The National Register. — London, England, 1822-10-27 00:00:00

In wittiess.--I do recollect a summons to appear at the 'Washita-house, but I was not present. Did you attempt to lay an information againat the Mr. Gurney interrupted. Waddington—You'll pardon me, Mr. Gurney. I will prove this is a perjured witnesy, sworn upon the four Evangelists ; and ii 1 can prove Lein a perjured man, ~not. to be believed— (drowning the voice of the Chief Justice repeatedly, who at tempted to apeak)—l submit, said Waddington, his erideaee ought not to be taken. Witness--I did prepare to lay an information against him tat did not then do it. Vaddingtou.—Did you not swear? Mr. Curney.-1 object IVaddiugtun.-1 will be heard without any interruption of Coonsel. 1 am legal, and will he beard. I will prove hint a perjured witnehs. kiinws a public !muse iu Devereii%-court, where witoe•s was, nod look refreblinieut, detend,int being there. Mr. Waddington insisted that Gook and other witnesses g ori ld withdraw.—(Orders giveu so to do.) ‘Vaddingtiiii.—Did you not read the pamphlet yon say you bought of the defendant t--I did not. Chief Jastice.-1 cannot say that evidence is relevant. Waddington.—Now, Sir, suppose I should refresh your toes mory— I will tell you what it was. Where was you when this book of Palmer's was purchased 1 This is a time fur asliu2l gllcslloll3. Can you see through that hat ? (holding up a bat.) Now can you see through a sheet of brown paper r Defendant observed be key-boie of the door was blocked up. (Laughter.) You could not see my baud at the spout I—No. Did you ever purchase of myself any book that was libel lous or blasphemous !—No, I never did. IPA you have asked me for the Republican I—Yes. Did I refuse you the book, and you gave me the money ; did you ever receive that book of me t Yes, of you. Do you swear it t-1 have sworn it. Waddington.—Now remember, I have evidence to prove the contrary. The Chief Justice.—l really have my doubts of this man' sanity. Waddington.—O, prove the contrary.---(Laughter.) -•- -:a • • What did you say to me ?—1 said I'd be a friend to you. Waddington.-0, a very good frieud, To the witness.— Did you not strike me ? You called me names. Did you never threaten to blow my brains out ?—No, I said if you was my prisoner I would not soffitr you to go. I would blow your brains out, or any other person's, rather than you should get away. Paper produced is Cook's writing. Waddingtou—l contend these persons are a host of incen diares. Gentlemen, you are my judges ; and whether you find me guilty or not, I will be beard—as it was said when the cities of Sodom and Cmnurah were destroyed—w If there be one virtuous man in the city, let it he saved." The Chief Jastiee.—After what I said of his sanity, let hint proceed. Defendant proceeds—Do you know the White Hart ? Yes. Well, were you not drinking with some notorious pick pockets? No. Did I not accuse you of being a notorious scoundrel, and you asked Inc to drink with you, and I said no, you are a coot- WOO informing rascal t—l rementher soniethiug of your abusiug me. I said I would be a friend to you. Waddington.—Do you mean over the left shoulder ?—(loud laughter.) You may swear any thing, 1 don't care twopence what you swear. He-esatained by Mr. Curney.—The witness said the placard he had been speaking of he copied with a pealed on paper. Ile copied both the placards in the defendant's shop at the same time. The witness having 'Ailed bin inability to recollect when he copied the placards, the Chief Justice repeated the evidence Le had previously given on that point. Witness—Copied these both at one time. Waddington.—My Lord, I wish hi n t to refresh Lis own me snory —lie wants no assistance from you. I don't know what to do where a witness in determined oat sweating falsely. Mr. Smith, Bow-street °Meer, accompanied last witness to defendant's shop ; Duke went with them ; part of it was Mr. Poole's shop. Mr. P. allowed him to remain in bit house durbir4 the day. Duke was stationed on the staircase, for the purpose of observing the house ; he some time after came Jowl', and remained with Mr. Poole and Parton in the parlour. Whilst they were there, Poole's daughter came into the parlour ; in consequence of what she said, the witness and Parton went out. Ile went into Wadilington's shop ; defendant was nut there. Ile saw the names of books written On the wall, with a mini and ha m ; attached it. The witness pulled a bell-rope opposite the book he wanted (Palmer's Principles of Nalare), There was a speaking trumpet which went up by the side of the spout. lie said loudly through the trumpet Have you got this r' lie at the smile time sent up the price allised to the book. The witness put two half crowns in the hag which went up. The defendant was not in the shop at the time, but came in soon after. me wituess had nmt f reel% lit the book when lie name in. W lieu IVaddi. ;Jon came into the shop he offered the witness a chair to sit down. Stonily after the book pur chased came down the spout and fell on the door. The wituess marked it. Cross-examined by Waddington:—lfe said, when the de fendant offered him a chair, he was only in the shop upon pri ♦ate business'. On a fanner day the is itness purchased of the defendant Pope's Universal Prayer. The Lord Chief Justice having interrupted the defendant whilst putting an improper question, lie said. My Lord, I know you sit here as the representative of the King ; but you are well paid for the discharge of your ollicial duties. You are all, from the Judge down to the Crier, Public Szrvants, and we are entitled to have justice." The Lord Chief Justice.—l t is my duty to inform you, when you are putting improper questions, that you are wrong. You are not at It[icily to put questions the law will not allow. Waddington.-1 ask whether he did not swear at Bow street. Lord Chief Justice.—That is a question you cannot ask iii law. Waddington.—Genilemen of the Jury, I have no law, and )Oa are what a situation we are in• - The defendant was proc. citing with irrelevant questions, when he was stopped by Mr. Gurney. in consevence of which he etclaimed--" Mr. Gurney, I will be et en with you this day before I have done with you." 'the witness then said, upon further cross-examination, that the defendant did not give him the hook, nor did the defendant reeeive the looney. Robert Duke went in May ►ast, with Smith and Porton, to the house of Mr. Poole. Ile loosed *Moo gli the key hole of a door up stairs and saw the d, Imiraut mid a little boy. Ile heard at the same time the amind of Smith's voice up the trumpet.— Ile heard him s.ty " have you got that." lie then saw W ad- le!NI . THE NATIONAL REGISTER dington leave the room and go down stairs. lic also heard money chink in his hand. The witness Men joined Smith and Punkin, and went to liuw street for a warrant. Cris•-examined by W thlingtou.—kie said the defendant mi,;!it bare had a huk iu which he kept his motley standing iu an adjoining room. --- Mr. J. l'oule, tobaeoonist, 201, Staand, deposed that the defentle.st took port of the shop in lne house Ise occ•npieJ of a prison natued Clarke. Vs addioaion was 11.. re every day ants; ho went to prison. His name wus painted over the Moir in large letters. Placards were in the window. (lo the Ith of May the officets succeeded iu taking the defendant, Luke and ether (Armors remained hi his parlour. Cross-gament...A by %Viddiu.,, , ,tun—ile admitted that be let the tslheers into his house fur the purpose of taking him. Se sera! pm soils of mean appearance were in the Isalitt of goMg lu Waddinvou's premises. 'clic) sold books, he supposed, as well as Waddington. June Poole, daughter of the last witness, corroborated the evidence giant by the officers. She saw the defendant go into the first fluor of his premises, and she immediately told the officers. Passages from the book were then read. The Solicitor General.—Thin is the case for the prosecution. The defendant, after some preparation, then addressed the Jury. It was not necessary, he said, to tell them who he was. Phis Diavidu ( /Ante)lus Regius), the Attorney General, had taken ou himself to prosecute him fur publishing a hook, which, according to the evidence, he had neither sold nor re ceived mon ey for. As to the merit or demerit of the book he knew nothitig. lie bud never read one line of it. Ile was at a loss to know what lie was prosecuted fur. Let them prove that uny person bud been led away from his duty to God and his country by the hook, and lie would answer for it. Black stone said, a man might be guilty of a crime without knowledge of his offence. Ile certainly stood in • situation of ignorance, before the officers dragged Gin to Bow-street ,where he was committed, nut on the oaths of witnesses that the work was a libel, but the bare opinion of )Ir. Vincent, the Magistrate. Ile called upon the Jury to pause before they gave elect to this es-ujiriuiuforwation, which he considered a relict of the old Star Chamber. Ile reminded the Jury that little credit was to be given to police ollicers since the blood-money conspiracy. Ile was prosecuted by the society for the suppression of vice. of whom the Bishop of Clo,her was one. That man had done more harm to religionythan all the blasphemous publieations in the world. But the Hi hop was • great man , but lam little 11 addington.—Only such wietches as himself were liable to prosecution ;—be was hap;,y to staid Imbue the Jury ; tor, as Paul said to Agrippa, he was glad to answer for I elf. The Lord Chief Justice.—luu had better confute yourself to your own case. iVaddington.—My case, mr Lord, is well known to the Jnry. I wish to say a few words abont other cases—l wish to let the Jury know what the Government and the Bishops are about. The defendant then read a hook, to prove that the Clergy were not honest; but the Lord Chief Justice interfered. sod refused is permit the defendant to make indecent ohservations. One of the Jury said, they were ready to hear the defendant speak for himself, but they had no desire to bear the work he was r..ading. Waddingtnn.—lf a verdict is given against me, the conse quence will be, that sour Lordship will be banded down to posterity as the most tyrannical dredge of the day. After having read several passages of another work, and the Jury expressed a desire not s r hear him, Vie defendant de tailed a violent outrage tarred to hi niu the prison. lie de- Miami offering el idenet, because he would not give the Soli citor-General an opportunity to reply. The Lord Chief Justice gowned up the case with the vent est moderation, and left the Jury to decide upon the ques tion, whether the defendant bad or Lail not published the One of the Jury asked whether any work abusing the Christian religion was unlawful. Ti.e Lord C ief Justine said, the Christian religion WAS part of the law, and t.) abuse it was unlawful. The Jury then found tile defendant Guiliy. Tlll KING P. THE ►SIIARITANT9 Or ST. PANCRAS. The Solicitor General stated, that tin. wee an indictment against the parish of St. Pancras, for not repairing the highway within the west side of the Regent's Park. The Lord ChierJustice.—This is a question of considerable importance; therefore it would be better to take the facts upon admissi.om, leaning the Court to determine time construction °film Act of Parliament. I think Hue woulJ he more satisfactory to the public in a case which tarns upon time construction of ten or twelve clause* 0 , au Act of Parliament. You give such ev deuce as you think proper, and then we shall ere how to dispos of it. itnessea were accordingly examined on the facts, after which the Jury were discharged from tinding any verdict. TOI:Us1311', OCT. 21. MACINfosU, V. OILToN AND CO. Mr. Campbell opened tbelpleadings. Mr. Scarlett stated the plaintiff's case. This was an action to recover a large sum of money fir 1 quantity of alum, sop 'Aim' to the order cf the defendants' agent, whu had absconded. 'rise defeodants pleaded they were not Wide. After the evidence was B one through, Air. Common Sergeant, for defendant, consented to a ver dict fur the plaintiff, agreeing to leas e to a reference such goody as should be excepted in the tonouut proved to ii , tve b e en de livered to defendants. Verdict fur the pisintiff—Monages 4001. subject to ■ refer ence. lIAMSDEN V. ASIPTON. Mr. Campbell opened the pleadings. Mr. Gurney stated that Rini's'len and Sharp, farmers of post horse duty, sought by this action to recover a considerable 2IUUI of money of the defendant, under the act 57 George 111. and another 4 •1, 2.1 George 111. ap. 21, the question turn ing upon the construction of these acts. Forty • ourth Gen. 3d. ch. 8. s. 3. where the distance shell not lie ascertained, and where any horse, mare, or gelding, shall he hired at par mile, then 14. t, per mile shall he paid." The defendant cariird mn the business of letting horses to hire, having *tattles in Gray'. Ina-lane. It was greatly more to the advantage of the stable keeper to pay Is. 9d. for each lime by the day, than to p.•y 10. per mile. The act says, wherever the distance is ascer tained, the duty shall he' paid per mile ; and in this the act is imperative. Now, in cases of funerals, the distance can cud must be ascertained. And in the ett..e of a nobleman's funeral * great way from town, and the title:Omit pay Mg by the day instead of the mile, would be a great loss to the plait/till, unless, as the act directs, that the defendant shall pay a duty of out-fourth of the money he !recites. Then the 9th Anne, c. 23, bas a regulation with respect to hackney coaches with more than two horses. Then the Ist: George I. pi or Me., that nu person shall let any horses to attend any funeral, unless li censed as hackney coach prop worm and if any pension sliJi drive any hackney coach to any funer.d without a uuuttwr stail 3:39 be subject to a penally. Apiet 24th George 111. c. 21, enacts a penalty for every liaeln.y coach plying within ten miler of Temple Bar without ■ number. The 42d George lit. c. 27, gives au exemption front assessed taxes for two horses for each backuey coach ; the other is 43d George 111. Then there are hares fur hackney coaches. Now ut funerals, hackney coaches we see every day, will have four or live horses, the defendant in such ease paying no assessed ditty. The Leetned Counsel contended the plainta, who paid a large auto of mu ey fur farming these duties, was entitled to be ;mid by the defendant fur every extra horse at funerals, as likewise by the mile fur every horse so employed where the journey can be ascertained, otherwise our-fourth of the money received. Mr. Seat-lett-1 he defence we wean to set np in this case is. that persons who travel to be buried don't travel post, and that therefore the plaintiff, as farmer of post duties, has no claim upon us in relyeet to funerals.-- (Laughter.) Lord Chief Justice.—Well, well, we shall see bow that is by the Act of Parliament. Mr. Searlett buboiiiteti that the defendant paid assessed razes for eighteen home, at one guinea a year each, it would there fore be fur the defendant to prove that any other than those horses were so used. N itnesses were examined upon the facts, and the parties ■greed to a verdict of nominal datum:es, with the view of Mill ing the question before the Court in the form of a special case. THE KM V. HOWARD AND GIRNs. This was an indictment against Edward Howard and Job. Gibbs, persons well known tt the public, charging them with a conspiracy, by subille means nod contrivances, to cheat and defraud R M. Darknell, of 11071. The case H as staled by 111 r. Scarlet], and afterwards detailed in evidence. Mr. Dark:nen, the prosecutor, said be was a stationer in St. Martiu's•court. He employed the defendants as agents, to lend out his money to interest. Ile supposed at the time there was a partnership. Ile saw both the defendants doin4 business ; the first transaction was in 1812. In 1817 the defendants re ceived 110/1. as the redemption of annuity granted to the NI ar gusts of Silo, by vvituess. lle applied fur the money, but obtain it. One of the defendunta pointed to a bundle of papers. and said, " 1 have his father's. will." The witness said, " what is the 11. e of that, I want my money 1" They promised the money several times—and one of them said--"ph, my boy, we have done the Illarlborim A b annuity for you." The witness saw Cildni several times, and always expressed complaints that he was not paid the .Marquis of Sligo's money. They repeat edly told him of the Duke of Marlborough's annuity, and on one occasion Gibbs threw down a bank note toy one thousand pounds exclaiming " look at that, my boy !" The witness said " then you can pay me." lie promised he woold pay the wit neon the next morning, provided he would not tell the other annuitants. They never did pay him, hut expended his money in the purchase of the Duke of Marlborough's annuity, which became invalid by a decision of the Lord High Chancellor. The witness, on his cross examination, said he bad been in bu siness forty years. He lirst employed the defendants in 1812. They got ham II per cent for his money for four yenrs. The plaintiff never gave them any general authority to lay out Ilia Marquis of Sligo's money. lie signed the debenture for the annuity in April, The Snlieitur-General addressed the Jury, and I Wit- IlelifeS were then called in support of the delendants' case, and after an able charAe from the Lord Chief Justice, the Jury ac. quitted both the titientbisiOl. FRIDAY, OCT. 2S. au lb au to OI bt Pt w t : s Waddington.-0 What did you 'a; Waildin4ton.-0 Did you not strike r Did you never till if you was my priso blow your brains o should get away. Paper produced i addingtou —I diares. Gentlemen, find me guilty or im cities of Sodom an one virtuous man in The Chief Jastiec proceed. Defendant procce Well, were you pockets No. Did I not accuse you asked Inc to di WOO informing rascal sue. I said I would Wad dingion.—D laughter.) You no what you swear. Re-examined by he had been speakin copied both the pla time. The witness havii copied the lilac:trill he had previously gi i taess—Copied Waddington.—M snory —lie wants no do where a witness i Mr. Smith, Bow- defendant's shop ; 1 Poole's shop. Mr. P the day. Witte was of observing the he remained with Mr. they were there, Pe consequence of who out. Ile went into there. Ile saw the a nord and hag al opposite the book la There was a speakio spout. lie said In this r' lie at the book. The witness up. The defendant in soon after. Tile came in. N 1 lieu VI the witness • chair chased came down t marked it. Cross-examined I Pendant offered him ♦ate business. On defendant Pope's 1:i The Lord Chief J whilst putting an i know you *it here a are well paid for th are all, thou the Jud we are entitled to he The Lord Chief./ you are putting imps are not at lawny to Waddington.—l street. Lord Chief Jostle law. Waddington.—Cl you are what • situ, The defendaut w whet' he was stoppe, La etclaimed--" before I have done v The witness then the defendant did nc receive the money. Robert Duke wet the house of Mr. Po door up stairs and so at the same time the Ile heard him 'Ay TIIE KING V LoDGE AND ANOTHER. Titis was a proceeding upon a writ of fieri fascias, at the in stance of Salmon ;old tidy, truss-makers, in the Strand, to de pri•e the defendants of the patent they had obtained for a double spring truss, on the ground that Mes•rs. Salmon and 04 had obtained a patent for the same invention in 1811. B,.•reral a finesses were called to prose time truss invented by the defendants, and for which they obtained a patent in 1818. WWI the invention of Salmon and Ody. On the part of time defendants, Dr. Carper, antl several emi• pent medical men, staled that the truss of Mr. Lodge and his partner u as unlike the instrument invented by Salmon and Ody ; but time Jury, under ali tile circumstances, Wound a verdict foe the Crown, chick determines the patent right to be is Messrs. Salmon and OJy YeI:RRAY V. LORD STAIR. ° this was an action upon a bowl fur 20001. executed by the noble defendants. The Solicitor General stated, that the plaintiff was a British officer, aho brought this action as the representative of Isis farer, to recovei the amount of a bond fur 20001. The father of Mr. Torrey, who was an army agent, received from Cul. Morgan two hills of exchange, accepted by Lord Stair, whilst he was Mr. Dalrymple, and these hills having been given sp, the noble defenilaut executed the bond in question. The bond was then put in and proved. Mr. Scat lett, as counsel for the noble rLfendent, said he had two grounds of defence to the action. First he should prove Vie bills upon which the bond was founded were given to dis charge a gaming debt at Paris. Secondly, the bills were nut to take effect before the death of the late Earl of *stair. It would appear tint the bills were negoeiated and made iitailable previous to tlio death of the late Lord Stair, and on that ac count the transaction was invalid. r,e present Lord Stair, when Mr. Dalrymple. in 1507, was in Paris. seal has iug en gaged in play with a Count Lieben. he lost 20001. Ile gave bills fur the same in the name of 31andeville, which Were after witads withdrawn, and others substituted by a Mr. Dodd, since Sir A. Dodd. The uo'de defendant gene oilier bills tu Mr. Dodd, which afttrwatils became the fouudation of the bond. It would appear from the statement that the plaintiff could not re cover, as the whole was a transaction arising out of a gambling debt. The learned counsel then called Sir Alexander Dodd, who 'list he was present in Paris when Mr. Dalrymple lost to Count Liehen, tdayin..., at dice, in the house of • restaursieur, the sum of 2110JI. This circum stance happened in Ibo 7, and Mr. Dalrymple gate two bills of es.cli , inge for lOdOI. Etch. The noble defendant at that time tinselled under the assumed name of Mandeville, and gave the bibs in that 113111 e. I t was idle& wards considered ac irregularity. 'flue bills weie withdrawn and others sninitiluted by Mr. Dodd. New bills were then gi•ru hy Lord Stair, which got into the hands of Colonel blorgan, suit nnally into the bands of the plaintiff rather. Lord Stair afterwards took back the bills, and gave • bond. After life evileure of Sir A. Dodd, a verdict eras taken for the plaintiff—Darnages one w ith !inert., to inure for notofuil ou 'point of law. The late Mr:. Girrick cooscions of her apw pro,Oling dissultition, that she ordered the sheets which were the bed when Lutrirh died, sad which were scrupulously ouseited by her, to be aired uti put upon the bed. Whilst the tiers mit wits doing this the cat: Ling .spited iu leer ckait. 1 ,s, . > _ ~.