The National Register. — London, England, 1818-01-18 00:00:00

JAN. le. RIOTS IN LONDON. COURT OF KING'S BENCH, THURSDAY, JAW. 15. (Special Juries.) BECKWITH V. BRIDGES AND ANOTHER. An action on the Ist Geo. I. c. 12, commonly called the Riot Act. The first count of the declaration stated, that on the 2d of December, 1816, diverse persons, being in num. lee 12 or more, unlawfully, riotously, and tumultuously, aesseehled together in the parish of St. Sepulchre, and unlaw fully demolished, and began to demolish, the house of the plaintiff. The second count set out certain goods, the pro perty of the plaintiff, injure& destroyed, and carried away. On the part of the plaintiff, Mr. Gurney stated, that the present action, as prescribed by the very wholesome statute on which it was founded, was brought against two of the respectable inhabitants of the ward, who would not be called upon to pay the sum recovered ; it would be collected by a general rate upon the hundred. It was unnecessary to enter into a detail of the particulars of those riots, so disgraceful to the persons concerned in them, and so injurious to the property of many individuals in the line of streets through which the rioters proceeded. The attack commenced upon the house of the plaintiff, a gun smith in Skinner-street, for the object of the infamous disturbers of the public peace was to arm themselves so as to be able to inthnidate the peaceable subjects of the King into submission, or to resist any attack that might be made upon them by the military. Young Watson, of whom so much had been heard, and who had unfortunately escaped justice, first entered the shop of the plaintiff, demanding arms; anti on meeting with remon. *trance by Mr. Platt, a customer, he drew a pistol, and shut that gentleman ; he was secured, and the mob instantly com menced an attack upon the house, breaking in the windows, both wood and brass work, declaring, that they would dee molish the house completely if their leader were not restored to them. The damage done to the house amounted to 611. Is. 4(1. A certain number of the arms taken away had here' restored, but greatly injured ; and the value of them, in their deteriorated sten-, was 3031 13s. 6d. The value of the guns, pistols, Sec. of which no tidings had since been obtained, was 9111. 19s, ; making, in the whole, 1,2811. 13s. 10d., the amount the plaintiff sought to recover by this action. Huber- ' the foreman of the plaintiff, preyed maw facts already before the public, relative to the attack noon the plaintiff's shop. Young Watson came in demanding" Arms! Anus!" and the mob re-echoed the cry. When he was taken, some of the rioters exclaimed, "We will pull the b—y house down, we will have him out." They beva their att ick i 111 l mediately. This relation was confirmed by Mr. Lydiard, alto also proved that several of the crowd threatened to demolish the house. J. H. li mgliton, J. Hunt, and C. Jones, tradesmen employed in repairing the injury, proved that their various bills amount p.l to 611. Is. 4.1. Mr. Parker, Mr. llortimer. and Mr. Nock, three gun smithsoleposed that the sum of 3031. 13s. O. for gnus, Lee. damaged, and' 111. 19s. for such as had been taken away and never returned, was reasonable. The Common Ser4eaut, on behalf of thi defendants, con fidently a relied that the plaintiff had no pretense for claim ing 1,2811. ander the Riot Act, which provided, (in conse quence 44 nnmerous disturbances and destructions of meeting houses,44-usat the time it was passed,) that the party injured 'humid have his remedy against the hundred, if the mob either demolished or began to demolish the dwelling house of the plaintiff. II had )seen decided in many cases, that in order to supper. this action, it must arise out of a felony corn. milted eatvessly under the act ; tile proceeding of the mob must he dt:ected to the demolition of the house, and if the rioters lad any other purpose in their attack, the action could tint be maintained. Here. it seemed clear that the design was to obtain arms in the first instance, and afterwards to liberate their leader, young Watson ;and if they plundered the shop, that was a felony, but a felony of quite a different kind : it was a burglary, and was punishable as a burglary, Mid the sidle, ing party could obtain no compensation from the hundred. For this reason the plaintiff could not recover for tle arms stoke, though he might perhaps, for those daunt ed. In Griesley v. Higginbotham (I East. 1:16) the Court of King 's Bench had held, th at a baker suing under the Riot Act. coud not obtain damages for a quantity of flour which had been stolen from his premises daring a riot, in which his premises were assailed and injured. Lord Ellenborough.—'There no damage was done to the building, containing the flour stolen ; that case Las no rela tion to this—it is not ad ;dera. You had better open the book at random, and mote from it what first presents Itself. Mr. Tindal, t with the Common Sergeant) read the note of the case in oi (14. r to convince his Lordship that he was mis taken ; it appeared that considerable damage had been done to the building to which the warehouse from whence the flour was stolen was a lean-to ; but it was held by the Court, that th. plaintificouhl not recover for the Hour stolen inasmuch a- that was a distinct felony independ. nt of stet. I. Geo. I. ; he culled have ,damages only for that a hick was destroy. (1 ur dannived. He further mentioned a case before Mr. Jui-tier Le Blanc at York, where that Judge had decided, that a party could not recover for furniture etoleffilirom dwelling house that bad been begun to be demolished iu a riot. Lord Elleahcreough.—lf it were unconnected with the act of demolishing, I should certainly be of the same opinion. I he Comunn Sergeava further referred to Read v. Clarke, (7 'l'. R. 406 )'for the partial demolition of the house of a Quaker, who would net illuminate for one of the victories of Lord St. Vincent. Lord Eliesibuion4ll.—l was counsel in the cause, and I re collect that it was held hut to be a beginning to demolish, because having the power to demolish if they chose, the crowd went away without prosecuting their purpose; they abandoned it altogether. The C )))))) non Sergeant added, that in Lord King v. Chain. hers, the same point haul been determined: Lord Elleatborongh then observing, " the acts of the mob must indicate a purpose to demolish the house." In the present case, the purpose was slot to demolish the house, but to obtain arous and to liberate their leader. Lord Elleeborough referred to the evidence of Holm and Lydia' (I, for the declinations of the tioters, remarking that the (pies:ion was. su hole r iheir purpose was MI Ili Will down and dillindlsit the house, had they not been paciffe l t by Ica' Mee that yon tug Watson bad made his escape ? They ut general contemp,.. lima of that u:du Is came ithiti the Act.l Hni Loral. ship add.•4l. that he ;Would ropuest the jury to divide the damaee• or the aims iejereal Keil fur those stoked iuu order 'Apt th. c.,,,m.03 Surat oil wickt afterwards, it InS thought ca,s,t ' T ot. 11,41:s it yiss clear upon the evi. duce that t 14: abtus returned Le :hue were oho KO in THE NATIONAL lIEGISTER. such a way, with splinters of glass, &c. as to show that they had been used as a means of demolition of this windows, dec., the jury would infer that those not returned (or stolen, as the Counsel on the other aide contended) had been employed for the same purpose. The Common Sergeant insisted that there was not sufficient evidence to show even that the arms returned to the plaintiff had been used in demolishing the house of the plain. tiff. That they had been so used afterwards to other houses would not bring them within the Act. Mr. Robert Newman was then called, in order to show, that the plaintiff had treated the fact of taking the arms as a substantive felony. For this purpose lie produced the record of the conviction of Cashman; but on cross-examination he said that the prisoner was prosecuted by the city of London, not by the plaintiff. Lord Ellenborough declared, that if the fact were shown to be otherwise,lit would make no difference. Though a man might have been indicted for the felony and convicted, it did not fix the character of the offence as applied to others. It was no less a felony because it was accompanied by other and higher crimes ; in Mr. Hutchins's case it was not less a robbery because t hat robbery was followed up or perpetrated by •der. Mr. Gurney, In his reply, called upon the jury, that the arms lost, valued at 9111. were all takes for the purpose of demolition, although they might be applied afterwards to other purposes. Lord Ellenborough summed up, and observed that by the Riot Act, that which before was a mere trespass at common law, had h , en erected into a felony, for the more effectual protection of private property. Of course the remedy by action against the offenders was taken away, awl that against the hunched (all the inhabitants being as it were pledges for the good behaviour of each other) was given in its stead.— The primary object had been to obtain arms ' • afterwards to obtain the * liberation of young Watson; and it seemed lin. doubted by the witnesses, that bail lie not escaped, the mob would have demolished the house. The arms they used as instruments of destruction against the building, and they were not taken away for the mete purpose of obtaining as much money as they would sell for. The jury dividrd the damage as stated in 'he opening of Mr. Gurney ; but they expressed a clear opinion, that the arms were all taken in prosecution of the purpose of demoli- I tion. Verdict for the plaintiff, damages 1,2811. 13i. 10d. ONSNDEIt AND POTTS V. WOOD AND ANOIIIER. An action, precisely similar, brought by the plaintiffs, who are gunsmiths in the Nliuories. They claimed 7521.105. II d. ; being 621. 2s. sd. for the repair of the dwelling house, 311. I Is. 6d. for damanaged guns, am. and 6551. L. for arms taken away. The Common Serjeant again urged his argument, that the purpose was not demolition, but the prorating of arms ; hut Lord Elleuborough was of a contrary opinion, and the jury concurring with his Lordship, a verdict war found tar the REA •. SAM?. In this case the plaintiff, also a ginismith in the Minories, recovered 9.121. Is. 441. It appeared iu evidence that neither the plaintiff nor any of his servants lived in the house, and the Common Sergeant contended that it was not therefore " his dwelling house," as alleged iu the ileclaration. Mr. Gurney, on ie other hand, prodneed a lease to the plaintiff's father, and the probate 411 his will it to his son ; but Lord Elletiborough seemed to be of *pluton that it did not satisfy the alle:lation; he, however, saved the point, and the plaintiff obtained a verdict subject to the discussion DEATH OF MIL ROSE. At his seat, Cuffnells, Hants, on Tuesday morning, the Right Hou. George Rose. He had for some months been in a ♦ery ill state of health, from which his advanced age afforded no reasonable hope of recovery. He was, we believe. little short of eighty. He was a gentleman of extensive informa tion, and of practical experience in all commercial, financial, and official subjects : he rose from his own merits and in dustry alone to some of the moat lucrative and important offices in the State. He was Treasury of the Navy, President of the Board of Trade, Clerk of Parliament, Keeper of the Records in the Receipt side of the Exchequer, one of the Lords of his Majesty's Privy Council, an Llder Brother of the Trinity House, Verderer of the New 'Forest, Hants, and Member of Parliament for the town of Christchurch. He was a native of the Mearns (Kincardineshire), and was first a steward, and afterwards a purser in the Royal Navy. At an early period in his life his arithmetical talents and eaten ! sive financial knowledge recommended him to the particular atteution of the Earl of Shelburne (aficrwards the Marquis of Landsdowne), who was then First Lord of the Treasury, and he was soon after appointed one of the Secretaries to the Treasury, but resigned on the formation of the Administra- tion of Lord North and Mr. Fox. On the subSequesit eleva tion to the Premiership of his friend and patron, William Pitt, he was again appointed one of the Secretaries to the Treasury, and continued as senior in that important situation for many years. On the retirement from office of Mr. Pitt and his political adherents, Mr. Rose resigned his situat ion, and was shortly after sworn of the Privy Council. He was subsequently, on the return of Mr. Pitt to office, one of the Paymasters-General of the Forces ; and on the dismission of the Whig Administration from power in Wan, Mr. Rose wa s appointed Treasurer of the Navy, which office he held to she time of his death. Latterly, the important office of Presid rut of the Board of Trade aus chiefly executed by the Right Hon. Frederick Robinson. The lucrative situatiosi of Clerk of Parliament was several years since conferred out Mr. Rose (with the reversion to his eldest son, George it Rose, Esq, M.l'. fur Southampton, And now Minister to the Court of Berlin), as au ultorior i r roision. The other siluationsabove. mentioned, of which that of President of the Board of Trade, that of Verderer of the New Forest, and the Keepership of the Records, become vacant by his demise. As Cleat of Pal liament, Mr. Rose will be succeeded by his son ; as Pre sident of the Board of Trade, by Mr. Robinson; and as Treasurer of the Navy probably by the Right Hon. Charles Arbuthnot. FnaNcit MODESTY .—A letter from Paris mentions tin amus.ng instance of legislative ambition. When the CuPillittee on the Reectiiiing , Law cause to elect a Reporter (or %what we should hrry d eo c te laiite, a Chair man) e ach of the ;line Mu bens voted for hinarY; secondfttial prixluccd the slama. result ; and tits+ third might hove ended in the like fruitless way, but that some one individual of less i ordinate vanity titan his ucir]hbours transferred his vote to General IY:lnarn- E,':•L'.) area vas in consequence elected. Front the LONDON GiIZETTE, Tuesday, Jan. 13. --wt..- BANKR VPTS. WIoXEY G. A. and SEYMOUR G. Chichester. grocers, Jan. 2G, 27, Feb. 24, at Chicb".r. AO. Mr. Hume. Ilolbom-couit, Gray's Inn. HEWLETT W. Sollwell. Glocester, fa truer, Jan. 27,28, Feb. 24, at Bristol. Atts. Poole and Co. Gray'S Inn-.quare. BintoEss H. Birmingham, factor, Feb.. 2,3, 24, at Birmingham. Att. Mr. Tooke, Holborn-oourt. TURNER F. Doncaster, cordwaincr, Jai 1. 20,22, Feb. 24, at Don caster. Att. Mr. King, Castle-street. OLivta J. Newington-causcway, nadirs iner, Jan.. 17,27, Feb. 24, at GuildbalL AU. Mr. Castle, Cursiu.r-street. HOC KLEY D. and HALL W. S. Brooke- greet, Holborn, working goldsmiths. Jan. 20, 24, Feb. 24, at Cui Ildhall. Att. Mr. Taylor, Field -court, Grays-inn. WILLIAM. D. Cannarthen, Currier, Jar I. 21,22, Feb. 24, at liens ford. Atts. Da. and Co. Doughty-sti eet. REDWATNE T. Preston, Lancashire, lin en. draper. Jan. 22.30, Fat. 24, at Preston. Att. Mr. Blakelock, S ergeant's Inn. DIVIDEND:I. G. Children, Tonbridge, banker, Feb. 14.. M. and .1. Barlow, Bartholomew-Close, si oge-masons. Feb. R. C. Harper. and J. M'Whinnie, Snow-ti Us, blacking-manuf.tctu• rers, Feb. S. E. Burr, Chatham, upholsterer, Jan. 27. W. Newcombe. Vine-street,Westininster , money striyeater.„ eb. 21. M. Reader, Bristol, fancy dressmaker, Ft b. S. . R. Wright, Wareham, Doric:, mercer, F ch. 4. J. Storr s and R. C. Young, Kingst pi-upon-ilUll• merchants, Feb. 10. W. Ritchie, Finsbury-square, merchant, '. 7 elx, 17. P. and W. Giblett, New hun t -street, lurk berm, Feb..ro, P. Stinton, Bristol, victualler, Feb. 11. H. Luffe. Renhall, fanner, Feb. ' 1! J. and.l. Fletcher, Liverpool.shlp-elituidl rrs, Feb. 6.' G. Wall, North Shields, ship-builder. Ft b. 4. T. Harding, Pont Modals. Glainorgan, 1: nen-draper, Feb. 6. 3. B. Rose, Sheerness. upholder. Feb. 101 W. Jacks, Bristol, merchant, Feb. 24. C. Stokes aad J. 11. Schneider. Stn. Bi.ttningluun. leatherAkrt, Feb. 10. R. Morton, Lucas-street, Commercial-row t, master mariner, Feb. N. C. R. Antler...on, W. Sanderson, and J. G! iddon, Austinfriars, mer• chants, Feb. 5. CERTIFICATES—Fi :n. 3. A. Samuda, Bury-street, St. Mary-axe, broker.—G. M. Thurkle, New-street-square, Fetter-lane, wine-men diant.—W. Booth. Hull bridge, Yorkshire, merchant—.J. Brook, I ludderitield, books. ller.— G. Potbury. Sidinouth, Devonshire, uphol• terer.—.l.W. Clattery, Devonshire, banker.—E. Flew' ier, jun. Liverpool, iron founder.—D. Devonshire, Old -street, jewel ler. CIRCULAR LETTER FROM THE COMMITTEE FOl THE SUPPRESSION OF ME: ;DICITY IN THE CITY, &c. MY LORD,•4 am directed to appri tc your Lordship of ti • general nature of the Institution coot I cassia tett by the Com mittee of the Society for the Suppres lion of Mendicity, and to solicit the honour of your Lordship 's sanction and support in aid of so desirable an object. Subject to regulations ofdetail,theitlan of the Society mey be briefly stated as hounded on that which originated with Mr. Matthew Martin in 1796, and has since, though on a li mited scale, been successfully carried on by him, as more particularly described in the Report of a Committee of the House of Commons, to whom the state of mendicity in the metropolis was in the year 1141.5 referred. The immediate purpose of such a Om is altogether to su persede the bestowing of alms on common street beggars, by the delivery to them of tickets of reference to an office to be established in a convenient part of the howl., for Ihe invemi. gat inn of their cases, with a s ie tv to ascertain their claim tot such parish' or fund, as only appear to be properly char g e. able with :heir maintenance, and for relief. it' absolutely necessary, until such claim shall be satisfitctorily unbitten. hated. As the organizing of such an efficient system, must, in the first instance, be necessarily attended with considerable ex pense, although the ultimate effect will be one of economy to the subscribers, and to the public in general, the Committee venture most respectfully to submit such their plan for your Lordships consideration, in the hope that your Lordship will nut only be pleased to contribute to the funds of the so. ciety, but to honour it with • communication of s ii ek sup , gestions as your Lordship may deem of ismort..tret to the beneficial condost ()fit. 1 have the honour to be, my Lord, Your very obedient servant, W. H. BODKIN, lion. See. Committee-room, Crown and Anchor tavern, Strand, Jan. 15. By a letter of a very recent date re.:eived here from Mr. Macdonald, the British Consul at Algii.trs, we learn that the Dey has retired to the Castle, h comic online situation above the c i.y, which he has strongly fort lied, and where he has also placed immense treasure. He there bids defiance to his enemies ; and has publicly notified, Ili:. t he does not consider himself bound by any treaties made with his predeeessois. although he hail before 111 . 01essi . 11 his intention to abide by them. He has forbidden any remote:lN: lire on the pert of the Consuls, arid threatens to behead any 01 1 them who may have tl.e teent city to approach him for that pi foliose. He had to i n lately attacked, at the head of tOu janiiissaries, by a person who was considered the rightful iIIiCCI)SSOr to the Regency, whom lie defeated and took prisoner; toil with a 1110deritiliril very utmost iiiii on in such eases among barbarians, instead of emote 1111 l ing bins to death in the usual summary way, as was expected. he or dered I • on board a Ttaiiisiau corvette Is lag in the harbour, gave hint 1.500 dollars, and fired a royal sa line on his departure. % it proof of the flourishing state of thei icon trade has lately orcureed. At Cyt:tutitfa it on wink in II ei ths i•Tyil i it, %I to. c ra w b i l ay, Esq. the pi °pile tor, has spontaneously increased the wages of all the men I ligagill in dual extensive concern, allowed to tie the first and most considerable in this ur any other countly in Enroll , . INeritig Cite late temporary di. pression of the trade, the iron works in the neigliume It od 11.,41 recourse , to supplying the wirkinen with pros isilliis.— ThiS system has been laid aside alingetlier at Cs fit Ilifa 4 and it I. b., 1 „.,1 ..,, disinters s . .e.i and ;ii aisi. rnl Iby au Escople sill he , t;eleemced b y l i b . ti th er %eel k., in ii;iiets the nil:vitriol'C g coliiiil'S Allil I VI•Iy Ill'll•i"Ilia: Is IIPIEs• 4 . 1,.... i ii i. „ -it ., 4. By . ili: me:tease of wages at Cs ferti.fa alone 1 maul rare, is 411.1111 to the eireolati.iii, soil the oleo ,iri Ili. Iv k s..mi Ifs it 1 it ages weekly or muntit;y, in cash. As ile.y leteilie is. 1,11. pi -ascii with Mr oopiii twice lii it, ell d I his 41th.110.12[11A wit., 0 a ill result to the wont) S . iii isi of the tv.41...5.t.510.c ittl.i.ibit 11.. e. 1 ti . .. the Otter met lacch.lll.l.e .his rim( at dip C.lsile lay, cuss ' like Gib just. Rild ag: ‘..; Ito alJi ess lb; r.., - liVitlt 00 lki. UV- Cilloo. CI:RV/rid:6 - 111 .o. , iii .~