Star. — London, England, 1829-07-08 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE: COURT OF KING'S BENCH, Inv 1. Sir J. Scarlett took the usual oaths for his office, as Attorney General. rAYTON V THE GOVERNORS OF ST.THOMAS'S NORMAL. Lord TZNTIRDEN delivered the judgment of the Court in this cause, in which a rule Nisi had been granted. calling on the defendants to show cause why the nonsuit should not be set aside. It was an action brought by the reversioner of the house (No. 109, Cheap. side), against the defendants, for having pu lled down al house adjoining that of the plaintiff, without taking the necessary precaution of shoring up the plaintiff's house. In consequence of this alleged neglect on the part of r''e defendants, the plaintiff was obliged to take down own house; he then brought an action on the case t) recover compensation in damages for the loss which be had thereby sustained. At the trial, Lord TSNTREDEN was of opinion that the plaintiff had sufficient notice of the intention of the defendants, and that he, therefore, ought to have taken the necessary precaution of ensuring the safety of his own premises. The plaintiff was accordingly noosuited. A rule Nisi was subsequently obtained to set aside the nonsuit. and the case was argued at considerable length. His Loitesithi , now said that, in the opinion of the Court, the nonsuit ought to stand. 'the rule was discharged. THE LING R. SEYMOUR. SSG. • rd TINTERDEN. with reference to the case, skid, an application was made for a rule calling on the prose ( nior to show cause why a new trial should not be had. The application was made some time since by Brother Wilde. The Court thinks that the rule Nisi for a new trial ought to be granted. THIS SING V. DAVY AND BRACH. Jacoh Wells Davy and John Beach were brought op to receive judgment. An information bad been filed against the defendants at the instance of the Corpora tion of the City of London, for committing a nuisance in the Thames, and the defendants suffered judgment to go by default. The nuisance consisted in throwing into the river, near Battersea, large quantities of the rubbish dug cut of the St. Katharine Docks. Accord. ing to the contract, this rubbish ought to have been landed at Millbank, near the Penitentiary. Whilst the officer of the Court was reading the affi davits in support of the conviction, Mr. DENMAN said, that the only object of the pro secutors was, as conservators of the navigation of the river Thames, to prevent the recurrence of practices such as that resorted to by the defendants, and which had already been carried to a dangerous extent. The prosecutor would now consent that the defendants should be discharged on their own recognisances, they undertaking to abate the nuisance, and to remove the rubbish from the river, under the direction of the Water Bailiff. Lord TaNTERDIII—That is a very proper COMIC This is, indeed, a great public nuisance, and unless the matter is set right, the Court cannot deal lightly with the parties. The defendants promised to repair all the mischief that had been done. Mr. &runs showed cause against a rule obtained by by Air. Comyng for discharging an insolvent debtor from a judgment to which he was made liable after his ei 'charge in the Insolvent Debtors Court. The rule was • obtained on the ground that he had entered the debt in his se edule, and that he was released by a clause in the Insolvent Debtors' Act from all debts due or growing due before his discharge. In showing cause against the rule, it appeared that the insolvent bad given a warrant of attorney to pay instalments, and that one instalment was becoming due at the time he claimed his discharge. The Court held that the parties might have ?roved the debt under the assignment of the insolvent s pro- perty in the Insolvent Debtors Court, as in the case of a commission of bankruptcy, and that the insolvent MI entitled to be discharged from the process issued against him. LU 9. HID& Mr. GUMMY showed cause against a rule obtained in this case to set aside an award. The plaintiff had given the defendant 2,5001. for the lease and goodwill of a public-house, and an agreement was entered into by the parties, under which the defendant was to return 1,0001. if he opened another house within half a mile of the plaintiff. The defendant opened the South wark Bridge Tavern, which the plaintiff considered within half a mile of his house, the Black Lion, in Bishopsgate.street. The question having been re ferred to Mr. Charles Law, the Barrister, that Learn ed Gentleman measured the distance, taking the nearest access, and found that the Southwark Bridge' Tavern was within the half mile one foot eleven inches. The arbitrator consequently awarded that the house was within half a mile of the plaintiff's house. ,Mr. Gurney contended that the award was correct. There had been three admeasurements. Two ways of measuring made the distance within half a mile, and a third, which he might call a dandy measurement, along the footpath to keep white stockings clean—tA laugh) —placed the house beyond the halt mile. The arbi trator had followed the rule laid down by Lord Ellen borough, who, on deciding a similar case of measure ment, held that the shortest access to the house was the way to be measured. Mr. PATTISON, on the same side, observed, that the object of the plaintiff was to keep the defendant from setting up within half a mile of the house, and the ar bitrator had found the defendant's premises were within the half mile. The nearest way to the house had been properly measured, and there could be no doubt it was within the half mile. The Arroarme GENERAL said, they all admitted that the nearest way was within half a mile. They did not rely on the line as the crow flies. which would have brought it mach more within the half mile, but the nearest access upon measurement showed the persons who went out'of the Black Lion had not half a mile to walk to the Southwark Bridge Tavern. The carriage way did not make the distance longer, but the thud way made it exceed half a mile. The question was, whether they were not bound to measure by the foot path? The class of customers who visited these houses were generally foot passengers, and therefore they came by the footpath. The rule laid down by Lord Ellen borough applied. They were to measure the nearest access by the footpath. Mr. CutrsT, in support of the rule, said, the three Gentlemen who preceded him had taken different views of the way by which the house was to be approached. His Leimed Friend (Mr. Pattison) had followed the black letter law instructions, namely, to pluck on his hoots, and wade through difficulties. His Learned Friend dashed over the deity ways to take his pint of porter, or glass of grog—(ll laugh). Mr. Gurney went in a carriage, therefore he preferred the carriageway; and the Attorney General, who never went to those Muses. did not • wish to approach by a right line.— , • The Learned Gladness contended that the measure meat which made, the distance mote than half a mile ought to be taken, and the award set aside. Lord" Tauraubms was of opinion that Mr. Law had taken a correct measurement. _lt appeared that the Southwark Bridge Tavern was within half a mile of the plaintiff's house, measuring by the nearest mode of ac- cess. " I think," said his Lordship, " the Arbitrator has done right in the nearest mode of access." The COURT refused to disturb the award. The ATTORNIT-GZNOULL moved for a rule to show cause why a writ of prohibition should not issue from this Court to the Court of the Duchy of Lancaster, to stay proceedings in a suit therein. The cause arose out of a claim to mines in the Manor of Ashburn. It would appear from documents that the mines were conveyed to the Duke of Devonshire, as Lord of the Manor. The application was now made on the ground that the Court of the Duchy had not a competent jurisdiction to 'decide the question. The COURT granted a rule to show cause. Mr. PLATT moved for a rule to show caul, why Mr. Cole, an Attorney of the Court, should not be struck off the Rolls, for allowing a Mr. Wilson to practise as an Attorney in his name. The Collar granted a rule. THE ZING V. •rrow. On the motion of Mr. LANOSLOW, the defendant, who was sentenced on Saturday to six months imprisonment in Lincoln Gaol, for a fraud upon the Apothecaries Company, was allowed to change his place of imprison ment to the Castle of Norwich. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Juts 7. Mr. Sergeant Menawirrnza was beard at some length' on a rule to show cause why a writ of privilege should not be issued to exempt Mr. Jefferies, who is Clerk of the Treasury to this Court, from serving the office of overseer, to which he bad been appointed by the parish of St. Andrew, Holborn. The Learned Counsel resisted the rule on various grounds. Mr. SergeantWmoz followed in support of the rule; and when he had concluded, The CoIMT said they would look into the form of the appointment of the officer in question, and give a de cision upon the question on a future day. STONZ V. lIIIITT. In this case a rule bad been obtained, calling upon an attorney to show cause why the judgment signed by him should not be set aside, on the ground that he had never been employed by the plaintiff. It was deposed that the plaintiff was ill, and having some debts due to him, he desired his wife to call upon the attorney, and ask him if he could get them is, but by no means to go to law ; be, however, did commence proceedings, upon which the plaintiff wrote to him, telling him to stop them, but in defiance of this letter he proceeded to sign judgment. Cause was now shows against the rule. The attorney deposed that the wile desired him to get is the debts without any reservation about not going to law; and he further deposed, that when be received the plaintiff's letter, judgment bad been already signed.—Under these circumstances, the Court discharged the rule. COURT OF EXCHEQUER. JULY T. Sittings at Nisi Pries before tie Lou Qum Boson. YIELD AND OTHERS S. HARTLEY AND OTHERS. Mr. CAMPRILL and Mr. RICKARDS alpeared for the plaintiffs, and Mr. PAVILION and Mr. BLACK/DURK for three of the defendants. This was an action brought by the plaintiffs, who were bankers, of Leeds, against the seven or eight de fendants, who formed a Company denominated the Leeds Pottery. It appeared that the defendants kept cash accounts with the plaintiffs, who advanced them various sums of money. from time to time ; and the balance now sought to be recovered, including interest, was 3,4471. 12s. 10d. On the part of most of the de fendants it was admitted that such a sum was due to plaintiffs ; but three of the defendants, named Brooke, Nicholson, aid Parsons, contended that they were not personally liable, as they were only acting as executors of some deceased partners, and they conceived that they could only be liable so far as the available assets of Ithe whole concern would cover. Mr. Caursar.r. cited several cues to show that per sons acting in a firm as executors to deceased partners were personally liable for whatever debts were con. tracted by and on behalf of the firm, without regard to the assets. The LORD CHIRP BARON held that the three defend ants were certainly responsible. The Learned Counsel for the defendants then ob served that they had no other defence to the action, and The Jury found a verdict for the plaintiffs, for 5,4471. 12s. 10d. COURT OF CONDELEGATES, JOLT 7. =CLIPS' O. ZUTSLIFIE. This was an appeal on behalf of the wife, and the husband in a former term was decreed to pay costs and alimony. The Proctor for the wife now stated that the cause , bad beers compromised by the husband's nodertaking to allow Mrs. Sutcliffe a small yearly annuity, for which he gave his personal security, but that the sr rangement was no sooner concluded than the husband left the kingdom, and resided for some time at the Isle of Man. The Proctor now moved that the husband should be pronounced in contempt, for not obeying the monition of the Court to pay the wile's costs and alimony. The Courr acceded to the prayer of the wife's Proc , tor, and pronounced Mr. Sutcliffe in contempt. An Inquest was held yesterday morning at the Turk's Herd, Putney, on the bodies of Henry White, aged Wm. White, his brother, aged 24, and John Curtis, aged 16, who (as we stated yesterday) were drowned on Sunday evening. The first witneu examined was a Waterman, named Jenkins, who deposed that on Sun day evening, about hall-past seven o'clock, he was plying at the stairs near Putney Bridge, when be heard cries of distress, appearing to issue from under the third arch of the bridge. He instantly jumped into his I wherry, and proceeded thither, when he found two cutlets entangled togeti , er. one of which was nearly , be uken to pieces. He succeeded in saving two of the ' unfortunate persons, but the other three were carried away by an under-current, and were not found till Mon day evening —Henry Williams: deposed that himself and five ocher young men hired a boat on Sunday, for the purpose of going to Richmond; and on their return in the evening they were raced by the boat in which were the deceased persons, who succeeded in getting to the bridge first, but they were not skilful enough to avoid it, and were driven by the current directly against the pier, and the cutter in which were the deceased 'persons was torn almost in half. The waterman came up, and succeeded in saving two of the young men, but the other three were lost sight of. The other young men who were with the last witness in the cutter were then examined, and they gave similar evidence, and the Jury instantly returned a verdict of 4. Accidental Death "--The Coroner said he hoped this lamentable accident would prove a warning to all inexperienced young men, not to hire boats if they were ignorant of lthe management of them. LORD MAYOR'S COURT, JULY 7. WELLINGTON V. 10X. This was an action brought for the recovery of 81. 10s. The case was a remarkable one, and a dispute took place about the evidence between the Recorder and Counsel. A bill of exchange in proof the debt was put in ; it was drawn by a person named Saunders, now dead, and accepted by the defendant in November, 1823, but the action bad been commenced within the period of limitation. Mr. BOLLARD, for the defendant, said the action was a mere fishing one, and by no means creditable to the party who had brought it. The facts were these— Saunders, who drew the bill, owed rent to the plaintiff for a house at Briztoo, and procured the defendant's I acceptance to it as an accommodation. Never, until biz years had elapsed and Saunders was dead, was the db• (cadent applied to for a farthing by the plaintiff, who, although paid the amount by Saunders, kept the ac. ceptance in his pocket, and now wished for the double liquidation. Rebecca Saunders, daughter to Saunders who drew the bill, deposed that she was present when the bill was settled in November, 182$, by her father with the plaintiff. Her father was doing a job, as a carpenter, for the plaintiff, who said, when it w as finished, " Now, Saunders, you and I are straight." " Have you got the bill with you r said her father. " No," said the plain. tiff ; " you :ball have it when you come to Loudon ; there's no occasion to be afraid, for your two daughters are present." The bill meant was Fox's acceptacce.— Went afterwards to plaintiff's house for the bill, but did not get it. This witness, in her cross-examination by Mr. Mute. HOLUM, altered the civility of her tone very much. Thete was no other bill between her father and the defendant. She came to speak about Fox's bill, and no other, and she knew there was no other. Mrs. Russell (another daughter of Saunders) de posed that she also was present when the plaintiff said to her father that the bill was settled. She called twice with her mother, at the plaintiff's house, for the bill, but did not recollect that she saw any one there. This witness, in her cross-examination by Mr. Mar mot/la, showed great impatience at being questinoed. We understood her to say that the bill was settled, in the way described, in the month of March, 1823. Mrs. Valance deposed, that she called three times at the plaintiff's house, and saw his wife upon one occa. sion, who searched tor the bill, but could not find it. A man named Penfold deposed, that in December, 1823. Saunders went to demand payment of the bill of the plaintiff, who told him that it was mislaid, but when it was found it should be given up. Mr. MIRICHOUSE here spoke privately to the plaintiff, who instantly started up, and said to the Recorder, " Upon my oath, my Lord, there is not a word of truth in all those witnesses have said." The Rzeoanza, astonished at such an interruption, sharply rebuked the plaintiff, and orJered him not to dare to utter a word again. The witnesses were all upon their oaths, and could have no interest in false swearing. Another witness deposed that he was, four or five months ago, offered 11. if he could get the value of the bill from the defendant ; he applied, but was not paid. Mr. Mummies said that he had a witness in Court to prove that a writ bad been issued against the defend ant in the year 182 S. The defendant here said, H There is not a Sheriff's officer scarcely in London who does not know where to find me "—(A laugh). Mr. Ashley, of the Mayor's Court, proved that a writ bad been issued against the defendant in October, 1523, and another afterwards. Mr. BOLLAND ridiculed the idea that all the witnesses would perjure themselves. Mr.lisasuousa said that this case was to be con sidered no longer as one of pounds. shillings, and pence, but as one affecting his character as a man of veracity. The Learned Counsel then proceeded to point out a discrepancy between the evidence of the two sisters, and stated that one of them had sworn that the bill was settled in March, which was before the rent was due, while the other swore to a different period. The Recommit—lt is no such thing, Sir; the young woman did not swear that it was settled in March. Mr. Minanousa—l have taken particular notice of her words. my Lord, and I have her words on my notes. The Rumania—l tell you. Sir, she said no such thing. Mr. Miazuonsa—My Lord, I pledge you my ho nour, that she mentioned March ; I took most attentive observation of her words. The Racoanua — lt is most indecent, Sir, to contra dict the Court in this manner. I pledge you my oath that the witness said no such thing ; and I desire, Sir, that you will not repeat this conduct. Mr. Miaanouse—l was just about to address the Jury upon the strong fact ar this variance of evidence. Look at your notes, my Lord, before you pledge your self so positively. lam boroe out by my colleague in what I say. The BRCORDIR—Sir, I have looked at my notes; I desire I may not bear this again. Mr. BURSAS! (who was with Mr. Mirebosse)—My Lord, my notes exactly agree with my Learned Friend's, and mark the variance in the testimony of the two witnesses. I The RICORDIR-Sir, I desire that this disrespect may end at once. Mr. BURIIADYMy Lord, I have in the Courts above often requested the Judges to reter to their notes. It is a common practice, and their Leldsbips never felt any offence at so reasonable a proposition. The witness has said what my Learned Friend has mentioned. The RECORDER—It is not so; or, if she did, it was a mere slip of the tongue, of which you take an undue advantage. Mr. Mu:arouse then suddenly sat down, saying to the Jury he should leave the caw to them, and 1147 not a word more. The RIWORDZI summed up at great length. and commented upon the evidence as he proceeJtd. He declared that there was no reason whatever for doubt. log the testimony for the defendant. - While the Jury were deliberating, His Loma's, addressing Mr. elirehouse and Mr. Burnaby, said, I must henceforward expect to be treated with more respect in this Court. Mr. Mtaanoves started up and said—l always act most respectfully in Mutts of Justice; and I must say that I have always been treated with respect in every Court of Justice except in this. The Recommit—This only adds to the disrespect. Mr. Buenas:—As I am included I must say, that the word indecent, which your Lordship bas used, is unbecoming, and altogether unprovoked. The Jury found for the defendant. Two men entered the P111114:01$ Boyd public-hoes?, Paul -street, Finsbury, yesterday, and called for some gin sad milk. and dotal the abacus of the landlord, to takedown the shutters, they broke open his desk in the bar, and carded of 204 in notes, and 80 sovereigns. POLICE INTELLIGENCE. MANSION HOUSE. • Yesterday Robert J.isel who was charged with forging a Chock upon Messrs. Williams and Co. bankers, at Birchin-lane, for 1541. in the month of November, 1827, was brought up for a final eta. mination. Ile had been remanded at his own request, havin g given the Lord Mayor to understand that he had an important communication to make to his Solicitor ma the subject of the char., Mr. nobler, junior, however, said not one word about any tun:. me nication. Mr. Gates, the Solicitor to the London Bankers, then tilled on Mr. Woodward co listen to the evidence which the Chief Clerk hAti taken down. _ . Mr. Woodward attended very scrupulously to it, and said he wished to make some alteration. It bad been stated that be had said he bad never autborivd the prisoner to fill up blank checks. He wished that declaration to be confined to this check.. Dir. Gates—End you leave checks open to be app:ied by the pri.- Goner as he thought proper ? Mr. Woodward-1 cannot really say. klr. Gates—Am 1 distinctly to uuderstand that the cheek with/ the signature to it has been filled up without your authority to him? Mr. Woodward-1 said on my former deposition what I canna retract. I did not authorise the pri.uner to Ml up the check._ . . Mr. Gates—You have raised al doubt in this case which d!sl not exist before. Read over the deposition, and say whether you cal retract any thing there. In the situation in which I stand I fed it tube my duty, considering the awful condition art the peis atmt , to have a most distinct answer to nly proposition. It would appear from what you have said, that you have sometimes authorised him to 611 up blank checks. I ask you now, whether that (presenting the alleged forged check) is nut one? Mr. Woodward hesitated—He was not aware that he had givst► any authority of the kind. The LORD Maros—Has the prisoner been in the habit of filling up the blink checks? Mr. Woodward—Certainly not in the habit. Mr. Mohler, jun.--Has he Dever filled up blank checks, autho. riled by you? Alr.Woudwaril—l can't say positively that be has not done so. My reason for saying so is. that from the multiplicity of business had to transact with the Gas Company, be has acted in my absence for me. Air. Gates—You see the awful situation in which this man stands. I must press you for a distinct answer, whether he might not hare filled up this check for you? You must know whether, on the 541 of Nov. 1827, you authorised him to draw out of the Bank 154 f. or not. _ _ _ Mr. Nobler, jua. submitted to the Lord Mayor that Mr.W OO 4. ward had already given his evidence, and be would ask his Lord ship wbether that was sufficient to authorise the committal of the prisoner for forgery ? The Loan ]larva—There is certainly enough, I am sorry to say. to oblige me to send this case before a Jury. llae charge has been made out in a sufficiently strung manner. The prisoner appeared excessively dejected. The deposition were then signed, and the prisoner was committed to ?sewgate for trial. Sir Wm. Curtis and a partner in the house et Williams and Co. were present during the damination. WORSHIP STREET. Yesterday a respectable-looking man, named Frederick 4llird. by trade a tailor, was brought before Mr. Wa•saa. the Magistrate. by Dorsett, a parish officer, charged with baying killed a man named Smith, while they were engaged iu playing a game at skittles. It appeared the primmer and the deceased, with two other men, who were present at the time, were all fellow.abepenates In the employment of Mr. Simpson, a tailor, in St. Swithin's-lane ; and on the evening before they took a walk, u far as the Duke of York, Beauvoir place, Kitipland.road, when • match at skittles was pro. posed and acceded to. During the play the deceased stood near the pins, and by some accident or other, be either stooped or slipped at the moment the prisoner delivered the ball, which struck the deceased on the neck near the ear. He instantly fell, gave three heavy groans, and expired. Howlett said, be was sent for to the Duke of York: He heard different versions as to bow the accident took place. One said be I was adjusting the pins, wither said he was stooping. lighting his pipe with a match, while a third would have it that Ise slipped, H. west Into a room where he saw the prisoner, who said that he was the unfortunate person who bad dose it. He then took him into custody, and thought it his duty to bring him before the Magistrate. Other witnesses were examined who were present, and the pri soner was remanded until after a Coroner's Inquest has been held. He was deeply affected, and regretted extremely that he shoukt have caused the death of a fellow-creature. L A M BET H.STRBRT. Mr. Wood, a respectable silversmith, accompanied by Stone the beadle, and ass of the Overseers of the Hamlet of Milo-esid Ord Town, waited on the Magistrates for the purpose of eaposing as iniquitous attempt made some due since to ilia the parentage of a bastard child on the former Gentleman. A girl named DiasSata Geesey had sworn a and to Mr. Wood; but she prevaricated so grossly that the case was adjourned, and subsequently she had ad mitted that a man named Young was the father, and that sbe had been induced by some female acquaintance to swear it to Mr. Wood, who, being a wealthy man, could better afford to maintain it. The girl being questioned by Mr. Haeounct, admitted that she had sworn falsely, when she deposed that Mr. Wood was the father of the child, and be ordered her to be committed for twelve months to the Haug of Correcdon, en her own confessloo, u a lewd person. Mr. Wood and the Overseers interceded for the girl, which called forth an ezpression et surprise from the Magistrate, who finally sentenced her to three mouths' imprisonment. UNION.HALL ♦ wises, named Rwr about three weeks shim tendered a bad ball crown is pueblo. ef a few deem it paper at the shop of Mt. Bersiem. stadener. of Great Surrey♦treet, and nomedod la the impedtion. Oa Thunday se'imight she same penes made a Is. mid attempt, wu detained, 'ad taken before the skiing Mash. trate, Mr. Swab's. Mr. Swaim stated, be well recognised the prisoner bevies tn. dered the ire half crown, and which be teen after disarmed to be a menterfeit, and took it into his parlour to preserve It, but ti some means it was mislaid. The Magistrate desired the cdicen to ask the prisoner her ad. dress. ke. They observed to the bench that the prisoner resided ' in a noted place in Old-strem-road. and they had no doubt was s cemmen utterer of base naerwry. The Magistrate remanded the prisoner for seven days. in ardor that the raw et the Mu might have mode, to attend. The fee. thee hearing took last Thursday. Mr. Boniest related the case. and rejaested i to know whether the premises of the prisoner bed bees watched by the police elan t They answered se. It was not their Maims; and Bend. the beadle of the with al Mist Chunk to whom the prisoner was given in charge. mid It was not his. The Gentlemen from the Mint (from neglect seam I where) were net In attendance; sad the Magistrate. wades all the drcenutanon. discharged the prisoner. medal* her new to bt seen in the noidhbourhood et Blackfrian agsis, and requested kW Denim to preserve the half crown. in use of SWIM SUMP' 1 Mr. Bentsen observed that that was not very likely. BA;THi. Jul 4, U Park ereetwet. Penland-oam 11n. Deo, of aow In Wesualower, the Lady at F. Pa/graye, Roof a acs. July 4, is Cetmaught.plue, the Lady Remota Yemen Wet► wort►, of a daughter. July S, at Lambeth, the wife of C. atemes, M.D. of a sos. At Kandy, at t►e lot January, the Lady of Captain M. LAndaaf• 70th Highlanders, of a daughter. MARRIED. July 1, at St. Jahn Lee. Neethumberlesd. Matthew Cam Rat of St. Peteraburgb. to Phebe. youngest delights, of the late J. D. Lanham, Fs+ of Beddlck, Darkens. Be Dahl% the Rev. Robert Peekeshass. to Harriet Mark, more dirmiser of the late Bight den. Deals Browse M.P. Is Dublin. Thomas Swettenhass. Esq. of Swotted:mu Mike, to A Math, eldest daughter of Colonel Ales. llesollair seadot. at Gbmire Chuck Cis . rcis Job OPMI.I. Me Copula In the ol Dragons to Dorset Rea* dwighter el William Massy Baker, Seq. et Fen WIWI, sear Col Monday. at Marria•benee, Ovals R. Irmo( the la ill lade, to Sarah, youngest daughter at the late J. Sabine, t ail ' Yesterday. the 7th Wt. at the Church et AS Sesia, •Ir lame, Mr. Ch hams of Great Perdesd.euvet. Lisa Itisafiell. et WaNdsweni ; when the parties. being mamba al the Church tom as 4 4 Free4hiskiag Chrialene," preeseted do weal grout et that body again the edebratlea of manly , bf a religions Woad et a civil farm . Nunn} N OTICE L ll Oyer and Offences commi the Adminlty a OW Bailey, Lee eight o'clock in 1 And all Sheri custody any Pat High Seas, or w required to tram Pri.oner to Mr. at his Office, Na that the mecum Prisoners to Ida 1 intended Session Officer., before a slum, or Rowel Offences, are rm THOMAS SNILTON Admiralty of Hai the Old Balky, L PRRPARATC YOUNG G Age, are e, CI.RIIGYMAN is by t►e see side, Full particulan Rev. A. B. Poo i H. TIENJA MU 11 (who suppil Decormiuns, at to quantity of SEC (.3046. with Pule the whole are in I day, by the Horti Tents, Poles, &e. Orders, by Poo S. Toolepatreet, I HOUS HENR Y Within, HOLDECR, yond what his Ilegi and good Family I also Marine Villas, themselves of his E tieulars on or Won tleman detritus of tin at their Walden It is presibted fe facilities in 'Cretin' extensive Conoeitio Forty Years), the e it. •ietllity to Gar Auction nt nearly isuite.4 with the vet the best guarantee I expected.-93. alb' ENUrS C, a-1 be reparod Messrs. IHOSIAS al Aladettester. It i stoppers at 4s. 64. by their various United Kingdom; engraved on the Gt or stopper of each h Inay br had, millet Smarr of Vismaaa genuine preparatiut THE BILIO and Son, am acme at the presto be his employed ii turniplog mums. ro w dy, they pri st blis. or eon se she stomach and Moe to the Wary relief to those who giddiness, indigestk The Bilious AM; the Government St Paul's Church Y. London ; W. Pe ts Country, price Yn i Homing Our peg Just published 1. rIIIIE AGII .A. wry un tht which the Causes, E learn, Gunorrhtea, veluyird. Part 11. Debility, Self- Muni Observations om Ve, Naries of Cases Mu them ha a familiar 11 By GOB 3 Natm - Omnibus ess Since Heave li and l A ( N o r A i s lnc ;n y t i b t ilr al i ts . :t . f o ri :m aP al l onions the peel dwelt upon, Inter/ Quo fugit VI - iWhither Iles aThe above May Istnoster-row ; C. C dadilly ; Callow and firer', Sotto; T. and aid Si'u, 174, nest. London ; Martini, 0 • wricb ; R. Deck, Ipi • pard, Corn ureec, 1 Cunbridse ; Todd, Trewenan, Reefer; Ilarrop, Ildambester towseract, Fdinbury by all 13uokeeUers—( i; bluer& Goss and 1 *air basso; and Pa • mist* tbo cue, at wake caploa lama 00111 kid C.. 1 . Finnutisse, 'Leda DUCD. In Cedviesileee. Mrs. E.llarrati. d her Silt rear. At Ids radian in Jaaimetreet. Deli pate. F. s. MPS Li. le the Nth year Obis age. At Hampteinvidt, Julia, trite el Coeds Willem ietarell• her nth yam At York Tema. 'Meat% Park la the OA year et lb 1 0 Jame Hews Wiry. as of Waren OtArb imam: Meted and Published by Jens Mem o et OM OPP OM," NU. s o liskyogiese. TM* I. mAIMINI