Star. — London, England, 1829-07-10 00:00:00

ER ASSIZES. IRD CIRCUIT. ,ILLOCZ and Mr. Baron VAUGHAN. July 25 at Abingdon. —.— 29 Aug. 1 - 6 -- 12 at Shrewsbury. , 17 22 Gloucestershire.-- 26 at Gloucester. HOME CIRCUIT. Before Mr. Justice Pau and Mr.:halm GAME& Hertfordshire July 29 Rues Aug. 1 ........ at Chelmsford. Kent — a at Maidstone. Sussex l5 ...... at Lewes. Surrey. -- 20 at Croydon. NORFOLK CIRCUIT. Before Mr. Baron GAMMON and Mr. Justice PARE& Buckinghamshire... July 27 Bedfordshire...... 50 Huntingdonshire. Aug. 1 ...... at Huntingdon. Cambridgeshire 5 ..... at Cambridge. Suffolk.. ....... 6 Norfolk —lO ... at Norwich. City of Norwich same day. MIDLAND CIRCUIT. • licfore Lord Turraanes and the Loan Cour Balms. Northamptonshire— July V 7 litnlandshire....... —,-- SO l.incolnshire Ail. 1 City of Lincoln ... same day ... Ditto. Nottinghamshire.— Aug. 6 Town of Nottingham same day at Nottingham. Derbyshire... ... Aug. 11 Leicestershire. —l4 at Leicester. NV arwickshire ....... 19 LAW INTELLIGENCE: COURT OF EXCHEQUER, JuLT 9. 4 HE SOLICITOR-GENERAL V. SPURS AND ANOTHER. Toss was an information filed by Sir Nicholas Tyndal, a. soli.itor General, against Messrs. Spiers and Red head, the object of which was to procure the condem• 11.1" z ion f four cases of silk. The information was filed under the 6th Geo. IV. and it charged that the silk had hems unladen before due report or entry of it was made at the Custom House, and before the duty was paid or secu•ed, in any of which cases the goods would be •ior'rited. The Arroam GENERAL stated the case. After alluding to the recent reduction in the duty on foreign •ilk, and the necessity which now existed for estrum:di., nary vigilance to defeat any attempt to evade the pay. ment of that duty, he said that it had been usual to' a.low all packages belonging to any of our Ambassa. dors to pass the Custom House without examination, on the assurance that they were really the property of an Ambassador. In December last several packages belonging to Lord Granville, our then Ambassador to tie French Court, arrived in this country, and were delivered to the defendants, Messrs. Spier, and Red head, who were his Lordship's agents. and who were very eminent silk brokers. On the 7th of December five packages, marked L. G. which signified that they hr longed to Lord Granville, artived in the Superb steam boat, from Calais. They were landed, but in consequence of some suspicions entertained by the Cus tom House officers, they were not suffered to pass, al though a person, said to be an agent of the defendants, represented them as Lord Granville's property. Upon subsequent examination, it was found that one of the packages only c .ntained furniture. and that the other four were filled with silks to the value of 4.0001. The ca•es containing the silk were consigned to the defen dants, as were all the former packages, and they were marked on the outside a furniture." &c. After the examination of witnesses in support cf the information, Mr. BROUGHAM addressed the Jury for the defen. dints, and contended, that under the Statute the goods could not be forteited, unless the unlading took place with the knowleJge or consent of the consignee. In the present instance the unlading was directed by the steam packet agent, without the slightest knowledge on the part of the defendants. 'she Jury found a verdict for the Crown; and in answer to a question from the Court, gave it as their opinion, that the silks had been shipped with the intea. Lion of defrauding the Revenue; but they did Dot agree in connecting the defend .nts with the fraud. COURT OF KING'S BENCH, JOLT P. LoRD BRANDON V. LORD VISCOUNT MRLBOURNE. This being the first day of the Nisi Prius sittings after Trinity Term, Lord Tenterden took his seat on the bench exactly at half past nine o'clock, when Mr. GuRNTY, on the part of the plaintiff in the above cause, applied to his Lordship to request he would 6z' a day specially for the trial. The action was brought' by his Noble client to seek redress for the greatest of civil injuries (criminal conversation), and he must na turally be most anxious to have it disposed of on as early a day as possible. Lord TIDITIERDIN—We cannot 6: it for an earlier dapthan the 21st. Mr. GURNEY—I am quite aware of that, my Lord, and shall be quite satisfied to let it stand for that day, or any of the four days your Lordship has appointed for the trial of Special Jury cases; any day from the 21 , t to the 24th inclusive. Lord Tr)ITERDIN—I see DO objection to that; are you opposed, Mr. Gurney ? Mr. GuNNEY—Before I came into Court, I understood that Lord. Melbourne's solicitor had consented, but I now find that my Learned Friend near me has been in. strutted to oppose it. The ATTORNEY GENERAL then rose, and stated, that it was of the utmost importance, that in a proceeding of so grave and delicate a nature, and considering the elevated rank of both the parties, that nothing should be done that could wear the appearance of hurry or precipitation; his Noble client would have to produce a number of witnesses, the greater part of whom were now resident in Ireland, and it might so happen that it would not be practicable to get them all over within the ensuingiottnight. Mr. Guatitty—Lord Brandon is precisely similarly circumstanced. and yet we shall take care to have over ail our witnesses within the time. The ATTORNEY GENERAL—But your Lordship will find that no day can be fixed. At first, four day, were fired for Special Jury cases, from the 21st to the 24th, both inclusive; your L •rdsbip then changed the Special Jury days to two, the 21st and 22J, and the Court has already named eight causes for each day ; they are nut now to be displaced, and your Lordship has quite enough to do to try sixteen heavy Special Jury cases in twr. days. _ _ Lard TENTRRDEN—What say you, Mr. Attorney, to the 23J or 24th. The ATTORNEY GINERAL—Your Lordship will find that it will tend most to the convenience of all the parties to defer this cause to the October Sittings. Several Gentlemen, who are members of the Irish bar; are to be %guesses upon the trial. It would be extremely in convenient to take these Gentlemen away from their peotessional avocations, whets they can be had at a time when they may not generally be so engaged. Lord TZNIIIRDEN.—MO must feel disposed to accom sedan these Gentlemen. Let some day be especially fixed between the 27th of October and the sth of Nov. for the trial; you can either agree upon a day, or let the Marshal choose one. HOPKINS V. THOROUGHOOOD. Mr. CAMPBELL stated this action was brought by a Mr. Hopkins, one of the lessees of the Whitechapel road tolls, in the county of Middlesex, to recover from the defendant Thoroughgood, who is proprietor of two coaches running on that road, the sum of 81.35. 6d. being the amount of tolls due from the 21st of July to the 20th of November last. The fasts of the case were as follow—The plaintiff claimed toll for the defendant's coaches passing through Stratford-gate, they having paid toll at Woodbridgeiate, and the grounds on which the demand was made were under the Act of Parlia ment passed in 1823, wherein it was enacted that all coaches having a fresh team of horses are liable to fresh toll. The Learned Counsel observed that it would be seen the toll was levied on the horses and not on the carriage, and therefore the plaintiff was entitled to their verdict. It was, lie observed, a case of considerable im portance to the plaintiff, as, in the e►ent of the Jury coming to a contrary conclusion, the plaintiff would be a loser of 5001. per annum. The ATTORNEY GENERAL, on the part of the defen dant, said be admitted every fact stated by the Learned Counsel in his opening speech; but be could not say whether the plaintiff would be willing to admit all that he (the Attorney General) was *boot to advance. The lease of the tolls was about to be put in and read, but that being also admitted, The ATTOISNIT GINgRAL observed that one would have thought the plaintiff bad taken a lease of the tolls in question, in the hope of making good his present claim, otherwise he would be a loser. The defendant had several objections against the propriety of the plaintiff's bringing the present action. In the first place, the plaintiff went before a Justice of the Peace, for the purpose of enforcing his present claim. but the Justice d& tide! against him. He then appealed to the Quarter Sessions, when his claim was again decided against him, on which the present action was brought; and another ground of objection to the present action was, that by the Act of Parliament, the Scl Geo. IV. chap. 26, it is enacted, that the proprietors have three different modes of proceeding—the first is by a summons before a Justice of the Peace, an appeal to the Quarter Sessions, or by distraining the goods of the party so refusing to pay the toll. This latter proceeding was not adopted by the plaintiff, and, therefore, the objection to his pre sent proceeding was well founded. In this case the plaintiff had his claim decided against him both io Essex and London. It was then agreed between the parties, on both sides, that the matter in dispute should be left to the final decision at the Quarter Sessions, at Chelmsford, the defendant, in the meantime, keeping a regular account of whatever tolls might accrue from the time of the Magistrate's decision to the next Quarter Sessions ensuing; and it was for the recovery of that sum the present action was brought. It was therefore clear the plaintiff, who had previously entered into an agreement that the matter in dispute should be left to the decision of the Magistrates at Quarter Sessions, had no right after that to bring the present action; besides, on looking into the express terms of the Act of Parlia ment, and putting a fair construction on the wording of that Act, there was no doubt that the defendant was entitled to the benefit of their verdict. The toll in question was never thought of until the present plaintiff became the lessee, so it was unnatural to suppose he would be materially affected should a verdict in this, as on all former occasions, go against him. Mr. Humphries, solicitor, deposed drawing the agree ment now produced. He was not aware who gave the instructions, but he charged the lessees with the ex pense of drawing it out. He saw Mr. Goodman, who was also one of the lessees of the toll gates in question, and handed him the agreement. Mr. Goodman deposed giving instructions to Mr. Charles Humphries to draw out the agreement pro duced. He took the agreement afterwards to the de fendants, who signed it, but on going to the other coach proprietors they rtfused signing it, in conse quence of which the plaintiff also declined signing it. There was afterwards an appeal to the Quarter Sessions. Lord TENTUDEII inquired if the matter could not be settled? The ATTORNZY GENERAL said he thought the Act of Parliament entitled the defendant to a verdict. Lord TENTLIWZNI cannot see that. I regret much that the framer of many Acts of Parliament are not more explicit in the framing those Acts. It was finally agreed that a verditt should be en tered for the plaintiff, in the sum claimed, reserving the question for the opinion of the Court. Verdict for the plaintiff—damages 81. Ss.6d. murex—tams O. TZWICS. This was an action to recover 1001. the amount of a bill of exchange; the bill was dated January 20, 1829, and payable two months after date. The defence was usury. Mr. Lewis, who is an Attorney of the Court, was in dorsee of the bill, and he sought to recover. on the ground that he was no piny to the alleged usurious transaction, but had given the full value for the bill. M'Neal, an uncertificated bankrupt, and a prisoner in the King's Bench, a Ili called to prove the usury. It appeared born his evidence that being in distressed cir cumstances he applied to the defendant, and obtained the bill with his acceptance. He then carried it to Levy, a Sheriff's officer, to get it discounted. He was there told that money in the city was very scarce, and that he must take plate to the amount of sixty pounds. The remaining forty pounds he might have in cash. 51 , 15/ea' accordingly took a silver milk jug,a sugar basin. and other articles, for which Levy deducted 601. and paid him 401. He took the plate to a pawnbroker in Holborn, who lent him upon it 1.51. and oTered to put chase the whole tor 2.51. The son of Levy proved that the articles mentioned by Nl•Neal r, ere in his lather', possession, and that they went from him_ He was present when they were ori ginally bought for 451. In order to show that the plaintiff was a &min./We holder at the bill, Levy's son iso deposed, that a few days before the bill became due, his father sent him with at to the plaintiff, and said •' ask him to give the money for it." He accordingly carried it to Lewis, who took the bill, and gave him 801. in bank notes, and the rest in sovereigns. The above were the facts, and Lord TENTIRDEN left the Jury Co say by their verdict whether they believed the transaction between Levy and the plaintiff was free from collusion ? It there was any contrivance to avoid the effect of an usurious contract, it would not be a bona fide transaction. and the plaintiff could not recover. The Jury found a verdict for the defendant. ib. Diccoturt (g - • ... —..:. ‘' 7 tr' SUMM v .-4 ,, •••Ak. ‘ . \l—Nil'a.rf., OXFOI .44 ' ; a n 6 i... - . . Berm Hui ... \0 1 44,;;‘ .... . J VIJD .4 '," s ' Air. -.... Staffordshire ... Shropshire.... .. 11erefordshire CASSAN •. BOND. This was an action brought by one attorney against another, to recover 6( 1 1. the amount of a bill of ex change, given as payment for professional services, and as compels...6cm foi A jourvey to Boulogne, in order to see the defendant and cult with him about the title a of an estate, which Mr. Bond had to dispose oc in Gloocestertgire. The defence was, that the plaintiff had taken a double security for his claim. _ _. Lord TINTIRDIN, considering this a matter in dis pute between two professional men, recommended a settlement by arbitration, and a verdict was finally taken for the plaintiff, subject to reference. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Jinx 9. Before the Loss Cum Juries and a Common Jury. NEWPERY V. A9MSTRONO. This was an action on a guarantee warranting the honesty of a clerk admitted into the service of the plaintiff. It turned out, however, that the clerk became delcient in his accounts to the amount of 341. which sum the defendant was called on to reimburse. The guarantee and lon were proved, and a verdict was returned for the plaintiff, for the amount sought to be recovered. ARCHES' COURT. ADULTERYHARRIS V. HARRIS. This WAS an appeal from the Consistory Court of London, where the suit was originally brought, by the wife against the husband, for a divorce, on the ground of adultery, from which he defended himself, and recri minated, by charging his wife with adultery on her part. The case was fully argued during the present term, and Sir JOHN Maroc this day gave the judgn ent of the Court. He stated that the parties were married in November 1820, and cohabited until 1823, when the ' husband, who was a Post Captain in the Navy, sa as promoted to the command of the Hussar frigate, and sailed to the West Indies, where he remained until October 1826, when he returned to England. Mrs Harris proceeded to Portsmouth in September 1826, to meet her husband, who was daily expected, and she took up her residence at the house of a Mr. Maley, who was a friend of Captain Harris's. After remain ing a few days at Portsmouth the Hussar was ordered to Chatham to be paid off, and Mrs. Harris came up to London, where the cohabitation was renewed, and con tinued until March,' 827, a hen a separation tail' place under the following circumstances:—Captain Harris had been made acquainted with various impru dencies and acts of misconduct, committed by his wife during her visit to Portsmouth, and became de sirous to separate from her. The wife admitted the general culpability of her conduct, but strongly protested that she was innocent of the last offence. —Mr. Motley, however, having insinuated to her that Captain Harris was in possession of the whole of the circumstances connected with her conduct in Pottsmouth, and particularly with what took place be- I tweed her and Captain Latouche, at Stanstead Wood. Mrs. Harris said she knew that her husband would ' live with her no longer, and consented to quit his house. Soon after the separation she commenced the suit against her husband, and the fact principally relied on to sustain the charge against him was in re ference to an acquaintance which he had formed with Lady Smith, the wife of Sir Charles Smith, who came home a passenger in the Hussar from 13 Al• hackies. Upon the arrival of the vessel at Ports mouth, Lady Smith was introduced to Mrs. Harris, and subsequently upon the arrival of the parties in London the acquaintance was kept up, and it was admitted that lon two several occasions Captain Harris slept at the lodgings of Lady Smith, first at the Regent Circus, and subsequently at her lodgings in Sloane street. With the exception of one single witness, a servant girl at the house in Sloane street, the Court was of opinion that the testimony of none of the witnesses went to prove that acts of improper familiarity had passed between 'Lady Smith and Capt. Hartis on those occasions. Tne witness alluded to had been contradicted by other wit nesses, and the Court considered her evidence as alto. !tether incredible, and that there were not sufficient grounds for charging Capt. Harris with the breach of honour with which he was charged in the libel, which alleged that he had seduced the wife of his friend. On this part of the case, therefore, the Court con& med the sentence of the Judge of the Consistory Court. The question which remained was as to the guilt of Mrs., Harris at Portsmouth as most dissolute, forward, and abandoned. Both her language and letters were un becoming of a modest matron, and her advances to officers and other individuals resident at Portsmouth, the Court pronounced most impudent and barefaced. When such was the conduct of a married woman,when surrounded by her husband's friends, as Mrs. Harris was in Poi tsmouth, there was very little difficulty in coming to the conclusion, that when a favourable opportunity occurred she would have little hesitation in surrender ing her person. To read the evidence In reference to the particular acts of adultery charged, would be un necessary, and would only tend to disgust and de moralise, but the Court was clearly of opinion that adultery was committed in Stanstead Wood, on the 13th of September, by Mrs. Harris with Captain 1 1.4touche. The Court was confirmed in this view by subsequent transactions, for it appeared that the day after Captain Hartis left Portsmouth. Mrs. Harris offered to bet Mrs. Motley a. wager of 3/. that she was I pregnant, and that she would have an eight months' child. In the sequel it proved that she was pregnant, for she miscarried in the following February. Under all the circumstances the Court concurred with the Judge of the superior Court, that the adultery of the' wife had been clearly proved. It was said, howe ver, in defence of Mrs. Harris, that the husband was himself the corrupter of his wife, and the author of his own dishonour, as he had introduced Mrs. Har ris to Mrs. Carey, a lady who was the acknowledged mistress of an illustrious individual now no more. It appeared, however, that Mrs. Harris bad en couraged this intimacy herself during the absence of her husband ; and it also appeared that Mrs. Carey was a person whose general conduct was con sistent with decorum, though this did not justify the course of life she was leading. The Court could not keep it out of view, that in cases where circumstances prevented a legal connection, a connection such as that which existed between Mrs. Carey and the individual in question, was less blameable. Perhaps it was unfor tunate that such an idea prevailed, but under all the circumstances of the case, it was quite impossible that the Court could hold that Captain Harris was barred from his remedy by having introduced his wife to Mrs. Carey, or that by.so doing be was the pander to his own dishonour, and that the wife was justified in com mitting adultery. Under all those circumstances the Cunt rejected the appeal, and confirmed the sentence of the Court below, which declared the husband in nocent, and the wife guilty, of the charge brought against them. Letters from Leghorn of the 21st July state, that by accounts from Constantinople, it appears that two English ships, laden wit► cern from Hassan, and three Austrian from Trieste, wit► provisions and warlike stores, have arrived at the above capital A 6re broke out on Saturday morning at Sheerness, is the stables of a Mrs. Coody, which extended to her house, and from thence to several out-hokum adjoining, anal. before the limes were subdued, property to the amount of abut 2,00 W. was destroyed. WESTMINSTER SESSIONS. These Sessions commenced yesterday morning before Francis Cows, Es . and a full Bench of Al4gibttates. GUAL.JIANS OF TRIt NIGHT. Samuel Watts, Joseph Trimby, and John Partridg e . three watchmen of the parish of Si. George, wete dieted for assaulting Joint Wright, one of the Bow m en patrol. The prosecutor stated, that on the night of the 25th of April he was on duty is Bond street, about twel ve o'clock. when two men came up; ooe of them told him he had been robbed of three sovereigns by a 0 °m oo who had ran into a house of a certain description io Woodstock court. He went with them in order to take the woman into custody, and finding the do r shot he knocked in order to obtain admittance, upon which, the defendant, Watts, came up, and ordered him to desist. Witness said he was an officer endeavourin g t o apprehend a woman on a charge of felony. Watts sa id that he did not care whst he wanted, he would ta k e him to the watchhouse, and sprung his tattle, o p o „ which the othtr defendants came to his assistance, and, alter beating him severely with their staves, took hin t to the n atchhouse, where they charged him with being drunk and disorderly. Gartner, the inspector of the patrol, came up, and s.eing witness was not drunk, told defendants he should report their conduct to Stafford. Witnesses were called. who proved these facts, and the Juty found thens guilty. They were each sentenced to pay a fine of Sl. POLICE INTELLIGENCE. GUILDHALL. Jessph Menders's' and Jahn Flnersit,allas Innenner Jack, journey. men butchers, and James Wilson. a servant out of place, were finally examined, charged with stealing twenty sheep front a field at Wal, thamstow, in Eases. Flitcruft made a voluntary confession, stating that on the 2.1 inn. the ether prisoners met him, and asked if he was willing to earn a pound, by assisting in bringing from the country and slaughtiiri l some sheep, which Henderson had bought? lie agreed, and they started. They reached Mr. %line's field about twelve o'clock at night; there Henderson held the gate open while witness and Wilson drove the twenty sheep out, and oa to town. The sheep were t.dten to a house in Spitalfields, where they were slaughtered and dressed. One was cut up and hawked about, which prndueed witness 245. and another was sold to Mr. Cross, in leadenhall, our 255. which witness also got. Five others were sold In Leadenhall, and thirteen in Newgate market. Witness borrowed the cart to convey those to Newgate market, and Henderson accompanied hint. Two of the skins, which bad been recovered from the pin of a fellmonger at Bermondsey, were produced, and identified by the skin dealer as those he had purchased of the witness, and by the Smithfield salesman, as belonging to the sheep be Mad will. A man in the service of Mr. Boyce, salesman in Newgate market, proved having received four sheep from Henderson; and on its being observed that tbsy were in a muddled state, be said they had been dressed by a countryman. The prisoners were committed fur trial. BOW-STREET. A hackney coachman yesterday summoned Mr. Frederick Pol. lock, the Barrister, for not paying Mm the fare. That Gentlernall. however, being engaged on business, s (timid of his attended in his stead. From the coachman's statement it appeared that Mr. Pollock hired his coach about eight o'clock on Wednesday evening, to take him from his house, in Bedford-row, to his chambers in the Tem ple. Mr. Pollock, on being set down, forgot to pay the fare, and the coachman, supposing that he intended to come into the coach again, waited there till two o'clock in the morning. At that time a watchman inquired who he was remaining for? and be replied, '• A Gentleman whose name be was unacquainted with." On his telling the watchman the number of the house, and the name of the street, from which he bad driven him, he informed him of the name of the Gentleman. The coachman then went away, and called upon Mr. Pollock about ten o'clock :n the morning to settle with him. kir. Pollock said that he had quite forgot, and be had not seen him when he came from his chambers. Me would, how ever, give him five shillings then, and if be found, upon considers. tion of his cue, that he was deserving, he would give him fire shilliogs more. Coachee was not satisfied with the promise, and he accordingly summoned Mr. Pollock for 9s. thus charging 14.. for his fare and time. Sir Itscoaao laughed heartily at the case, and said that It re. minded him of a similar circumstance that occurred many years ago. A coachman was engaged by a Member of Porliansent to drive hoes from his residence to the House of Commons, where,having alighted, he forgot to payfor his ride. The master of the coach being acquainted with this, provided the coachman every day with fresh horses for the space of three weeks, at the end of which time the member was summoned, and obliged to pay for the rode, and the whole tines that the coachman had waited. In the present case the coachmas was right, and fully entitled to his fourteen shillings. The gentleman accordingly paid the money for Mr. Pollock. A very decently dressed person, who was ' on his entrance into the office, immediately known as a native of France, applied to Ur. kliessum. under the following ludicrous circumstances: Foreigner—lf you please, sate, I have come to dis office to oh. tale justice, in a very creole affare. I was vary mesh trebled wig a pane in my teet, and I went to have it cured at one dentish this town. He said I mush have de toot out,; and I, safe, did agree. He took one toot out; but, sere, can you imagine k peo.sible when I say he took de wrong one out? I did soars se mush pane dat I went to anoder dentist, and he put in de wears toot and pull out de right. He say, besides, that his broder dm. ash was vary bad deetlsb, and had not done his office right. Mr. lifinamou., front the comical manner in which the Frani man repressed his grievance, and the singular subject of compel'. could not restrain his laughter, which offended greatly the par foreigner. Complainant—Oh, Sare, you may laugh, but what le wet* you is death to me. I can assure you, Sam, I havemut lON AI kale bit, not one inereems, since this villan pull oot is VMS toot. I will, however, be revenged, and you, Sere, must Omni de joostice. blr. MUUMUU. said that be was not empowered to afford kis any assistance. He could only advise him to apply to his attorney. Complainant—Very wen, Sam. You do as you like; but I wig make him pay for destroying my appetite and my toot. ' The poor Frenchman then made his exit, amidst the suresuaincd laughter of every one present. WORSHIP-STREET. stns Payer, an old offender, was charged with an attempt to rob Harris, a very dashingly-dressed little Gentleman, aged lit years. He was walking in the City-road on Wednesday eve*. ing, when the prisoner knocked him down as if by accident, and made a snatch at his gold watch and seal.—The Magistrate ant her to the Tread-mill for three months. THAMES POLICE. A poor sailor yesterday applied to Mr. Baomuur, and stated. that upon the arrival of his ship it was surrounded by a legiou of crimps, " likes swarm of bees." He was prevailed upon to go to the lodging house of one of them, and there he remained for elates days, and then paid for diet and edging for that period HI. Her ing =ether ship, be wished to remove his clothes, but they were detained upon a fresh demand, of which he knew nothing. He wanted the assistance of the police to enable him to get Ms clothes. Mr. Bosoms, thought that the remedy was in the ship owner's hands; what could be more easy than to allow the men an advance of 10 per cent. upon their wages, until the proper time fee 'maim arrived? which measure would put money into their possession, and possibly enable them to avoid the description of laud shack, called "a Crimp." An officer was directed to accompany the sailor to the Crimp% house. At Babrahans,Cambridgeshire, the Lady of Henry John Adam. Esq. of twin daughters. At his house in Pall-onall, the Lady of T. Tyringhani Hernia. Rai. of a daughter. MARRIED. At fit. Margaret's, Wesunineter, George Hankie, jen. Eat 0 1 Coventry -street , to Mary, Welt daughter of William aeons sit of Parliament-street. DIED. July 5, m Falmouth; aged 62, the Rev. William Coney. At her boast in South Andlemma, in the list year altar 10 Anna Maria, widow of Sir William Jews. July 6, Catherine, youngest daughter of the Rev. Dr. Pevab. Burton Crescent, aged 11. At her Mese at Lydd, in Kent, Mrs. Murray,widow of Omni Thomas Murray. In Whitehall-gardens. In the 12th year el her age. Mak go b daughter of Cuthbert Belson, Esq. M.P. for Neweastie.upen.Tyas At her hones. Lissem.grove North, Mrs. Mary Sumpter, aged a Lemma; Printed sod Published by Joint Monte, at thillato 011102, 210.1, Plckettlhles• TOO& Bar. r'9P• eel N tmi I: ] ..___. CONTR THE CO. kis M That on Ti reeeiveTenden One Huni Fifty Ton Si Ulundi Otte Mind To be delive ford, on or belt Samples of ( tendering ; a sa tracts may he s Each Tender delivered befor Person who Ni must attend to HOUSEHOI BRON MR. Plii Timms he will, by or the Premises. I Formed of ROI and Dining Ro and Teat Beds Merino Curtail Two costly stIC Turkey and Br and Glass Wm several fine Brc Clocks • Orma inodert; Picture and a variety of May be vies at One Shilling 73, Bond-street iiikiici MR. PHI Mammal TION, at bli E A S Including a sups of novel and I Waken; a Mehl, Spoons and For objects appropth dery Plated Wu Purdy, an elegat Boles, and blisc, And brought In head. May be view bed at Mr. Milli KLEG A N Superb MR. PHII Tommy AUCTION, at A CASKET of Enriched with B other Precioas S and rings, annb seven stones, On Mao, a Selection with financings, worked ends, ( Lace Veils, Scat tently brought ( May be tiewe Phillips's, 73, B AND ENT] ALL that BROOK hi theenutiti ACRES of cap! good Farm Ha House, excellent Nag Stable, Car House.—For fin Tunbridge, Kew OLYLAI IL Strand. 1 the Metropolis, pH ate dwelling Gentleman of Inns of Court, of Parties favouri EFFECT ARCHITE and Pena fite valuable Prr PATENT M DOORS, at the 69, Princes-met applied, and whe pedidoe, and sav smallness of ape new in use, are 1 Cosiments Lever Cramp to of the whole are REPORT of the H( at the City of L London: Just publisbed THE NEVI '• Brambh & SIR PHIL Gamut'. Bart. 5. The CHEI Subaltern. In 1 4. OLDCOU 5. ADVENT poet svo. Sic id. s• If you weal farthest from a C & WALDRC 7. DILVERRI Dlioureed." In 8. GERALD] of Elizabeth. li EIrBREW: posrlavo. la. R ICHRL eve. .01 lla. 60 IL The DAV IA Two V.l.e po -Ammi