The National Register. — London, England, 1822-01-14 00:00:00

, * FW ?, , ___.. Voma ,' n • LAW INTELLIGENCE! COURT OF KING'S BENCH. w Eon Etartaar, JAN. 2. Sittings at Gni/dhoti before the Lord Chief Jusiim. LEWIS IL WALTER. This was an action brought by the plaintif f , an attorney, against the proprietors nfThe Timm newspaper, to get-over a coutpensuti )))) in &images fur the publication of a lito I, r. fleeting on the t haitieter of the plaintif f , and injurious to him us an attorney. The Solicitor General stated the caw. The plaietiff was a solicitor residing in Looduii, nod coroner fur the Duchy of Lancaster. The libel of w hich he complained muse out of the following traweirti ))))) It happened that Mr. Leo is was concerned professi )))) ;illy for a gentleman named Hingham, whose property the Sheriff had seised. The parties in Mi. potion afiernairds thought proper to indict Mr. Ilinghoin, Mr. Lewis, and oiroslwr, fur couspiracy, and the indictment was tt ied at the Kilig-trin Asidges. After the proceedings had been opened. souse irregularity in point of law was dis crisered, and the learned Judge matamtly directed the Jury to acquit the defeudants. Tue case was stated by Mr. Ser f:eau. Owlow, who made some allusions to Mr. Lewis which should wit have been reported, bemuse they were ex-parte. nod %%bully unsupported by es idence. If the statements halide by counsel at the opening of a Cause were not mode nut, but, on the cuntriry, the rause ended without calling wit. newts it was the duty of a reporter to abstain from publisbs fug passages detrimental 10 bas chtiracler. In this instance tile writer of the libel bad nut only given the strung uhser. cations made by Mr. Sergeant Onstow, hut made comment upon the proceeding. After the acquittal he thought pro per to state tints the Jury were compelled to acquit the de tendants so the great regret of a crowded court, to whom the statement, and evidence, as tar as it went, hod made a con saL•rable impression. The libel, ah.ch was injurinus to the honour and professional chain. ter of the ore published in the Tiers of the 12th of April, 1821. Ile should prove the publication, and the Jury would no doubt cousider it a case in is Inch some damages ought to be given as a vindication of charm ter.—lle understood the defendant intended to prove the libel was copied from a country paper. It was true it did not appear nrighailly in the Times ; but in case the Timex had not copied ii, the slander might have been seen by few readers. Tue publicatiou io the Times made it generally known. Sc vend evening papers also copied it from the Times, and gave the article publicity. Mr. Milison, ft the stamp•ulfice, produced the Times of the 1211 i of April, 1819. The plaintiff's solicitor preyed the admission of Mr. Less is, in 1813, as all attorney.—On his cross-examination, he was not able to say the plaintid' had been a regular prac titioner since 1816. The libel was then rend. Mr. Scariest adverted to the counts in tier declaration, and called the attention of the Lord Chief Justice to the fourth nod first, whits set forth that the defendants bad pub- Itshed a libel to injure the plaintiff in his profession as all attorney. Ile submitted that there was no proof that Mr. Lewis was regulaily practising RP an attorney ut the time of the publication. This being an alleged !Ho lon the plaintiff as tin attorney, and injurious to his practice and profession, it was necessary to spew he was an attorney. After a few words in !mower to the objection, from the Solicitor General, The Lord Chief Justice held, that the proof of the plain tiff practised as an iittorney would be sutfcient. Mr. Scarlett then contended, that there was no proof the plaint II had acted as an attorney. The Lord Chief JuAlice was of opinion, the last objection taken by Mr. Scarlett was Wail, and the plaintif f was nonsuiteds SOAKES O. noo‘oar• This was nn action to recover 6101. the amount of Isis sustained by the sale of n quantity /if whale oil, which the defendants had refused to take according to contract It appeared that the plaintiff's broker cutercil • is con tract with the Defend/tilts to sell them tit a stated price, portion of the oil iii the ship Plerridc, Southern o hali r.— The defendants refused to take the oil. A sale the took place, and Messrs. Hodson nod Co. were called upon in this iustance to snake good their loss. The Solicitor General contended that the plaintiff's could not recover, because the contract was not in writing. The learliedJ tidge was of opinion, under all the circum stances. that the plaintiffs might give a subsequent assent to the contract made by the broker, and if the Jury were of op' • bey did give a subsequent assent, they ought to dad a verdict fur the plaintiffs. The Jury timid a verdict for 0811. damages. THURSDAY, JAN. 10. This day the Lord Chief Justice sad the Judges sat is Banco, at the Sessions House, Westminster, fur the pur pose of hearing Special Arguments. The order in which the Cons t propose to take the Causes is this First.—The Country Causes moved previous to Michael. sass Term, Will. Secondly,—The Middlesex and London Causes. Thirdly,—The remainder of the London Causes. GAME LAWS—HAYWOOD •. HORNER. This was a penal action, ou the sth of Anne, against the defendant, who resides in Essex, for keeping dogs to kill game, he being unqualified. The cause was tried before Alt. Justice Ilurrough, at the Assizes for Essex. It was proved in evidence that the defendant kept two young dogs, half-bred setters : but there was no proof the dogs had ever been used for killing game. The Learned Judge WA.. of opinion, that the action being against an unqualified person for keeping dogs to kill game, it was sufficient to prove the keeping of dogs, without evidence that the dugs were used for killing game. lie considered setter dugs of a description which brought the defendant within the Act. The Juoy reluct antly, upon that exposition of the law, found a verdict for the plaintiff. Mr. Willey some time ago moved to set aside the ver dict, and cuter a noinutit. On that occasion he obtained a conditional ride, and this day Mr. Marryat skewed Cause against it. The Lord Chief Justice asked how the declaration was expressed Mr. Glirney said, it charged the defendant with keep. isle dogs to kill and destroy game. hit. Justice Bayley —lt a man keeps a greyhoittid for the impose of killing game, you would have no difficulty iu sttewing lie kept alum al to destiny game. On the other hand, if a nulls keeps a greyhound us tierce Dente chained up ill his yard, and kra 11.. a loose at night, aJury would say be was kept to, the pi atectiou ut Isis house. Laid Chisel J it is sufficient to allege iu .. -, THE NATIONAL REGISTER the declaration that a male kept a greyhound for the de struction of game, and then the question is, how do yon prove the destruction? I cannot allow that the mere keeping a dog is proof of the killing of game, or that it must he presumed such was the object et' the party.-- proof of the killing is required. if it were not so, a man who keeps a setter or hitcher, to defend his house, or fol. low his carriage, or fur the amusement of his children, would be liable to the penalty—which it never mold be the intention of the Legislature to impose In such a case. Mr. Justice itayley.—‘ll proceedings under the blh of Anise, which have come within my experience, have required evidence not only to Shaw that the defendant kept dogs and engines for the destruction of grime, but that lie actually destroyed game. Mr, Justice Hulroyd stated a ease tried at York, namely an action in Troyer, against a Magistrate, for seising a slog, and. as it was not kept for sporting pm - poses, the Court held, that the parties hail no right to seise it. Mr.Joistice Best said, this was an action on a penal sta tute, and it required a strict einistructiou. PertiollS got their livelihood by training and bringing np dogs, and every one of that class would he liable, if the rigid con struction contended for was to be allowed. He bad never known an action in which the mere keeping of a dog was sufficient to convict the party. 'the rule fur a nonsuit was made absolute. OLD BAILEY SESSIONS. WEDNESDAY, JAN. 9.-I'he Sessions commenced at Justice-hall, in the Old Bailey, this morning, belure Chiel Mann Richards, Mr. Justice Burrmigh, Sec. Samuel Hotne was indicted for stealing two mares, value 501. the property of Mr. David Getting'; and %Villiain Smith Cutts was charged with receiving the saute, knowin4 them to have been stolen. Mr. Gen i:•Ls is a farmer at Goilstone, in Surrey, and tbe inarea in yips:lon %vet': missed on the 144 tilt. front a field in which they were at pasture. Mr. G. came im mediately to London, and, with an officer of Union Hall, obtained information. which induced hint to go to Narrow-walk, P tildington,where Cutts occupied stables, and where Nlr. G saw one of his mares. He inquired to whom the stable belonged, and Cutts presented him self as the owner. Mr. Gettinas said he wanted to pur chase two homes, and Ciitis took him into a stable, but not the one in winch lie had seen the mares. He said there were none in that stable that would suit hint, and asked Cutts whether he had any cart horses in the other stable. He hesitated, but at length said he had only two young colts, that had never been shod. Mr. G. pressed to be shewn into that stable, and Cutts opened the door, and there Mr. Geuings found his two mares; their shoes had been taken Mt before they were turtle(' into the pas ture, btu it was impossible that a man experienced in horses could mistake them for colts twit had tweer been shod. Mr. Gettiogs claimed the mares, and said they were st o len property ; and Cutts accompanied hint and the officer to a public house in the neighbourhood,where he pointed Home as the man from whom he had re ceived them, and stated, that lie and another man had Isrolight them ni his stable on the previons night, and requested to leave them fur Ike night. The prisoners were taken to Union 11.114 where plume made a confession of Isis guilt, and told the name ui Ise matt who had accom panied him when he stole them. When the case was nearly clotted, the learned Judge (Burromr,h) expreaned an opmlou,that there was no evi dence beyond the declaration of Cutts (which could not be taken against Home), that Name ever had possession of the mares in Middlesex; awl the venue therefore was wrongly laid. The prisoners were found Not Guilty; but an order was given for their detention, to he tried again in Surrey. THURSDAY, JAN. PROSECUTIONL—L lye was put to the bar on au mdictineut charging lino with having put oh, and disposed of, a five-Nowt Batik note, purporting to be one of those issued by the Gover nor and Company of the Batik of England, he well knownig it to be forged and coninerleit. Harriet Golf. the wife of George (huff the isolice officer, deposed to her having been employed by huisey, the officer tit the Town-hall. S.mthwark, to purchase some bad mites of the prisoner, at the Jacob's Well, 13 bicau, and other pubilediouses, the last of which was on the v7.lt of December, at the White-horse, Brick-lane, where she purchased a 51. note of the prisoner fur a sovereign. Witness became acquainted with the prisoner though the InvunS 01 One Mary Dowling. The notes were pursed to be forgeries in every respect, by Mr. Glover. the bank inspector. The Chief Munn recapitulated the evidence, and the Jury, alter a short consultation, returned a verdict of Guilty—Death. Aged 49. William Kiser', aged 17, was indicted fur tittering a forged 101 rime. In Ihreember last he went to the situp of Mr. Bowen, in Oxford-street, stationer, and ordered a (inutility of paper, for which he paid a iOl. note, and directed the paper to be sent to Mr. Outrattes, in George street, Portin in-square. The paper was sent as directed, hot it was 'mind that 'tone had been ordered. On a subsequent day the 'also:nor offered another KO. note to r Wedgewond, anodic!' stationer in Oxford-street, in payment for some piper and pens, which he said lie j 6 directed to witeliase for Mr. Scott, of Bedford-row. Mr. W e dgeoood, however, suspecting it to be forged, sent for two officers, awl the prisoner was taken tutu custody. The prisoner in his defence said he had only one request to inake, and that was, that his life might be .pared. Nlr. Justice Burroughs said, that did not depend upon hint. The Jury then found the prisoner Guilty, but strongly recommended Itutt to mercy uu °CLAM ill Or his youth. Mr. ‘Vedgewood, the. prusecitior, joined in the recoot- Inetidalitm. and WaS procerdity, ill an agitated wanner to state, that his Itappinehs in life would he fur ever cut off if the law took its lull course. when Justice Borrutigts stopped him, and said the Court eonld only lisurn to Me recuu,tuul lelldJlln 11. CurrlSG AS11) 5TA3111240.--Julio Crook, a awn of 1" - '~ , . 4, middle age, was illdirlesi for cutting and maiming Mary Ann Nelson, with intent to kill and 'taunter her. Thomas Lee lived in the same house with the prisoner, and he heard a noise above stairs, and went up and saw lie prisoner and prosecutr it struggling toaeitiet. former had a knife in has hand, which witness took from him and pushed I up stairs, desiring him to govern his passion. The woman seemed much frightened. --Read, jot'. the police officer, produced a knife which hr found in the prisoner's room. It was very bloody when he found it. lie also produced an apron, which was stained with blow. The learned .fudge summed up the evidence, and the Jury, after a short consultation, found the prisoner Nut Guilty. ' Chief Baron Richards said he could not part with the prisoner without repeating the ..ilvice given him by the witness Lee—" Govern your passions." Read, the officer, said, there was another indictment against the prisoner fur bigamy, and lie was ordered to be detained. FRIDAY, JAN. 1.--CHAR•IS Or NIOSOIN.--TIOS morning I). Mahoney was indicted for the der of R Needs. Mr. It. Harrison, a pupil at the Lonclon.hospital, deposed that he saw the deceased n Vat lie was bruitglis to the hospital on the 13th of N.areitiher. Ile had a wound on the front of the head, but lie slid not discover that his skull was fractured until, three OF four days after. The cause of death was an inflansimit ion on the lungs. the body was opened, and it was Mond th it the deceased had been subject to pulmonary infia 000000 but dim Iracture of sue skull was the cause ul the isdiassintation of which he died. T. Staggs, Loaml of the Green Man, Whitechapel„ swore, teat on the night of the I 2 ii tit N seemlier, about o'clock, the prisoner and the deceased came tietulhis house toaether, and alter being these sonde time the pri soner said " You know you gave me a slap in the face once, and I del nut deserve it."—Deceased said " You do not bear malice, do you t" Prisoner replied, '• I have not forgotten it, and you haul better look out for yourself, for I. shall look out for you.—They were drinking to. tether before and after this conversation and seemed very friendly. J. Harris, a caster-monger, was at the Green Man.—as Prisoner and his two partners went out first, and the de ceased went out alone shortly after. Witness and -asesss Francis went out alone behind him. The prisoner and his Intends were walking before the deceased, and all at once he saw Needs tall, and the prisoner and his friends ran away. When Needs fell lie was not abuse two y.irds iron the prisoner. ‘Vititess pursued the iugitives but could not overtake them, and he returned and tumid the deceased in the care of a watchman. Witness, with the watchman and ai.other, to ik the deceased home to Catherine•n heel alley. Ile was wounded on the side of the head, and bled very much. He seemed very ill.— , Witiiess cut his hair off, and applied a plaister to the wound, and then went away. Other witnesses colifiratied the preceding evidence. Several witnesses gave the prisoner a good character, Mr. Justice Parke summed up the evidence, and the Jury imind the prisoner—Nut Guilty. CHARGE OF MORDNR...-1111(MiaS SiratfOrti stood in dicted fur the wilful murder of Abraham Slade, Ile WAS charged also upon the Coroner's Inquisition with man slaughter. The evidence in this case, which was that of Mr. Slade, the butcher, of Tottenham Court-road, did slot differ in any point f what we rtrirted as given boils: he Curoner's Jury, and 'lite Jury found the prisoner Guilty of Manslaughter. MIDDLESEX SESSIONS. On Monday last these Serums commenced before N. Coast, woo presided as Chairman, and a numerous Bench of Ilagistrates. ASSAULT AND PALM! IMPRISONMENT OP SOW STREET OFFICERS. After the Juries were swoin, and some C3SCS of petty assault disposed Charles Mott, William Butler, and John James Minch, three respectable Iliiiilllll.llllsl of Whitechapel, were put on their trial fur a midseineatior, in assaulting and lalesely imprisoning Thomas Goodin and Attielby, both Bow-street patrols. ftir. Alley stated the CASC lin the prosecution, in which he enforced with great RAIIICiIIIESS the necessity of pro tecting (Avers its the discharge of their duty, to whom eve.y honest mats was indebted, fur the protection of his person and property. lhounts Gooding deposed, that he was in company with Ashelby on duty, as Row-street patrol, qui the Lunt mercial-road, about a quarter before twelve o'clock at night on the night of the 7th of November. Ashelity, who was a short distance before him,saw a woman with a bundle under her cloak, which he asked her to chew, saying he was a peace officer, but she refused. Mr. Butler, one of the defendants, was standing at his dour at the time, and came up to them and said, " Officers, you have exceeded your duty." The woman said she would go tit the toll•nouse, which was near, and would there show her borate. She did so it contained two bed • icks, winch sue told where site had bought, and also where she loved ; after which, Ashelby and witness said trey were satisfied, and site might go away. lice three defendants had come with them to the toll-house, anti Dustch asked witness his name, which he refused to tell. Mott then took witness by the collar, and all the defendants said the woman must give charge of A mob collected, and the woman gave charge of witness and Ashelby to a watchman, who took theta to a watch house, where the w an at first refused to sign the charge, but being pressed by Ilse defendants, did itu They were both detained an hour, till the o fficer s el the night came. the witnesses was cross.examined by Mr. Adolphus, who was Counsel for the iklettdatit M o tt, and by Mr. Charles Pillips, who was Counsel for tba other twos.-- wttn h esses admitted th Co at the defendants were all , s.