Star. — London, England, 1822-10-18 00:00:00

W =. ~ , 1. • "I ~ tt l i~F =~l. ~~ } R . Tilt NEW MARRIAGE ACT. Dear Polly, believe me, i long before . this, . In Wedidek expected the sea of my bliss: What a pity two hearts, that by love are fast tied, A law su unfeeling should strive to divide; For how can they think that entind such as your's • Would consent th.: her name should be stuck on church-doors? Whilst your Tommy, his age, trade, and place must divulge, That each prying fool his rude jukes might indulge— Dow long It:: has liv'd, and Coa knows what beside! What a shalt::: thus !o.sever a man from his bride! Yet, whilst modesty paints the dear blush on your cheek,. I of . Wedlock no more shall e'er venture to speak; The termsswhich they..proffer us Dever will suit, • For with ntodesty love is torn up by the toot! _A LAW INTgLLIGENCE. COURT'OF 4INGI BENCH, OCTOBER 17. • WEST O. WADE. Tliis was an action to recover a debt alleged to be due by the defendant. The circumstances of the ca s e are as follow :—The plaintiff is a tailor, and the defendant the widow of an officer, who, at the time of his death, carried on the business of manufacturing paint. At that period he was indebted to the plaintiff for some clothes. which he got from him,. and this debt was increased by his having supplied defendant's family with mourn ing clothes to the amount of 131. 'The plaintiff had already taken paint to the value of 91.55. which left only 31. 15s. due of the last debt. She was subse quently arrested both for her husband's debts and the entire amount of the one contracted by herself. On her arrest she gave bail, and lodged what she con ceived to be the sum due by her, 3/. 15s. in Court. The shopman 9f the defendant proved that when she was informed of the plaintiff's having got the paint she regretted it very much, as she could have sold it for cash to another. She also said, Well, this is all on accrunt of the poor .Colonel, and I fear I shall never receive.a farthing for it." A witness for the defendant said, that in a conver• sation between him and the plaintiff, in which he reproached him ltrreting the defendant, plain tiff said that he expected the paint would go in the old accotrnt. The CUIEF Jus•rtcc said that the verdict must de pend on the construction put upon the conversations. the Jury were already aware that the wife wasmot in law -bound to the debts of her husband, unless she had subsequently agreed to take them on herself.— With regard to the expression of the defendant, " All this is on account of the poor Colonel," might mean that it was in conseqtTence of the mourning procuad at his death, and in that case she would not " receive a farthing." however, this was a matter for tkeJury only to determine.—Verdict for the defendant. EWINGTON V. PARKINS. This was an action to recover 1581. 4s. Mr. GURNEY stated the case. He said this was an action nomi na II y against the Sheriff, but really against Hopwood and Laver, Sheriffs' officers. The plaintiff, who was the indorsee of a bill of exchange for 101. to a person named White, arrested him for the debt. White entered bail, but in the bail-bond the name of Arabella Hazard was inserted as plaintiff by the offi cers. This name was era,ed, and that of Wingrave substituted. This name was also erased, and that of the present plaintiff iicroduced. The plaintiff pro ceeded against White for the recovery of his debt, but was ttonsuited, because at the time of com mencing the action the name or/Wingrave was in the bait-bond as piaiatiff. In consequence of the nonsuit plaintiff incurred costs to the amount of 1481.45. besides the original debt, White having since become insolvent. It was a constant practice with Sheriffs' officers to make the same bail-bond answer for several actions by the erasut e of names, by which system the plaintiff incurred the loss of L5B/. 4s. which he now sought to recover. It was proved that Wingrave's name was in the bail-bond as plaintiff, at the time of commencing the action, and that plaintiff's name was subsequently in troduced by the Shetiffs' officers. Mr. Hour called no witnesses. He admitted that the Sheriffs' officers were the real defendants, and that a substitution of names had taken place, but without any improper design. It was merely an in nocent mistake ; which had been taken advantage of by plaintiff's attorney to furnish himself with a large bill of costs. - . Verdict for the plaintiff; 1581. 4s. subject to reduc tion by tile Master's taxation of the bill of costs in the former action. GORDON V. CAMPBELL. This,was an action to recover from the defendant, as the surviving partner of the firm of Stewart and Campbell, the sum of 121.50. The facts of the case are as follows :—The plaintiff, late a Captain in the Portuguese service, wrote in 1816 to Mr. Stewart, then in the service of Greenwood and Cox, army agents, inclosing a bill on them for £l5O, with which he was to buy in the Three per Cents. Some time after, Mr. Stewart formed a partnership with the defendant as army agents, and during this partner ship several written communications passed as to the 1.:150, which was never applied to purchasing in the • Three per Cents. In all these communications "r and not " We" was used, which shewed that it was a .transaction on the part of Mr. Stewart, and not .of the firm. Captain Gordon, it appeared afterwards, did business with Stewart and Campbell, and in set tling his accotint . die never ieceived credit for the. w hi c h•h o wcztildisave done if wii considered the debt of the firm. Mr. Stewart has since died in solvent; god the q'nestion now was, whether the hill' sent &Stewart was sent to him merely as a personali friend, or on tile account of the firm, upon which the evidence was circumstantial? The CHIEF JUSTICE said, that the Jury would form 'their verdict aecording to the impression which the evidence had made upon their • minds. If they •be -Loved that the money' Was 'emitted to the firm, they • *ould.then find for the plaintiff ; but if, on xhi con trary, they were of opinion that it was remitted to Siew,art °Liras the friend of Captain Gordon 'which he confeoed was the impression upon his then they would find for the_ilefendant; how 'tis wits eritilely . for their coakideration.—Orer the defend-tat. VW V. PRACOCIG was an action to recover claques from the defendant, for having held the plaintiff to bait on an ,A~ -. _ ~ - k ' Verdict—Damages £ls—Costs 40s. WESTMINSTER SESSIONS. , i • arrest, for a bill oreicishlc,e+lE . Mtbe having ben iveviouslp satisfied. .1 Mr..MAßltyArr -stated t"ho.—. raik ' said the,plaintiff was meehanist hi4 . lVl4extiff 46, siding in JermYn-street,. and . the "defenatint . st'as an attorney. residing in Cambridge; The plaintiff; to accommodate a 'friend of his (Mr. lisse*Who also resided in Cambridge, accepted a bill - exchange fOr July, 1820, payable in four - nintahs. Mr. :Tones baVing an extensive. dealing witlithe defen dant, and Sews indebted to turn in a large sum, gave him this bill.as a iatisfaction for part antis demand: In three. Weeks after the bill became due, Me, Jones 'paid it, together with a further sum of SOL in cash, -, but did not then take up the bill, the defendant having said it Was at his office in Barnwell, about a milefrom Cambridge; however, he gave the plain tiCa memorandum, acknowledging the payment of the bill, and the receipt of the SOL Notwithstanding. this, in the course of the following year the defendant made an affidavit that 501. was due to him on the bill by the plaintiff, and, without any previous commu nication, 4rrested him; to which the defendant was obliged to give bail. The defendant then commenced an action againit Mr. Brandt, which he droPt on dis covering that the bill had been satisfied, and accord ingly took out a rule of discontinuance. Upon the termination of that suit the present action was insti tuted; the Learned Counsel said that he would prove these circumstances in evidence, and had no doubt that the Jury would award a liberal compensation for the injury sustained by the plaintiff. The bill and arrest were proved. Mr. Jones proved the payment of the bill, with SO/. besides, and the receiving a memorandum to that effect from the defendant. Hopwood, the keeper of a lock-up-house, proved that he had Mr. Brandt in custody for three or four hours, and his having been held to bail; the costs in curred during the time were two or three pounds. An Attorney employed in the former action proved that 61. costs had been incurred. Mr. GURNEY, for the defendant, maintained that to support the action it was necessary to prove that the arrest was founded in malice, and cited the case of Gibson v. Katers, 2d Bolton and Puller, p. 129. Mr. MARRYATT contended that an action was maintainable, and cited a similar case from 4th Taun- ton, p. 7, in which it was held that an action was maintainable. Mr. GURNEY then addressed the Jury. He said, to l i give the plaintiff any compensation in damages, they should be satisfied that the defendant had ar rested the plaintiff maliciously and with an intent to injure him; to support which, a particle of evidence had not been offered. Was it probable that any man, much less a man experienced in business, would arrest another, knowing that the payment of the debt could at once be proved by the production of his own me morandum, and thus subject himself to all the con sequences of an action ? It was admitted that Jones was considerably indebted to the defendant, and it was not improbable that the defendant might have supposed the payment of £BO to have been made with out reference to•the bill at all. The Learned Counsel -said he was persuaded that the Gentlemen of the Jury could not for a moment believe that the de fendant was influenced by any malicious motive, and therefore he entertained no doubt of their verdict. The Cum, JusTios said, that he did not agree 'with the Learned Counsel for the defendant, that an action was not maintainable in this case. His Lord ship was of opinion that, at all events, the plaintiff was entitled to recover the expenses incurred ; but if the Jury were satisfied that the arrest was founded in malice, and with an intent to injure and ruin the plaintiff in his business, then the plaintiff was cer tainly entitled to compensation, but in what degree it would be for them•to consider. Yesterday the Sessions commenced before FRANCIS CoNsv, Esq. Chairman, and a Bench of Magistrates. A Jew, named Alexander, was tried on an indict ment, charging him with an assault upon Loyd, a watchman belonging to the parish of St. Paul, Co vent-garden. The prosecutor stated, that between four and five o'clock in the morning, about two months ago, he saw the defendant in Phoenix-alley, pulling the bell, and knocking at the door of a house fre quented by women of the town ; that he went up and desired him to go away ) which the defendant at first refused to do ; but that after being taken into custody, the defendant acknowledged himself in fault, and was allowed to depart, but that he after wards followed the witness into Hart -street, where, after somCabusive language, he struck the witness. This testimony was in part corroborated by that of other watchmen, who had come up at the time. Mr. ADOLPHUS addressed the Jury on behalf of the defendant, and called the following witnesses to contradict the statements of the watchmen. James Livermore said he had been in company with Alexander the greater part of the night in ques tion. Between four and five o'clock in the morning Alexander went to the door* of a house in Plicenix alley, and there saw a young woman with whom he was conVerstrtgin the •passuge, the door being about half open. %uiche' was there, the prosecutor, Loyd, .came otit of a house on the opposite side of the way, crossed over, and desired Alexander to go away about his businessf The latter said he would not go, on which the watchman pushed him from the door, and threatefed to'take him to the watch-house. The de •findant, indignant •at this treatment, put his hand into his pocket, pulled out slime sovereigns, and said he would fight the prosecutor for £5 if he was offhis beat. The !WO accepted the challenge by saying thee it . w . ented only 2Q minutes to five o clock, when 44iihould be off duty, and that he would then fight hiM: When the hour of five- o'clock arrived, the . parties were in Hart-street, and witness recommended tb the defendant, who had then got into a public-' house, to give the watchman something to drink and put art end to the dispute ; batpshe defendant said he *mild give him nothing . unless itmas poison. The watchman; in the mean time; followed the defendant, and called him by a shocking name not fit to be men tioned. The defendant said, if he ealled him by that name again he would' knock him down. Upon this, the watchman struck defendant on the head.-with a stick and cut • his hat; a scufilesensued, and other watchmen corning tip, the defendant was taken to the watch-house. He was afterwards brought to Haw-street,nad committed for the assault. The neat witness was William Richards, who said il ! 1 laved • I‘.”-.4/..... the *ould.the ',HI . v, ttayy, du 'Mr. Se„ )' ; . i t (which fl , .tainti), thi I e'er, this i, dict For tt I ; This vt defeadaui I. 1 . - ~. .. , ... ._ _ • .. . . . • • " . . . . _. . •• • - • . ~: • . - I attending at Willis's Rooms that night, and wits " tie • defendant. - _ . -- i hit oat t cOsoitikti.or Ilk: Masa% pir ish, I n t l been s inck the T ew ,Taivjgpt,,bnioni sw • Y coining honte - on theititortditg in , lttotsticin through 1 ' LitTLS WA fiIIiAPPONo Hart-street. He gaVe an account of the ttansaction 1 • Samuel Waddington, of sift sticking and Radical similar ttilliat of- tht I*st , witness: 'He positiielY notoriety, had Made an application to the Court at swore that Loyd, the watchman, gave the first-blow, ' an early hour in theimorrang, and past barn:eh broke by striking-Alexander up he addressed the Bench a second time. His cons. Oil the head with his stick. He had not known the parties before, and they were both plaint wats this :—After allading to - the prosecution equally indifferent to him. • that had been carried on agaifist him some time ago, After a short charge from -the Chairman, the Jury and the verdict of Not Guilty given in his favour, he. found the defendant—'Not Guilty. said a notice was ia-ently sent to the two parties wimp Joseph Arndt, the proprietor of a haekaey-coach, had been his bail, stating that -choir recegaizance% was indicted for assaulting his servant, a man of the would be estreated. • This notice came from Mr. name of Claxon, whom he had employed to drive his Allen, the Clerk of the Peace; and he thought it a coach.—The prosecutor said, he had been sent o- 1 most unjustifiable proceeding, because he had mask in'April last with the defendant's coach , and was de- his appearance when trailed on ; and of coarse his ball sired to stop•as long out as be chose, but to bring , were 'discharged from any responsihility. He there home plenty of nioney. When he returned home he l fore wished to know whether the Court would seises" gave the defendant twenty-four shillings, and then such a proceeding as this to take placa? Oa his ;i.e.. the defendant called him most abusive names, and dressing the Court a second time, be read the crere struck him. He had been then employed eleven days of a letter which he had sent to Mr. Allen, in whi..a% in driving his coach. . he expressed his astonishment at the threat made IA On examination by Mr. ADOLPHUS, he said be was earcat the recog,nisances after he had regularly made , not a cad. He went ont at eleven in the day, and re- an appearance, had taker[ his trial, and been honour turned at one next morning, when the defendant ably acquitted of the lie e ious charge made against: d—.-d him, and said he would have no more of the him ; and as he conceived this to be a most opprv.- Paddington g amen. This happened in Deck-lane, sive proceediitg, he would, if the same were persisted: in, appeal to the Legislature. •In the course of hio Westminster.—Mr. ADOLF:IIE7I, for the defence, called George Slater, a harness-maker, who said he was address, he said that Mr. Bennet should present A.. Petition for him to the Heirs?. of Commons. present when the prosecutor came hone, at dote o clock in the morning, with ihe coach and hones, The CHAIRMAN said it was not in the power of the which were in a great heat. On this Mr. Arnell re- Court to make any order in the matter complained of by Mr. Waddington. It appeared that the notice proached him for using the horses so ill, told him to sent to the bail was not on accolint of an appearance quit his service immediately, and pushed the gate of not having been made, for Mr.Weele.ington did regu the yard against him. He did not see the defendant strike/he prosecutor. , larly appear; but because certain fees, which were The prosecutor here stepped up, and said it was usual on such occasions, had not been paid. That not three o'clock, but .A little after one. was a n:atter which rested solely with the Clerk of The Jury found the defendant Guilty, and he was the Peace and the Eeclscquer. The Court could nest sentenced to pay a fine of £4, with liberty to speak prevent the parties from demanding tees; nor give to the prosecutor. any opinion whether such demand were just cr on- Richare 1 elillar, a little fellow of whimsical manner just. Therefore he would recommend Mr.Weddingte n to go to the Office with his bail, and get the reaoala and appearance, was indicted for an assault. Ann Matthews said she was married woman, and zances withdrawn by paying the fees. Viaddington.—Let Mr. Allen make out his bill, lived in Chapel -street; Broadway,Westminster, in the all disc same house with the defendant,where she had lodged and it sh CHAIRMAN be .—Th harged. ii Court has no power to order for three years. Her husband was a watchmaker. In May last she paid the defendant some rent, and then Mr. Allen to do anything of the kind. Waddington.—Theit I say the charge of fees, as proceeded, on the 14th of that month, to take away her furniture ;he interfered, and prevented her friends well as the whole proceeding, is mo,t litigious and from taking the things away. When witness went to unjust : I will resist it, and my_bail must shift tor the door to remonstrate with him, he knocked her themselves.—He then retired from the Court with down two or three times, and said no goods should great indignation. be removed until the taxes were paid. SOUTHWARK SESSIONS. Two witnesses (a woman and a man) • were called, _ Yesterday the Sessions for the Town and Beroneh and proved the assault. • of Southwark commenced before the LORD NIAYON, The defendant, when asked what he had to say for the RECORDER, the HIGH BAILIFF, and Alderman himself, addressed the Court with great confidenCe J. J. SMITH. and fluency. The woman owed him money, and as FALSE WEIGHTS AND MEASURES. he saw Mrs. Matthews sending away the things in a The RECORDER, in Iris charge to the Grand Jure, wry unclandestined manner, he was resolved Flat to stated, that there was one circumstance connected suffer any such goings on ; and he could safely swear, with the trade of the Borough cf tiouthwark, to if it corned to an oath, that he never struck the woman. which he reeretted to say that he found it neces- After some other queer remarks, he called a lad who nary to call t s ieeir particular attention. An immense had been an apprentice to the husband of the pro- number of tradesmen, upwards of 160, had been rre secutrix, who said haatlid not see the defendant strike sented at the Courts Leer, for having used Ike. Mrs. Matthews. weights and measures, arid he trusted that some effec- Com/olive—Nor did I see him strike her; but were teal means would be resorted to for putting aie eed you present at the time?—No, I was up stairs. to such a system of disgraceful deception, by 'which CHAIRNIAN (to the defenclant)—Have you any other the poorer classes of the people were daily sufferinise witness to call ?—No; but I'll swear I never struck: A DISPUTE WELL SETTLED.. the woman. James Counsel was tried for an assault upon A. CHAIRMAN—That won't do ; three witnesses have S. Kebbel. sworn that you did. Mr. A RABT): stated the case. The two disputants. After a short charge from the CounralieJury found arc old mesa. The prosecutor is a green-grocer, and Ithe defendant Guilty, and lie was sentenced to pay a sells coals, in the Borodel . The delendaiit is a coal fines, of 21. 13s. 4d. merchant, and was displeased because the other sold Henry Loyd, a young man of respectable appear- a cheaper article. Abuse and a knock-down blow were ance, WAS indicted for assaulting Diiniel Cohen, a Jew. the consequences, and the prosecutor was the sufferer. The prosecutor said he lived in Norfolk-street,Com- Cross-examined by Mr. WA LFOno.—The defendant mercial-road, and was a dealer in old clothes. The had offered to settle the matter, by giving a beef-steak, defendant was foreman in a hatter's shop in Piccadilly, and a bottle of wine to the prosecutor, and three gui at the corner of Old Bond-street. On the morning neas to a charity. . mentioned in the indictment he was in Piccadilly, Here the RECORDER interposed, and asked whether and, as he was passing by ththouse where the de- the beef-steak anal the bottle of wine would not be the fendant lived, some persons-called out from the cellar, best way of settling the business now? and offered to sell him old clotheC He waited about Mr. WALFORD thought that would be the most ad the place for some time, while they continued to give visable plan. him to understand that they had clothes to sell ; but " Very well (said the RECORDER), and the two none of them came out, and at last a quantity of water Learned Counsel can dine with the old Gentlemen." was thrown upon him. He complained of this treat- Mr. ARABLE advised his client to accept of the ment, and went up to the shop-door. to find out who terms, but the client said he could not think of cha had thrown the water upon him,. when the defendant rita until his expenses were paid. The Learned Coen came up to him and said, " Begone, you d—d Jew sel having endeavoured to reconcile him to the ex thief, or I will kick you out." After this the defend- pence—" Why (said the prosecutor), I have paid you, ant and others beat him about, and did him so much and you can't call that nothing." He finally conientei injury that his wife miscarried when she saw the con- to drop the thing if he should be permitted to handle dition he was in. the money, eat the steak, and drink the wine. Tire brother of the prosecutor said he was passing This was agreed to; a verdict of Guilty was by by at the time, and saw the treatment the prosecu- mutual consent recorded, and the defendant was tor met with. -• bound over to keep the peace for one year. A third witness, who was passing at the time, said he saw the defendant commit the assault. Mr. ALLEY, for the defendant, said these Jews had behaved in the most offensive manner by calling out " old, clothes," at the door for a considerable time, and collecting a mob about it ; when the Gentleman then at the bar was obliged to go and push one of them away. This prosecution was nothingless than a scandalous attempt on the part of these fellows to extort money from a respectable tradesman. .Mr, James Moore said he was at the defendant's house when the Jews came np to the shop. Mr. Loyd was trot in tbe shop at the time. Witness saw the Jews quarrelling with the workmen in the cellar, and the prosecutor complained that water 'had been thrown at him. Witness said to him that he bad no controul over the men in the cellar; but that they would soon. be going to their dinner, and then he might talk to them, and try to find out who had thrown the water on him. The Jews,-however, per .sisted in making a disturbance; and shortly after this witness heard the windows broken, on which he ran „,, .... out ; the prosecutor immediately came out of the nmr,ision — I as a fortune-teller, prxip.•, ...._ ._ _ shop. • When witness came out he had a small stick in his hand, which the Jew forced from him, and be gan tobeat him with it. The moment Loyd, the defend- Jun, came np, the Jew began to abuse him, a scuffle ensued, and-they both fell into the kcnnel together. Another• foreman, in the batting department, at the shop,- spoke to the prosecutor having broken the windows ; and when Mr. Loyd came out he found the two men beating Mr. Moore with a stick, and all Mr. lAyd did was to prevent them, on which a struggle took place, in which he All in the mud; but, he - new; i ge:qui tug A Roma sn..—A few nights alp, the house of Mr. Cones, of West Ham, was broken open, but one of tte servants being alarmed, discharged a blunderbus at the thief, and lodged the contents (small shot) from the back of his head to hia loins. The robber turned out to be an old servant, who had lived many years in the family. lie is in the London Hospital, in a dreadful st&tc. DIRTEIS. At Gogar House, the 11th inst. the Lady of James L'Atair, of Dunkenny, Esq. Advocate, of a son. Oct. 15, at Viscount Ebrinzton's house, North :alley -strut, Lady Nugent, of a still-born son. Sept. 50, at Vanities, the Lady of John ILllce.vs, Esq. R.N. of a daughter. ?JAMMU. • At Glasgow, the 11th instant, Francis Erma, Est of the Island of Trinidad, to Elizabeth, daughter of John Smith, Esci• botAscller. nrlD. Monday, after a long and painful nines*, in the MI year of her age, I'l-ances Ann, only daughter of the Rev. Peter Beo, of Tottenharn-grero, Middlesex. Wednesday, at Kuightsbridge, Charlotte, wife of Captain if. Evans. Wednesday se'nnight, aged 53, William Abbinger an nevi. tric character of Ipswich. He is said to have acquired, in his profruips as a lartasta.teller, property to the amouot of 4203 tat. 'AIAILS. AKA MI 1. Dublin 0 1 Waterford 1 1 Guernsey arid Jersey 0 0 Lisbon 0 0 Holland 1 0' America 0 0 A Int. Oils. O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O I • 0 • 0 France liamburgh Mandela Malta Gottenburgla Brasil• at LONDON nitint;se TO-MOH KO "rII H- W ATI Sit rnmg 4 ttcrimenl 3S rinuth•after a .SS atinatos after LON DON Printed and puha place, 'D hi - Levi ls: Titi . .• _~~' ~- ..• I ‘ j