Star. — London, England, 1827-04-13 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE. COURT OF CHANCERY, Ann. 12. GLASSINGTON V. TRWAITSA. On the sitting of the Court, this morning, Mr. Glas sington, the petitioner in the above cause, begged to re mind-his Lordship of his promise to deliver out the mi nutes of his order to the Registrar. The LORD CGANCELLORI have rut forgotten that cause of Qlassington v. Thwaites, but if persons will blunder for three years together. in the way in which they have done in this case, the matter is not easily set right. l have, however, drawn out the minutes, which I will deliver - to the Registrar. Mr. Glassingtnn said, it he had not been in the peat's% distress, he would not have troubled his Lordship. the fact was, that he had been arrested in his Lordship's pre serfce, whilst his cause was being argued. at the instance of his former Solicitor, who was now the avowed agent of the defendant. The Lotto CHANCELLOR—If any one has dared to arrest you whilst you were attending your cause, I am sure, it a proper complaint ,had been made, the party would not have ventured to do any thing of that sort again. With respect to the case in which you are en gaged, I do not believe there is any Gentleman at the Bar who ever saw a case which has been so conducted. If you or any one else supposes, that where blunder follows blunder, till a regular system of error is estab lished upon the record, each as 1 never remembered in my life, and imagine this can be easily set right, you do not understand the difficulties of the case. I can.-bOw ever, assure you, that no one is more desirous than /am to get you rid of all your difficulties. SITTINGS. His Lemont'r stated. for the convenienceof parties, that the First Seal would be on Tuesday the gith inst. but that, he would sit here on Thursday sliest and the fol lowing Saturday, for the express purpose of giving judgments, letting the Solicitors on both sides know the cases in which he would give judgment. GRANT V. ORANT•-•.Ni =RAT IMMO. This matter was again spoken to. By one calculation that had been handed to the Court, it appeared that doily 5001. and a fraction was due to Sir Alexander Grant, by another 16,0001. and by another 6,0001. His Lordship felt unable to reconcile these calculations, but it did appear to him that the last sum ought to be the sum to which the writ ought to be reduced. Mr. 14. tar's client then consented to givrbail for the 6,0001. TAILORS . RIGHTS TO HAVE Et...PARTE HISONCTIONS. Mr. SBA/WELL moved a few days ago * befnre the Vice-Chancellor, exiarfe, for an injunction, on behalf of one tailor against another. His Honour considered, that if he granted the injunction, it would be abasing the principle nn which the exTerie injunctions had been granted. We believe the parties lived at Bath, and that the plaintiff is the father of the defendant. Mr. SRA/WELL applied yesterday, at the rising of the Court, to his Lordship, in the shape of an appeal. His Losisant, said to-day.he wished to know what be was to do shout the tailors? Mr. SHADS/ILL considered the only question to be, whether the Court Would grant the injunction or not ? His LORDSHIP thought he could not refuse it merely because the parties were tailors. The next point was, whether the sum of 2501. stated to be in dispute be tween two tailors, was a sum too small for the jurisdic. Con of this Court? and upon this point his Lordship did not feel authorised to say that one tailor was not entitled to have the interference of the Court against another tailor, in consideration of that sum—(laughter) —and therefore the injunction would have to go. • • WELLESLIti W. THR DUES OP REM/PORT. Mr. SHADwut stated, that as the costs already in curred in this matter were very considerable, amounting to above 3,0011. and as they would necessarily be in creased by the appeal which Mr. Wellesley had thought proper to set down before the House of Lords, his clients, Messrs. Hutchinson and Holdsworth, the Solicitors for the infants, bad been advised to present a petition, pray. ing that the Receiver might .he directed to advance them a suns of 2,0001. in part payment of their bill, and for the purpose of enabling them to prosecute the suit. 14e. Tnalmove, on the same side, thought that it was a most extraordinary thing that Mr. Wellesley should have evinced any desire to be served with a copy of this petition, as, considering what had been done in this cause. that Gentleman had no concern whatever with the distribution of his children's property. Mr. HART. on the part of Mr. Wellesley, said, it was the kit time he had ever heard it asserted that a parent, also . . by the law of the land, was the natural and legal guardian of his children, had no interest in preventing their property from being wasted and dissipated. He trusted his Lordship would not allow the property of the infants to be employed in the payment of these casts, merely because it was alleged that great expenses bad been incurred in the carrying on this suit. The parties had not thought proper to deliver any bill of costs, nor could he, by any means, conjecture how the sons of 3,0001. had been incurred by two or three hear ings and a few hundred folios of affidavits. Mr. SUADWeLL, in reply, said, admitting Mr. Wel lesley was the natural parent of the children, still, ay.. cording to the judgment of the Lnrd Chancellor, he had not placed himself in such a situation as would enable him to act in that character. The Lotto CHANCIILLOR said, though he could not lay down any rule why Mr. Wellesley should or should not have been served with a copy of the petition, yet, notwithstanding the decision of the Court as to his rights as a parent, still it ought to take care that such a deci sien should not have too harsh en effect. The reason Ire wished Mr. Welledey should be served with the petition was, because he apprehended it would be said that the receiver had no money in his hands wherewith to pay the costs; as, on looking over there very volumi nous affidavits, he remembered that Mr. Wellesley had himself received some portion of the rents,in consequence of certain mortgages on the property. The real question upon this motion was, whether it would be for tl.e benefit of these infants that the sum should be advanced for the purpose of enabling their Solicitors to carry on this mat ter before the House of Lords. in order that the errors of that Court might beset right, or whether it should be re• leered to the Master ? Upon the whole, as he conceived no ewe wield doubt that this had been a very expensive proceeding, be could see no objection to Mr. Shad well's client having 1,5001. subject to an account. • Mr. Harr thought Messrs. Hutchinson and Co. ought to deliver a bill of costs. ne LORD CHANCJILLOR had no• objection to those Ger.t!emen taking their bill in before ths. Master, and haring the twhdle of the eons which he should allow els° to the present time. Mr. Haat—Does not your Lordship think that Mr. Wellesley should attend the taxation of the Bill ? The LORD CRANCRLI,OR-1 do not • know what. to, say to that. Will Mr. Wellesley be at the expense of it? for you s-e there is no other fund out of which these costs can be had except the eldest boy's estate. No further conversation took place upon the subject. VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT, Ann. H. COY INT• eA RDIN BMWs v. KIIIIIILI AND itilliSlF•isuomiarr. The VICE-CHANCELLOR, on taking hisseat this morn ing, gave judgment in this case. His Honour minutely went over the evidence, the details of which have already been made public. He observed that in March. 1822, the plaintiff, Henry Harris, became proprietor of 14 24th shares of the property of Covent-garden Theatre, with Messrs. Kemble, Willett, and Forbes. and Mr. Const, who was also one of the defendants. This agree ment provided that the plaintiff, Henry Harris, was to assign a lease of Covent-garden Theatre to a Mr. Harrison, and that Messrs. Kemble, Willett, and Forbes were to take a lease of the Theatre from this Gentleman for ten years, at a rent of 12,0001. per' annum ; the plaintiff was to receive 7.0001. a-year under this agreement. All the profits of the Theatre were, according to the conditions of this agreement, to be paid to discharge the incumbrances that affected the property. The plaintiff having no other property excepting the Theatre, stipulated that he should receive certain rents paid to the proprietors. These consisted of the profits , ofthe saloon and fruit-room, the profits derivable from iniocerta, and the rent of a private box, rented bySie E., Antrobus for 2101. per annum, making in all a yearly, Amome of 14601. The defendants.; it appeared, were' ' dissatisfied with this arraagement, and entered into an agreement with him to purchase his interest in the establishment. An arrangement was accordingly pre fteski by the defendants, that the yearly expellees of Ate Theatre should be proportioned to its profits.— he plaiotiff objected to this proposal, but offered to take the Theatre at a rent of 13,5001. per annum., , The defendants, however, refused this offer, and bad recourse to a proceeding which his Honour was sow called upon to decide, namely—the original agree ment. The plaintiff, Mr. Harris, soon after thisagree went, resigned, and the affairs of the Theatre fell into the hands of the defendants, who, conceiving that Mr. Const was a party to the arrangement, introduced his name into the deed of agreement. Mr. Coast, how: 'ever, filed a bill in Chancery, with a view to carry into effect a deed executed on the 15th of March, 1812, which proved, amongst other things, that the profits of the establishment should be applied to the payment of the debts by which it was affected, until the whole of thoie debts were satisfied. The Lord Chancellor made an order to that effect, and desired that a re ceiver should be appointed to carry into effect the pro- visions of the original deed. A few days after this order had been made, the defendants caused a letter to be written, directed to Mr. Harris, repudiating the agreement entered Into between the parties. On the 11th of March,. 1824, the plaintiff filed his bill, in order to secure the due performance of the lease which the defendants had assigned him. Mr. Const was made a party to the bill, not on the grounds of his being an executing party to the deed, but that be had subse quently identified himself with it. No case, however, had been made out against Mr. Const, and therefore with respect to him, and as far as he was concerned in the Bill, the Court were of opinion that it should be dismissed with costs. The rest of the defendants, exclu sive of Const, then said, that they were no longer bound by the deed of 1822. They. insisted further that they had no notice of the deed of 1812. He (the Vice- Chancellor) was of opinion that the plaintiff in this re spect had not departed from the agreement. The plaintiff was charged next with misleading the defend "ants with regard to the profits of the Theatre; the ac eounts of the Theatre were for many years ept by a person named Brandon. The defendants admitted that those accounts were open to their inspection, and one of them actually suggested an alteration in the mode of keeping them, which was afterwards adopted. Yet it was charged against Mr. Brandon that he was in competent to keep his accounts. The plaintiff had written to the defendants, stating that the average re ceipts for 12 seasons were to the amount of 82,0501. one third however of the gross receiptsof the Theatre was to be deducted for the expenses incurred on benefit nights. His Honour here entered into a variety of details, read ing over and commenting on the evidence with great clearness and precision, with a view to shew that the plaintiff had not wilfully misrepresented the profits of 'the Theatre. The next charge against the plaintiff was, that he concealed from the defendants the letting of a box in the Theatre. This box had originally been let to the Duke of Gloucester, at a yearly rent of 2101. The plaintiff sold this box to Sir Edw.Antrobus for each alternate week, for the term of twenty-one yam's.' Mr. Harris, however, being a proprietor of one-half of the.Theatre, could easily be held responsi ble for this act, and therefore the charge of conceal. ment could not be maintained. Under all the cir cumstances of the case, his Honour was of opinion that the plaintiff was entitled to a decree. He should, there fore, make an order to that effect, and refer the matter to the Master to settle the form of deed, stipoisping that Mr. Const should not be a party to it. He should also direct that a new trustee be appointed in the room of Mr. Harrison. With regard to Trotter, there was no occasion to make him a party to the deed, and, there fore, he not being a party to the bill, had a right to have it dismissed with costs. Harrison, however, being a party to the deed, his costs should be taxed, and paid by the plaintiff. His Honour concluded by directing that the costs of the plaintiff should be taxed, and that they should be paid by the defendants. beginning of Drcember, and sent him away.. I had five pigs, worth about 11. each. Oa Saturday morning.i the 9th of December. I went to Gloucester market, and returned at six o'clock in the evening. when they were all gone. The next Tuesday I saw two at Samuel Gardner's. I mgt with another at Frankis's house, and another at Stroll' market. I never got any of them again. I knew them directly I saw them by a scissors mark. Prisoner-- - 4ather, you do not know where they are marked. Samuel Gyde—They were marked on the foreheads' he bought them, and I paid for them. I told him on the 6th of December, and again afterwards on the Bth, of December, he should never do any thing for me again, or torch any thing of mine. By she JUDOS—He used to buy and sell for me be fore that, and eat with me, but slept out. I took him before the Magistrate on the 7th of March. We have had no quarrelling since. He was saucy to me the very next week after the pigs went. I did not send for him to go to Gloucester market. Prisoner—Yes, you did, father, ancll sent you part of the money for the pigs. Samuel Gyde—His wife gave me a 11. note bill. Prisoner—Father, I told my wife to give you the 11. in part payment, and to say I would make up the rest as soon as I could. Samuel Gyde—No, his wife gave me the 11. in part of money owing to me before. Samuel Gardner—l bought two pigs on the 9th of December of the prisoner for 11.175. 6d. which I gave him. I did not know he had left his father's service then. He used to be in the habit of buying and selling for his father. His father claimed the pigs the next day, but I did not give them up: Henry Frankis and Daniel Estcourt also bought pigs of the prisoner, which the father claimed, but they did not give them up. The prisoner said in his defence that be had sold hundreds of pigs for his father before, that he sold these for him, and,ititended giving him the money, and had sent him 11. in part. Mr. Baron VAUGHAN.—It is a melancholy thing to see a falser prosecuting aUM It is doubtful whether the prisoner might hot conceive that the authority his father had given him was not properly put an end to. It is singular that there was no prosecution until the 7th of March, and if the pigs were stolen, it is strange that the father did not insist upon having them back. The prisoner may be a very unworthy son; but you cannot, under this charge, consider whether he did or did not embezzle the money, and from the nearness of the relationship, there is some doubt whether he may not have mistaken his authority. The Jury found the prisoner Not Gstiky. Mr. Baron VAUGHAN.-4 hope this will be a warn iog to you. If you ever appear here again, where you are no stranger, you will meet with no mitigation of the punishment for the offence of which you may be guilty. Henry Workman was indicted for having stolen a bay gelding, the property of Edward Osborne, out of "bin field, At Tortworth, on the 18th of February, nes. Mr. HORACIS Twurs.—The horse was lost on the 18th of February, 1825, and found the next day in the pos *ion of the prisoner, who was suffered to depart on his promise to produce the person from whom he said he had got it. This he did nut do, but went away entirely, and was not heard of until a year and a half after wards, when he was taken into custody. He must now aceount for the way he got the horse. George Clarke, corn dealer, at Tetbury—l saw the prisoner on horseback on the .18th of February, 1825, on my return home from Wotton-under-Edge roarket. We talked together. Hi praised his horse, and said he had ridden it from Somersetshire. He told me be was sent by his father to sell it, and was about to den with a man of the mime of Simkins. I appointed to meet him the next morning, to chop his horse for my mare. He came the next day, and offered me the hone for 251. I went to his quarters to see the horse, and after bargaining a long while, he agreed to let me have him for six guineas and my blind mare. He said it was as bad as giving away the horse. I suspected he had stolen it, and I therefore took him to the Angel Inn, and got him into a room, and said, " Young man, you:liave 'stolen this honer and I gave him in charge of the beadle while I went to Simkins, who came back with me, and Simkins said, the prisoner had called on him. The prignier then said, his father lived at Red-hill. be-1 low Bristol ; he would fetch him, and satisfy me about. the horse. We let him go, but he did not return, and I never saw him until last September, when I pointed' him out among a crowd of people at Wotton-under- Edge, and he was apprehended. Edward Osborne-_I saw my horse on the evening of the 18th of February, 1825, and missed him the next morning, and immediately put out a hand-bill. The day following the prisoner came voluntarily to me, - and asked me if I had lost a horse? I told him I had; he said a horse had been taken op at Tetbury, which an• swered the description of the bill, and Mr. Clarke had it; I gave him a shilling and some victuals, and told him if it turned out to be my horse, I would give him something handsome, if he would come smother day. I got back my horse, but the prisoner never came to me again. Witnesses were called for the prisoner's character, but did not appear. Mr. Baron VAUGHAN—The horse was stolen from the prosecutor's field, and almost immediately found in the prisoner's possession. The ;resumption of the law in such cases is, that the party in whose possession it is, steals it, unless he satisfactorily accounts for his having it. Verdict—Guilty. Sentence of Death recorded. Mr. Baron VAUGHAN, after making inquiries of the governor of the gaol, said, "This is a very bad offence, but its there is no reason to believe that you belong to a gang, it is probable your life will be spared ; but you cannot hope to remain in this country. " r the enti had 1 1 , par cost seta ing! lest cot hat t eat lay nom • DOI as 41 sit) tte pei to to 1 to hit of up of pu tel fel 013 cli . . ou G, 4 • • . • • ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE. GLOUCESTER, Aver. 10. The Judges, Mr. Baron VAUGHAN and Mr. Serge= BOSANQUET, attended Divine Service in the Cathedral MANSION-HOUSE. this morning, where the Rev. Mr. WILLIAMS Preached. A person named Jackson applied to the LORD MAIMS for Ms Business began a little after one o'clock. Mr. Baron Lordship** advice, under these circumstances: A friend of his had, VAUGHAN presides in the Crown Court. For the county he Cheshiresaid, found ts a eh c o her use for dre 4loo , nn in Cutt i ls an-stdreCeotlsneanrkthine and city there are 192 prisoners in the calendars. Lord favour of Mews. John - and ' Philip Perrin& of Bishopagate-street. EDWARD SOMERSIT was foreman of the Grradd Jury. He had that morning presented 'the cheque at the Bank, to mar -7 homas Gyde, aged 26, was indicted for stealing, on tarn If it were genuine, and the clerk to whom he shewed it, took the 9th of December, in Painsivick,• five pigs, the pro. it from him (applicant), dashed his pen through It, and refused to petty of Samuel Gyde. return it, when the applicant snatched it from the Clerk, and it was torn in the scuffie. He wanted to know if he could summon The prosecutor is the father of the prisoner, and by the Clerk for the assault? the bad conduct of his ion lie has been compelled to The LORD Maros replied, that he could not, as, however int institute this prosecution, with the sincere conviction proper such conduct might have been (and he was sure the Bankers that it is the only means of reclaiming him. • would not have sanctioned it), It did not amount to an assault. ! -- . Besides, many persons are in the habit of fi lling up blank cheques, Samuel Gyde—The prisoner is ray son. I made hini which accident had pot 'hens in possession of, and plVStfliing them a wcaly aliowance of 8 but I ceased doing so in the •ra differmt liat:ks, demanding soznethilig Cut their twubis and Isavo POLICE INTELLIGENCE. of time. isrishilhy the Cloth imagined tills to be a Adige , sort. His Hi er% T o " w dati oull, r b e r tl wa theMed s etrtaint,hiegiZiLialkantiontleo rtueltarMan,,keak if thecheque were genuine. GU11,12/H ALL. [ In our Police report co Wednesday.w• mentioned that ,- r a .4mactsman, was committed for abstracting A ,11=780 6 be found lying in Fleet-street, after be knew eileased. He was proved to hale picked up th e bee analkeMilits failing from the owner, to have stared there ink and to have correctly described a part of the notes I yen he persisted in denying that there was any money wherever in the pescitet-book when he found ie. H i was discredited, end be was sent for trial; but a can, Richard Laws, a cerium, was brought forward, va n * , statement goes to prove the Coachman's entire innoep ft , stases, that he was driving a cart through Ffeet.stre tt i mmediat.4 y after a haelknercoach on Friday last, and saw the coach man pick -;",! the pocket-bookbast be did not notice a roll of notes near it, uh.- witness took Bp, and it proved to be the identical Xis poor coachman had been committed for teeming. 11,, his good luck to Mr. Nicholls, a publican in the Savoy, day, and imbsemsently changed the notes with his master' The siker stated, that a man having seen the Police Re port e. coaelsman's commitment, and having overhead seine ru men ,- L ,, taproom talking over Laws good fortune, stated the cireemst arr e to a frieud, who communicated them to the prosecutor, -- . led to the discovery of Laws, who had Linn up .Cie of t. The cater was directed to bring forward all the evidence to thew the notes were in the carman's possession on the were lost, so as to completely establish the coachman's i who, unless bailed by a Judge, must nevertheless remain gate until the 31st of May. BO W-STRRRT. Yesterday information was laid, ruder the Act s Gee. ' 79, commonly called the Printers' Act. against Meßpg, g i as charging him with having published a certain hand.hin, s . paper, not having thereon the printer's name. The case arose out of the segoebbles in . St. Pure ca l m den, between the Its and themes—die advocates of Met.. admirers of open vestries. . Mr. Boosinsacm made a few obeervatioes on the contents paper, which he said far mended the bounds of fair , and offered to withdraw the information, if the other . admit thus mock. Mr. ADOLVIOS, on the other hand. objected, is /ai m , proceedings, and the point was reserved. He there denied ail k ledge of the transaction, and the complainant called whams A youth deposed, that Mr. Gandy had given him - papers to deliver, and paid him 6d. per hundred. He . witnesses knew Mr. Greatly agate, shim* it was Aged had since shaved off a very hood kom pair of whiskers, suddenly become so short-sighted, as to wear qwetacles.(iaaghte), Mr. Attest/nos—l should like to know who the stupid fade. Is laughing'—whoever be may be, he Is a most consurnmat , Mr. Bamitame thought there maid be no great harm Mr. Amm.ristre—lt le an outrage area mason Ma common sense, if you know what they any Mr. lif 'deficit Mr. Bamatmee—Yes, I do Maw what they are, - know what you are. A copy of the bill was produced, bet the informant mein that it was the paper actually delivered by the 0 and the ease was dismissed. MARY-LA-BONNE. Yesterday, a servant out of duration, who lodged at , in Oxford-street, was committed to the New Priem. 4 He was charged by a cow keeper's boy. at Kentivh.eowa, attempted to minunit an unnatural crime so Sunday nit Henry Zgeu, a respectable looking Twang man, who a stranger in London, was charged with an assault. Amt. of Bury-street, stated, that as a young Lady s. along Percy-street,stnder his proceeded, at half-past titer's nesday night, the defendant and another young man ins' with the most disgswitsg language, and when he mewed t Lyon struck him. Mr. Lyon denied the truth of this statement, and • a Mr. Smith to refute it. 0 That man, your Worship," said the watchman, _ been charged too, for he is the other party that insulted Mr. Gatemen.-.-Then I won't take his evidence. Mr: Smith—lt's very hard, your Worship, that , what I have to say: Mr. Gearerne—lt is very bard that a Lady is not walk along the street,-under the protection of a Gent out being insulted in this shameful manner. Lock until they Sad bail.—The gaoler obeyed the Magistrase's but an apology was afterwards accepted by Mr. Fixate parties were permitted to leave the ce,, the young I no doubt, with a determination to avoid in future ' London watchlacruse. UNION-HALL. Yesterday, a man, who said hie name was William piled for a license to preach. He said he bad carried c nem of an umbrelia.maker, In Derbyshire, but having ported that most of the community in the &rough of were in a state of utter ignorance of Divine Revelation, London for the express purpose of expounding to them t" the Gospel, and to save their souls. The applicant w, deaf. He handed to the Magistrate a letter written 1..._ and which was Intended as a specimen of hie orthography of writing. The Magistrate told him that he had bete , Derbyshire, and follow his buskins, and refused to grant TOWN-HALL Aues.lfaris Ore, an old wawa, was charged with net round the-house of a respectable tradesman in Tee This hoary Mom, was the same day discharged from \ Compeer, after seven days imprisonment, for stealing tubirseattor, and in revenge broke his windows and she promised to repeat frequently. She was value and costs Ss. which being-mable to pay, sbe was, the House of Carer:don at Simon for seven days. AIM Ash, a desperate looking ruffian, was held muting a disiarbasee at St. Thomas's Hospital, where and ley wife bad received the kindest treatment, and bad I of ague; the wife remaining as nurse, whom he sought of her imam A true Bill has been found by the Grana the County of Middlesex against William Crock, St. James's-street, for keeping a gaming•house, the prosecutor, a Mr. Dicks, had lost at yr the sum of 9701. at the game of rouge et 'Rol LAKE'S GENUINE PILLS, justly L curing, in all its stages, the VENEREAL One small Pll is a dose, and the taking of one Bet, am, will soon convince the patient of the certainty rummy. Nothing can be better mouthed, Man movenient than this Remedy, for such as are obliged or to sea, as it needs no confinement nor restraint sixty years experience (in an extensive practice) has will effect a Cure when repeated Salivation and all u. avail nothing. For the Scurvy and other Chronic& this Medicine has not its parallel Upwards of 40,1 of both sexes have been radically cured, of the above dors, within the last eight years. Prepared and ffogrietors, T. TAYLOR and SON, Members of Lige of Surgeons, at their House, No. 9, New Dozes of may es. 9d. each, duty included.----rr reeti doom and Lights in the Passages at night.—They by their appointment, with copious directions, at to 110, Oxford -street; Mr. Disharongh's, No. 7, fish-sirrevaiN Pearly oppodte the Monument ; and by one Person is then' C Oll ' siderable Town in Great Britain and Ireland. Advice rid" p Twos taking the above, or other of the Proprietor% Jtisdktasa DIED. azialat, elj et i e r t i on t i 7 s a tneh t a a r i y iy previous ilhaesa, at Addle Croft. In the to" anniversary of the da e r li on iud w deth h is i sli ch uld b e e : tli vr e l im s P h d . t i mia tis risec ed ha r l as j: : P p i pe cta ar sW°ilfbrtirithern the register ads. Parish Church of Alniondbury. This venerat 4 man enjoyed during the whole of his long life a most singobri, good stable health, unaided by medical science; the only doctors bill be ever had amounting but to fourpence. His food was ;Ms and simple, consisting principally of dishes made of oatnwal never drank tea, and never was intoxicated. He lived fie the wig* . of four of our Kings, cue of which was the longest reign frog!" in English history. He retained his faculties to the last, and Magill' was so perfect that be bad never occasion for spectacles. As sonOlo list he was exemplary. and be was an ornament to religion. --- -- - HIGH-WATRIt at LONDON-BRIDGE TO MORROW. Moraine 46 aunum attar 3 Aftentoas a • 6 maims attar 4 * Imivene: Maid and Palbead by Jess Mayor, the ereptietili at the lizas Omen, rickettsia/Pe, Teaatia.Bar. N. 4 ' • a cheist ett 1 04;0 1,41 I go to Mew l , SUS' # ll1 i reir.unarati t o, that Hitagdrik ng Fla from a knew to wham s the boot lairs. I tha t was nu tuxes kw. ad money or !WWII C. Hi s 4,,, d4 :V l ' :1 1 * Man, mewl vsig. " tn. *, *kcal iseence. taws 411.01 1 set immediately sachroan pick as .*fl' rat it, which tlll • ir XIS *tick 40 He steutieeed . I ;way, the lame miter's d0k...: • )I re Report et t 4 one cam eo I be dramaturge tutor, and ib m l 4 of the motl e y. 'ideate possible; : on t he day ti n lan's Mamm, cumin it New. Lim P • If Go. 'Mar. VIP IPareill Go* dc printed . 1 10 rs, Comm Gm. seketood Mg Ilk e contents of the t _ . 41 f ; WM& CAW side midi rof Ally. is listing, sa Oa denied all tam Z y d %imam. w eak him MI edit rldss I. He awl albs M alleged dot be Indies, sod bad - tatleaklaaulatet), :11 11 0 1 stupid faded% summate am t harm in. a lasgb. *4l son decency led Braterichl ..• . ars, and I ail derma fold h I the Belem bes md et a ifeimelap Cheiessol .tows,wishbaslai It daf orbs said hoes wk. Mr. Oro Lady mu walkirg SW eleven era Ted man insulted ht wowed them, Na. ad called foratiti tweak baud.. in, "ought t 011.41 .44., nwlted the Lady.' Ike. Ap.m sa▪ t you WWI% bar • is not pfultted Gentleman, wit& • ihal .ask them bed tp lagistrate's side. IT. Matt, ant tht stn ming totnuryinn, of /km ore the Mode al s a Can at o k id Ipilliam Wg46," Zeus arrird on thole* datl having heard kw idol ough of Southwark shitm relation, he cameo fig them the maim! tummy I ft was eseeedirep :ten in bad BOW Ow"; hography and lOW %Oa ad better num to 10 grant thallium 1".13 id with twang a 141111 b in Tooleyiereet— I from the Norm* mating bacon from Demo is and raised s riot, was fined is the WIA I r wu committed to held to bail fa where both hist and bad been rated sought to depute Grand Jury for [us Crockford, of .house, in which at various timei u et T i rly famous tar AL DISEASH.r . Ice klot, in I rec d* _, linty o f his Rorer more safe, or ' we A etigad I° P }agriis • i trained Diet; ail a) boo pe•ww lthsti - a an other me w swank& awe" 4of 40,000 Pr"' • e above cowl al* and a sold by qit Is irel we b a• • l in -They are alo wli i 7 1°5 : 7: :A t es ti. Fliathe' c l ewfT ediew 7ff ecill: • Croft. In the tam chal Joshua White v i liered f il e l . : ( l s a oo the as most .krhi fooi a oni pPlrae ri T :t w ae nf da l as ::: s6 :f f p r: w ; ib be: , de of patine ectac kah lbl4.eglibw:r:ignabil it tr s bellise" l' W—" pg : t to relies*. p a TO MORROW. IBir =lutes atter 3 situates atter 4 • no. the Proptigi l, T49,14.8a.