Star. — London, England, 1817-08-06 00:00:00

LilW LIV 7 T LUG ENCE. Cnt.TR OF Cll INCI.IIY. AUGVAT 3. FiLyra AND DI HL RN 2, IDE 111 Kph DV Tf! 1:4:v. U. isa:AVEit ..nn oTtlizts. 8 r V.:rel. Rotaiu..i sail, rnis was a motion on the ; •iat .4 the ....etendatits, praying his Lurdship to erd t'i I (:: ritleMin had, on an application V:ce 0'44.3019r, been appointed receiver in CALN Stl'All.l he enavivered to canse survey% to mid? of certain chinch estates in the P.-ash of nattier, and sever.il other Pa:isties in Norfolk and s u il . o ik, ar.d the tithes }1!)•1 other ecclesi.o.tiihr pros petty to b • valit.. l ; that t(e Receiver should also, tie ,pproh, t ii to i tat the Maiter, b-: aliowed to NH, of the money in his iiands tor•reoairing t-:11111:!1", pats `littie-houle-, and other pre.. wits s, to let the property on lease, and tha' he should turtiter be :411.)weJ. w;0) approbati in of the t,l,p,rer, tC hring actin;, alut to pay out of the nu). • my ii fi;s hunts the cost 'if certain legal proceed• tcc. power; were required for the bene fit of th e pr.p.i ty, ant w,r- to be ex ere i...,l en:y with the consect n( the Master. Dirt , tites had t .a > en reyecting the tit! es, whis:h renderci a survey •T, y cumArl • !!. 1 i Att.*, on !).: nt . pl ATM.; TS. contendet! R.:crlyer t..ty been .iyoitited, with er:ry it; it thert 're 1114, unoti A; vas altogether uncalled tor. ile, in particular, oh ,:cted to allowmA the c• sa incurred i.i legal proceed.' .ngs to be paid by the Receiver, even with the con-, sent of the Maim, as that sill giving a power which wonld take away the right of the parties to the final decision of the Court on the question of eons. Upon the wholt! it appeared that the powers oldie Rteeiver were already sufficient, and that they ought not to be extended. Sir SAMUEL RortILLY said, that this application a Mere s t from that on e h'ch the Receiver had been appointed by the Vicr-Clienceltrr. Some things had Kan asked in that motion which were not included in i: is; and several ;sewer. were now requested whice made no part of the former application. It sue i r WAS the interest of the plaintiffs, as well as the deli/dints. that as little expense should be' incurred as pcssiSle ; and he could not, therefore, understand hew it happened, that a general order was objected Le ; for if that geaeral order was not granted, it wee Id be necessary to make repeated applicatioas to the Court. and on each occasion there would be a distiect report of the Master. This certainly was not the way to avoid expense. With regard to the payment of bills f.sr repeirs, it was become necessary that such a power should be given, as the Bishop of Nerwich had given notice to the Receiver that he mu. keep the pirsonage.house in repair. If an ath• davit et this tact was necessary, it would be produced. The LORD CIiANCELLatt said the affidavit had bet ter be made; and its the mean time directed that the emotion should stand over until vemorrew. • PATEN 1* 11EAD-IIitiT3HES. ASETCALI v. ThoMPboß. Sir SAUDI& Rummest moved to dissolve an injunc tion granted by the Vice• Chancellor, to restrain the defenden. from pirating the parent of the plaintiff; which ht• obtained in September last, for hair brushes to clean the hair, and, at the same time, the skio of 1? ocnli ( which Oh? rephited at the time.) The L , ito CHANCELL it asked if this motion was opposed, and no Counsel appearing, his Lordship observed, that the injunction moist be soon brushed A it the motion was not opposed. Mr. Leecta then appeared in Court, and said he bud ins. r uci ions to oppose the motion. Sir SAMUEL ROMILLY, in continuation, said that the plaintill professed himself to be an eminent brush maker, and had made some excellent improvements in brushes, for which he obtained a patent. The defendant did not deny that he made brushes of the same kind,' but he attested most positively, that the invention of the plaintiff was nothing ; it had been known from time immemorial to the trade. In all brushes the hair was first uneven, and the only im provement of the plaintiff was selling the brush in an uefiiiished state. This certainly was a thought or invention of the plaintiff that never come into the . bead of any of the trade before, for they never before thouight it right to sell a brush in an un6nished state. • However, unfortunately for the plaintiff, there was 'au old brush in Court, which had bees useably a per hurler, a wig -maker. a wig -dresser, Ike. df the name et Fox, for thirty years antecedent to the patent of the plaintiff, which wes exactly the same in principle. The LORD CIIANCF.ILOR" Pray, Sir Samuel, is the brush you allude to a Fox's brush P" Sir S. Romieee (whose reply, horn the laughter crealed by this witty remark of his Lordship, we could not collect) proceeded...." The defendant brought his action in the Court of King's Bench, against the plaintiff, by the way of ,tire facial, to oblige him to prove his ntent, which was to have been tried before a Sp ec i al Jury'; but was prevented by the injunction of the Vice-Chancellor. One of the arguments on that occasion was, that the defen dent had his brushes stamped in a similar way as !bore of the plaintiff's. The I,IIID en A eceeenn—to Shew me these brushes. it is certainly curious enough tc see a Lord Chancel . Ice obliged to be a judge of brushes." The follow ing were then banded up :—four head or hair brushes, nix long broom, three shoe brushes, three tooth brushes, one knee-buckle brush, and three clothes brushes. His Lordship examined them. Sir S. Romiti.x admitted it was not proper that the defendant should use the stamp of the plaintiff on his brushes; but it would be recollected that the lat ter had only a patent for the hair or head brush, and that be bad marked ail his other brushes in the same %Kay, as it he had received a patent for them. For :',stance, the broom was stamped, the tooth-brushes, Sec. which were before the Couir, and be had nu c:ltibt but his Lordship had minutely examined them, ::::c1 if the defendant stamped his in the same way, he hoped that Mr. Leach would not carry his aro nlity so far as to brand it with the epithet of its Indus dime to delude and deceive the public. Mr. LEACH--" I think we ought to he allowed to amend, our affidavits as to the stamping of the brushes." Sir S. Rostrum said he was sure the Court would llig!)est imporranfr fn the working coming:oy, for, by the injunction, s: yeral hundreds of journeymen be longing to the tr.*da had been unemployed for the fast seven d sys. His Lf.rdship, thereiote, be W4s confident, would disc •Itre the injunction ; the brush in Court, .belonging to Mr. Fol. which fled been in use for thirty years brtisholg wigs, spewed that the plaintiff was not entiikil to his patent. The LORD CHANCULIIII —" Hand me the brush of this old wigmaker. It must be a curitosity, after being so long used by him. It certainly is an antique, and looks.uneommonly well." Mr. If your Lordship looks minutely at it you will find it similar to the head-brush of the folaintiff, only his looks more fresh." The LnRD CHANCELLOR That is because it is 57unzer pa Mr. •U. HE D then followed on the same side with Sir SAMUEL Rol/ILLY. The Lotto CHANCELLOR—" However I may hare been Amused with this Las?, as w•rh as those around use, yet I do not think the specification of toe patent will bear the plaintiff out. Hn says it is for clean sing and adjesting the hair, and at the same time he contends here it is 41,0 to effect another purpose." Mr. LIACH, Counsel for the perhaps tlwie never was 4 cas-I of greater importance to the public than the present, as it retarded pa tents. It made no conseimence whether is was A • hait-orush or a steam en.!iiie. 'Eve patent was grnntesl to the glavniitf in conovieuce of his invention tr , arrange and demise the hair by his brushes, and if this was a new invention, could it be contended that he was not entitled to the benefit of the p.:tent ? ft had not been attempted to be sworn that the plain tiff had not made a new arrangement of the hairs in thy brushes. He agreed that the stamping of all the Plaintiff's brushes, as it be had a patent, was of the utmost consequence, and he WAS sorry he was rt , ,t furnished with athdavits as to th it point. But the question for his Lordship to com:d• r was, whether the Plaintiff had or had not a patent ? and whether he had or not, it was of the utmost consequence to him that the Defendant should he restrained from selling his brushes, As it they were the ns inulacture of the Plaintiff, and perhaps hereafter, on this ground it would be necessaly to make an application to the Court. Sir SAMUEL RONIILLY" The Defendant denies that he uses the same words cn his label, as that of the Plaintiff." Mr. LEACH said, he did not contend they were the same words, but that they conveyed the same mean. ing. The Plaintiff wished the question to be tried in a Court of Law, and the charge of delay was not applicable to him, as he wished only far a Special Jury, on account of the importance ot the question to the Public, and particularly tradesmen. Under these. considerations, he had no doubt but his Lordship would continue the injunction. Mr. 'remove followed, and stated, that in a con versation be had had with Isis Lordship, he expressed great doubts respecting the validity ot a patent which cJvered the whole ot a machine, without the whole of it was new. The brushes were not liked tormtrly in their present shape, but they had now come into great repute. He would leave it to Sir Samuel Rot:1611y to say. it this was not the case. Sir SAAIVIL itnatsta.e..-1 , My Learne*Facid does me great honour, but I grant him the boon of judg ing how revolutions in the public taste are accom plished." 'l'he Loan CHANCELLOR" I have examined the eld brush, and see it is rather carious ; but when any of us has been as much worn, we will be quite as antique." Mr. TnasLove said, he advised his client not to shew his brush when the injunction was granted. The Loan CHANCIILLOR" He was bound to have exhibited it, and in future on such an occasion, let it he understood, that the article charged to be imitated shall be lodged in the Master's office. I remember in a case of waste, that a person made an affidavit. and actually affixed his oak trees to his affidavit, to thew the nature of them." • Sir SALIUSL RosIALLY rose to reply. The LOAD CIiANCILLOII--.Sir Samuel, MS may save yourself the trouble of replying, as I have made up my mind on the question. I am decidedly and clearly of opinion that. the plaintiff is not by . any ] means entitled to the relief be asks for by his applica. tion for the injunction in the first instance. It may be useful for tradesmen to know, as I see a number of them in Court, that though they may manufacture a certain article in the course of their trade, yet they are not at liberty to sell it to the world as the pro. petty which had been manufactured by another. I do not know, perhaps, if I make myself understood,' but I mean that A cannot publish any work or sell any thing as the property of B, unless he distinctly avows himself to be the agent of B. The Court have already, as all of you know, decided this in a variety of instances. Day and Martin's blacking came on before us last summer, and it was then held that though a firm Oa similar naturemas established with that of Day and Martin, yet that firm could not sell their liquid as the liquid manufactured by the origi nal Day and Martin, even though the original firm had never obtained a. patent, and did not alledge in the slightest degree that they had such a patent.— I The same decision bad been given respecting the' Wonderful Magazine, where you know it was dal ded that though many Wonderful Magazines might be published, still the persons so publishing had no right to pass their Magazines as the productions of the plaintiff. I remember also a case in the Strand, where a Mr. Myson had a signboard, 41 Myson's shoe warehouse," and another tradesman wishing to establish a rivalship, placed his son in the very neat shop, and put up a signboard se My Son's shoe ware house," thus wishing to palm his son's shop oh the public as Myson's shop. The Court, in this case, came precisely to the same conclusion as I feel my self bound to come to in this. I am pleased with Mr. Treclove's a:gu ment, and I temember the cobversatioo he now alludcs'to. I am well aware of the opinion I then gave lit the case, and one which I still do ad here to, though I am ready to admit, that during the time I have beeil at the BAT. and presided here, much altercation bas taken place respecting the law of Pa informed that therm wars to getion pending in the Court of King's Bench. not at the instance of the pa tentee, but of the Jetendant, by a orirefuriar ; and he would unquestionably have in. that case at once re fused the injunction ; but being furnished, as he was, with such a deficient state of facts, he could not do otherwise than he did. The opinion I gave to Mr. Treslove was whet I always felt, and was indeed the principle on which I acted during the short time 11 held the office of Chief Justice in the Common Pleas; and ind ed it is, in my opinion at least, founded on equity and just views of law. In this particular in stance. *lieu one sees that the patent WJS granted in September, and the application for the injunction was on:y made in July, and when the practice of the Court io every instance is considered, I am bound to say, I will not allow the injunction to be supported. The conduct alas of the patentee in all ming a stirs facia: to be raised against him, made the use more against him ; and therefore I do hereby order the injunction to be dissolved, and let it be this moment dissolved. f ant anxious alwaysoin every instance, to preserve the right of pat..nwes, but I ant not here put in pos session of such :acts as would induce roe, or any Judge, to consider this sulliciently made out for my sustaining it. For the purpose of establishing the practice of the Court, I do hereby peremptorily order that the brushes now prodocerl, and spoken of in the 'a-.l l .Lorits, be lodged in the Master's Oflic., as exhi bits, and let this he the practice in all cases in future. he parties may do as they please with the la* mt. but I shall not interfere, nor nuke any other order than for the immediate and absolute dissolution of the injunction. You may do as you like about the suit stirs facie*, but perhaps, Mr. Leach, the stamping might he put on the record.— Injulction dissolved. The Court Was excessively crowded. ) They all tumbled to pieces ; there was too mur:t wa- Iter put into them ; they had not been writ tempe-ed. Mr. Justice BAY utv.Have you known better bricks to have keen made in a clamp' Witness—Ten hundred thowand times, my Lord. 1 (4 laag4.) Serjeant VarcittaN appealed to the .Tory, whether the single testim ny uf Woodward wis on: I)etter ' than all the evidence on :h., other side They saw how Allcock gave his evidence, and : they cc uld not fail to form a right judgment of it. He did not at all like to see a,vaitilei4,,blillklng his evidence (Ail. `crick had alwar kept, his, tight eye half shut). They !could not see whether he had an eye in his held. They might raj , 'upon ii ° no wiiness was to be c...- dited who could riutlnolt the Court and Jury in tise face. Neither. would he or they be disarmed by 11. e figure and face of a Lady in the br a t.—( A tau;/r.) But at last came Mr. Sermon, to preach them into 4 verdict, by sleepy assertions as to water and burning. and thousands and hundreds of thousands. ( 4 Iv.gh.) Had the OlaintilT brought his action against Al:ciAk, the pl-a would have been that Preston was the per son liable. The Jury would give their verdict fur tbp plaintiff, since tkey reertiied only justice : and then Allcock and Pr, sins alight settle their rents arid balances as they pleased. The JUDOe state , ' it to he clear from the evidence, that zt.e . - ereement was with Ailcock, and that tl.e brick. wet,. baJ.—Writict for the defendant. warmly e. Wr-11MT. The plaintiff hi:d many years since lent £lOO w the iqendant, his nephew, who soon afterwards fell into embarrassed circumstances. The uncle slid he wiaild not press him for payment. The detenJart had lately come into possession of some real property in Birmingham. The plaintiff asked payment, titi: the statute of limitation to six years wis pleaded. Ti e action was brought in hopes of making it appear that the debt had been admitted within six ye.rs; but when the evidence was almost r,-ne through, the JuJge said he daought it tvoold not du; and tl.e tiff agreed to be tionsii:LA. LIEDGEs v. DELBVAN. This was an action to recover payment for a mare. The plaintiff, a wholesale grocer in li:rmingh sm , had sold a mare oa the 'IS I Joy, Ibl6, to defendant, likewise a grace- in Lii:minAliatii, bi.t who has sites gone to America.; it was agre'ed that the price shout , ' he 50 giiine,is, pay tole by b'lls at six months fin , * the 14th of Septitidier following, and that the plait. tiff should keep the mare till the lA of September, if the defendant did not find it necessary to take her away earlier. The dtfendant sent for her every day to the plaintiff'. stable, and rode let for scv weeks, from the '23.1 g.f . July tn the 7th of August ; he then represented to the plaint;ff ihai die was lame. The plaintiff sent for Parker, a farrier, who told him he had better have no law suit about it. d , A v er y bad advice that was," exclaimed Mr. CLAIIKE.-.—(4 laugh.) At last the mare was left in Tay's livery stables; and word was sent to the plaintiff that she was there at his expense. After much contrad.cv.ry and unsatisfactory evidence had been gone through, his Lordxhip said, that since the defendant had kept the mire so long, rode hut. co much, and quitted her I .io abruptly, it seemed cl ear t h e J uly must fi n d LJe pl.undtF. 11....iict tor the plailittir—Dzanattrs guineas. Sunday, the men and boys, amounting to 22 in number, who had been acquitted at York, or discharg ed for want of sufficient evidence to put them on their trial, were met on their approach to Huddersfield by An immense number of men, women, and children, who hailed their safe return. The scenes which were exhibited between the men and their families, and de boys and their parents, at this happy meeting, we shall not attempt to describe. Whatever might he the dis position of any of the accused before they went to York. it was evident that they had availed themselves of the advice (.1 the tt tightcous Judge," as they stib d Byron Wool), fur eve:: i t this liniment of exultation, there was not the leis:: indication of tumult or excess. COUNTY or Aestanit Assizzs.-11,1ore the lion. Baron M'CLEA. LAND in the Criwn Court. and Mr. Justice OSISDP t: in the Civil Bill Court.—Onne Wade, a schoolmaster, iitdieted for tendering an unlaWtul ' oath to Jam 4 to become a Thresher:— Guilty. llis 1.-%rdship. addressing the pi iso:.er, sa : d this was not the first time he hal be n f was tried in Dondalk, about three years ago, kr a most infamous riot he and his party aloe tried for assaulting and attempting to murder a man. on se. count of religious opinions. The prisoner took a corr. &pint:ins part, and leaned against a wall, instead of the crutch which be usually made use of, and beat him until life was nearly extinct. His Liirtlsh-ip cora eluded by sentencing him to he tranlortetl ler Fie. The prosecution against Mt. Rlorat O'Costr..a ;1 carried on by the General Post Cl:Ece, and the int ist ment charges him with awing concerned in a ece,ip;.. racy to rob his Majesty's Mail. James Castle, convicted of s!"eep.stealing at the Abingdon Assizes, was executed, on Saturday latt, at Reading. Castle was the leader cf a nuinero gang, and had in company with his at.setiates driv , n away fifty-four sheep, with an intsnerln of destrcyi them out ',l revenge to 1!:, owner, ! - ,ut was stupp,A, 1 1 alter killing seven, by the fears of his brother, eon. victed with him, but since respired. The Coggethall co:v:1) was OVe , Virned, or! Frid ay last, just as it ve.is torning the corner cf the Black Boy Inn, Chelionford, by wh;c't accident J, : sof GiToTchtiah Mr . Me ss ing, .n .1::sg:ofE who sat on the b ox w i t h therr, the Ityor of Colches. ter, Mr. rase of Kirby, also c o rtide passingers, were sevtlely hurt anc! rendered unable to precut rrt their journry. An inf,irt under the care of :5 servart inside the coach r,.ceiv.q.l some contusions on the h!eao. Th e foilow,14:; sit)p!i*a- hill of fare is c liv,u trum ` the dinner ord6l / hoqi Falcon Inn, GrAv,!!eed, as ordered byl:a ltitkh4.. e .ti7tain • kirst Course.-1154 vor Cale boiltd, with pn.k e-u<nrp. 4d do —rin oinel•••.V.a do::..0 eggs, at.i v roa•tec; ;—ro gram wilesi nett p.atni cat: ye lks,ert—lirea .1 WO butter ! red hi rriopr, Cream. an.lbisetttb. Fresh herring.‘ Ate r.oor daily brought to B. i 'burgh market from Dtto'mr, and ate telling at 6i. the duzen. CORN•EXCIIANGE, MAtiK•LANK. AIMICaT 6.—The weather having br • ti. ince Monday, has occa ',is morning, and :es vivre obtained ; but all other ;ley, Beans, aod 'ard stared; • WARWICK ASSIZE% MONDAY, AUGUST 4. The commission was opened here on Saturday last. This day, Mr. Justice BAYLRY sat at Nisi Priw by 9 o'clock. Mr. Justice Houton), on the Crown side, addressed the Grand Jury (Sir CHARLES MoRDAUNT, foreman) at 12. The calendar contains no less than 109 prisoners; the greater number is for burglaries and tbeft‘ There are near 20 for forgeries on the Bank of England, against all of whom true bills have been found; one is tor rape, and one for murder. William.gio, aged 11, pleaded guilty to the bur. glary and theft of a watch charged against him. lie was persuaded to withdraw that plea; but the Jory, after a hill investigation of the evidence, found him guilty. They recommended him to mercy on account of his youth. _ Plarbe Coal wa• convicted of giving a counterfeit shilling, knowing it to be counterfeit, in payment of a pound of butter. NISI PRIUS. ALLEN V. HACKNEY AND HANCOX. This was an action for trespass and assault. Hack ney is a sheriff's officer, and Hancos. who offered no &fence, is his follower. They had a warrant to ap prehend Pritchard Smith, an attorney, in Birming ham, for debt; they had great difficulty in finding him, and hearing that he frequented the house of the plaintiff, Mr. Allen, at Birmingham heath, they came to search for him. On the . I.9th of November. be. tween seven and eight in the morning, a loud noise was heard both at the front and back-door of Mr. Allen's hcuse. The servant-maid, together with her father, then in the house visiting her, went to the door. Hackney and Haucoa asked if dr. Smith was not there They answered that lie was not. However, they entered, and insisted upon going up stairs, which was refused. The girl ran up to. tell he master, who immediately came down, and said they should not go op stairs. Hancox, however, proceeded, when Mr. Allen laid hold of the skirt of his coat. Hackney took hold of Allen by the collar, and shook his fist in his face. They then went up stairs, lot,ked into Mr. Alien's bed-room, where Mis. Allen, who is blind, was dressing, and into Miss Allen's bed-room, who had just lift it. They saw that Mr. Smith was not in the house, and they departed. Serjeapt V.tivailmi said, that this was an outrage-: ous violation of civil liberty. a gross oppression mle* the colour qf law, which The Jury, as the guardians of civil rights, were booed on that account to air* with the greatest severity. He did not like the ell pression, vindiaive damages ; but they were called upon to award such damages as would be a suitable punishment to the defendants for their violation of the law, and their intrusion into an Englishman's castle ; and at the same time be some compensation to the plaintiff for the insult, oppression, and wrong which he bad sustained. Mr. CLARKR, on the other side, submitted to the Jury that no violence or wrong had been committed. Had the defendants found Mr. Smith, they could not be blamed. They had not, indeed, found him ; wile. then he had been conveyed out through a window, or otherwise concealed, he knew not ; but his having been often in the house was warrant sufficient for their inquiring for him there. The plaintiff must have verdict, but they would, he hoped, allow no damages. The Juno stated, that the trespass and assault wen• very slight indeed, and that the Jury should recollect that the defendant would have to pay the costs of this action, which of themselves would be equal to considerable damages. Verdict for the plaintiff—Damages Is. The A/961.—A very sensible verdict indeed. WOODWARD D. PRESTON. The plaintiff in this action is a brickmaker, and brought this action to recover 415. being the balance of the price of 47,400 bricks, made by him at Bs. the thousand. The defence was: Ist, that Allcock, the proprietor of the ground, and not Preston, his tenant, was liable. and 2d, that the bricks were si bad that no use could be made of them. . Wood Ward (the plaintiff's san. called by die plan tiff) said, that the bricks were made in a chimp; an that therefore they were not quite well burst. ..'l'l defendant bad built some houses with part of th bricks, and had paid witness's father the part of the account which had been paid. Mr. Allcock (called by the defendant) said, that the bricks were tnade on his ground and trying or der- The money Preston paid was admitted by hies a 0. ItaIMILLY saw fig wens sure the t.ourt won't' "" t""*.. •'n's`L'"s 11 . , w 14W VI a (ler. Luc money Preston /End was admitted ny rum weather having fine since Monday, has occa. not allow this, but decide on the question at once. teats . Had this application for the 'opinion been as part-payment of rent. He had engaged to Pres- sniped very heavy stars of all grain this morning, and or,an w d hi had b h s e ve br s n s , 01 ' t l'! e )e o ri n t n_C .,s nAti s c e c n uic for e _ n the s s e pec wn i s 6 o cat ion fairly eut made y in to the possession Vic.V ic. y Chancellor, those sbuilt. it when WociAlward and f P 1 ilk PI to which, big h him , . 1 " t facts present . P it was _ with .c ditli ed ce s ltJ n t p h it a i t day's o lv r e i a c t e: wb•tuite other he "d. " Now I am in possession of all the brush- day been laid before me, I know his Honour would Allcock were stipulating as to the bricks. descriptions were uusale.gble. Barley, Beans, and r. iski:ig secrets And may begin business to.morrow?' a lecidedly have refus e d t he i njunct i on . I must here Sermon, a carpenter and joiner, had bought some Oats , were I a_so 'and stared; .33 insluFL K,,miLLlt said, this m . ttan was of thr says that his Honour should without doubt have been 4the brick:, and they were :.*:e worst he ever saw. ,ale of either sea:: rnsd%. I i