rrc aiding tiwv engage to give their orders.—N.B. The froprieti4t of I-I , tels and Coffee-houses may be sup plied with Furniture of the last year's production, at the maaufactured price. i/F.PARTURES. l.e Earl anti Count•.-. 11 hf Jersey and family, to their seat, Nliddleion Ptak, Oxfordshire. The Duke and Duthets of Zsiewea.s:le and family, to their seat in Yorkshtre. • Lord and Barnard and family, jesterday, from Greillon's Hotel, A Itt,trarte—t• eet, to •lit.lr seat in Northaniptouahire. Lady ;to:ten Manners, to llorrc y. .1 he Ri7.ltt Hon. Wr Pol.:, to Ireland. I aly Collier, to Devdissltire. Eon. Mrs. Damtr, to Kent% • 7.)uwat.• Counte . .s Grey, on a visit to General Grey, at his .t, near York. Fari ad Coastess of Charlemma and family, from Heil •Tditea I Intel, Ilanover-square, to Tutitt taiga Wells. Lady Thomas, to h e r s. at in Sussex. I .erd Castlereagh, to hls atm, North Cray. Captain Bripett, of the Royal Navy, to the Isle of Wight. The Earl ac i d Countess of t;oefort and family, to Ireland. Earl S. Vi.tcent, to his seat I:1 EfSeN. ;he Earl of ilclicster ar.d family, to their seat in Dorsetshire. :'he Earl of littraourt, to his era; In Oxfordshire. Mr. and Mrs. &whin, to thuir seat, Ottershaw. . Sir Willitun Elliot, to Seotlard. The Larl ant i C ountess of Mt:la - rave, from 1 - farley-street, to the.r sett at hulitam. The Counters cf Clare, to rreland. ' Lord and Lady r..".1V14 0 !) (lower, from Stanhope-street, May fa:' to their sear, Dextco, Viscount Cranley, for Clandon House, near Guildford. Nassaus, from Park-place, to his seat rear Colchester. Lord fiwydlr leaves town this day for his seat iu Lincolnshire. Lady Willoughbyintrads to follow on Monday. Ihe Earl of Darlington and his Bride are expected to leave .;ern tO -13 C7rOM ?v: Cheltszium. LOP IATELLICENOt - . COURT OP CHANCERY, JULY So. SANKRIJ„j•T PITITIONS. =PARTE OSBORNE IN THE MATTER OF PARR. This was a petition to supersede a Commission of Bankruptcy:.Parr, a Liverpool merchant, some time ago sailed to Buenos Ayres, where it was understood he was now settled, without any intention of return ing immediately. Before he sailed, he gave notice by public advertisement, of his intention to do so ; and offered to take charge of cargoes to sell at Buenas Ayres. After he had departed, and remained at Buenos Ayres for a year or more, a creditor of his in this country took out a Commission of bankruptcy against him. The Commissioners met, but there was nobody to prove the act of bankruptcy. They met a second time, when a person was produced who swore to a debt due to him before Parr left the king dom ; and hence it appeared to have been presumed that the leaving the kingdom was with intent to de lay creditors, and was therefore an act of bankruptcy. Sir SAMUEL ROMILLY for the petitioner.—This was no act of bankruptcy. The mere circumstance of going abroad would not constitute.an act of bank• ruptcy, unless there was reason to presume that the party really did•so with intent to delay creditors.— This was the utmost point to which the cases had gone. When a person went abroad in the course of his mercantile transactions, creditors might inciden tally be delayed, but this was not sufficient to consti tute an act of bankruptcy. The intention to delay must appear, or the circumstances must be such, that it must be presumed. In the present case there was every reason to presume the direct contrary, as the party had given notice of his intention by public advertisement, thereby enabling his creditors to pre vent his departure if they chose, and it he really had any creditors whose debts were due at the time.— There was another objection to the commission, which was that the act of bankruptcy was proved by an incompetent witness, the witness being a creditor who might prove under the commission. Mr. HART, contra.—As the bankrupt was indebted A the petitioning creditor and others at the time of his departure, and as he went away with the design of remaining abroad, it ought to be presumed that lie went with intent of delaying his creditors. There was property of his here which could not be distri buted except under a commission. But suppose there were not, still if he had property abroad, a commis sion ought to issue, as he might be induced by the consideration of the consequences of not appearing, to appear and pay his debts. It the witness proving the aet of bankruptcy was incompetent, they ought at least to have the opportunity of proving it by an other witness. The CHANCELLOR, taking into consideration that the mere act of going abroad, without good reason to presume an intention to delay creditors, WAS not an act of bankruptcy—that the intention had been publicly advertised—that considerable delay had taken place before the issuing of the Commission— that at the first meeting of the Commissioners there was no one to prove the act of bankruptcy—that at the subsequent meeting the proof had been made by an incompetent witness—and that even now no one was mentioned as capable of really proving the act of bankruptcy—was of opinion that the commission ought to be immediately superseded, and it was or dered accordingly. =PARTE CLARKSON IN TILE MATTER OF CLARKSON. The bankrupt in this case had before his bank ruptcy taken possession of farming stock of consider able value, as one of several residuary legatees. He was afterwards transported for some offence. A pe tition was presented on the part of the other residuary legatees, to be permitted to prove the amount of their share under the commission. The Chancellor order ed an inquiry into the value of the stock, and gave leave to the petitioners to prove for what should be found due to them ; but, as there had been consider able delay in prosecuting the claim, he ordered the petitioners to pay thz costs of the inquiry and of this application. EXPARTE JAMES IN TILE SIATTER OF JOSEPII. The petitioner had received a box of cambrics be longing to the bankrupt ; caused the cambrics to be valued by a sworn broker, who valued them at 8189: he then took them into his stores, and sold them at £2OO. He was wiling, therefore, to allow .420() for them, and to deduct so much out of the amount of the debt due to him from the bankrupt : hut it was doubtful whether he ought not, as they had come into his hands subsequent to the bank.. ruptcy, to have had them sold under the commission; and Whether, as he had not done this, he ought not to be charged with fhe whole invoice price, whjch was £5OO. The Assignees were satisfied, however, that the petitioner had allowed the full real valuejor them, and therefore consented to the prayer of the petition that he should be allowed to prove under the commission, upon the ground that two hundred pounds was the full value. The CIJANCEI.LOR, as the Assignees were satisfied, ordered accordingly. COUNCIL-ROOM, se FORE THE VICE-CHANCELLOR. DREW V. DREW—PLEA. A bill was tiled by the grandmother against the grandson, for an account of the produce of a partner ship concern in the business of coal-merchants. The bill stated, that the grandmother had, on the death of her husband, taken the son into partnership in the above business, and upon his death, his son, (the plaintiff's grandson) as executor of his father, ought to account. The grandson filed %plea, denying, to the best of his knowledge and belief, that there was any partnership. It was stated at the bar, that the ion ought to ac count, as his father was, at any rate, agent to his grandmother. The VICE-CHANCELLOR said, that the whole of the bill was framed upon the idea of a partnership, and that, therefore, the plea of " no partnership" went to the whole of the bill. That plea must therefore be allowed. The defendant had sworn to it, and he might be indicted for perjury if he swore falsely. FITZGERALD V. FORSTER-.-DEMURRRR. The bill in this case stated, that the plaintiff had gone into an auction-room, where a house at the west end of the town was advertised to be sold, and pur chased the house at £5091. He had then just retur ned from France, where he had been a prisoner, and wanted a house for family. There was only one bidder against him, whom he took, as he alleged, for a bona fide bidder 3 but he afterwards discovered, that it was only the vender, or an agent employed by the vender to bid. There was also a charge, that if there were any other bidders, they also were agents for the vender. The bill prayed, that the contract might be so aside, on the ground of fraud, the price being £l2OO beyond the value ; and also that the plaintiff should be allowed for repairs and improve ments made in the house subsequent to the purchase, amounting to a sum of £l7OO. To this Bill there was a general demurrer. The - VICE-CHANCELL O R adverted to the law, that the vender might, upon notice given to slie atictio neer, bid, or employ a person to bid, so as to prevent the property from being sold at an under-value.— There were cases, however, where, when several.per sons were so employed by the vender, so as to give an appearance of competition, the contract had been set aside. Here, however, there was only one bidder alleged to be employed by the vender; for although there was a charge, that if there were more bidders, they were also employed by the vender, it was not positively stated that there were more. Then it was alleged that the plaintiff paid more for the house than it was worth. This was no ground for seuing aside the contract, otherwise they would have enough of applications from purchasers at auctions, who would be very glad to get rid of their contracts. It appeared to him, therefore, that the demurrer must be allowed, though he should be sorry that this should be considered as a final decision. COURT OF JUNG'S BENCH, JULY so. SPECIAL JURIES. COWLEY AND ANOTHER (ASSIGNEES OP LUNN) T. RO BERTSON. " 1.4. This action was brought to recover £146, the amount of a quantity of slops, sold by the bankrupt, to a woman of the name of Gillies, and who had since been married to the defendant. Th e pl a i nt i ff proved the bankruptcy, the delivery of the goods, and the marriage of the defendant with Mrs. Gillies. Mr. PARK, for the defendant, stated, that his. de fence was most curious, and very short, namely, that the former husband of Mrs. Gillies was alive long after the contract for the goods, and that she con,e quently could not contract, or the defendant be lia ble. He should prove, that her husband's name was Matthew Tittery Gillies, which was a very strange combination of names ; that he went to Tortola in a •fessel called the Eaton, and arrived there. He should prove that a Matthew Tittery Gillies was alive in Tortola in 1 809 ; that he had written home to his wit, in 1808, although, in consequence of her' having been married again, it was thought right to withhold the letter. He should also prove that the description of the person living in Tortola was pre cisely the same as that of the husband of Mrs. Gil lies. He felt it right to state, that Mrs. Gillies and the defendant had supposed Gillies dead at the time they were married, and Mrs. Gillies had gone, into mourning for him. Mr. TOPPING asked his Lordship, whether he thought it competent to defendant to give such evi dence, he being estopped by his plea to dispute the marriage ? Lord ELLENBOROUTGH thought the evidence admis sible, as defendant, in his plea, did not admit the marriage. H. Howard, Clerk of the parish of gt. Ann's, Limehause, produced the original registry of the pa rish ; in which, under date 24 , th December, 1791, there appeared a marriage of Matthew Tittery Gil lie's, widower, with Mary Dobson, spinster. E. Dobson swore that she was present at the mar riage of her sister with Gillies, and alto at the mar riage of the same sister with defendant, in 1808 : that Gillies was a seaman, and had had three chil dren by his wife. Gillies went abroad the last time in 1801. Witness had never seen him since. She had often seen him write ; and a letter having been put into her hands, she said it was his. Her sister went into mourning for Gillies, and had believed him dead ; the reason she had for so believing, witness did not know. Mr. M , Cleverty had resided 20 years in the West- Indies, recollected that Matthew Tittery Gillies ar rived at Tortola in 1806, as the Chief-mate of the Eaton; and the Captain having died,• he was ap pointed in his room. Witness had seen dillies in witness's yard, in the year 1811 ; he was well ac quainted with Gi:lies's hand-writing, having received many letters from him : witness had recommended an agent to him on his first arrival ; witness knew Captain Floriman, he lived. at the island of Anne gado ; Gillies principally lived with him, and was occupied in supplying Tortola with fowls and vege tables ; Gillies had of:en told him, that he had a wife and four children in England : Captain Floriman came to England about four years ago: a letter being - put into his hand, he swore that it was the hand writing of Gillies. The letter was then read, which was addressed to Mrs. Gillies, dated May 2, 1809, and began "My dear and once-beloved Mary." It complained of her silence, and stated that he had written by many vessels ; asked about his children, his wife's sister, and various other friends, and complained of his si tuation ; and it was signed her unfortunate and loving husband, Matthew Tittery Gillies. Dr. Lettsom affirmed, that he was well acquainted with Captain Floriman, and that he had been in Eng land in the months of July, August, and Sept. 1809. Mr. TOPPING said, that he thought the defence was sufficiently made out ; but it was apparent that his clients were justified in bringing the action. Lord ELLIINBOROUGH, in addressing the Jury, re marked, that probably such a combination of names had never before occurred. Gillies was probably the only person of such names in the world, and there would never, in ail likelihood, be a person of similar , names. The plaintiff then chose to be called. PARKER AND SIRELLA v. JAMES. The plaintiff had shipped a quantity of goods on board the Astrea, a vessel belonging to defendant, to go from Liverpool to Venice, with leave to touch at Trieste. Part of the goods was insured, part not. The vessel had a letter of marque, but on the voyage was guilty of several acts of deviation, by cruizing and lying to, and was taken while cruizing out of the course of the voyage. An action had been brought against the Underwriters, but they, in consequence of the deviation, had a verdict ; and this action was brought to recover the amount of the goods from the owners of the Astrea, on account of their breach of the contract entered into by the bill of lading. Lord ELLSNBOROUGH told the Jury, that trey must • . be satisdect, that, as to the goods not tooted, the plaintiffs had sustained an injury by the cruizesof the Astrea : but, if satisfied of that fact, they would find for plaintiffs for the wliole. The Jury found a verdict for plaintiffs for the whole ANDERSON V. WALLACE. This was a question on a policy of insurance on . ship and goods at and from London to Quebec. The vessel, it appeared, after her departure from thin country, and arrival in sight of Newfoundland, for several days experienced such dreadful weather, that all on board expected to perish. After contending against it for three weeks, When the vessel was be. come a compleat wreck, and was making upwards four feet water an hour, the Captain, with the advice of his Officers, determined to tun for the first port they could make, and they with difficulty matte Kinsale. After their arrival at that port, the owners abandoned, and now brought their action against the Underwiters, as for a total loss, on the grounds chat the voyage was lost. Lord tu..emionoucit said, part of the cargo wit; iron, and other commodities, of a description which, the vessel having been preserved, could not be t0t.411: lost. He doubted it this artificial idea of total los! could be supported ; a verdict, however, might entered for the plaintiff, subject to the opinion of the Court hereatter.-i-Verdict for the Plaintiff. ANOTHER MURDER. Yesterday an Inquest was. held at the Slain, Wapping, before J. W. Uswni, Esq. on ihe body , Jacob Geerts, who was found on Wednesday mornitn under a barge at Wapping Dock, with a wound of his forehead, and another (that had the appearani of a stab) under the left eye. The deceased was with out a jacket or hat, and had nothing in his pockets but a comb, a clasp knife, and a pip! tu!)e. It appeared in evidence, that the deceased was native of Amsterdam, about fifty years of age, and seafaring man. On Saturday last he came to the house of Mr. J. Meyers, a publican, rather in liver, ant' spewed him a canvas bag, in which, he said, were doubloons. Several persons were present, and s, and heard what passed. One of his lodgers said, till contents of the bag might be worth £2O ; when a deceased observed, he would not take NO ler Mr. M. did not see the contents of the bag. The de ceased said, he had been to Doctors' Commons to re. ceive £l5O far the rent of his hanie at Amsterdam, which he had not received fur ona..f years. He at, said, that he bad a gold bar in his chest, which w, worth more than £llO. Being rather intoxicated, remained at Mr. Meyers's house until Sunday even. ing, when he left it perfectly sober, and said that hr should go to his lodgings, in Sir Wiltiam Watren'i square. He said he should go the back way, put bi money into his chest, clean himself, and i ;o to biz( He had a watch in his pocket, and asked witness it had any doubloons to sell, for which he wouli gi him £4. 12s. each. He borrowed of the witness. This was the last time he saw the deceased. Frederick Hencken, who lodged %ski) the last wit ness, stated, that he saw the decease] between six and seven o'clock, on Tuesday evening last, by the Iron. bridge, near London Dock, sitting on a stone. He asked him how he did, and what he was sitting theft for ? He answered, he was looking at the btliast. lighters. He was perfectly soh. r. ‘Vitness left him, and he said he would come after him in a few .mi nines. This was the last time witness saw bun alive. Witness never saw any money about the ptrson the deceased, though he had heard him speak of ha , ing plenty. Mi. W. Meyers keeps the Sun in Sir William Wai ren's-square. The deceased had lodged with hit about twelve weeks; had heard him speak of hay nk plenty of money, but never saw any. The last tiMe he sawhim alive was on Saturday, at dinner. Hi' chest was overhauled in the presence of his lodgers, and his clothes were not worth 61. J. Robeton, an officer of the 'Thames Police, was on duty near the spot where the deceased was founi on Tuesday night, and sill three o'clock on Wednes. day morning. He heard a plunge in the water, an," went to see what was the matter, but could percei , nothing. Had there been any struggling or blows, he must have heard them. The CORONER observed, that the case was attended with considerable difficulty; fir while, On the one hand, the deceased might be supposed to h we fallen from the wharf into the river, by mere accident, am that the contusions on his forehead and face were oc. casioned by the pressure of the craft ; yet, on the other, a suspicion would .naturally arise from tte manner in which he was found, without his jacket, money, or watch, and with a bruise which seems ac companied with that degree of force, and In so limited a space, as almost to preclude an apinion of its beit% the effect of a gradual pressure : the features of the face were also without injury. The plunge heard bT the Officer, he considered to have been occeeioned the precipitation of the body into the River; and the party had died from violence, that act was prey: ously.committed, and he was brought either ayipi or dead to the wharf. On viewing the place he att• fered with the Officer, that no person could have re. treated without his knowledge; en the contrary, he was convinced it was very probable, without any re ference to a concealment in the craft. Whether the w deceased was possessed of muc h property or uet as doubtful; but it was in evidence, that he was in the constant habit of affirming that he carried gold about him ; this might have excited the cupidity of s me vicious persons, and incited to the commission of the double crime of robbery and murder. He knew it was within the scope of possibility, that every suspi cious circumstance should be explained ; but they were to judge of the superior probabileies, and whe ther the injuries on his person, and the siiitati..n in which he was discovered, had arisen from accident or from violence ; and, if from the latter, it would con. stitute the charge of murder, though against souse person or persons unknown. The Jury returned a verdict of Wilful Murder, against some person or persons unknown. Dom.—A meeting took place yesterday ttirninor between Lieutenant H. and Lieutenant W. tvh. cers of the Second Battalion of Buff-, rationed at Reading ; att,r exchanging shots, the Mai iess wis amicably adjusted by the iiiierlerence of the seconds. Lieutenant W. had a na,row escape by Um ball front his Adversary's pistol grazing his back. • the the ied )le, n a :his for hat ing be- of Oft ade lers , the hat ras ich, +III Loss be the , in of log on nce ith- . cots • ,s a Lda >use And ere VI the, the it. de- re• 4?,r, th,o WAS , he 'en- be n's. his f ,tiva wit• and •on. He wie 4St.t. mi. rye. I of 4,- 'ar. ng 'he His ers, was and es- and ire . ws; ded one Ikn And oc- the toe ket, ac• ited • log the by Iby d evi- ins lit- re. he re. the II as the