Star. — London, England, 1820-04-27 00:00:00

1 INCUBUS BOTANICUS; • -on, THE NIGHT-MARE OF LINNMUS. TRANSLATED FRONt THE SWEDISH. I dreamt that I died, but that after my death, • - I still was percipient clay ; The Earth was my body, the Air was my breath, And tity blood Bow d. in rivers away : 'l7lien Flora, who trampled ma ender her feet, In gay colours daiic'd over :he ground ; And what's more, my olfactory senses to greet, Shed the balm of sweet olotirs around! Ard she tall'd the gly Nymphs that attend in her train, In colours so variously drest, Ard, doffing the white shroud wherein I was lain, They (Lined a quadrille on my breast ! And they took it in turn to figure away, As their sbewing -off seasoa came round; While lady Arunti soft music did play, • And Diana beat time on the ground ! • But Diana was taller than all the rest, And her weight t with a,;ony bore; When she starnis':.t, the blood B:,w'l up in my chest, As Ur. title rises up on the silare ; But m•- Lean was of rock in a mountain dell, Whence torrents of livid did Bow ; And the . Nyntrhi as they danc'd, and sipp'd at the well, More blooming, and tresher did grow! Calantim the &dr, 1 . 1 a robe of white, More modest than colourless scow, Was the first wh) footed, left hand and right, 0.1 the frolic fo.ntistical toe: DATodilla, the next, was a gaudy Miss, With a yellow vest end a green gown; She stoop'd and stet gave me a j•abulsy kiss, And nodded her head with a frown. For she viessf'd her fair rival step up by her side, Ilyacinthia vested in bide, Whom NirCliSLIl would surely have pick'd for his bride, When bath'd in the morning dew ; Det she gave place, in the warring round, Tu a Nymph of great power to lure, Aiaaryllis, whom all the fresh vallies resound • With her fringes of crimson pure! Tuiipa. gaudy toiaeue, kept rule, • Who sets such a price on her features, A.id dresses fuc ev'rylsoliday foot, Who capridonsly pays forsetz'a creatures. Chaste Viola neat, so sweetly perfulu'd, . • Stole lightly nay bosom along ; And was itakuw% by Llosa, who blushing 3f411111%.1 rre-rtui:l - ..ter O.:r the throng! Now, ail oa :lute-den, in a pai.ned scarf, ONnie lrii pti.iy and 5/114r:. 111/lOd:1611Ze.f: tirey Who pieec'd my lieJrt with a dart— Irwas the got.l:l.eas Electra.* vita s/L:24X11 V) whom attic dwelli. , zs ar e Whs. -Co !)v titincrriog there, Leaf:V.4w at by window of Ils.a.Vx The cont.:l.:ion was Amp, and gnat was the smart, And then to my great sus pr a se, I fast dr, saat I was dreamb; and then with a. start, I awoke and I rable'd my eyes. I had &aid. dear '-‘l2,:da, and thin an my breast, In one of the P.:pilian And thy (mgr.= 4re:lth, u we bath tart:aid, L'ad sat au a dreaming on Lowers! • Tke Electricity. or Lt;ittning. Lei It ISTELLIGENCE. COMIT OF KING'S BUNCH, APUIL 36. EARL OF DA&YLET V. ROBERT sLiclf, ESQ. jr.l Moose was rising to she cause against the Rule which 1 - . ad been obtained by the defendant in this case upon a former day, when he was inter rupted by The LORD CLUES' JUSTICE, who intimated to Mr. Scarlett, the Counsel for Mr. high, that be under. stood that Mr. W2.S desirous that the new ar. tides of the peace exhibited against him should be re a over. _ _ _ Mr. Mainz observed, that the Rule had been ob- tined on other grounds. The Rule called upon the Earl of Darnley to sliest• cause why Mr. Bligh should not be discharged out of the custody of the Marshal of the Marshalsea, on entering into his own recogni zance of ,C2OOO, to keep the peace towards the Earl of Darnley and Lis Lordship's family. The motion for this Rule had been made by Mr. Bligh; because bigber security for his good behaviour was de manded :if him than he of his own accord was in- dined to give. Mr. Sr.A HL ETT said, that before his Learned Frier.d proceeded further he had something to offer to the Court, which he trusted that they wo:Ild receive it they had the power to do so. When his client made', the affidavit on which this motion was granted, he Lad no le.gal adviser to inform him how to act. He (.7th. Scw - lett) would, however, no* put - in another, affidavit on his behalf, if it were consistent with the forms of the Court to receive it. To this affidavit the prosecutor could put in his answer, and the case would afterwards come more fully before the comi &ration of the Court. The LORD CHIEF Jurrlce intimated, that the question on which they had now to decide related to the amount of the sureties which Mr. Bligh ought to be called on to procure. The manner in which the Bale had been drawn up afforded to the defendant au opportunity of putting in such affidavits as he thought proper, and tolihe plaintiff suds others as he chose to draw up in reply to them. Mr. Maoris apprehended that the affidavits mast relate to the mere amount of thesureties: if they re lated to other matters, they were clearly inadmiskible. The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE asked Mr. Scarlett ha: the.nature of his affidavit was? Mr. SCaRLETT replied, that it related to the place of residence of Mr. Bligh, and explained certain cir cumstances which had occurred previous to the cz hibiLion of the last:articles of the peace between his client and the Noble individual in question. Mr. MOORE insisted, that if such were the nature of the affidavit, it was clearly irreleart and iaad- The Loan CHIEF JU,TICE.—Have you seen the articles last exhibited,' Mr. Scarlett ? Mr.ScAux.err.—l have not, my LOrd. • The Loan CUILF Jusnots.—Then you bad better heat than read, and then you will be able to judge whether your Affidavit is relevant or not. Me. Odicer of the Court then commenced to read the' articles of the peace exhibited by the Earl of • Darnley .against Mr. Blth, but had nut proceeded far before - he was iaterrupted by Mr. SCAIMETT, who observedrthat he did not wish the whole of then: to b e rea d, but only that part of them whis:h was new. This part of them was accordingly read. It reeitedl his Lordship's apprehension of personal violence from' Bligh, and set forth that, in the summer of last )car, Nigh was under recognizances of • t With two sureties under recognizanees of COO ea. to refrain from annoyinic the Noble .Eatl or ; that on Mr. Blig - h s representation.to his Lord ship last August, tingle had been'compelled before he obtained those sureties to deprisit,a largo sum to indemnify the parties, and that he was. desirous of going ,to the Contiiletn, which he could not do unless he were permitted to receive this money back, the Earl of Darnley consented that the two sureties should be rescinded, on his (Mr. Bligh's) promise that he shiiuld offer no further _annoyance to his family ;.. that Mt. Bligh made this 'pledge by letter to The' Earl's solicitor, in which he said that he would avoid lily Lordship as much as possible, " consistent with the feelings and honour of a Gentleman instead of doing which, he lately met the Earl of Darnley en-' tering his house in Berkeley-square, and asked lihn• whether he (the Earl) would now acknowledge his s ' affidavit to be false? and added, " I will have satis-. faction—by G—, I will." Mr. Seatteerr then observed, that this was the' only insult which Mr. Bligh had offered to the Earl of Darnley since he had consented to his liberation.—. He had now in his hand two Affidavits of Mr. Blight, one of them explained the circumstances of the Ins, terview in question in a way somewhat differing from the manner stated by Lord Deruley, and also the reasons which had induced him not to quit the Country. The other was the previous Affidavit on which the motion had been founded. The COURT then decided, that the Affidavit which Mr. Scarlett had offered that morning was irrelevant and inadmissible, as relating to circumstances which had happened previously to the exhibition of the articles of peace against Mr. Bligh. Mr. Rooms then said, that he wished to enter into the grounds of the Rule first, in order that he might have it discharged, and contended that Mr. Bligh ought to be compelled to put in the same sureties as before. In the very month last year when Mr. Bligh lad been permitted to get back his money, on the plea that he was going to the Continent, he had, in stead of going there, gone down to Sandgate, a watering.place, where the Earl - of Darnley had a house liar his family, and had taken a lodging exactly opposite the gate of the Noble Earl's house. In the very same month he had also taken lodgings' in a house in Berkeleyasquare, where the Noble Lord's house was, though he did not enter upon them till the 21stof October following. He said, indeed, in his Affidavit, that he merely resided there for air and exercise: but how 'did it happen that, when he wanted to walk in the square, he always walked on ; the Earl of Darnley's side, which was the west, in stead of his own, which was the east? His house, too, was in that corner of the square ivhich ccm manded a full view of the road from Berkeley-square to Piccadilly, and so to all the principal places at the west end of the town. No situation, therefore, could be better chosen, from which to watch all the motions of the Earl of Darnley'; and it was therefore becoming their Lordships to consider whether thii was the effect of accident, is Mr. Bligh stated it to be, or of design, as he.(Mr.Muore) believed it to be. Mr. Bligh had also complained of the hardship of being imprisoned for want of the required sureties but the Court were bound to consider that something was due to the peace of one of the most amiable and honourable families on the face of the globe (for such was Lord Darnley's), and that the only way of securing it, was to compel Mr. Bligh to find the re quisite securities. Mr. Bligh's poverty might prevent him from finding their ea-say. but had it compelled hint to annoy Lord Darnley in the manner which he 'had done? Indeed, if his Lordship had not been a man of mild and f ;rbearing temper, some of their Lordships might, in all human probability, have been compelled to enter into a greater inquiry than the one which they were then conducting. They would also see the necesdty of not dimini shing - the sureties in question, when he stated to them, that in 1812, when Mr. Bligh had been bound to keep the peace towards the Earl of Darnley for five years, himself in £lO,OOO, and two sureties in £5OO each, he did not molest Lord Darnley during any part of that period ; but that, as soon as was expired, he began to haunt him again. So too, last year, during the time his sureties were bound iu their recogni zan ec s, Mr. Bligh was perfectly quiet ; but, as soon • as they were discharged, he renewed his former vio lence of conduct. Vann there two circumstances, it appeared, that though he valued not his own word, lie did care for the recogniZances of others ; and therefore they ought to be demanded of him. On' these grounds, he (Mr. Moore) trusted that their Lordships would not allow the discharge of Mr. Illigh upon his own single recognizance, because, if they did, there was no security that the Earl of Darnley would not in future be annoyed by the same kind of conduct as had already afforded him so much vexation. • • • Mr. SCARLETT observed, that the arguinents used by his learned friend tended to establish the mon strous doctrine that the suspicion of an offence was more to. be punished than the offence itself: for they asked their Lordships to commit his client to prison for life, by exacting of him such bail as he was un able to procure, when, even if he had committed the offence imputed to him, his -punishment could' nat. have extended to that length. He could have wished that his client had been in possession of such fulAs as would have enabled hint to make the neces sary deposits, for in that case he would not have ob jected to the bail required • but he had• sworn that he was not in possession of them, and it was there fore a hard matter to require of him such heavy sureties. The exhibition of articles of the peace was intended for the best purposes, but it was the duty of the Court to take care that it was never used for base ones. If the case had gone before a Jury, Mr. thigh might either have explained or ccntradicted the expressions imputed to him ; but as articles of the peace were exhibited against him, he could not deny the charge, but was obliged to abide the punish-1 . ment attending on the crime, even before the com mission of the crime was itself established. The Count, after hearing some further arguments, 'decideit that as Mr. thigh had not kept his promise to. the Earl of Darnley, when he was permitted to withdraw his sureties last )car, the parties should 'now be replaced in their former situation, and Mr. thigh must now enter into recoginzances to keep the peace towards the said Earl and family for the term of four years, himself. in the_stim of £2,000; and either two sureties of 4500 each, or four of £2.50 - sh, as he should find most convenient. Less than . , . .1. • - - . that they could not do in the situation in which they wtte phtead—a situation which bound them to protect the lives and persons of his Majesty's subjects.•' Mr. Bligh was then removed out of Cciukt in the custody of the lipstaff. ' THE KING D. LORD RANELAGH. The defendant, Lord Ranelagh, was convicted two. Terms since, upon-the prosecution of Mr. Adolphus, for . attenipting to piovolie that Gentleman to fight a duel ; and ju !gment was deferred on account of his Lordship's indisposition. Mr: BROUGHAM, on'the part of Lori Ranelagh, now requested that, if judgment was to be pressed against his client, that judgment might.be pronounced in his Lordship's absence, or put off until the ensuing Tetm. He made that motion upon an affidavit from Lord - Itanelagh's physician, which stated his Lord ship's continued indisposition. Mr. SCARLET? said, that if any intimation were given on the part of the defendant that he regretted what had happened, he (Mr. Scarlet) should be ready to meet that intimation more than half-way. Mr. Baouctiara observed, that nothing could give him greater pleasure than to be furnished by his dlieut with instructions to• that effect. Of course, however, no such intimation could be of any value, unless arising out of due instructions ; and the present state of Lord Ranclagh precluded the possibility of com munication, on -the subject. It had been particularly insisted on by the medical attendants, that upon this subject, which had. greatly agitated his Lordship's mind, he should on Do account be spoken to. The Loiw CHIEF JUSTICE supposed that theie could be no objection to the delaying judgment until next Term, if that sea: what Mr. Brougham wished. Mr. BROUGHAM.—If the !batter could not be arranged, and if it was deemed improper to pro nounce judgment in the defendant's absence, that was his wish. Mr. SCARLET t did not object.—Judgment deferred. WRIGHT J. CLEMENT. In this case, Mr. SCA RLETT shewed cause against a Rule in arrest of judgment obtained by Mr. Platt. The ground .on which Mr. Platt had formerly ob tained his motion was, that the counts in the declara tion were defective; that they did not profess to set out either the words or the tenour of the libel, but only the substance; and that they alleged that the defendant had published of and concerning the plain tiff " these libellous matters, in substance as follows ;" and then set out the libel. 'this, he had contended, 'was equivalent only to saying, that the words were to the effect or purpose following, but such a declara tion was not sufficient. In addition to his former ground, Mr. Platt now took an objection applying to the seventh count only. That count had imputed to the plaintiff felonious intention. The act in ques tion, even taking it to have been committed, would not have amounted to felony. • Mr. SCARLETT contended, on the authority of a variety of cases, that it was not necessary that the libel should be set forth literal& but merely in sub stance. The word " substance,' as employed in the declaration, was equivalent to the word matter, and applied to the matter of which the libel was consti tuted. In reply to the second objection, the. Learned Counsel, urged, that, in charging the imputation of a felonious act, the plaintiff had merely committed a mistake upon the point of law. The word as felons= ous" was unnecessary; but it did not, therefore, 'vi tiate the imputations which were actually made one. It was competent to the Jury to find their verdict without at all adverting to that imputation. MT. SCARLETT was followed by Mr. DENMAN and 'Mr. Currey in an argument of considerable length, which turned principally upon the meaning and ac .ceptation of the words in question. The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE —The first objection which has been taken by Mr. Platt must, in my opi nion; prevail. Upon the second objection the in clination of my mind is different ; but upon that ob jection, it is not necessary at this time to pronounce any decision. In cases of libel, the law requires that the - libel itself should be set out; and unless that course be taken, the declaration is not complete ac carding to law. The ordinary mode is, to allege that the defendant has published a false, scandalous,, and malicious libel, of and concerning - the plaintiff, " to the tenour and effect following ;" the word " te-, pour" has always been held as binding the party to set out the actual libel. Another mode has.been, to allege that the defendant has published of and concern ing the plaintiff a certain libel, containing " the false, scandalous, and malicious matters following ;" and Courts have always considered that allegation as im porting that the plaintiff would set out the libel, itself.. In the present case something mote has been intro. thread. The allegation is, that the. defendant has published' of and concerning the plailitiff matters, " in substance as follows ;" and the question is, whet her the additional words, "in substance," do not vary the sense and meaning of the passage ? It appears to me, that, according to - the usual accepta tion of these words, they have that effect. Suppose, for instance, that I were -to-say to any individual, "I have met with a book containing some observations upon the matter of which we were talking last night, and they are in substance as follows:" would that in dividual, then, suppose that I was about to quote_ fi'om the book in question or would he suppose that I meant to give-him an abstract of the 'contents, ac cording to my own conception ? I think, that, un. der such circumstances, every man would take the latter view of such a proposition. These -words • in . the declaration - can only be understood in the same i 1 sense and Meaning s hick would belong to them if they appeared in any other situation. A number of words have acquired in law a technical sense, differ.' ing perhaps in some respects from that which is -ap plied to them in ordinary conversation. Such words,' when we meet with them, must be taken according to their legal meaning ; but words which have not acquired in law any such distinct and technical-sense, can only be reatived according to-their common ac ceptation. It appears to me that, according to the plain intent and nietinins of the words, " in substance," the plaintiff, in employing these words, did not pro fess to set firth the libel itself, but only a sort of 43- strnct of the libel, and for that:lc:ascii the Rule for arresting joigment in this case must be made abso lute. I am always-extremely sorry to deprive a plain tiff of the benefit of kis trial, btit it is' of the'highest importance to adheie to the ancient and established forms of pleading. If deviations were permiaed, eae instance would infallibly lead to another, until at last we should depart entirely front those 'saiti:ary rules which the policy of our la* has thought . it nec essary requite: • --, , Mr. Justice PA YLEI( and Mr. austidelioLaplrD Co incided with- the Lord Chiefinstice.—Rule absolute. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS. APRIL 26. CRONIAT V. FIZATIiC,OTE, EsQ. Mr. Setjzaut.TADDY . .'movtd 'for a Rule to . shen , Cause why-the:verdict obtained for the plaintiffin this case should not .be • set aside .and a new trial granted. He observed, that it -was an action brought against the defendant as Sheriff of Herdbrd, for in g taken the plaintiff's goods in execution under the. cirtnnetances :=The father of the plaintiff had made an assignment . Of his property to. his son about the time when an. execution was sued out against him, under which- property had been subset quently taken to.the amount of £5OO, and which vp the occasion of the present action. ' At the trial of ..71e ea:lse it appeared that -the plain= tiff had paid his father the sure of C•'_-5O ; which hail been applied to the payment of some old debts cot.':. tracted by his father when in business as a brewer; and that in consideration of that sum his father bad gone to an Attorney, named Smith, for the purpose of getting an assignment prepaid ;-but the Attorney; knowing the circumstances in which the plaintifFs father was placed, refused. to prepare the instrument, on which it had been drawn up by aifother person ; that the. Excise had received notice of the change in the business from the lather to the son, but that no alteration. had been made tit rating the pre vises in the parish books, and that the father was in posses sion at the time of the ,ev y. The Learned Ser,eaut contended he wtr.; entitled to his Rule on two.gro Inds: first, that the possession f the I.:tiler was inconsistent. with tha deed ; and wcondly. • :!rat the evidence of ' Mr. Smith should have been iezeivel on the trial to prove the fact of his refusal to prepare dead, as his evidence would not have been such a disclosur: of a confidential communication as to In ing it with.a the general rule in that case ; in support I,f the latter. position he cited Duffin v. Sinith, :'rake s Nisi Prins Cases 108, and Cobden . o. Kendrick, 4 Term Ile- Torts 431, but. • The COURT said, that as to the first point, it had long been settled by the cases c: . ELiwards v. Harbetr, 2 Term Report% .587, and Kidd v. Ravainson, 2 80. sanquet and Puller, 59, that it - was a proper question for the determination of a Jury ; • • and as to the se cond, that there was no case cited by the which would govern the decision in this, .for here the Attorney was consulted in his, professional character alone, and there was no other obstacle to his beiticy, employed by the party but his own objection ; and therefore to admit his evidence would be thedestruc tion of all that centidenca. which - should ever exist.. het w ezta the aztorney:.ancl.his motion was tbereore refused. • • • • . - OF.R . NtiSil i , APRIL Zo. - • IMPORTANT Ta-PAPER-FIANOERS. KiNt; DoBSoN., This leas . art infOrmatinn under the I.ooot queen Anne, exhibited against the defindatit, Mr. @Met Dobson, a paFiefhanger and 'painter in dis . teniper; residing at 42'7,- Stiand, charging bins with staining 120 yards of elephint paper (in decbrating . the Salami of the Adelphi Theatre)„ without - the. duty having first been paid, and notice. not.having , been given where such paper was to have been stained, wherthy he was liable to' a Penalty . of 1:30.— ., Tha defendant was ordered to pay the mitigated penal 4 of Ten Shillings. r - IMITATXVE PEPPER. Several persons were fined 40s. each, for selling • imitative pepper. The Court informed them, that this offence had become so common, that infuture the lowest penalty imposed would be £5. OBSTRUCTING AN OPTicalt. Elizabeth Harris was fined ur the mitigated penalty of 20s. for assaulting an Officer who had seized. a track, which the and a man were dragging, contain ing a quantity of in - andy and rum, for which she had not a permit. The beautiful planet Venus is now an interesting object in the western sky, and will continue so every clear evening between sun-tet and midnight, till ell midi& of Stay. • Yesterday, a fire consumed the workshop of,Mr. GRUPWITU, ink-maker, in Coppice-rsw, (;lerkenwel,.. Two fire horses were with great difficulty saved frorn the Raines. Thursday night, Kir. (*enema, currier, Cartsdykc, who had been incareerated in Greenock, on a charge of Radicalism, and afterwards conveyed to I)tiql barton Castle, -returned home to his family, having: been liberated by the order of Mr. Horn, Advucaze Llepine r —the examination of his (Mr. Cameron's) p - pers entirely sa . taying the Legal Authorities et hit innocence. • DIED. April 1, at Salisbury-gm:n, near EdinburEb, Lady Dick, se.. of Prestonfiuld. March 28, at Seafield Baths, Joseph Thomson, Esq. J. burgl4 and fate qf. Jamaica. March 23, at Perth, Capt. Colin Campbell, of the Wes: Perthshire Local Lately, at.his sear, Sunville, in the county of Limerick tl2,it r In October fait, at Baseglepore, Bengal, John Battyc, aged 46; he was apt/ants of 2G years la the IleinburaLle India Company's Civil Service. Lately, in consequence of a fall from his hose, J. Pais7c7, Esq. cule.of the Sheriffs' Peers of Dub:in, which causes a - canay of a glad in the gift-of ill.: Ccrporr.:!an. Thursday, at Broondwall, near Corbridge, riddenly, s 'John Brand Unsfreville, of the Its: -al Navy, the last male n.- scendant of that ancient and konol:i . .ble Affil 2, at .his house in .311.1die:on 'Prat, Francis, ' Esq. awed 42; he had risen in perfect healtli, and was In the e• 3 of dressing himself, when he fill down in a fit and espire.!. At St. - Juan, Cuba,. a Lady aged 4.5 yeah, tha mother c f less than &A cisildrea, who were all .baptise d. The fa•lter a:4 twenty-three of the children were allafive about sit weeks Eks - - . ..... , . CO.ll. 11 Alt K la, APRIL 26. Ships at Market. . Ship &Ad. . L'ri.:-,s. 63i Ne.wcabtla .;:i . 30s 6.1 to 4O< 61 7 Saudcrland . . :I 31/i 3d to las •. 4 1 1 . Ci::ders • 0 . • OOl Od . • - -........, . MAI LS Voss DAY.--mti. Afro • " ARIL rt-e. Dublin • . 0 _. 1 . 1 tang o . ? Waterford - e .01 Muse - • • -• a e Guerapey and Jersey. - 0 0 Haiubasgh . . ..0 • 11.:11.uul • 0 0 1 pottenbur g b 0 1 Flawirts 0. 0 Malta •0' 4, Janlica *0 0 New work .0 0 - iIiGH-IyA,THAat LON DQ, .klienshos ' ji if() • • - . trlnka3 :Jeri - L6\ fieiNT pithlishea Rapir; ri4cv. Toner-am ei til 111 -a I 1 j U tr 11 et iW ti do di tl a al at at In 1 is si el • tl a s a a • • ■ 4 1 1 3