Star. — London, England, 1823-05-14 00:00:00

A POETS GIFT. FROM THE MUSEUM ; OR, RECORD OF LITERATURE, SCre A gift, dear maid, from Friendship's hai;l— rose in all its sweetness dress'd, Ere its full beauty could ezpa• Is culi'd to bloom on * ELLVI. oreast ; It leaves the bush on which it grew With joy to be embrac'd by you! Its rosy hue is like your cheeks— Like you, a bud in beauty's spring— Spotless and pure, its leaf bespeaks The flower of love without the sting ; Bath'd in the balm of morning dew, Like tears of feeling shed by you! But as I shook the parent tree, To tear its offspring from its side, The dews fell, as it wept to see The bending farewell of its pride ; I saw it weep—but then I knew Those tears were not a type of you! I knew its beauties 'oust decay, That all its fragrant sweets would fade, That time must wear its charms away, And cast its brightness in the shade— • I sigh'd, as Fancy's pencil drew The fate of nature—all but You! You—like a never fading flower, Whose leaf is free from spot or stain, The spoiling blast, the wintry shower, May fall upon the bud in vain ; Tho' Time the fairest flowers will strew— 'Twill only add more charms to you! LAW INTELLIGENCE. COURT OF KING'S BENCH, MAY 13. LEECH ; M.D. V. VEITCII, M.D. This was an action on the case for unskilful and improper treatment of the plaintiff, whilst he was under the care of defendant to be cured of insanity. It appeared from the case, as opened, that the plaintiff, who was a Doctor of Medicine, holding a situation in the British Museum, was attacked, in the latter part of 1812, with an aberration of mind. In the month of June, 1821, he was placed under the care of the defendant, a Gentleman skilled in dis eases of this description, and removed to a private asylum of the defendant, called Rosslyn Cottage, at Brompton, where he ►emained until June, 1822. It was alleged that during this interval the plaintiff had been treated with great harshness and unnecessary severity. He was placed under the care of a keeper named Richards, who, according to the evidence, had treated the plaintiff with considerable severity— such as knocking him down and beating him when he attempted to make his escape from the house, which he had tried to do on two or three occasions. There was no distinct evidence that the defendant was cog nizant of these acts of severity. The gravamen of the charge against the defendant appeared to have been an excessive administration of mercury to' cure him of his unfortunate malady. It was stated, I that when the plaintiff was placed under the care of the defendant he was in good bodily health, and was very quiet in his disposition; but that he afterwards I became emaciated• and debilitated from the use of mercury, and by no means recovered from his dis ease. The acts of cruelty imputed were attributable entirely to Richards, the keeper, who was in October, 1822, removed from the defendant's service. The plaintiff appeared to have been well fed for a person labouring under his unfortunate disease. After the plaintiff had quitted the defendant's house, he was removed to Bath, where he was considerably reco vered. The object of this action was to recover a compensation in damages for the unskilful and un kind treatment to which the plaintiff was alleged to have been subjected whilst under the defendant's care. An attempt was made to prove that another. patient, named Hamilton, an inmate of the defendant's house, experienced similar treatment, but it did not appear that the defendant was privy to that cause of com plaint, the misconduct being entirely attributable to Richards, during the absence of his master. The wit , nesses examined in support of the plaintiff's case were principally servants, who had been successively. in the defendant's service; and, on cross;examination, attempts were made to shew that they were influ enced by undue motives towards their master. It appeared from their statements, that the defendant had been informed, from time to time, of the con (filet of Richards, but that he treated their commu nications lightly, as being incredible. Amongst other witnesses examined were Dr. Powell and Dr. Sutherland, who spoke to the plaintiff's debility from the use of mercury on the occasions when they saw him, but neither of these Gentlemen ventured to at tribute any improper treatment of the plaintiff by the defendant, being unacquainted with the state of the patient's body at the time the medicine was given. Mr. Baouonast addre;sed the Jury on behalf of the defendant with his usual acuteness and eloquence, and opened a strong case of exculpation and defence. Several witnesses, amongst whom were Lady Moleswortlr, Miss Moleswor th, 'three or four Medi cal Gentlemen, and several persons residing in the immediate vicinity of . ltosslyn Cottage, who had an opportunity of observing the treatment experienced by the plaintiff, were then examined to support three strong propositions; first, • that the plaintiff had been most kindly and - skilfullk treated, according to his own acknowledgment, whilst under the care of the defendant ; secondly, that the siefeadant was a Gen tleman of undoubted skill in his treatritent of mental diseases, and a man of the most kind-hearted and tender disposition; and thirdly, that the actual treat ment of the plaintiff was most kind, attentive, and efficient, for the purpose of his cure. At the time ' the plaintiff was placed under the•defendant's carehe was troubled with a liver complaint, for which the mercury wai administered. Even the keeper, Richards, was exculpated from the cruelty imputed to him; and sirith reipect to the Gehtlealan named• Hamilton, his case was represented td be one of aggravated dell; rium, which required tire strongest measures of coerb cion . th preserve himself, as well as those who attended him, frchir fatal violence. Mr. SCARVETT , in reply, contended, that however skilful the defendant might be in his profession, and however high his character for humanity and kind ness, yet still he was answerable for the misconduct - • - • .m•• of his servant, and the injudicious us? of a violent medicine, which had reduced thOplaintiff almost to death's door. . - The LOAD Critter JUSTICE summed up the case for the Jury, and left it to them to consider, first, whe ther the plaintiff had been subjected to undue seve rity on the part of the defendant's servant, for which, if satisfactorily made out, the defendant was respon sible and, secondly, whethir, notwithstanding the high testimonials as to the defendant's skill and judg ment, there was any want of care on his part in the administration of medicines for the purpose of curing the disease? _ . The Jury consulted a considerable time, and found their verdict for the plaintiff—Damages 501. The trial lasted the whole day. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, MAY is. CAPPER V. WRIGHT. Mr. Serjeant Prt.r. stated that this was an action of trespass, brought against the defendant for unlaw fully seizing and taking the plaintiff's goods. The; plaintiff was a gentleman in the service of Govern ment, and the defendant a bookseller. From circum stances, which it was needless to mention, the plain tiff had been separated from his wife, who, it ap peared, had contracted a debt with the defendant, for the payment of which she, in conjunction with another lady, had given a warrant of attorney. She had, however, discharged the debt (which at first amounted only to 801.) by two payments, the first of 201. and the second of 101. These payments were I made by a person named Wilkinson, who was now unfortunately dead, and who had omitted to -take a receipt on the payment of the second sum of 101. After Wilkinson's death, the defendant had chosen to enter up judgment on the warrant of attorney for the whole sum, which he subsequently levied under an execution, and to recover back which the present ac tion was brought. George Green proved the seizure under a warrant directed to him to levy the sum of 841. together with Sheriff's poundage. The house was at No. 10, Duke street, Westminster: Cross-examined--Did not know whether the plain tiff had any property in the house, or whether the whole belonged to Mrs. Capper. Mr. Gude was then put into the box. He first stated that he was the attorney of the plaintiff on the record. He was then asked by Mr. Serjeant Vaughan whether this was not in reality his own action, or lwhether Mr. Capper would be liable to the costs ? I Mr. Gude having admitted that he had indemnified Mr. Capper, his Lordship refused to let him proceed further in his evidence. Mr. Edmonds, a Clerk of the Exchequer, was called, for the purpose of producing the writ, the warrant of attorney, and other papers ; but he stated, that being filed of record, they were no longer in his possession. Mr, Cocking, linen-draper, was then pot into the i box. He knew Mrs. Capper and the other lady, who had joined with her in granting this warrant of attor ney ; her name was Abbeville. These ladies applied 'to witness for a loan of SOL to discharge an execu tion levied on their property. Witness said he could ' not lend them the money, but he recommended his 'friend (the defendant) to them for that purpose. De. fendant advanced the money on their giving a war , rant of attorney ; witness had received 201. in part 'payment of that debt, from a person named Wilkin son ; that money was paid to witness on account of the debt due to the defendant, if the defendant would receive it, but if not, witness was to place it to the credit of the ladies in their account With him, they being indebted to him in a much larger sum ; knew from Wright that he had taken steps to recover his WI. never heard what he had done with the property he had seized ; witness went to spew the Sheriff% officer the house, when the eXecntibn was to be put'in; thought the goods in the house were Mrs. Abbeville's. Green was recalled, and he staled that-the affair was settled, he believed, by the payment of a check ; but he could not identify the check: Thellherfirs poundage amounted to IL 14st. Mrs. Money, the sister of Mis. Camper, provetlehat the goods did not belong to Mrs. Abbeville,' but to Mrs. Capper; the former was **As lodger in. the house. Mrs. Capper had been separated from her husband nearly twenty years ; she was allowed a se parate maintenance, out of which she had purchased these goods. Mr. Edmonds was recalled—He was defendant's attorney, and' had received the amount of the execu tion from Mr. Gude, .by. a check for the debt and expenses.—This closed the pliintira case. Mr. Serjeant YAM:MAST, for the defendant, asked his Lordship' whether the plaintiff bad made out his case in such a manner as to call on the defendant to answer it? His Lordship havinganswered in the af firmative, the Learned Se*ant addressed the Jury, and contended that the plaintiff's case was totally without foundation in justice. The wife of an indi vidual had contracted a debt,.far which she' had given her warrant of attorney, and, by virtue ofthat instrument, her goods had been taken - in execution. This execution had. been discharged by: her very friendly attorney, and • she -new turned mend upon the party with a dedaratiowthat she-was a married woman, and her very gallant attonley, after indem nifying the husband; prewailed on hins . to permit his name to be used; in order to defeat the just claim of an honest creditor.. The nature'of the case was 'per fectly clear,and he trustedthe Jury would not enable the parties to succeed in their object. Mr. Justice Duaaatsme charmed the Jury.—The action was clearly maintainable in law, as the goods were undoubtedly the property of the husband: On the last Spring. Circuit a man was triedfor burglary —the first count of the indictment charged him with breaking into the dwellior hewsivekhe husband, and the second with breaking Wolk* of the wife. 'lt • red on the evidearti that‘the house 'in question as inhabited by It married WOCCialti: who -bud 1... ' ived separate from• her- husband, artd - who-had fur. nished the house and supped:ad herself by her rpm. rate maintenance. On this- evidence his Lordship doubted whether' the: helm conklhe properly de ' scribed as the house of the husband r and he batlin: served-the point for the consideration of the-metre Judges, who were unanimously of opinion that tht counts were properly framed: On this' case therefore . Übe Nile was maintainable in law, but it was for the Jstry to say to what damages under all the eir turnetautee of the case they.thought die plaintiff en tide4,--Tbe .Jury rote rned a verdict for the plaintiff —Damages One Farthing. ~_ MIDDLESEX SESSION'S. these Sessions commenced -before F. CoxsT, Esq. and a full Bench of Magistrates. Mrs. Simeon, the mother of Nirs. Chatterley, the actress, was tried. for committing anassault upon Mrs. Christmas. Mr. CHARLES PHILLIPS, for the prosecution, stated .the case, in doing which he said he should avoid any .allusion to certain scandalous hr.ts that had been thrown out, and which he believed to be without the slightest foundation. Mrs Christmas stated the facts of the case as they appeared in the Bow-street account. She had one to the house at which Mrs. Simeon lodged, in Craven street, when Mrs. Chatterley was at the door, and en tered the hall, in which sirs. Simeon met her, and struck her in the mouth with a candlestick. Yesterda- Cross-examined by Mr. A I,LEY.-h was. between nine and ten at night; took tea for supper and nothing stronger than tea the whole day. Mrs. Chatterley parted with Mr. Christmas at the top or the street, but witness had never seen him with her ; never touched nor attacked Mrs. Chatterley. Had, in passion, sworn she would wish to dip her hands in Mrs. Chatterley's blood ; never swore that she would cut Mr. Christ mas's face into deformity, but. said she would scratch it ; had often seen Mrs. Chatterley with her husband. Re-examined.—Had been six years married to Mr. Christmas, and had a ditYrtence with kim before he saw Mrs. Chatterley. Mrs. (]'Donald, the landl a dy, stated that she opened the door ffor Mrs. Chatterlev. There was confusion in the hall, and Mrs. Chatterley said she should be murdered. Mrs. Simeon came from the par lour into the hall, and Mrs. Christmas bled at the mouth. _ Cross-examined.—Mrs. Simeon was very ill at the time, and could not be left alone. The knock at the door was alarming, and so was the noise in the hall. When Mrs. Chatterley entered the house Mrs. Christ mas had, witness believed, hold of her; had seen Mr. Christmas at the house, in company with Mrs Chat terley and Mrs. Christmas also. Mr. Christmas had been once at the house after Mrs. Christmas had left off coming, but that was to write letters for Mrs. Chitterley. Mrs. Simeon and Mrs. Chatterley left witness's house on account of the rent, and there were also some words about Mrs. Christmas, as witness did not wish that Lady to call. • , Chas. Bel win attended Mrs. Christmas to the house; she was quite sober, and never abused Mrs. Chatterley. Cross•examihed by Mr. ADOLPHUS.—Lived at the house of his aunt, Mrs. Macbeth, who had a house for lodgers, and who formerly kept an oyster shop in Vinegar-yard. Mr. BOLLAND, in addressing the Jury, accounted for the circumstances which had excited the jealousy of Mrs. Christmas. Mrs. Chatterley, much to her honour, had, after the decease of her husband, paid off his debts, to the extent, of upwards of 4001. and she availed herself of Mr. Christmas's services in set tling the accounts. He represented that Mrs. Sime.%n' could have known nothing of what had occurred outside the door, but having heard her daughter im plore assistance, in her case of extremity, she had started up from her sick couch to defend her. Mrs. Simeon was therefore justified. She was nearly 70 years of age, and extremely infirm, but such were her fears for her child that she forgot those impediments. It was to be regretted that such a delusion existed in the mind of hfrs. Christmas as jealinisy, but it was well known how hideously such a passion would ope rate, notwithstanding that there existed no doubt in the world that the suspicion could be traced to no source. Mr. PHILLIPS asked whethet. Mr. Bolland would call Mrs. Chatterley? Mr. BOLLAND replied in the negative, and his rea son was this. A lady in a public profession ought not to appear before the Public except in that pro fession. She was sure to find enemies among the idle and' vicious. The CHAIRMAN said the object of the prosecution was obvious. It was nev; to inflict punishment, but to Injure the character of a virtuous woman. It was a case of jealousy, whieb, like the jaundice, made everything itt nwn cdlnur. It was also without the slightest toundaticfn ; but what could tutu the course of a jealous eye? The assault had been involuntary. There was no guilt attached to it. The Jury returned a verdlet of Guilty. Mr. PHILLIPS said his client did not wish to have Mts. Simeon punished. The CHAIRMAN.--Nn; I thought exposure was what was wanted. Well take care the punishment shall not be heavy. Unprejudiced men see how it is Fined 3s. 4d. ' Among the Insolvents brought before the Court, on Monday, was Sarah Mynd, who stated that an apothecary of Southwark attended her in an illness, and sent in a bill for 11.95. 6d. but, without apply ing for the money, summoned her to the County Court, and issued execution, whereby the debt and costs amounted to 231. Is. ! On this she was taken, and had been in the County Gaol for Surrey fifteen weeks. Beyond this sanguinary claim s her schedule only exhibited a debt of 71. but to her there were owinggoOd debts to the amount of 451.—Chief Corn. saissioner—" This is one of the most cruel cases I ever ' knew of. Let the poor woman be sworn and dis ! charged immediately." Tiiuxt.—Nesterday three inhabitants of the Parish of St. Martin's, Ludgate, who had incautiously en. tered on, premises, without first ascertaining if there were any arrears of claims with Respect to them,' were xnainioned to Guildhall for twelve quarters' Tither. They. were ordered pay immediately or a distraint would they were further told; that (Tithes were a. chargepa the estate, and.the last occu- PA4C. wias e Vbli 49 1 '.* the time.the premises had been untenant , and smears. prissaaT:swiegzat.--kelimbing-boy, at Ttorne, was liiiht.todesiii on Wednesday sennight. life poor ithihrititiate Woes etriplbyed to liCelid a flue which had net& beeit swept i'II die rtfolrettioo. ortbh Occupiers.; fitittttisdi bb; 1641de' his ulaY ibio atiother chimney, with, Whieh'it was 'not'supposed'to conantinieate, and' hifottir whieh was' a• Rte. Vie tout f f dli,ng rine s itkb of thelad's entering the chimney; itemedi digtely ttiot . fire, and the poor boy was bu'i nt tri - dekth Issistanee could fie' iven ? Coroner's ver diet—Accidestal Death. dotlnri'!—et,Orkeuteepasaingtry. wait a - MeV fiend on his tgrentlentan on the head with the eigt of it, when, perceiving: what he had door v ise bawled out, " ;bre. a care, iu Why," replied the gentleman," do you intend to hit me again 1..' • RECORDER'S REPORIX;%". • Ye7,terday the RECORDlarimtte his Report to his MAJESTY in Council, of the . following . pritoners under sentence of death : Charles Olft, 21, uttering forged bank-notee ; MatthewJsrba. son, 36, breaking and entering a dwelling -house ; John Purdy, 24, burglary ; Thomas Barnes, 26, stealing in is &wiling-boar ; Richard Grigg, 26; highway rubbery; Henry Pesten, 19, bri,th.. ing and entering a dwelling-house ; George hllititt, 91, bi t i mar Jobbery ; John Mounsey, 17, breaking and entering a dtveliiag. . house; Daniel Deneer, 21, highway robbery; Thoaus Pletcher, 12, stealing' in a dwelling-house; Thomas 'Groves, 39; bare stealing; Joseph Johnson, 20, breaking and entering a &Ms* house ; John Toomey, 15, stealing in a dwelling-house; Mao. rice Iloulihan, 40, and 'William Trapp, 26, - cutting and maiab. ing ; John Bushell, 17, John Barlow, is, and Thomas Knit*, IS, stealing in a dwelling-house • Ann Norris 2f, and &T M' 'Prayer, 2i, hip :away robber •; Eleanor 51' Kenna; 24, and App, Reason, is, r.!ealing in a dwelling-house.— \Vhen George fr.lliolt was ordered for execution olvt .11otiday, the 'l9:h instant. I'O.Z,ICE. Bow-ST2ETT.--Yesterday, a yoltng• man, whose appoirgh er . was that of a gentleman, calling himself Charles M&4, was titan* up by Duke and Jennings, two of the patrol, charged with vie, lently assaulting the former, while in the execution of hit duti Duke stated, that he and a great number of h!i brother officer.. were on duty during the whole of the previous night, at th e dreadful fire which took place at the house of Mr. Gotta, New -street, Covent-garden. When they first arrived upon the spot, they were su stationed as to prevent the too near dpproack of thieves to the houses, and also to afford evert' passible facility to the coming up o( the engines that had not then arrived, and to the working of those already in action. To do this, it wu necessary to keep one passage entirely clear from spectators, —a task which they had great difficulty in accomplithing, owing to the obstinacy of those who preferred the gratification of their own idle curiosity to every other consideration...—. The defendant was so determined to act, hi opposition to the Police, that he placed himself immediately in th e i r way; w e t clinging to a post with one hand, he with the other brandished a heavy club-stick, and swore he would break the head of the Erse man who attempted to remove Wm. Duke took hini gently by the arm, and endeavoured to prevail upon him to go away ;het i . instead of doing so, he hit the officer three or Init. blows 111/011 the head with his bludgeon. Duke then seized him by the ed. far, and immediately received a blow from the defendant co the right arm, which made him drop his staff, and he was unable tsi lift his hand to his head for a considerable time. Jentiingeasd others then came to his assistance, and the defendant was se. cured, but not without strong resistance. The defendant, whose linen was stained with blood, and who had sundry bruises and cuts on his head and Lice, assured the. Magistrate that he had not assaulted the officer. They had given him a d—d bard blow on the face, as his Worship might perceive. Mr. HALLS.—What are you, Sir ?—llefendant. I am the son of a Gentleman. Mr. Ha tt.s.—Then, Sir, if you expect to meet with the con sideration due to a Gentleman, you will be a little more decorous• in your language. lam surprised that a young man of your ap pearance should not know better than to resist the police, upon such an occasion as that of last night. You must have been aware, that their only object was the preservation of the lives and property of the sufferers in the awful calamity; and yen ought to take shame to yourself for interrupting them. The defendant was ordered to give twenty-four hours notice of bail, for his appearance at the Sessions. Mr. George Payne, another genteel-looking young man, was next charged with an assault upon Bond, jun. one of the patted. This also took place at the fire. Bond saw the defendant stand ing in the way of the engines, and begged him to move, when the latter immediately struck him in the mouth, and knocked him down. This was just as an engine was coming up; and fad not Furzeman, a very aeive officer of St. Giles 's Parish, who had volunteered his services en the occasion, seised him liy the leg, and dragged him away, he must have been killed. The defendant expressed great contrition; and was suffered se arrange the matter privately with Bond. Mr. Brown, the Secretary to the Westminster Rre Mee, stepped forward, and said, he felt it his duty to state, that be was upon the spot soon after the fire broke out, and saw a sal titude of thieves in a very short time collected together, who endeavoured to force their way into several adjoining houses, where there was much valuable property; and would have stir ceeded, but for the prompt and determined interference of the Bow-street Police. lie felt pleasure in bearing testimony to their excellent conduct. It was impossible that men could render more efficient service than they did upon this occasion. Mr. am extremely glad to find that our officers have so conducted themselves as to merit such an eulogiunt. The best reward they can earn, is the commendation of th e P u bli c . Ilaztos-Gaaean.—..T. Bony was fined IM. for breaking a hedge, and stealing fifty heads of asparagus, the property of Counsellor Agar. 'Luxes PoLice.-4:,Garrah, the Sofia Pugilistic Champion, was ordered to find substantial bail for a flagrant assault oist Mr. Cope, of SbadwelL BIRTHS. Saturday morning, in Queen's-court, Pimlico Mrs Ran , of three fine girls, who, with their amither, are tieing we& May 3, at f.stle Fraser, Mrs. Ciskei Frame of a daughter. . April us, at Londonderry, the 1414 y pf: Calleisal Fir Willi a m WMiama, of the 13th Regiment of riot, of *aim. MARRIED. Saturday, at Bruton, Henry Augustus Colby, Eq. 0111fablt • Royal Engineers, of Grove House, near Yeovil, to Fahey Art garet, eldest daughter of Edward Dyne Esq. of Bruton. Itionday, at the Savoy Chapel, Don ald Mackinaws, MIX I. Jane, second daughter of Thomas Puke, Esq. of the Shand. and of Alanavon Montgomeryshire. Dec. 13, at Bombay, Captain William Miller, of the HE& East India Company's •Artillery, to 'Katherine Saab, daughtee" of James Graves Russell, Big. of Cliftuts, Glovatoorsidre. • DIED. On his passage to this country, in the feed Cel*mei, Chm. Daw, Esq. Surgeon in the Hon. East Iddis Cempeny'eservers at the Bombay Presidency. At Bushire, in Persia, on the 17th November, whack, ki gone fur a change of air, Mr: Robert Green, Assistano&trgel*; in the Hon. East India Company's Service.' May 3, at Dumfries, James Crichton, Batt. of Frim's Cates..; Dumfries-shire. Alay 5, at Edinburgh, Christian Glasdoed, youngest daaglelf of John Glassford Hopkirk, Esq. W.S. • Last week, in, Sloane-street; Captain. T. Herds R.N. Ryas. rapher to the Admiralty Board. April 27, at Scotstown of Um; Um. Aheokie4 wik.al tenant Absolon, R.N. on the Preventive Service. April 29, at Montrose, Captain. Francis lona,• at dirt** 'Royal Veteran Battalion. • Sunday se'nnighs, Sir Robert Kingstttili , Baet. of Sidemenoey near Kingselere Hants, aged 53 yeses. . . April ao, at Keswick, C..ptain Buckle, R.N. aged 75. April 2.5, at Balait, in his 44th year, after a severe 011traseir a few days, Mr. George Thom, of•Aberdeeri• Mt. Thentserese with reputation as a Master iti;he Royal 'Neer foe fleatirtweety years. At the time of his death he commanded theship Nattier of Aberdeen; and it is remarkable that his Second Mate. Gage Walls, to whom he was much attached, was kilted ou board, bg accident, a few hours before his master expired: Monday se'nnight, a man-belonging-re the Foundry'. at *S; east end of Dundee, who had beitn as his "Risk is t b i aasOlro dropped down immediately after breakfast", uttered a lost amid eepired. Saturday se'rinlght, James Vagen, a gardener, at KAM / Itaa to bed in good health, bet was timed dead it morning: • ; - MAILS. A MU. DUE: , .' i 'Dublin 1 0 I France !Waterford 0 0 Hamburgb 'Guernsey aii.l Jersey 0 . 0 Flamkrs Lisbon 0 0 3laks :Holland 0 0 I Datum/m . O •Anierica • as. um 1 d 0 • • 0• • • 1: 0 O 1 O 0 - (it G 1-1- WA ":' Ft It LON DON' **l Dile t0....f • Mcrnmr: • - 39 4 1152114:4 1, - -ft•Ph . • Afternoon . • 11301140 : aft* LONDON; Filmed and publishelby. i. ILarT F P Place, Temple-Bar. •