Star. — London, England, 1830-12-01 00:00:00

with, aOladditional time granted. In six similar cases the Househad into in only one had they refused to interfere. He moved that 14 (lays be granted for making good the tecognizanees. lie main • , that there was sufficient ground for the application of the petitio • they had been deprived of their legal advice "by the set of filen - .• The complaint against the return was a substantial one. He was not the petitioner; otherwise,why was he not in the petition ? The bor(mgh of Samford was not a rotten borough, as would be proved if the parties were allowed to go to the committee ; and further, they would there show that there had been, during the election, the most daring interference with the rights and privileges of the people—lnter terence which the house, he doubted not, would duly punish, on a case being made out. He hoped that any "trumpery" language of an Act of Parliament was not to be allowed to prevent the house from the op portunity of inflicting moral justice. Mr. MABERLEY said he had certainly viewed the hon. member a., in fact a petitioner; and added, that he had the authority of the noble lord, rho was supposed to have influence in this borough, to de clare that his lordship bad not in any way interfered in the election. —( Hear.) Sir E. B. SUDDEN contended that the construction of the Act could not allow this application for time ; he considered that it was imperative. Sir J. BURKE said, if this application were complied with, he should hereafter move that various former resolutions of the house on similar applications be rescinded. Besides, here there was no affidavit. Mr. S. RICE said, however strong might be the case on the part of the petitioners, the house must decide in case of application for addi tional time, on the principle of law ; and he therefore trusted, under all the circumstances, that his hon. friend would withdraw his motion for additional time.--(Hear.) Mr. TENNYSON then, it was understood, withdrew his motion. 3IAILBOSOOGH ELECTION COMMITTEE. Sir R. PEEL presented the report of the Marlborough Election Com mime, which set forth that the statement of the petitioners as to the right of election, was not the right of election at Marlborough ; that the statement of the bitting Members truly set forth what was the right of election in Marlborough; that the sitting Members (Mr. Esteourt and Mr. Bankes) had been duly returned; and that the petition was not frivolous and vexatious. Report laid upon the table. Mr. KENNEDY then renewed his application for extension of time to the Dumbarton election petitioners to make good their recognizance*. He considered this case to come within the meaning of the Act, where additional time should be allowed by the House. Mr HUME thought mach good would be done and much trouble saved, by rigidly adhering to the Act of Parliament. If there were a general rule, let it be generally and rigidly acted upon. Sir E. B. SUDDEN considered that the petitioners were not entitled to have the prayer of this petition conceded. Lord J. RUSSELL said, that this case merited the consideration of the house; it was a case of mistake—and one where the petitioners had I been right, and official authorities wrong..-- (Hear from Mr. Hume.) If this point had not been settled, it would be bard to deprive the peti tioner of his remedy, and to prevent the investigation of the election petition. Lord ORAIIAM said, as far as he was concerned, he would with draw opposition to the reception of this petition.—(Hear, hear.) Sir R. PEEL observed, that out of the fifty-seven election petitions that had been presented this Session, this was the only cast where the parties had not thought fit to atten d examiners. This was a point for the consideration of the house. After some remarks-from Mr. LITTLETON and others, the prayer of the petition was complied with, and ten days additional time granted to enter into the recognizance.. A message from the Lords brought the Duchy of Lancaster bill, the adverse claims bill, the cognovit in bankruptcy cases bill, Ac. Read a first time, and ordered to be read a second time on Monday seninight. Mr. CAMPBELL said all these bills had received the approbation of the judges. Severally ordered to be printed, on the motion of Mr. GOULBURN. Mr. LAMB presented various annual returns respecting the state of the gaols.—Ordered to be printed. MILTROPOLITAN POLICY.. Mr. WILKS rose to move for various returns respecting the expense of the Metropolitan Police, &c. He said, in consequence of the inten tion (of Sir R. Peel) to move for a committee to inquire into this sub. ject, he would not trespass on the house now with remarks. The jeer. lousy as to the character of this force, however 'audible it might be, required no particular comments from bim on the present occasion ' • it vas not necessary to oppose, or join in the complaint ; that question did not fall within the scope of his motion. But as to the al4.at re garding the additional expenses, &c. be considered that they were well deserving of the most serious consideration of the house. Hence he moved for accounts. In some places, the increase of rates, on account of this force, was declared to be as much as 130 per cent. In very many it was 10, 20, 30, 30, and 80 per cent.—.nay, some went so far as to declare, that the Increase of their burdens for this item of charge had been as much as 1,000 per cent. To set all these matters in their true point of view—to enable the House to judge of the truth or error of such allegations—to place them in a situ. ation to arrive more correctly at the facts—induced him to move that an address be presented to his Majesty, praying him to give directions to have prepared an account of all moneys levied and paid in the metro- politan police district for and in respect of the nightly watch" for the year preceding the employment of the metropolitan police; an account of moneys demanded from every parish and place since the employment of the metropolitan police; also return of a ny general or• dere issued by the Secretary of State, or the Magistrates appointed un. der the Metropolis Police Act, since 7th June, 1830. Mr. MABERLY made some observation that was cheered, but its purport did not reach the gallery. Mr. LAMB mid he had no objection to the motion, as far as the same could be made out; how far all the informationcould be distinctly obtained, so as to meet the hon. member's object of accurately contrast ing the expense, he could not tell ; but whether more could be obtained towards the elucidation of such object than already appeared in the ape pendix to the Police Report, he was not prepared to say. Sirß. PEEL observed that he did not rise for the purpose of op posing the motion. He could have no objection to the production of the returns; but if the hon. member (Mr. Limb) in having the returns prepared did not take care to have the several heads of outlay carefully specified, so as to show what really were the charges connected with the old watch—he knew not of what use they would be. According to the wording of the hon. member's (Mr. Wilke's) motion, those who were hostile to the police might return what were the wages given to the watchmen ; but would that item show what had been the expense to the several parishes of the old watch ! They ought to have also the several contrac , s, and all the outlays connected directly and indi. reedy with the nightly watch. (Hear.) It might be perfectly true that in some parishes the expenses would appear greater titan what had been incurred by the wages of the nightly watch ; and it also might be correct, that elsewhere there were additions to the extent of a hundred and thirty or one thousand per cent.—for there were some parishes that had taken good care to have no regular watch at all, trusting to their neighbours for all the protection they had. In other instances, it was found that large lebts had been contracted for the building of watchhouses and for °tint. matters • the discharging of those debts became requisite, and of course had tended to swell the amount of charge. He repeated, however, that without a distinct spe. ciliation of all the sums that had been raise d, and of all the expenses in. curved on account of the parochial watchings, the required returns would not accurately contrast—the object sought by the motion, the dif. terent expenses of each system. (Hear.) Without that distinct speci fication, the comparison would not be full and correct. Mr. HUM E said, that there was very considerable dissatisfaction on the subject of the new police, particularly on the ground of the addi tional expense that it imposed on the several parishes; and if there were not all the cause for complaint that some alleged, as to the increased ex pense, the sooner that was made manifest the better. That the dissatis faction on account of the new system, on account of the increased bur. dens that it imposed, was very great, moat hon. members knew as well as himself. He had three petitions to premien that subject; they were now waiting in an adjoining room ; but for reasons generally known he should not present them that evening. [We believe the hon. member alluded to the indisposition of the Speaker.] The expense was increased in many parishes to an extent that could not be borne. In one parish the expense was advanced from 1,4401. to upwards of five thousand pounds.—(Hear.) In fully equal proportions had the expense been in creased in several poor parishes, and where the rents had been decreasing for some time ; and that rende red the inability to meet the new burdens so much more difficult. Under a proper system, an improved police might be most beneficial; but if it were to be so ruinously bur densome, its practicability, in many instances, would be very ques tionable. The motion was then agreed to, and various accounts ordered ac cordingly. Mr. HODGSON rose amidst cries of " Adjourn, adjourn," and then said he would adjourn, until Tuesday next, his motion for' A Return, by the Town Clerk, of every City and Borough in England and Ireland, returning Members to Parliament, wherein theright of election is solely or in part in the free Burgesses or Freemen at large, of the number of persons entitled to the freedom of such City or Borough, by patrimony, marriage, or servitude, who have taken up their freedom in each of the four last years from the present time." The Colonial Acts Validity Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed on Thursday next. The Consolidated Fund Bill was read a second time. MST MASTER-OZWZNIAL or Ii LAND. Mr. HUME asked whether it was intended to fill up the sinecure once of Postmaster-General of Ireland ? Mr. S. RICE said he replied with great satisfaction that it was not the intention of Government to fill up that office, (Cheers.) Mr. OOU LBURN begged to remind the house that the situation had been for some months vacant, and 'Vat there had not been the slightest intention of again filling it up. (Cheers.) Sir C. Burrell, Mr. Sykes, Mr. Esteourt, Mr. Peel, and several other members had leave of absence granted on account of the disturbed state of their districts and counties. THE SPICA/Mel INDISPOSITION. The remaining orders, &c. were postponed, or passed a stage, amtdst cries of" Adjourn, adjourn." The SPEAKER begged to return his acknowledgments to the house for their consideration towards hint but he was not so unwell now as when he entered the house ; so that if there were any business of pressing or public importance, he trusted the house would not adjourn out of its kind consideration to him.—(Hear, hear, and adjourn, adjourn.) Lord NIORPETH and several other members had large bundles of petitions to present. but they declined presenting them; and the house adjourned at a Quarter to Seven o'clock, till Thursday next. LAW REPORTS. VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT, Nov. IL His Honour the Vzcz-Creancat.Loa sat at Liman's Inn In Bank. ruptcy to-day. SPECIAL INJUNCTION. SPEAD V. YEATMEAD. Mr. PAYNTZR, at the suing of the Court, applied foe a special in junction to restrain the ddendant from collecting in, any of the partner ship debts, or otherwise interfering in the concerns d the partnership. From the statements of the learned counsel, it appeared that the Oain tiff and defendant had been in partnership together as wine -mats, and a few months ago they had mutually agreed to dissolve partner ship. At this time a sum of 1,8001. was due to the plaintiff individually from the partnership, and It was agreed between the plaintiff and de fendant that a deed should be prepared, the purport of which was to sti pulate that the 1.8001. should be paid to the plaintiff in preference to any other payments, out of tbe partnership funds. This deed was ac cordingly prepared, but the defendant refused to aigo it, and proceeded to collect in the partnership debts, on which account he had received various large sums. The VICE CHANCELLOR considered that a sufficiently strong CUR had been made out, and granted the injunction. COURT OF KING'S BENCH, Nov. 30. (Sittings at the Nisi Prius before Lord Tsarina:sax.) WILSON V. SMITH. This was an action brought to recover the value of a chaldron of cosh. supplied to the defendant's wife. Mr. GURNEY stated the case to the Jury, and said, that this action was brought to recover a small sum of money for cosh supplied to the defendant's wife. Mr. Smith chose to defend this action • and be (Mr. (1.) should therefore enter into the details. Mr. Carmichael Smith had formerly held a very lucrative office in the Exchequer, and had since retired upon an allowance. In the year 1822, he married this lady, to whom the goods were supplied. They continued to live toge ther until 1823, when she was compelled to leave him, through the ill usage she received. She again returned to him in 1824, when he again ill-treated her, coafined her in a mad-house for a few da, and she again left his house at the end of the same year. The gross ill usage this lady received was quite sufficient to make her leave her home. Her husband frequently kicked her deprived her ofl food, and placed the servant at the table, and she had instituted a suit in the Commons in the early part of the year 1828. The defendant had aired her 1001. a year, if she would retire to America, her native country, but as she had declined this he was liable to pay any reason able debts which she might contract. Mr. Carmichael Smith, the defendant, then stood up, and said, I believe my Lord, in some cases the defendant is allowed to address the Cain pre to any witnesses being called ; now, 1 should like just to make some observations upon the speech of the Learned Counsel, as I conceive— Lord TENTERDSW stopped the defendant, and told him he could not allow him to address the Cowl. Joseph Thacker—ln the year 1828 1 was canna to the plaintiff. He lived in Southmoiton-street. In March of that year 1 delivered a chaldron of coals to Mrs. Smith, No. 45, Upper Berkeley-street. The price was 83s. or 841. John Connor, applied to Lord Tenterden to protect him fmm the violence of the defendant. His Lordship assured the witness that there was no fear of the defendant committing any violence in the Court. In the year 1824, I was in the service of blr. Carmichael Smith. I went into his service in January. He then lived in Sloane.street, (Mrs. Smith lived in the house, but she had been away) and a housekeeper, named Judy Neele, and a young woman called Betsey. Mrs. Smith slept with bee husband for the first three nights that I was there, but they quarrelled and separated their beds. Mr. Smith afterwards slept in the back parlour. I used to go to him about nine o'clock in the morning, and usually found Mrs. Neele there. She never was there when he was out of bed. I recollect going into the room once when I was spM. Mrs. Neele ailW out, " Don't come in, John, I will bring Master ' s things out, myself."— A sheet time after wards she did bring them out. Mrs. Node kept the keys, and was, in fact, mistress. I was ordered not to let any body in or out of the house without Mrs. Neck's Remember, in March of the year I went there, a lady She saw Mrs. Smith, because she went down stairs whilst die lady was at the door. Mrs. Neele was very angry. When Mr. Smith cams hems, he was very much enraged ; but Ibegged his pardon, end he then went up stairs and knocked his wife down, and shut the door in bathe& I have often heard Mn. Node call Mrs. Smith a in the presence of the defendant. Have frequently heard Mr. Smith order his wife out of the room. Have seen bruises on her arms; Mrs. Smith said they were occasioned by pinches and blows given her by her husband. Have beard Mr. Smith desire the servant only to give his wife an inch of candle. She had a fire in her room only sometimes. Have known Mrs. Neck in Dir. Smith's bedroom an hour at a time. I went into Mr. Smith's room one morning, and found Mrs. Wale on the top of the bed. I left Mrs. Smith in the house, but know that she left a short time af. terwards. This witness then detailed a series of W mar committed on Mrs. Smith by her husband. Lord TeNTESDIN.—Have you any questions to put to the witness? Defendant.—A great many. Lord TIXTEIRDEN.OO on, then. Defendant—l will presently, but I must arrange my papers; my attorney ought to have been here ; but he has not come although I have sent twice for him. Lord TIIXTERDIN—Then you must go yourself. Defendant to witness—What religion are you ? Witness—Roman Catholic. Defendant... Did not I, after my wife returned home, treat her with great kindness and attention ?—Yes, for three days. Defendant—Not for three weeks ? Didn't I drive her out and walk out with bee for three weeks P.—No ; only three days. Defendant—Hare you seen me strike my wife ?—Yes. Defendant—Did I ever tell you I was mad ?—Yes. Defendant—Did you ever see Mn. Neele in my room ?—Yes. Defendsnt—These proceedings have killed Mrs. Neele. Witness—lt was whisky killed her (roars of laughter). Defendant—Did you ever say, if you had such a wife you would either end her or mend her ?—Never. The rest of the evidence was of too indecent a nature to publish, and the whole of it was irrelevant to the question in dispute. Walter, a watchman in the parish of St. Luke, Chelsea, spoke to a disturbance which he had witnessed in the house of the defendant. Upon hearing a loud noise he went into the house, and found the de fendant with a pistol, and Mrs. Smith on the floor. The witness pre vailed upon her to leave the house. The defence was, that at the time Mrs. Smith was supplied with the coals, she was receiving alimony, according to the decision of the Con aistorial Court. __Mr. Gurney said he could prove the cause between the defendant and his wife had been moved into the Arches Court, and from that moment the allotment of alimony ceased. Lord TEXTERDEY held that the payment of money might have been a continuation of the order of the Consistorisl Court: and as it had been proved that the wife of the defendant did receive alimony, the action could not be sustained. The plaintiff was nonsuited. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Nov. SO. (Sittings after Michaelmas Term, before the Loan Cutter Jurricir.) _ _ HANNAY V. SOLTIIY. This was an action brought to recover compensation for false imprisonment. It appeared that the plaintiff, who is a pedlar, had entered the premises of the defendant, whose dog ran barking at him, which he struck with so much violence, that it appeared dead, and has remained deaf and blind ever since. The detendant requested the plaintiff to accompany him in his pony chaise, which the pl a in t iff as sented to. The Magistrate recommended him to make the defendant some compensation. to which the plaintiff agreed, and left his peek until he should return and redeem it ; instead of doing which, however, he brought the present action fur remuneration for the time which was oc cupied in going before the Magistrate. Mr. Sergeant WILDE appeared for the defendant, and argued that the plaintiff was using the animal cruelly and maliciously, and on that ground the defendant was justified, according to the Act of Parliament, in taking him before a Magistrate without a warrant. Mr. Sergeant TADDT referred to the Act of Parliament, and held that, as particular animals were specified, and dogs not being mentioned, it could not be made to apply to the present case. Tile LORD CHIEF JUSTICE left it to the Jury to my whether the plaintiff went of his own accord before the Magistrate, and whether the Injury committed by him on. the dog was justifiable for his own pro tection. If a person committed an injury, be being immediately pur sued and followed up, may be said to be found committing the injury, and may be arrested without a warrant. Verdict for the plaintiff —Damages 101. SECONDAKIEW OFFICE--Cossunit-oTazzr. OF PROMISE OF itAinanor. I RUSSELL V. WADE.—The following cam, which was trial before Mr. Potter, excited a great deal of interest. It was upon a writ of in. I quirt' for the as-essment of damages for a Breach of Promise of Mee. nage. The damages were laid at 1000 pounds. • Mr. Ogle, as solicitor to the plaintiff, also acted as Counsel, and Mr. C. Philips was Conned for the defendant. Mr. OOL I stated the case for his Client. She was the daughter of a respectable woman, who kept a lodging.hotuse o in which the Mendota a patina, resided. From vie moment the thiendant entered the horoil,l entered the house, an intimacy commenced between him and the youag Lady, and they soon became pledged to each other as man and wife. The plaintiff appeared to be most sincere in his attachment, and that the young Lady was sincere, and had the most unbounded reli ance upon his honour, was unfortunately p oved by the result of the intercourse. The defendant had, or pretended to have, a curious fancy about him with respect to issue. He seemed determined not to marry any girl until he ascertained whether she was likely to have children or not, and the proposal of an experiment wee accepted. The matter was decided in the alkalise. The young lady's conduct, in this bad for authority the ancient an d weU-known practice which s h a le = in Wales; but the defendant, although he admired the Welch custom ="to the indissoluble tie, was satisfied with the trial he had married the daughter of nether lady, to whom he became a lodger. The plaintiff's feelings upon this occasion were tortured in the extreme. She had always borne the most excellent and irreproachable character, sad was now the mother of a child, of which the defendant was the father; and which, Instead of proving a source of unalloyed i tplitera and comfort, reflected disgrace upon the unfortunate young kre. Hannah Russell, mother to the plaintiff; knew defendant about six years ; he had 11, a week as journeyman to a Mr. Lushy Law, a r2seiter, and also did business for himself. He came to lodge in her and an intimacy at once 'prang up between him and her daugh ter. n March 1828, found that her daughter was pregnant, and was told by her that defendant was the father. Defendant discontinued his attentions a month afterwards, and had since married the daughter of another landlady. Witness's daughter was confined on the Bth of Oc tober, 1828, had suffered greatly in her health in consequence of this cruel treatment, had always maintained an irreproachable character i and was greatly attached to the defendant. She had never been flighty or guilty of levity. Mr. Ogle asked witness whether her daughter had aot lost an advan tageous offer b this calamity P Yea, (said the witness,) a Mr. Bacon would hays paid his addresses. Mr. Pim - Live objected to the question, as well as to many others, which Mr. Ogle, from a want of experience, asked, in opposition to all the rules of evidence. The witness, upon her crospexaminatka, stated, that when the plaintiff lodged in her house, he was a journeyman painter, and that he was paid by the week. Mr. PHILLIPS—When did your daughter tell you that he intended to marry her ? After I investigated the affair of her being in the family.way. Were you present when the defendant told your daughter why he would not marry her? No. Did she not swear the child to him before the parish officers ?—Yes ; I wu unable to keep the child, and be paid three shillings and sixpence a week for its suppott. My daugh ter never made any claim upon him for money to my knowledge. I lave that confidence in her to believe that she would have communicated it to me if she had made any claim. Take care, my good woman, what you say. Did you ever see a let. ter in which she asked him for 60L?—Never. What t not that ktter ? (handing a letter to her.) Witness looked at the letter, and; after a little hesitation, she.admit ted it was in her daughter's writing. She also said, upon be! by the Learned Counsel, that she meant she never heard of a Wartr i t s h e t: i t came to a settlement. The defendant had paid 51. for her daughter's confinement, and 21. for things for the baby, independently of the weekly allowance. Miss Elisabeth Russell. sister to the plaintiff, stated that the de fendant came to reside at bee mother's house in 1824 or 1828. She had bawd him say that he could earn iL a day. After he had desetted her sister, witness asked him his reason for doing so, and he said he had no reason. lie never said anything to the disparagement of her sister on the occasion. He mentimed that he had VOL in a savings' bank. Witness never saw her sister allow any one to take improper liberties with her. When she charged the defendant with being the father, he said he was very sorry, but he would not come to any agreement. (A laugh.) This witness was cross-examined upon some minor points, and it appeared that she had said a great deal upon mere hearsay. Ooxx then examined witnesses to prove, amongst other things, that the defendant was owner of a house of considerable value,and failing in that object, he stood forward himself as a witness, very much to the astonishment of Mr. Phillips. Mr. Ogle deposed that the defendant, three or four days ag , offered him 401. in settlement of the action. The offer was uncond. tionaL Defendant said that the circumstances were very bad for him, that he knew be behaved very ill to the young woman, that be had pro. raised her marriage and not performed his pianist, for he fancied she had been guilty of levity; that he wished to settle the action, but his eircumstancee were indifferent ; and that be would give 401. together with costs. Witness would not agree to the proposal. Defendant then said be would take the benefit oldie Insolvent Act. Witness told him be undeestood that be had a house worth a ososiderable sum, to which be replied that it was worth 0001. but that it was mortgaged for 0001 Cross.alamined.—.Pray have you kept anything back in kindness to the defendant ? Mr. Ogle.—Nothing, upon my Namur. Did you teU him that you would use every word of this pdvate cam. muniastion against him !—No ; I did not. As you come forward youneU in such s manner, your object is, I suppose, to enhance the d,amagss P—l most undoubtedly wish to en. hence the damages. Pray, is it your custom to get information from parties for the pur. pose of giving evidence against them ?—No ; I should scorn to do soy. thing of the kind. Olt ! then it was because you failed in the evidense you produced, that you offered your own ?—Certainly it was. Mr. Punates..--Upon my word, you have distinguished yourself as attorney, counsel, and witness: (laughter.) Mr. Ogle complained of want of courtesy upon the part of Mr. Phillips. In the course of the cross-examination, which was excessively erten, but upon points of no public interest, Mr. Nature asked the witness whether he did not know that, in the Secondaries' Court, ifs farthing damages were given, the defendant would have to pay th e costs ? Mr. Ogle replied that he really did not know the fact. He had never once considered it. He must have read and beard of it 500,000 times, but he really never gave it a thought. Mr. Ogle's clerk was also examined, but nothing was elicited. Mr. Nature then made a most able address to the Jury. He looked upon the ease as a lesson to men on the confidence they reposed in others ; but be bogged to be considered as totally excepting the general practitioners in the law from the rule he wished to lay down. An attor ney had thought proper to undertake a cause in three different char acters, and had also the mock-modesty, after having d e t erm i ne d to try the experiment of a display in those distinct /*made% to claim the indulgence of the Court to his inexperience. Indulgence he certainly needed, for never had been 'famed so erroneous an estimate of the duties of any one of the charaiters he had stepped forward to perform. Had thete ever before appeared an instance in which a geo des= of the law, finding that his witnesses were unable to prove all he wanted to prove, stepped into the box to fill up the defect himself ? To be sure, he had tried his clerk first, and that - clerk had brought to mind the story of Tim Flanagan, who happied to be clerk to an Irish attorney, the terror of the poor; a man who charged Bs. Bd. for a Wok, and raised his price for a word in proportion.. In drawing up his briefs, that worthy limb of the law regularly ap. pended snots bene, " If the above is not enough, call my clerk Tim Flanagan :^ (loud laughter.) But the Tim Flanagan of this case had more conscience, and did not succeed in supplying the deficiency. He left it for his master, who had heard and raid of a thing 500,000 times without knowing anything about it, to do that.—(Laughter.)— Hr. Phillips said he would put it to the whole of the profeasion,whether an attorney in such a situation as that which Mr. Ore stood in towards the defendant, ought not, when an ignorant man app itd to him to settle an action. to have cautioned that man as to the communication he was about to make, and to tell him to consult his own legal adviser as to the propriety of offering a comprotnise. In fact, there had been exhibited upon the occasion a violation of confidence as an attorney, a gross nits. take of business as an advocate. and a arrange propping-up ofa bad case as a witness. The learned counsel then proceeded to comment in a very powerful manner upon the we itself. The young lady had, he said, been represented as a paragon of purity and virtue before her fall. Certainly, I Lucretia was but a fool to bee. She had proved her claim to the reputation which had been given to bar by the witnesses in the fullest manner, by trying the experiment as to the chances of those domestic comforts which some parents considered indispensable. But it was rather unfair to the honest Welsh women, to say that they were in the habit of setting the example to young Ladies who kindly allowed the consummation to take place before the ceremony. No, no, the praeice alluded to, and which existed perhaps a couple of hundred years ago in Wales, t wo. taped no such leseo l n. el ‘/The oung Welshman was put to bed on the handling occasion up in a perfectly harmless condition. There amid be no upon the virtue of the female candidate f ee matehnony. But far different was the ease in the present instance. Miss IL weld not stomach the bundling, and she insisted that Mr. Wade should dispense with the inannbrance before the experiment was t r i e d (bud [slighter} It was not to be supposed that a young lady who had consented to be so very kind. and who had regularly made a ecu niary claim for the favour she bad granted, weed feel very acutel y the loss she had sustained ; and it was to be hoped that the jury would takes proper measure of the whole trausaction. POTTS', in eummit up, stated that there was 00 impeachment of lily._ogies credibility, although he certainly should have warned the defe nda nt of his intention to take advantage of the calumnies. Lion made to him. The Jury amused the damages at 101. It is but justice to the young gentleman who appealed as' atasenlyi counsel. and witness, to sate that he exerted himself with UNINIONniaI activity to serve his client ; but the experintent was spoken of Ity,patorl ral of die prof assay as a meet dimiteybus obit, piftlailarly in appeal. don to the learned mindsotaa on the iintglitle, who Beastly diritim l leave him a leg to eland upon. POLICE RICPORTS. Maxerow-Hotraz.—Geterge Williams was charged with havin g stolen a portfolio, containing stamps to the value of 5.11. the property a Mr. Stevens, of 35, Throgmorton.straet. James Bull, servant to the prosecutor, stated that at a little after fo nt o ' c l oc k on Saturday last, as he returned to the shop, from one of the fire offices, he saw the prisoner with a book in his hand, coming w e of the door. One of the partners was serving a customer at the momen t with wafers ; witness believing that all was wrong with the prio noei. collared him, and took the book from him. Mr. Holger, jun. appeared for t h e prisoner, and asked the 'k now whether the prisoner did not appear to be looking over the book at the time, and whether a mistake might not have bow made as to his apparent intention to go away with the property ? The witness replied that the prisoner was evidently making off w i th the book. Fully committed far trial. Mr. Jones, a respectable solicitor, melding in the narrow p ut e f Princes.atmet, near the Bank, charged several vapbond boys with h it . ing acted in such a manner as to give great eseistanos to the oper a ti ons of pickpockets, and for having used the most digesting languag e . It appears from Mr. Jones's statement, that the boys congseeate in Princes-stree when a coach or cart meets with another vehicle i n t h e narrow part, and begin a regular blow-up at one party or the other. At such times a passenger often loses his watch, or handkerchief, and the thief easily escapes with the aid of the young black guar d s: who lend a band, and escape under the hones' bellies. Several re cent instances of the kind had occurred ; and except some check Ira given to the rising villainy of the idle children of the metropoli s the safety of property would be much less secure than It at pris m was. The language used by the infant ruffians too, was of so di*. • nature, that a resident in Princes-street could not sit w i t h E as st n at y in the front of the house. The LORD MAYOR observed that the cads and Wise fellows belong. ing is the stage-coaches encouraged the boys to act in the manner de. scribed. His Loniship sent back the defendants to prison, and said he should issue directions with respect to the conduct of the coachmen sad cads. GIIILDHALL.—WitIisies Monica, Jobe Met* and Jews Davis, were charged with committing a violent assault upon a seafaring man, in Barbican, about twelve o'clock on Monday night. hlagson, a watchman, said the prisoners came along, arm.in.arm, anti Monks pushed against the sailor in passing. Whether the latter made any resistance to this treatment he did not observe ; but the next thing he saw was, that Monks and Davis rushed upon the sailor, and Bong him down into the road. The witness and some other persons secured the prisoners, as the man seemed to be severely hurt, and was covered with blood and dirt. He appeared to be somewhat intoxicated. Mr. Aldeaman THOMPSON recognized Monks as a noted uttrterof base coin, who had been discharged by him on Monday morning. Mr. Alderman, one of the Common Councilmen of the ward in which the affair happened, said he accompanied the parties to the watch. house, and entered the charge. Austin Impudently said that he was a resurrection.man, and should perhaps one day take charge of his (Mr. Alderman's) body. The sailor was not now in attendance, per h aps from inability, he having received a dreadful wound on the head, not was his address known. A watchman was sent with him to Cloth fair, where he said he lived, but he was not known there ; and he was then accompanied to Golden-lane, where he was left, the watchman being unwilling to neglect his beat any longer. A Mr. Wilkinson, who saw the whole of the assault, had likewise failed to attend. The prisoners said the sailor struck them first. Mr. Alderman Tuoursow remanded the prisoom till Thursday, in the hope of discovering in the interim, whether the sailor was seriously hurt or not. Bow-fkrazwr —Fellows, the old Leicestershire freeman, was again brought forward yesterday, before Mr. Minshull, for further exarnina. tion on a charge of having defrauded several persons out of money, by pretending that he could procure foe them Government situations. On this occasion, two fresh charges of a similar description were brought forward against him • and Mr. Boucher, one of the Solicitors for the Treasury, stated, th at be had a charge of felday to prefer against the prisoner, who had signed a will as an attesting witness, well knowing at the that the will was forged. The facts were these:— In the year 1826. a former, named Richard Luke K'ynie, died, and a will was placed in the hands of Mr. Mule and applicant, for the put. pose of being proved in the Ecclesiastical Court. The necessary steps to obtain the probate of the will were taken, but upon examination, it was fi nally rejected by the Court is • forgery. The prisoner Fellows was one of the attesting witnesses, and since then no trace of him could be obtained, until the report of his examination at this office appeared in the newspapers. On reading that report, the King's Advocate coui. municated with the Lords of the Treasury, who at once issued dine. dons to have the prisoner prosecuted. Mr. MINSIIIILL said that he was quite ready to hear any charge on the subject. Mr. Bonaire replied that he was not dm mowed with any evi. duce, but that if the prisoner were detainedl enstody for a week, the proof necessary to bring home the charge iambi be adduced. Mr. Minsaut.r. accordingly remanded the grissaer. MAIT-LA-11031111Z.-4 gentleman nese the Regent's Park was en Monday brought the embalm J. Rowszn-: sox, Req. on a warrant charging him with m nernalt. Bury Mestsard, the son of a respeesside tradesman. stated 'that about five o'clock on Friday evening, he was in quest of a Mr. Wil. llama, whose address he was imperfectlyacquainted with, and he saw the defendant knocking at a deals Faniestreet t be went up to him, and inquired if Mr. Williams resided there ; and on being an. swered in the negative, he made farther Inquiry as to whether he was in Frederick-street, upon which the defendant desired him to leave the place he stood in, and on the complainsnes declaring that he had aright to remain, as he had only civilly made an inquiry. be broke a good sired stick across his back. The gentleman said, in defence that be had endeavoured to avoid the complainant, but he had crossed after hint, and having made a num. bee of inquiries, the complainant was certainly ordered to go away. Mr. IRAWLINIIOII-1311t what broke the stick ? Defendant—O. I struck him arson the back, because he was into. lent. He made use of scandalous language. Mr. RAWLIXIII3II.-Just mention a little of it. Defendant—l don't exactly remember what vu said. Mr. Itairustsow—lf it were gross ai.d obscene, you surely must remember a little of it. Defendant—Well, then, he called me a blackguard, and thing. of that sort. . . —. —.— The worthy Magistrate observed, that the assault was quite unjusti. Sable, and be would advise the parties to retire. The complainant received a *bromism remedy. Toww.um.c.—Charles Salkslel and Thomas Chapman, sweepers of the crossing at the end of Thomas's.street, were brought beige Mr. Alderman Ansley, under these circumstances —The elder of the two swept up three sovereigns, of which the Aber demanded a share ; this was refused ; the broomsticks went to work, upon which, a policeman interfered, and the consequence was, the impounding of the then so. vereigns in the hands of the Alderman. The otheers stated that nothing could be more likely than the finding of the sovereigns, U. during the election, the corner of St. Thomas's-street was the haunt o f thieves. who, if likely to be detected, would drop their booty. The three sovereigns were claimed on the part of the High Bailiff, as the representative of the Corporation, to whom they belonged, las a " suite," by long established right, as Lords of the Manor. The Al. demon informed the scavengers, that if they applied at the City Chamber, where the money would be paid in, he had no doubt the Chamberlain would order them to be paid at least one.half the amount. as had been often done before ; and with this they departed, expressing their thanks. Aim Ansley, a miserable poor woman, surrounded by five lovely children, was charged with stealing Sib.. weight of beef from the they of bit. Atkins, a butcher, near the Borough.market. In her defence she urged the extremity of distress; her husband, who was a comb maker, unable to obtain employment in town, was gone upon the tramp." She had since received from him eight shillings in the came of six weeks ; but he, fearing the potash of the parish officers, had a° 4 _, let her know where he was. Her children cried to bee for bind , =a she had none to give them; her heart was nearly broken, sad in St of despair she committed her first fault against society. — Several respectable persons, with whom the prisoner had formerly lived as servant, gave her a most excellent character. 141 r. Alderman ANSLIT, in the language of humanity, pointed out to be. the ea , . lomat sorrow she was preparing for herself, by so improper a count. she ought to have applied to the parish. Mr. Atkins, the prosectot , to his lasting credit , interfered on the prisoner's behalf, and she wa- in consequence discharged. BIRTH. Saturday, at his seat, Denby Grange, Yorkshire, the lady of Sit John L. L. Kaye, Ban. of a daughter. MARRIED. At St. Mary's, Bryanston-square, H. W. Chichester, Esq. of Lis. coin's Inn, to Alias Isabella Manners Sutton, slaughter of his brace the late Archbishop of Canterbury. • DIED. Sunday, at Clapten, T. Nisbet, Esq. aged 83, and In the Bank of England sixty years.—At Brighton, Caroline, the wife of Lieut.-Col. Roberts. of the Royal Artillery, and eldest surviving daughter of Mehl' T. Maitland, Req.—At Statehouse, Devon, Mary, the wife of capt• J. N. Wylde—Friday, at Cambridge, in the VOth year of his age, non' stoned by a fall from his home, Matthew Newberry Arbuthnott go. binson, Req. of Trinity College, eldest son of Matthew Robinton, of Dulwich, Surrey—The 13th lost, at Bmmley, in the 77th Year in her age, Charlotte. relict of the late Rev R. Bltteke, vicar of Calmbe• rough, Backe, and rector of Netteswell, gases. VEVI mow HIGH WATER AT LONDON BRIDGE T0•11 ... 0 .. .. 1 . 7 0 .5. % s. ig.l g Si *min 3 1111 Alterman I Lowly' I andarubliebeh by Joss Ilavirs,,Aille lovise Otrms, Na. 1, Pickett-plan, Temple i SI Ti Ai 1 :44 Do Ca HI DI It eas mg Du IE 11. 01 the