The National Register. — London, England, 1822-12-01 00:00:00

rIP a• • nys LAW IATELLI:,LNCE. COURT 01 1 KING'S RENCH. moisnar, N.O. 2.5. THE SING V. THE tiritetinstry OF eastnnincr. The Solicitor General moved on a former day for a Mandamus, commanding the Vice Chant%llor of the UdPenny of Cambridge to elect Thos..leffion, Esq. :1;A. to the office of Lecturer of .Miueralogy in the said Un.ve.sity. Sergeant Lens she wed cater OM day against the conditional rule. on the ground that the co.nt had no power to grant the Mau damns. The court directed the application to stand over until Wednesday. THE LINO V. RADFORD. The defendant, a 51:ult . 's Aker, appeared so receive such punishment as the court in us judgment slusald award, for exact line from a person named Wisel, whom he had in us:oily in a lock-up house. the sum of 211. 156. (id more than he was legaily entitled to demand. The subject matter havin" been et fe.rred to the master of the Court, dist a tasks read his ts,sort, by which it appeared that the defendant had received the overchatAe alreat'y stated. Mr. Cooper, who moved tor the attachment against the defen dant, tinder hich he was brought before the court, stated, that this was not the only instance in which the defendant had int. posed in his client. The court sentenced the defendant to pay a fine of 251. to the Sing, to refund the sum illegally received, to pay the co.,:s, and 6tiird committed to the prison of the court until the whole is paid. QUEEN MAIL—THE LING V. WILLIAM CLARKE. The defendant in this case, when brought up thrjudgment last week, had t i me given for the purpose of making an arrangement with his printer, to induce lam to give tip the unsold copies of Qacen The defendant now put in an affidavit, and produccel twenty-five copies of die wok, as all whica remained in the printer's hands. Mr. Gurney said he felt it to be his duty to press for the jiitlgs meat of the coon against the defendant, a it appeared from his schedule, filed in the Insolvent Debtors' Court. that at that time there were copiLs in the printer's hands; either, therefore, there bad been a very extensive sale since, or, what was mote probable, wine of the copies were kept back. The court would also observe, that by the defendant's withholding the primer's ramie. it was impossible to have his ahidavit as to the copies unsold. _ . _ The Judges conferred together for some time, when Mr. Jos. ice Bayley proceeded to pass the 'sentence of the court. Ilia lordship observed, that, from tie recommendation of the July and the defendant's sul , sequent conduct, the tour had been inclined to spew a very extraordinary degree of lenity towards but he had chosen (front motives which the court had no right to censure) to conceal the printer's name, the case must be considered as one where the printer's name war withheld. The court, tilting the recommendation of the Jury into its consider ation, and the defendant's conduce at t' e trial and since, did order and Adjudge, that he should be confined in the house of correction, in CoWho:II-fields, fin font calendar months, and find securities 11w his good behaviour tor fire years, himself in 401. and two sureties in VOL each. 'fliedefendant asked what was to he done with the twenty-five colatx of the work which now held in his hands ? Mr. Justice Bayley—The court rualses no order with regard to thesis ; but if you are prudent you will destroy them. The defendant said he had no objection to give them up the Society for the Suppression of Vice, and accordingly Lenthsl them over to the solicitor tot the prosecution. Mr. Justice Bayley—That, as a voluntary act of your own, is extremely lroper—very proper conduct indeed. The defendant then bowed to the court and withdrew in ens.otly. THE KING v AsirmitsoN. The defendant, who acted as surveyor of highways at Mile- End and W hitcchapel, appeated, on the motion of Mr. Gurney, to receive jnilginent, having been round sulky of a fraud, to keeping back vat inus emus received 6y inane of hisollice. The defendant, who is a limn of respectable appearence, put i n his afildastf, stating that he had been prosecuted in conic stiplehce of the entertained towards hint by an individual and that he had not been allowed the opportunity to explain the appartnt deficiency in his accounts. Mr. Gurney said, he was surprised with respect to the dcfcn dant's affidavit, and he prayed the court to allow one day to answer it. lac court complied with the request, and ordered the defen dant w be brought up to-morrow. TUESDAY, NOV. 26. IoNES, GENTLEMAN, o. It ItADLEY, GENTLEMAM. This was an actit,n for work NISI lohour—business done by one attorney for another. The [dahlia is a clerk in court. A letter or the defendant's was put in, requesting tardier time for payment. A clerk of the Olinda 's proved the business dont., and the TV:15110 ibleiless or th e rits.rgts. There being no defence—verdict for the plaintiff lOGI. and costs. Other undefended causes were disposed of, but of no public interest. At twenty minutes to eleven the Lord Chief Justice, Justices Beat and Holroyd, took their seats in Banco, laming short motions, anti) eleven, when Mr. Justice Bayley came into court. The attention of the court was occupied in hearing an area 'neat upon the terms of an award respecting paying of costa, of no interest, until past twelve. The case of certain attorneys being moved to be struck ofrthe rolls was called nein to-day. Mr. ites , ler, for the detendanta, observed lbw parties were now attending the Court of Continuo !Ness, which Court had determined to proceed iu its judguieut without waiting for the dcci,ion of this. Tito motimi %%as accordingly permitted to stand over. VIE KING r. ANDY.RSoN. The defendant, who was op for judgment yeaterday, and re• mantled to give coons. I for the prosecution on opportunity of answering affillvits, again stood upon the Hour of the coml.- Ihe defendant in his allidarit had stated that his prosecution WAS to be traced to hostile feeling OA the part of a Mr. Pepper c•o n. on• of the churchwardens, and unfair proreedinga against Lint at a parish meeting. He denied that he had embezaltd the parish money, and attri'auted the apparent deficiency in his arrounte to errors w!!ich he had not been allowed to explain. Mr. Gurney on this occasion, put in the affid.tvit of Mr. Pep• percorn, who deposed that the defendant had contrived during vine sears to hold the office of sort eyor of the higlays , l3S, a.ol during that time had defrauded the parish to the amount of •ithteeu birdred pounds. tither ailidavits stated that the prosecution had been com menced in consequence of r..solutions passed at a meeting of toe Inhabitants of the Hamlet of Aide TI a 'Midas it of Mr. Harmer the attorney, abio Fisted, that the defeietant bating been iiiitictori at Elicks's Hail, had re wired the proceedings; by reilitioeri into this court, and Oa be uhiniately suffer. d a t erklict or guilty to he recorded agaihat him. ... The Common Sergeant adilreased the nowt in mitigation of paniMment, and Mr. Gurney in aggravation. The Lord ChielJustice.—Let the deftlidunt he eentanded in theoatudy attic Mari ball, and be broti6lit 112 ag4tu to motiow. 1 lie dileudaut wan taken out of moat •. •••• • • . . ` TILE NA' INAT. It WEDNESDAY, NOv. 27. THE MIND o. WM. /4EIIEIIBOM, The defendant was brought op in custody of the Marshal, pursuant lu the order of ,esterd iV, to receive sentence. Mr. Justice linyley, pronouncing the judgment of the court, said— The defendant, as surveyor of the highways, in the Hamlet of Mile End, Whitechapel parish, was prosecuted under two indictments, Cz..--for unlawfully and 11 - audit!. idly making and producing hide accounts in writiti;, and fraudulently concealing and neglecting to enter in those accounts seleral SUM 4 money received from 12 thtlerent persons. The sums certainly ware very smell, not exceedin4 on the whole 41. and a fruition on the hist indictment, and 31. and s fraction on the second.— And that lie did afterwards'ialse a false nath in swearing to the truth of tit. tir.t account, and would have sworn to the second account, but that the nia,giatrate before whom the oath was tea dire.: refused to administer it. 4" The court held that this was a very considerable aggravation of the defendant's The court adjudged, filial upon the first indictment the defen dant should pay a line to the King of SOUL and be ini t risoned four calendar months, and until such fine should he paid. And on the second indictment, after the pa) ineot of 31101 hue, and at the expiration of such imps isonmeut of font mentlis, that be should be further imprisoned fur two calendar monlbs. tiK• v. rape* to the power which the King util Consul had to de. cid, the question might be tried by en issue. It was admitted that the King, as visitor, had power to iuvesti,tte coniplaints proceeding from the inivetsity ; but the royal decision must proceed front leis Judges. The Lord Chief Justice observed, that this being the last day of term, the court could nut then devote any longer time tee the argument, but would he prepared next term to meet the question, and give judgment thereon. The decision was consequently postponed. The court sat to a late hour, hearing and deciding questions relating to points of pearlier. MR. HENRY DUNT. As the Judges were rising to quit the court, at a quarter pact seven o' duck, Mr. Henry Hunt ruse on the floor, and begat, to address them. Mr. Justine Bayley.—What is it you move, Mr. Hunt I Mr. hunt.--1 a isle to move itaiiest one of the officers--no, not one of the °litters, but a gentleman of your Lordship's Court, Mr. Cheeks Frederick W illiams. I wish to ask your Lordships that lie may be triennially prosenuteal for insulting me, and trying to provoke nee to light a duel, which would hate forfeited my recognizance s. The Loud Chief Justices--That is a motion for a criminal in. formation, and mast be made by Counsel. Mr. Iltoet.—l hope your Lordship will not drive me to Coun sel in this case. I hive heard of" alt a thief tee catch a thief ;" but I sin afraid it will not do to set a barrister to catch a har• crater. Mr. Justice Bayley.—The same attempt has been feerneerly made, and the Court decided against it. The eistinetiou is this —every man has a right to he heard in his own WHIM! ; lent in a criminal information the Crown is the prosecutor, and there fore only counsel can move for it. Mr. Hunt— But in this ' , infielder case— The Lord Chief Justice.—There can be no Wore of jus lice. We do not conclude you ; you may prefer a bill of in dictment before the grand jury. Mr. Justice (lest.—Or bring yonr action. Mr. Huitt.-1 have another case to bring before your Lord ships ; but at this late hour, alien you leave been fatigued with so long a sitting, I can scarcely loess it. Mr. Justice Best.—We will hear you move any thing in a civil cause. Mr. 1111m1.—I scarcely knew whether your Lordship will think this a civil cause. 11 is a complaint against one of your ofliorrs, Mr. Lulling:on. the Master of the Crown ethee, for eatortiou. Your Loettship may remember, that when I was a prisoner in llctiester gaol, I applied by ney counsel, Mr. Chitty, leer the redress of cei lain grievances which I was suffering. The High Sheriff of the County redressed these grievances, and cousequently I requested leave to withdraw my application on payment of coats. The costs were tatted ley the ma ter, who male an error of If. in cabling them up, against me. I was de taint. lin ',cheater gaol for these costs—at least I was obliged to pay them before I left it, as a detainer was lodged against me. 'f he Lord Chief Justice.—lf you complain of a mere error, you can only apply that the Master may review his Lesation. Mr. Ilunt.—N o, try Lord ; for these errors have happened singularly olten--o ce in the case of the High Bailiff ot West minater ; once in a case before Mr. Justice Best, when a pound too much was charged nee. Three niece there leave been errors, and all against poor me. (A laugh.) The Lord Chief Justice.—We are sorry for it : but what can we do ? Mr. Iltint.—l have long affidavits on the subject; bat I will not trouhle your Lordships with them now. The Lerch Chief Justice.—Then you will not move now Mr. Ilunt.-- Not in this case ; but on the other question I wished to address your Lordship. The Lord Chief Justice.—That has bee n decided already. Mr. Mont.—Rut only in my case, may Lord. The Lone Chief Justice.—Yes ; often before. lluut.—l could chow your Lordship many cues to the contrary. 'the Lord Chief Justice.—Not now, on the last day of term —another time we will hear you. Mr. Ilunt.--I wish to ask your Lordship a question about an indictment which I preferred for a libel moitest a newspaper editor named Dr. Stoddart : the bill was found, but I do nut knew how the case stands. The Lord Chief Justice.—lt has been long out of the paper —do you wish to re-enter it 1 111 r. Ilunt.—As I said, 1 redly do not know what has be come of it. The ca e stood for Waal, and was called on, but when I informed your Lordship that I wished to open the case to the jury. you refused to permit them W be sworn. The Lord Chief Justice.---Yes ; ou the same ground that you cannot 1111(1,e for a criminal information in person. Fvery eri minul procee cling is at the suit of the King, and the prosecutor cannot interfere. Mr. !lieut.—l can show your Lordship cases— The Lord Chief Justice.—At peseta that is the rule of the Court. If you can by ancient cases show that rule to be wrong, come prepared nett term and we will Lear you. At present we can say no more. Mr. Ilunt.-1 am happy to see your Lordship so well after so lung en absence. The Judges then left tier Court. .1% it was the last day of term, they remained until till the motions were disposed or, abide, w ith the application of Mr. Hunt, proloogeu their sit ting until ball-past seven o'clock. FRIDAY, NOV- 29. Sittings after Term, before the Lord Chief Justice. WASTE e. LADY CARR. The plaintiff, furrier to his Majesty, brought this action against Lady Carr, for hating ley the negligence of her coach men, driven leer carriage against the chaise, in con sequence of which the plaintiff and his wife were Orman out and touch injured. The question was whether the accident Lye pei.ed by reason of any improper conduct we the part el Lady Cttrr's see% ants. It appeared, by the evidence, that the defendant's carriage had re.urned to town from Ealing on the 27th of Mn) last. — The defendant's daughter* and Mr. Pereaval,ber seen, were in side. They were driving aleeeeg Piccadilly with the iidentien to go to the carpet warehouse in Leicesterlields. The coachman drove on the left of Piccadilly. 'll lien they reached the Re gent's CIICUA, a hackney-coach was drawing across the street to fall into the coach stand. The coach came on the light side of Lady Cart's carriage, and at the same moment the plaintiff attempted to drive his chaise across the horses heads The coachman pulled up his lonises, and the pole pestling over the wheel of the chaise, overturned it. The plaintiff e.nd his wife were thrown out, and the chaise broken tee pieces. Mr. W. got op with a severe bruise on his eye. Ilia wife leceited a contusion on the head. She was taken up by (me ulltlee persona alto UAW the accident, and was conveyed licence. Mr. IA ay le asked whose carriage it was, and said, do not go away. I in sist on kuowiag whose carriage it is. The coachman gave Mut au answer. He applied to the (outman, but could not obtain • - 31 . 1:14014.: I lON OF TOE MAGIiTRATES OF Do% Eft. Mr. Jervis skewed a6niallt a rale Mei, directing II timbres Corpus to the Captain oi his Majesty's ship Glosce.fer. to tiling up the bodies of two individuals who had been carried on board that ship, under a conviction of the magistratee of Dover on a charge of smuggling, under the provisioes tut the statute .)7 of the late King. Ile admitted that the otreuee hail been committed within the jurisdictiou of the magistrates of toe pont of Folkstone ; and that the conviction of the defendants had talica place before two magistrates of the port of Dover, who, it was contended, had or/jurisdiction ; but be (Mr. Jervis) contended that they had jut isdietiosi. The act gave ynriselictiou to the magistrates withal the liciati of the port in which the best or vessel detected in snot gling should be taken. Mr. Littledale was beard in support of the !Sabena. The Lord Cilia Justice did out consider it necessary to give an opinion on the question, whether the magistrates of Dover had authority to take eogitizance of a smuggling transaction within the Jurisdiction of the magistrates of l!olkstone. In case he had beeu celled upon to decide that question, his opinion would, moat plutlably, have been against the authority exer cised against the magistrates of Dover. The second question io the case was most material, namely, whether the magistrates were mit blend to skew on the face of the conviction that they had the authority they had exercised t—The conviction was had iu cunsequence 01 'bat deficiency, and the writ of Habeas must issue. Judges Bayley, flolroyd, and Best, were oldie same opinion. Rule for the writ of Habeas Corpus wade absolute. BRIDGE STII LET GANG.IIIE KING V. RIDGWAY. Mr. Brougham on a former day obtained a rule to sliew cause why Sir John Sewell, Julio Atkins, Esq. and James Murray, solicitor, should not pay the cosiS to which they had put the defendant by resson of not proceeding to trial at the late Lan evitt r assizes. where they indicted him for perjury, and at an advanced period of the assizes sued out a writ of Certiotari to reions e the proceedin,As. The rule also called on the aforesaid parties to s:iew cause why toe i should awl be gnashed, and the► made pay all the e•penees. Mr. Si rgeaut Itullock thin day 'hewed cause against the rule, hut The court, feeling that the defendant bad been placedlunder circutuatancea of hardship, wade the rule ahaolute. CRIMINAL INEMINIATION. " - • Mr.eresswell moved for leave to file a criminal information against two magistrates of the burottO of New Radnor, in South Wales, for refusing to grant a licence to John Ciitliths, a publican. The uilitlavit of Griffiths, on which the application was made, stated, that during 15 years, previous to October, IsZI, when his license expired, he had kept a politic house in the borough of New Radnor. and having applied to the two gentlemen, who acted an magistrates, they refused to renew his license, stating that they would not iu haute allow more than six licences in the borough. The affidavit weld on to stale the borough to be very extensive. The application was refused. The Common Sergeitiii said lea was instructed to move for leave to file a criminal information against three magistrates in the Weal of England, for corruptly refusing to grunt publicans' licences, but he understood notice had not been given of the motion as required by law. Coder that omission be mentioned the matter, with intention to move neat term. THURSDAY, Nov. 28. THE KING V. THE CM% ERsITY (IF CA IHDRIDGE. Application was made for a Masilames culling upon the ice Chancellor of the University of Csiubridgc to adwit Mr. Jepsuu, as lecturer of mineralogy. The motion was opposed by Sergeant Lens, first on the ground that the lecturer in mineralogy bad no right or interest in that ollice which could entitle hint to call upou the court for a Maidoctirs.—lt was also contended, that as the King was visitor of the University, all complaints relating to the ititernal affairs of the Colleges ought to be made to his Majesty in coun cil. Tile court did not see that Dr. Jepson intended to dis charge the duties of the office, and they direzted au "dada, it to be made on that point, before they proceeded fu:ther iu the matter. ..... Ti:e Solicitor General this day produced the affidavit of Mr. Jepson, in which that gentleman &clued his intention to act iu the professorship of mineralogy, which he considered an odic:, of honour and profit. The Solicitor Ceeeral said it would be necessary to apply to the arguments which hail been urged against the application by his learned brother, Sergeant Lens. —On the first point, namely, that it was not an office of profit giving the applicant any specific right w hich the court could re cognize ; he was prepared to prove it was both an office of hmour and profit, giving the professor a right of appeal to a court of law, lie adverted to the election professors of che mistry, mathematics, mineralogy, music, botany, and anatomy. Those distinctions were always conferred by a inajcrity of votes in the Senate house of the Unisersity. The professors took precedence n . proctors, and on that account it was an office of dignity. The professor of miner logy swore at his election to give lectures, and all who attended his lectures were bound to pay him. In alilition to the emolument thus obtained, he re ceived 1001. from the royal bounty. 'I lie gift was provided for by vote of Parliament; and it had been urgul that on some oc casions Parliament migiA refuse to continue she supply with respect to these professorships ; but if that event should ever I happen, it was out probable that the King would withhold his real bounty.---Ipon the other point, namely, that the King was visitor, and that all appeals lay lu the King in council, it could nut he denied that in two instances apptalsliad be, n made to his Majesty in council, but the applicatiou iii those cases was made by consent of the partite. if the com t felt there was any wi ight in that part of pis I.:arusd ftkod's arguautut the doubt with I MIIII 0