Star. — London, England, 1823-01-23 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE. COURT OF KING'S BENCH, JANUARY 22. • MILLER V. CALDWELL. Mr. ROTCH stated, that this was an action brought by a poor sailor, against the owner of the ship New Liverpool. Having performed two voyages, on the third the vessel was iaken by a French privateer, in consequence of which he was refused his wages, as defendant had agreed for at £.B per' month. It unfor tunately happened the defendant was in America when the plaintiff was in England; this occasioned s lapse of some years in bringing this action. At length meeting Mr. Caldwell in England, the de fendant agreed' to pay him half his wages. Mr. Larder, the Mate. went with the plaintiff to the de fendant's lodgings, in Bury .street, St. James's, to iden tify Miller as one of the seamen of the New Liverpool. The plaintiff delivered his account, giving defendant credit for money received,which reduced theamount to £47. The plaintiff was under. the necessity of ar resting the defendant, who had pleaded the Statute of Limitations. The question would now be, whether the' defendant had admitted the debt within six years.— His settling with Larder, the Mate, who had sued him, the Learned Counsel contended, would amount to an admission of wages due to the plaintiff for his services arising out of the same voyages. Mr. Larder, the Mate, proved the hiring the plain tiff on a voyage to Quebec and Newfoundland, which was performed ; also another voyage to Quebec; they were captured and carried into Boston ; the plaintiff was sent to Halifax, where lie remained a prisoner until exchanged. Witness saw the defendant in 1817, in Bury-street, to whom he mentioned Miller and • other of the mariners, offering to identify them ; in 1819, he met Miller in London, just after the wit ness had got his wages ; Miller never could find the defendant ; witness went several times to Caldwell's lodgings with Miller; Caldwell was sometimes in England, and sometimes in America; succeeded in finding him last March, and he then introduced the plaintiff to him as one of the poor men, and stated that his wages were so and so; Caldwell said very well, and asked if this man had got any money of the Captain during the voyage? to which witness an swered, he had not received a farthing I Mr. Caldwell then said, I will go and see my attorney about it ; afterwards 'met Caldwell, and asked if he had seen his attorney, and whether he meant to pay the man his money ? lie said' he would tell the attorney to do what was right; witness told him that the amount of the plaintiff's claim was £l6 13s. 101— the plaintiff, Miller, v.kas then himselt in company with the witness. Cross.exarnined by Mr. GURNEY—Witness was en gaged at 10!. a month ; swears thatcommon seamen, in time of war, have Si. a month R has known 201. a nimith given to common heathen, from Quebec, in time of war. Mr. GURNEY complained of the severe terms in which Mr. hutch had spoken of the defendant. Mr. Caldwell was merely the agent of a commercial . house in America, residing in England. The defend ant had no documents to shcw whether the ship's crew were paid by the house in Quebec . or not. Air. Caldwell was abused for pleading the statute of limi tations to a claim which bad no existence, as against him. \Vas it any sailor who might be . picked up in the street that was to make a claim against Mr.Cald eil, and this at the distance of ten years? The LORD CHIEF Justice, in his charge to the Jury, observed that, .in his opinion, the defend ant's saying I will go to my attorney," was a tacit admission. This, his Lordship thought, was a' fit case for the defendant to bring into Court, to see if the plaintiff had bound himself by anything he had said to the mate. It was a hard rule for mariners, but the law had recognised it—that, if the ship was lost, the mariner could not recover for that voyage. This claim, however, was for antecedent voyages ac tually performed. If the Jury believed Larder, here vas an acknowledgment that the wages due to the plaintiff remained unsatisfied. The Jury found for the plaintiff—Damages V. 31. 15s. 10d. and costs. QUESTION or FRAUD AND INSANITY. TURDON, ADMINISTRATOR, C. BROSKBRIDGC. Mr. GURNEY stated, that the question in this caw was one ofgreat importance : it was an action brought by the administrator of one Jane Evans, deceased, to recover a considerable sum of money which the de fendant had possessed himself of, and converted to his own use, by means of his influence over this fe male, who was a person of such weak intellect, that she was known by all the boys in the streets by the name of mad Jane Evans. She had some property in the Funds, the interest of which supported her; she continued to reside with a widow, Mrs. Pardon, until after her husband's death, when she went to ic side with a person named Jackson, where it was pro posed that a transfer of the property, from Consols to Navy Five per Cents. should take place, and an investment of part of her property was contrived to be put in the name of Ann Purdon, the niece, who was removed from Jackson's house to another with the deceased, who would consent to anything that was proposed by givinf: her a piece of plum-cake., The defendant caused her to 'consent to the transfer and re-investment of the 1,000/. Stock, which defen. dant pretended, after her death, that Jane Evans had given him; and he stood upon this defence, that the Stock in question was a gift to him from Jane Evans, whom he (Mr. Gurney) would shew to have been up to this time, and for long previous, in a state of per fect idiotcy and mental imbecility. The LORD ClilEr JUSTICE proposed, that as this was a dispute between relations, it might be referred. This being rejected, the following witnesses were called and examined: Catherine Furnham knew the defendant, who is a dealer in pearl ash, at Kingsland ; Mrs. Jane Evans lived with Mr. and Mrs. Purdon ; old Purdon died about ten or twelve years ago; she afterwards lived with the elder Jackson, who was a relation of hers, in Globe - fields, 13ethnal-grten for about two years; she quitted them, a n d went to live with Brockbridge, in Green-place, Blackfriar's-road ; defendant- is' a coach and bedstead carver; Jane Evans lived with defendant for five years, until she died last June two years' ago; witness always considered her an idiot; she used to flay with toys like a child; she was tarried of thirty whew witness first knew her; she required so be coaxed to eat her victuals ;.spineti c ue s she went u p gain raving 144 passiciC shewaseiot alloired to, Ann Purdon told witness she had' £3OO of her mo ney, but that she had given it up to M . r. Brockbridge. About half a year before her decease, witness went to see her at 13rockbridge's, but Mrs. Brockbridge prevented her seeing her. Witness thinks the interest of the money was quite enough for defendant's care of the deceased. Cross-examined by Mr. SCARLETT.—Defendant had two daughters, one twelve and the other four , teen. NVitness's husband will have been dead two years next March. There was a little demur in the family of Jackson, so that witness proposed to take care of her. Elizabeth Todd.—Knew Jane Evans, likewise old Mr. and Mrs. Purdon, who lived next door to her in K highland- road ; has known Jane Evans since she came from boarditig-school, which is forty years ago; she was then twenty years of age; she was silly, simple, and incapable, one day laughing and another crying. Her idiotcy was known by every one that went along the street ; she was always the same, and witness has often hindered her from being ill-used b y the boys, who called her the mad woman. Mr. SCA ntErr.—Mind that you do not laugh and cry on the same day. Mrs. Powell, apparently aged ninety, mother of last witness, deposed that she lived next door to the Purdons forty-five years. Jane Evans was a childish, simple, helpless woman, always so—she did not mend as she stew older—knew her at ilack,ort's, jun.—can't tell whether she was comfortable or not. John Wilson examined.—Knew thel:tte Mrs. Evans ruo:e than forty years ; witness's father lived nearly opposite; PurdoL's children were witness's school. fellows. Nit's. Jane Evans was a person incapable of conducting her own affairs ; she was a person of weak intellect. Wibert Ealam, rope-maker, deposed, that he worked in old Pardon's field ; used to see Jane Evans daily ; she used to walk up and down the field, talk ing to herself; the boys used to teaze her; used to call her aunty. • Western, a baker, used to see Jane Evans daily ; she was totally insane ; she used to play with bandaleurs, cups and balls, and used to talk to her self; she was incapable of taking care of herself; was called " the mad woman." Cross-examined—Never spoke to her in his life; has seen her at the window playing with her nails. Mr. Scisrmerr-LPlaying with her nails? Winless—She used to play pretty handsomely with her bandaleur and cups and balls ; she never took a particular fancy to me but once in her life—(A laugh)—witness once drove away some boys, from which she called the witness " her good-natured 'baker," and used to smile at him. Mr. SCARLETT—You do not tall her an idiot for that?—Oh, yes, I do, indeed—(A laugh). The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE observed, unless the de fendant could materially vary the case from this mass of tvidence, the plaintiff must recover, as the de ceased evidently could not be in that state of mind to bequeath property. Charles Humphries was apprenticed to the de fendant. When Jane Evans and Ann Purdon came to reside there, witness was aged eighteen, and re sided about a year and a half. Whil , t he was there, she was completely out of her mind, and childish ; never saw her do anything but talk to herself; de fendant and wife managed her ; never saw any ill treatment. Witness has heard defendant and wife say that she was born an idiot. In witness's opinion there could be no question about it. Cross-examined by Mr. SestabeTT.—Witness quar relled, arid did not serve his time out; was taken be fore the Chamberlain and imprisoned one month; was discharged for an assault on both his master and mistress. George Purdon, grandson of old Purdon, resided in the house with Jane Evans; corroborated former witness as to her imbecility of•mind ; has seen her talk to the wall, and then begin to dance and sing. She had books and toys, and all nib things as chil dren play with she has made pincushions, and put them behind the kitchen fire; she got worse as she grew older ; saiv her at Brockbridge s two or three years before her death ; Mr. and Mrs. Brockbridge began to look cool upon those relations who cape to see her. • Joshua Jackson.—Witness's daughter-in-law is relation of the Purdons. Jane Beans was in wit ness's: house about three weeks with his son; for nearly two years saw her almost every day.- Ants Pardon was with her ; she could not take-care of herself ;- Ann, Pardon managed all ter affairs ; she could not remember anything; was fond of a cake or a few halfpence tO play with. Witness Used to go intent Are (_ Aphus) am). tor the purpose of harassing this poor woman, a warrant of attorney had been fictitiously filled up by the de fendant, and a distress thereupon put in, with the view of preventing her from prosecuting this action. Ile should prove that the defendant had attempted to bribe an attorney's clerk to give up a written agreement between the parties.. This was a case of all others which would excite the indignation of a British Jury. Ile was convinced that the verdict of this day would be such as would relieve the plaintiff from that oppressive injury she complained of, and give the defendant no cause to triumph at the success of his projects. The Learned Counsel then called the following witnesses: Isabella Staniforth—Witness is• daughter to the plaintiff, and first resided at Demerara. She was in forined of her father's (Captain M'Pherson) death by the defendant, who went into mourning as well as the rest of the family. The defendant said that he must purchase the house on Stepney-Green, as if for himself, lest the £5OO which he had received to pare! chase it should make it subject to her father's (Cap. tain M'Pherson) debts; this was after he said wit ' ness's father was dead. Captain Lovie came to her mother's, and told witness he was going to arrest her mother; her mother said she did not oboe him anti money, and he could not arrest her. The plaintiff desired the witness to get him out of the house, and she would shut the door: witness got him out, and her mother shut the door upon witness and defend ant, who were both shut out together ; defendant then begged her to let him in again, upon which Captain Lovie seized her by the hand, and said, " By G—D I have got you now !" and Captain Lovie used' her mother in the most shameful manner. Mr. Guar:mt.—This was courtship. Defendant then called to the officers to jump over the garden-wall, which they did. Mr. Lovie then seized her mother by her hand, and threw her down upon the sofa, and held her down with both his hands. The officers then arrested her mother; an agreement was drawn up, and her mother signed it without knowing what she was signing; witness was not then married, but was married a few weeks after. Captain Lovie said, " So Miss, I hear you are going to get the start of me and your mother." Defendant then told the witness he intended to marry her 'mother, and would, as her father, make her a present of some silver tea-plate on her marriage. Captain Lovie said, I am to give your mother a written agreement to marry her. ! On the witness 'asking for what ? the de fendant answered, " Because your mother is always doubting me, and I intend When I return in March or April, to marry her ; I am therefore doing this to quiet her mind." Witness remembers dining on board the defendant's ship herself; her mother, her grand= mother, and her aunt Wilson, were there; her grand: mother was placed at the head of the table. Cross-examined by Mr. SrAnLwrT.—Witness has been married sixteen months; her maiden name was Gordon ; is nearly twenty ; .did not live with defen dant ; only went to see him when he lived with her mother ; witness was at school when her mother went to Demerara ; it was 'either in 1816 or 1817 when Captain Lovie came home; her mother has had a daughter by Captain *Pherson.; did not know that her mother lived with Captain tonic as his mistress. Mr. SCAR LETT.—HOW long is it since you was it a boarding-school? Witness,' don't write down dates; I don't keep memorandums; it is impossible to remember. Mr. ScaaLarr.—Well, don't be angry with mai Witness.—Oh no, Sir, I have no Occasion to be angry with you! ScA nt.err.—When was this loves scene acted • between your mother and Captain Lovie? Witness.—Scene! what love scene? I don't know anything of love scenes -*--(4 lough). Mr. SCA RLETT.—Why the love scene you gave as when your mother signed the agreemedt. = WitneWhen she was arrested by Capt. Lousy that was no love scene—(Laughter). Air, SCAALiTT cross-examined, but elicited nothing material. Mary King lived as servant with Mrs. M'Pherson in 18211 remembers Captaiii Lovie being there, and was present once when he said to M rs . Stanifo;th;.... “.I understand you are going to get married berme your mother and I get married; and, please GOD, when I return, your mother and I are going to be married, and I will make you a present of a piece of plate on the occasion.` Remembers that soon after, when her mistress was. ill, Captain Lovie was in' her bed-room, and milled witness to rensember that he would MN ry her Mistress when he cam e b ac k. Cross-examined by Mr. MARRYATT.---h did not, : • . •.. • . ..._. t • -a....... - * go to the door wtuamokeoetto•oseqo me she was not with Ann Pardon and. her to the tank to, : rtieve . -ma terial seeing CaptitinLnia ' - her' s like witness as at all M. A. G. M,Pherson remembers being at the Cio n taken away; she amaastaborterse u a companion dividends. She signed her name with a geed deal in her mistress's bed-room, as she was ve r y in. to any we; she was often tallting : and raving to her. 'to do. Had £l5OO inthe three Or Cents, - Wines : sl olf with a crovid of people round her. Witness recommended a change of the Stock to IficreasCthe , and Magpie when her grandmother Wallace, hem, considered her to be quite an idiot; it was necessary interest, and it was all sold out ; with it was . :ht ;.[her, and Captain Lovie -were there and had tea ;sea to pacify her, when angry, with a piece of cake.— in the five per Cents. ElOOO in her name, and ii.o I in Captain Lovie take a letter out of his pocket, nib ' Witness applied to defendant, Brockbridge, to receive Ann Purdon's. None•of the five per Cents. w.:re sold read it, said—" Now, Mrs.•W-a/lace,_re siAssaan her smiler w4nisse r 'seevartLyeers ago, for that till after she left witness's son's. Rumfordand-Ashier'lfoltrintend tolniteniy- mind up, and; Pleits - e•Goi k - Ann and William Purdon, relations, thought her un-. were the brokers. . when I return you may know by this that Lint . ........_ comfortable, and that for the safety of her money S evera l ot h er w i tnesses were exa mi ne d, a f t * tiviik . any" your daughter." they wished hei - io lie . with Went. Witness stated that i Mr. SCARLETT rose for the de f endant ; M r. G URNEY Cross-examinedo— Witness has been to a b oar di* Ann Purdon had 0300 of Jane Evans's money, which : having replied, and the LORD CHIEF Jusrice stun- school, but cannot say within a year or two how li mit she would give up whenever she should be compelled. I med up, the Jury found a verdict for the plaintiff— ago. Cannot. tell when this meeting at the public. 'Defendant said he would take care of the property, Damages £lo4s'and costs. • house took place, but thinks it was in winter._ T N and every one would have their share. Defendant words in the letter shown at the Crown ald Masph BREACH OF PROMISE OF MARRIAGE. .. ~ stated that he was to have the interest of her money - were, that if he did not marry her he won d p,i / l iat M'PHERSON V. LOWE. • for taking care of her. Defendant's wife was her When witness came from school she_we t it and said this wa s Mr. ADOLPHUS stated tire case, l '., l ' niece, and is sister to Ann and William Putdon. The to rsingston to learn dress-making, and went to a an action for breach of promise of - marriage, brought d defendant came to witness when she was taken awayay-school there. -- ' by a widow lady aga i n st the defendant, a Captain of to his house, and requested witness to go with her inlsabella Wallace, the mother of the plaintiff, Mic West India s hi p. She went out to Demerara in the l a coach. Defendant gave her a piece of plum-cake.roborated the testimony of the last witness as to what defendant's ship, before her marriage Kith her late Witness sa.v her very often at defendant's. There husband,C * MTh I 1801, Captain erson. n J anuary, passed 'at the public-house, and likewise that Wire was no improvement of lap intellect. Never was Captain ' . she dined on board the defendant's vessel he placed Lovie same ,home, 'stating that Captain . consulted about removing her to the house of defend-witness on his right, saying she was to be his Mother. MaPherson was dead. The lady was then residing in ant. Remembers being sent for to defendant's house ; E ng land , in-law. 'Mrs. Wilson, her daughter, was on board in a house which Captain M'Pherson had saw Mrs. Brockbridge, who told witness her husbandwith she is in her; iven defendant 5004 to purcha se for her. The dc had sold off, lift his home, and had sold out Jane gi ven . . "1 do hereby solemnly promise to yon, o rs. Dl' Pherson, tLat fondant, on coming home from Demerara , came to the I will marry you when I return from Demerara , please Gym I Evans's money. Then Thomas Brockbridge, the de- house where she resided with her mother, and took (Signed) • 4 JAMES EOM' fendant, came to witness, and wished her to go to • up his residence, professing honourable suit to the Mr. Staniforth, son-in-law of the y plaintiff, was pre: Jane Evans, to make her comfortable, for that her plaintiff. A letter would be put in, in which the de- sera on the 20th of November, 181, on board the money was all safe, and he had placed it in his fendant promised to marry her. The defendant is defendant's ship ; remembers Mrs. Wallace sitting at banker's hands. He stated his reason was, that he forty years of age, the plaintiff somewhat older ; but his right-hand; nothing was said about marriage ;.-.. and his wife had been at variance, and his wife wished that was no topic of defence to answer the action.— the defendant said be would do himself the honest to have it all in her care, but she should not. De- He understood the defence set up would be, that this of sitting by her. In April last witness waited on the fondant told witness that every one should have their letter was intended as a demise of the premises which defendant, to know whether he meant to marry his share of it. Thinks he told her it amounted to nearly Mr. Lovie had purchased for Mrs. M'Pherson, in mother-in-law, or pay her the £1000; as he had 1:1500 ; and that by selling it out he had made which it would be alleged she had filled up a blank agreed ? Witness knew the ship was, going another rather more of it. with a promise of marriage, where no such thing was voyage, because he gave witness an order for hi s gm . Mr: GURNEY.—It will turn out so to be. intended. He (Mr. Adolph; ' should whew that, I series. Ile (Lovie] said he should not - -v her the' marry her the n , as she had threatened to bring an action against him ; that he would not be driven by any one, but they might lead him; that when she had commenced her action, then he would marry her, but not till them.. Ile acknowledged he had given her the a- reement, and that if she brought her action he knew she would get tlOOO ; thinks this conversation was on the 9.5rh of Aptil. Knows the house in which the plaintiff lived, but the execution was before witness was ac quainted with her. Remembers seeing Thoroughgood, the officer, there inSelitember last ; he was in posses. sion of her property. Mr. SCAULETT objected to part of the witness, testimony, being since tite action was brought. Mr. ADOLPHUS submitted it was competent to prove the admission of the defendant, and the me* sures he had taken to prevent this action. The Caner JUSTICIL—The promise not being per. formed, it is for the defendant to shew that there is some good reason for it. • The evidence which related to what had passel since the action was brought was rejected. Cross-examined by Mr. Scarti.Err.—Thinks the dinner on board the ship to have taken place on St turday, the 19,h of October. Witness does not p 4 the attorney; but has supplied his mother-in-law with goods, and lent her money, which she-may ro pay him at some future time, as fortune may fame her, bat he does not know in what way. James Makan—ls employed by Mr. Truitt, the at. torney for the plaintiff. Witness waited on the de- Itendant with a letter from Mr. Truitt ; when witness fist went into the coffee-room of the Crown ad A agpye he was not there, bat came in shortly after. w ds, and witness gave him the letter, intimating at the-ea-me time that be (the witnes.) wai awate d its contents; the defendant told him that he neva had written such an agreement ; but, if he revisers; bered right, he had signed his name to a blank sheet of paper, and had told Mrs. *Pherson that she might get what she liked Written at the top of it, sad that as for the matter of £lOOO, she might just as well have put down 0000. He asked witness:si take tea with him, or, if he chose, wine, as he bad something to say to him; the defendant then called for a pint of wine, and said to witness that he, wit? ness, might be a good friend to him. Witness asked him in what respect? . Defendant answered and said, " By destroying the agreement which they s:fy Ihm written, and you may as well have part of the money as the rest;" and added, that if the witness would make away with the agreement in his presence, Ist would present him with £150: the defendant fur• ther said, that the reason he gave it was, that the? bothered him so that he wrote his name, saying, they might get what they pleased of him. • M. A.G. *Pherson recalled by Mr. Seaattvv— Witness dined with them on board. ship; is omit was not the next day after they met at the Crowe and Magpie ; but thinks it was in the same week, Cannot say how many days before; it might have been one or two. Mr. SCARLRTT then addressed the Jury for the der fendant, and called several witnesses, the ptupedif whose testimony was to prove that the plaintiffwee a woman of light character, and had lived with Capt. Lovie as 'his mistress; and that her late husband. Capt. *Pherson, was in such circumstances as to be unable to advance the SOU spoken of. The LORD CHIRP JUSTICIS having summed up the Jury, after a short consultation, returned a verdict . for the plaintiff.—Damages £5 OO. • MINING INTELLIGENCE.—The Copper Ores sold at •Redruth on Friday amounted to 1326 tons ; standsr4 £lO9. 12s. Copper Ores for sale this week at Truro —Poldice 471 ; Wh. Unity, 190 ; Pembroke, 639 i Tresavean, 3064 East Crinnis, 254 ; Wh. Maid. 143; Carharrack 80; Tingtang, 135 ; Union Mines, 1321 Penstrnthalaik—vg pi* tons. 6 d — C 1 . 61 .1 .1 - irt NlMmio.m. COAL MARKET, JAN. 22. • ' Adf o r;s 44s 6d—Bardon OM—Beaumont 46s 6d—Cherlest 460 an's Primrose 481 6d—Percy Bast 46s—liebburs NW 50s--Pelaw Main 50e—Lion's Main s ssl M—WilUniltia WI —Walasend &Mae 501—Wallsend Newmarcb 51s. • 04 Ships at Market-25i Ships sold--sei unsold. : MAIL& &ma. au& . ala. ow& DON& • a• ' 1 France 0 1 Waterford 0 1 ItiornOsali• 0 • Guernsey indJeriey 0 0 Flanders • • Lisbon - •• • Holland - . 0 1 - Gettenbatik 0 L'l America 0 0 Brawn • •.. 0 1 ' iiitieCWATlLltit UMW* biillatvit•TtXsitA r ti , Me t . erno rning on . - '• LONDON le ss . riArnit(. ON . 1)7 Afternoon LONDON : rrtsited.atui published by ILlivra - fila. ,INGSt 4I ' place, Temple-Bar. .