The National Register. — London, England, 1822-06-16 00:00:00

LAlf INTELLIGENCE. COURT OF OF KING'S BENCH. MONDAV,JVNE W. THE KIND V. JACKSON, SEN. AND JACKSON, JUN. This was an indictment against the defendants, tither and son, charging them with conspiracy to sue out a com mission of bankruptcy. The case has already beeu before the public. Jackson, the younger, for a sum of money, was admit ted as a partner in the business of Mr. Fox,• surgeon, &c. hi liishopsgaie-street. Some time after, whilst he was a debtor to Mr. Fox, the father made him a bankrupt, and this pioseceitiou commenced on the ground that the de fendants fabricated debts alleged to be 'hue from the father to the son, for the purpose of supporting the com mission. The Jery, on the trial, found the defendants Last Term, the Solicitor General moved for a new trial, chiefly on the ground that a material document had been found since the conviction, which would alter the blush of the case. This was no other than a receipt for expences the father had been at in binding his son by indenture, which, Milk money advanced to 1 to carry on business, and ,1001. fur which lie had his sou's bond, suede out the ainount of the petitioning debt. Elie Cunt t grained a rule to chew cause, and this day it was opposed hs Mr. Seas lett, who contended, that the production of the doc 1111 l ent alluded to by his learned friend would not have altered the verdict, as the Jury would not have given credit for snore than the 4001. proved by time sou's bond. The Lord Chief Justice considered this a case which ought to he submitted to the Jury in every point of view, and the Cuurt, under all the circumstances, ordered the rule to be made absolute for a new trial. WEDNESDAY, JUNE 12. LETS U. REV. C. \TIMONE, D.O. AND - ROLITEN, MM. This was an action of trespass brought against the de fendants, who ale magistrates of the county of Nottingham, for false imprisonment of the plaintiff. It appeared in evidence, on the trial before Mr. Justice Park, at the last simmer assizes, that the plaintiff was, on the 12th of Sep lumber, ItrtO, committed to the county gaol on the war rant of Dr. Wvide for further examination, and was detained till the lith, in the Idol's' yard, when lie under went another examination, at the keeper's house. Ott the 2 ith he was sent, by order of Dr. Wylde, to the House of Col rection ; and afterwards Mr. Moisten came to speak with him on the subject of the charge, at his own desire. Application was made by his attorney to see him ; but Dr. ylde refused to grant it, saying, `• We will not suffer any to see him till he is fully committed for trial." His daughter also applied to Dr. Wylde, in Mr. Rolsten's presence, fur liberty to see him, and for permission that his attorney might attend him; but the answer given was, that his dearest friend should not see him until he was fully committed, and then all attornies and counsel might come at their pleasure; that they knew lie had not dune it of his own head, and they would soon have those who set him on. A Habeas Corpus was granted by Mr. J tts• tics Bayley, the commitment being bad, with some ex pression of a hope that the magistrate would admit him to bail in the country, and save him further expellee; but on hearing it, Dr. Wylele said he would never bail him till he was compelled so to do. Ultimately lie was brought to London, after lying in prison three months, and dis charged by Mr. Justice Bayley on giving four sureties in 2501. each. At the following assizes, a bill was found against him, but no prosecutor appeared, and he was ac quitted. On this evidence Mr. Justice Park said there was nothing to go to the Jury against Mr. Moisten; and as he thought the Jury st rind that there was a joint trespass or none, lie nonsuited the plaintiff. In a former teem, Mr. Common Sergeant obtained a rule to skew cause why this nonsuit should not be set aside, and a new trial granted. Mr. Clarke now showed cause against the rule, contend ing that there was no evidence whatever to affect Mr. Moisten, and that it would be extremely unjust to force him to a second trial. The Common Sergeant, in snpport of the rule, urged that there was evidence of concert which ought to be sub mitted to the consideration of the Jury. Mr. Rolstea concurred in the refusal to admit the prisonet's friends, and was apparently acting throughout with Dr. wylde, a. they were arm in arm when the daughter met them. Although Mr. Rolsten did not join in the original commit ment, or iu the change of custody, yet if he concurred in the continuance Of the impriso iiiii ent, lie was liable, fur every days detention, with a fresh trespass. This ap peat IA to be an attempt, by duress, to obtain some com munication front the party accused, which wits most COIF rary to the spirit or the British law. The Lord Chief Justice, after conferring with the other Judges, said, that the Court who were anxious only to do justice to all patties, thought the plaintiff ought to have the opportunity of sub ' g his cape to a Jury against Dr. 11 'y but that it would be improper to put Mr. Itulsten to the expeace of a defence. Against him there was no evidence, because a refusal to give an order for the admission of a visite, to a prison could never be the ground of a trespass. They would, therefore, set the nun suit aside, if the counsel for the plaintiff would consent to enter a nulle prosevii as to Mr. Mitten, and they would give him time to reflect, and to confer with his client on the proposal. TUESDAY, JUNE 11. THE KING v. PALMER AND PARE. The defendants, Henry Palmer and Thomas J. Palk, appealed on. the floor to receive sentence, having been convicted at the last Surrey assizes °fa conspiracy to in duce Sir Thomas Chanipneys Hart. to accept bills of exchange to the amount of and to give a war rant of attorney. in one instance a bill of 5001. was obtained for a canteen, described to be of great value, and otigi :tally part of the plate equipage of Prince Beauliartiois.— Other bills to the amount of 1,504. for claret and sherry write, a horse, gold snuff-box, 6,:c. The *hole transaction, on the part of the defendants, was a cheat and fraud upon the pro,ecutor. Mr. Watford prayed the judgment of the Court. Judge Best read the nun's of the trial, from which it app , ared that Sir Thos. CJtampneys being in the King's /tench in want of money, Palmer brought I' he canteen as Ike property of Park, which was stated to have been bought at the Custoni-house for 4801., and could riot be made in England for 500 guineas. Sir Tiros. Cliamptieys gave a bill for 5001. which went into the bands of Park to pay for the eastern. He also gave a warrant of attorney. Tile rani was then hawked about by Palmer, for the purpose of raising Looney. Sir Cliainpurys, L'utvevor, THE NATIONAL REGISTER received no more than 1001. The next transaction was the acceptance of bills to the amount of 1,5001. for which he was to have fifty dozen of claret, a large trustily of sherry, and two bills of exchange. Sir T. Champneys wee also to have a horse worth 100 guineas, and a gold snuff box worth 150 guineas, which were offered as an induce- I meat to accept the bills. The Jury found the defendants guilty. The defendant Park put in a long affidavit, stating that the canteen was worth 500 guineas. Ile gave it to Palmer to sell, and it passed to Sir T. Champueys, who raised 1001. upon it. The deponent wished to get it back, but he had never been able to obtain it, so that he was the loser, having never made use of the bills. Several respectable persons gave Park the character of an honest man. Henry Palmer stated in his affidavit, that Sir Thomas Champneys made the bills payable by persons who- had given him no authority fur that purpose. He advanced him 100 guineas, which had never been restored. He had only received 201. to pay for the stamp, which he found for the bills of exchange. After the bills were not paid, lie requested to have the property restored, offering to give back the bills. The property never was restored. Sir T. Champneys had sustained no loss or inconvenience. He had given nothing but bills, and had received 100 gni• neas. The deponent described himself to be t 5 years of age, and formerly employed in the transport service. Other affidavits were read, which gave Palmer a good character. Mr. Gurney, as counsel for Park, addressed the Court in mitigation, and made severe observations uu the con duct of the prosecutor, Sir 'l'. Champneys. Mr. Comp) followed on the same side. Mr. Watford, in aggravation, defended the character of Sir T. Champneys, and deprecated the attempt made by the defendants, whom be termed sharpeis, to injure that gentleman's character. Mr. Adolphus also complained that the character of Sir r T. Champneys had been unjustly aspersed. Mr. Justice Bayley, in passing judgment, considered I Sir 'l'. Champueys a weak man, who had been duped by the defendants. The latter, he said, had returned all the bills, and the warrant of attorney, so that Sir 'l'. Champ i Heys was not liable. That circumstance induced the Court not to inflict the fine. The sentence of the Court was, that the detendants be imprisoned in the House of Correction, Coldbatti-fields, four calendar months. LOltD SONDES O. IFLLTCHER„ The Solicitor General moved to set aside the damages assessed by the Jury in this case, on the ground that the verdict fur 10.0tiol. was more than the circumstances could warrant.—lt was an action on a bond, in which the defendant had covenanted, to give up possession of an advowson, of which the noble plaintiff was lay proprietor. 1 lie breach was, that the defendant had refused to quit the living, being desirous of doing the duty. The Solicitor General proved on the trial, that the life interest of Mr. Fletchir was worth no more than 7,0001., and he contended, on this occasion, that the Jury were nut justified in giving more than that mom. The Court were of opinion that the verdict ought not to be disturbed, observing, that the rev. defendant might re lea e himself by giving up the living. - . TIIURNI)A If, JUNE 13. THE SING V. A MAGIbTHATI OF NOTTINGIIA3f. Mr. Sergeant Vaughan moved. fur a rule to show canoe why a criminal information should not issue against a ma gistrate of the comity of Nottingham. lie did this on affidavits, which set forth that the magistrate had taken upon himself to convict an individual, under 1 Geo. IV. for inflicting summary punishment for malicious mischief, whose offence consisted in removing a batik which ob structed a way previously dedicated to the public. The learned Sergeant argued that the circumstances loader which this was done sufficiently proved that the magis trate had been actuated by corrupt motives. The Court were of opinion, that no sufficient ground was laid to warrant them in calling on the magistrate to answer the charge. In order to induce them to put any genUeman in the commission of the peace to the anxiety and expellee of showing cause against a rule of this kind, a prima facie case of corruption must appear on the afßda. vas of the prosecutor. But here it was perfectly Cll. with those affidavits, that a great deal of evidence Oil the usher aide might have been before the magistrate, and on which he might have acted. At the same time. by refusing this application, they did not prejudice the party who considered himself aggrieved, in the pursuit of any of his ordinary remedies. MR. CHARLES MURRAY, HOW. SEC. TO THE "CONSTI- 1 IITION•L ASSOCIATION." The Solicitor General showed cause against the rule obtained last term by Mr. Botch, calling on Mr. Murray to show why lie should not render an account of monie.•, and pay over a balance to John de Wolfe and William► de Wolfe. or to the original owners of the vessel called the A regt rosoia. Mr. Justice Bayley here suggested that justice would be best dune to both parties by a reference. The Lord ChiefJcistice enforced the recommendation of a reference as the best course, whether the present rule could or could not be snpported. The rule and all mattes@ in difference were then referred to Mr. Alderson, with power to enter into the whole me rits, whether lie should think the rule sustainable or not, allil to snake such inlet locator, orders as be should think 6t• COURT OF COMMON PLEAS. ssuNILLY, JUNE 10. NIGHTINGALR O. HIRST. Mr. Sergeant Pell applied for a rule to thew cause why the defendant should hot pay the plaintiff's Costs In this case, under the statute 43d Geo, 111. It appeared from affidavits produced by the learned Set grata, that the de fendant had been arrested for a satin of VOL, that the plaintiff had only recovered S.A., and that NOl,, had for. nterly been paid on account. In the plaintitra demand a bill of exchange for 1001. had been included, and the defendant .toted it as his belief that tkc plaintiff was not possessed of this bill until after the action was commenced. The Court vented the rule. WEhiNESDAY, JUNE CLANK O. BROOKS. The plaintiff, a licensed vitualler, brought his action against the defendant, to recovt r t ii. and a fraction, which the defendant had received fur hint, and bad re fused to pay over. The defendant is one of those persons who, not being attorneys, are allowed by the least respectable of those who are admitted to practice in their names, and the chief out of the tletuautt, tuntottutiug to UI. Lie., was let a debt received by the defendant film a person named Sutherland, who, being sued by the plaintiff, had signed a rognetrit. The remainder was for a quantity of spirits sold to another person by the plaintiff. The defendant also received that bill upon application. Sergeant Pell contended, on the part of the defendant. that Brooks never received any money for the plaintiff in• the character of his attorney. He was no attorhey, but clerk to Mr. Isaacson, who acted as plaintiff's attorney. It was true the money was paid into hi% hands as Isisaeson'il clerk, bet Isaacson had the money, and to him the plain tiff ought to look for payment. With respect to the other transactions, au endeavour was made to prove that the plaintiff was indebted to the defendant a• balance arising out of business done. The plaintiff's case was conducted by Sergeant Vaughan. He resisted the defence as a trick, got up to defeat the claim of a fair tradesman, who was not so well acquainted with the chicanery of law. The Jury, under all the circumstances, found a verdict for the plaintiff for the whole of his demand. PREROGATIVE COURT, WEDNESDAY. June 12. WILL OF HIS LATE MAJESTY. Dr. Enshington this day renewed his application to the Court in behalf of the claims of Princess Olive of Cum berland, under a testamentary propounded, purporting to • be a bequest of 1.3,0001. The learned Advocate went through a long and elaborate deduction of authorities, from the reign of Henry the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth. which had furnished cases in point, with the opinion of Sir Edward Coke and other lawyers, that the right of be queathing private or personal property was inherent in the Sovereign. The following is the 51d:stance of this curious document :— " We, by this paper, to which we hereunto set our royal sign Mi MIMI, do give and bequeath unto Olive, daughter of our royal brother of Cumberland, 16,0601.; iluid we command our heirs and successors, after our de mise, to pay the same to the use of our said niece, as si• regompence for the injury she may receive by keeping the marriage secret." The attesting witnesses to this instrument were stated' to be the late Earls of Warwick, Chatham. and Mr. Dun ning, afterwards Lord Ashhanton. Mr. Dickinson, ste— ward to the Earl of Warwick and Mr. Vancouvro, proved , the genuineness of the Eel I's attestation, as did Mr. Lloyd, an attorney, that of Lord Chatham, and Mr.Grilfin,seany years clerk to Mr. Dunning, his signature. That the Earl of Warwick delivered this instrument into her hands, in presence of the Duke of Kent, explaining other ,eir commences attending the transaction, and hiss being charged so to do by his late Majesty, 'The instrument was dated in the year 1774, and the learned Doctor said • it was important that this was before his Majnaty bad' been visited by any mental affliction. So confident dill the individual hes self,nsid three respectable persons who had supported her, feel in the justice ottiev.ciaim, that, as the Court were aware, she had adopted a mode of pro ceeding which, should •lisat claim sot be substantiated, would lay her Habits to a criminal prosecution for forgery and perjury. Application had, in the first instance, been made to Isis Majesty?* Government, but they had wholly declined to interfere in the case. The only question now to be considered was, whether it came under the juriadigo lion of that Court. He had the same high antlinsiffraord Coke) on the atsrmative side but, had lag no such autho rity, wisely it could not br for ;0-moment doubted that f right of decision existed; with which the Act providing that the King may die intestate would be rendered ntid• and void. Mr. Dodson was about to follow, when His Majesty's Advocate held a short conference with. Dr. Lushingtou, after which Dr. Loshingtonsaw}-understanding that a eery lot portant communication had just been made to his Majes ty's Counsel, and which regarded the interests of his client, he would beg the Court to permit the case to stand. over till next cuort day.—Ortlereil. Within the last week, not I , mts than II horses.. studied to the stage coaches between London and. Cheltenham, actually sunk beneath the extremes_ heat, and dropped lifeless on the road. DARING ROBBERY.—Om Tuesday morning, about half past three o'clock, a mo►t daring and alarming rob. fiery was committed in the house of Mrs. Osbourite, 4g, Green -street, Hyde Pcrk. Mrs. O,buurne, who is a widow lady, and resides in the house alone witiva females attendant, and had, she supposed, only just mopped asleep, when a sudden glare of light passing across the upper part/of her face awoke her, and she saw a man standing. at her bed-side, in the act of examining ber face to ascertain whether she was asleep, with a dark lanaern. She gave a scream, but the ruffian ittiasediately • clapped a pistol to her head, and with dreadful oaths and imprecations swore he would send her to h....if she made the least alum, and demanded all her rnoney...--i- Mrs. Osbourue, as soon as she could recover her voice. and senses. which were completely overpowered with. terror, said, " For God's sake do'nt harm me, and I will give you all I have," and handed the robber • her pockets, containing two 101. notes, some sovereigns, and silver. At this moment the female servant, who slept in . the next room, being awoke by the scream, and heariog her :Distress speak, called out, asking whether she wanted any thing. The robber, on hearing her voice, .started, instantly closed the lantern, and darted out of the moa► down stairs, and let hlmselt out at the front dour. The servant immediately got up, and opening the window, saw the fellow romung; she called the watch, but the thief eluded pursuit, by jumping over the Park wall.— - An investigation into the circumstances took place at Marlborough street, and Plank, the officer, stated, that the thief had made an entrance by cutting a round piece out or the kitchen door, jest under the bolt, and evidendy_ had reconnoitred the house before night, as round the place front which the piece was cut had been and was marked ru as not to come in contact with the bolt, but immediately under it; and front tither material circumstances, the ()dicer was of opinion that the thief must have been well experienced in similar offences.— Mrs. o,botitne is a very infirm old lady, and has been seriously indisposed bIILCC Ilse rubbery, ocvasioned by ca. cessive tutor.