The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser. — London, England, 1825-12-05 00:00:00

I~ ti Ii 1 Wsadbit Awes eltommlw to the defendant, man is a leasilmin in 64liptkenwelL The plainti ff was a native of it th•ilikad 17 or 18 became arrant to his brother /44in & pseltsbatelsep In thee town. After being about two years le dalleflaitienifratest into the senrioe eif a butcher for a short dada lad Ibsa basun Amman to a grocer in the town, with ' trailiallielleaddned.abont four years. He then taint me to ion. 'di& wall samead teas service a a Alt. Home. a grocer, of Calm leeasatta Win: of 116 L n. year. In ?sly, 1824, Mr. Homer sold • Jilt Were to dish defendant, who, eta a short time, *grad with the plaintiff to rnmain in the situation at the same celery which he .!tad Arses paid an.ilia. Renner. The plaintif remained in the de tesient's minim until the month of May last. a hen they agreed so pail. at was ellezed, an.'er the folloning circumstances:—The 1010SW4 in ail. thie situations which he bad pretiously held, mu allowed Tyner with his merle, bat the defendant would allow only etsii:ll-bear, wi-leit the plaintiffcould not drink, on ac count of ha bad quality. Fintliog himself ill. he was obliged to 'Li-continue drinking it, entrenting himself with water, and . purchasing twins -a• week, out of his own funds, a pint of beer, which he brought front a neighbouring public.house. This gave great o ff ence to tbe defendant, who expremed bimseif so *sante neon the' snbieet, that the plaintiff gave him a month's settee .o quit his situation. At this time the derendmn owed the plaintiff alma a year's 'salary. On the 6th of May, the plaintiff lehig shout to kite the situation in a few days, the defendant called him into a room, when, to his surprise, the latter charged 'him with hating fobbed the till. This accusation was made in the mance of the defendant's brother, who is an attorney, and or' a - 11 f. Scott. The plsinti,ffrepelled the charge with indignation, and an - media/1v pulled out of his pocket all the money he had; the eh:fa:dam diced upon a sixpence which he said had his mark upon it, having 03t it, with other marked money, into the till the day WM. The plaintiff became more indignsrd at this, and said he Tad hid the slatter:lt in his possession for three days, having taken it in canine. Ile they: submitted his person to teach. and desired . that his boxes should be examined. In his nook was found some • Old money, end a promissory note for 301. The possession of this alone, he accounted for, by saying that it was the fruits of his eco nomical wrings whilst hi his previous situations, and that he had bad a legacy of 21 1 1. and interest thereon, which he had lent to his brother-In-hew at Brighton, who repaid him, with interest thereon. ' He then underwent a rigid examination as to how lie had accounted tor all the money which he said had been in his pomession, which he did to the best of his ability. The plaintiff then determined to nquit the situation which he did immediately. He then consulted cis attorney , wh'o wrote a letter demanding the payment of the plaintiff's wages. The defendant's attorney emote an answer to this letter, saying, that if the plaintiff proceeded he would do soat Piterrii, but that the salon would be defooded. On the 9th of MillWdit defendant caused • the plaintiff to be apprehended by at. slice °Roar, anti taken before the Magistrates at Marlin, toe, upon a charge of felony. The Magistrates imme. destine& the char. The muted sixpence was not pre vail)* evaininatiott. The plaintiff then commenced an action vanes. The defendant afterwards preferred two several Imileimmit stamina the plaintiff,bot they had never been brought to eisl.• Older these circuit - lemma the present action was brought. It was MISS by the plaintiff's Counsel, that if the defendant, find. ring himself minalten, had made some apulogy, the plaintiff would lave ro els; m to conside table datnages ; but tenant If doin,g so, he had thellardihond to pm a justification on the recent. '1 his was stated**, be an action et vital importance to the plaintiff, a young ONO whose way oxieteres depended upon his character. Mr. hi".tat'ett left it to the Jury to determine whether this story, which was 'toted to thenprejudire of the plaintiff, was nut trumped up .tyr di ir itetteident , its order to get rid of the liability to pay the plain. tiff'a wages. ✓ s Ara'43habman. the plaintiff's brother-in-taw; Mr. Cook, the ir•mer, of Brighton ; and 'Mr. Horner, were severally called, and the/ proved that the plaintiff was a young of most correct habits; WAS remarkable for his economy, which amounted almost to pan i ideefet 11114 1 11.141wahrovx saved money out of his wages. In 11122 he had had a legncy of 201. and interest thereon, which he lent to hie brother-in-law. 'They all spoke of him as a young man of tan. blemished charaCter. Reid, the police-officer, proved the apprehension of the plaintiff, a; theanalsoes of the defendant. Mr. alailett, the clerk at Marlborough-street (Ace, proved the dismissnl of the charge preferred by the defendant. el' 'MT I,lledis a young man lodging in the defendant's hones at Wee period ht question, proved the words laid in the declaration, pond added, that the defendant said the plaintiff was a rubber, a • ' hegsten, and a rascal. . . his wan the nature of the plaintiff's esse. Ail . Jr. Dvgteasr addressed the Jnry, and proposed to show, that :Ikinetillaation pleaded was well founded ; and if not , ye: that the ideletedent had acted in good faith, and under a conscientious belief ~igite the plaintiff had robbed him, in which cue • the defendant would he entitled to a verdict. .-, Mr. Itheloesd.ea, the defendant's attorney and brother, proved rePI. 111 the 6th May ho went to the defendant's house; be there met An Stott. The plaintiff was called into the room, and told . defendant suspected him of having robbed the till. The Immediately produced about a pound's worth of silver. A • Mae fixed upon, which the defendant identified as one l !Phi lieseld be had marked among other silver to the amount of , PIN mil pet it in the till on the night before. The defendant pe. abisely denied the imputation, and said he bad taken the lid. In .change throe days before for a pot of porter. The defendant said 14M mal4l oat heave, because he had himself marked it the day before. The plaintiff, however, positively denied the charge, and sishf he knew nothing about the money. The plaintiff submitted !Voids box being searched. and there four sovereigns and a half were .11talid. and a promissory note, which the plaintiff said he had a flag time:bad in h a pouresion. He said also that he had 401. alien bespeimad Mr. Homer's service. He wee then required to ateount for hit tenement. sad the manner In which he had disposal imfillbsslioollp - mbieb he mid he had had. He accounted far the seeninsp,f bet mable the satisfaction of the defendant, there being . smimisfriL l s. which he did not account for. t ..Charlen Scott and Mrs. Anne Knight were cell examined, filllitlbeW me ebies was Wunder to that aimed" produced. Mr. SCARLET T, in .reply. ridiculed the attempt made by the de fendent to evade the paytnent of the plaintiff's wages., and insisted apse the improbability that the latter would commit such a theft .as bad been imputed to him, while be was known to have saved illgney be , his economical habits, and to have had it within his 00,4 for any purpose he thought proper. He also strongly dwelt nOon tho eareumstance of the proceedings respecting the marked *enema not having been concocted into a protecutton until the plaintlf hid shown a determination to proceed at law for the re inivery of his wages. The LORD C/I/EF JUSTICE. in summing up the evidence to the Jury , left it Mr theta to consider whether the defendant had matte out such a case as would justify the course he had pursued cm this oacasian. The Jury, after a short consideration, found a dialiet foe the plaintiff—Damages, 1001. Ayala was then taken, be Grant, in another action between the same patties, fur the plelntiff's wages, 201. Ills. Bd. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Serruna, Drc. 3. Ntilites= Atosmed Sittings befure the LORD CHIEF JUITICT. CRIM. CON. PEOLT.Y U. BURCH. Mr. CHITTY opened the pleadings. This was an action for cr:minal conversation, alleged to have taken place between the de. fazdant and the plaintiff's wife. The defendant pleaded the general lame. alt. Sergeant VAIIG/LAN stilted the facts to the Jury. He ob ' Vl Ved, that it fell to his lot to open to them the circumstances of • Ibis case, which he believed would be fouad a mo't disgraceful one ha the part of the defendant. Thsy had already learned from the opening of the pleadings,. that this was m action for criminal eon vecsatiao srith,the plaintiff's wife. He had peculiar satisfaction in "lievinx to address himself, on this subject, to tradesmen, who were • au Alen in the same class of life es the parties concerned, sod than ;sebain none could better appreciate the loss of a virtuous woman's lerespecially in that rank of life to which they all belonged. °old; therefore, be the better able to estimate what damages woo he commensurate with the injury, and to give them and no mem% Ail these cases differed most materially in the shade and derma of the offence. according to the citaumstances under which the{ offence was committed. It would be necessary for them to at • ar.icularly to the peculiar facts of this we, in order to see "elle:her the offence here was not marked by peculiar circumstances of aggravation. The Brat fact which a plaintiff was bound to prove 1 , 64, that the adultery had woolly taken place, 8111 a that he be: tiered he should be able to give such evidence as would put that =Bast beyond the possibility of doubt. The plaintiff was a per mit residing in Holkorn, and carrying on business by the sole of mineral waters and gincr-beer. He had also tinted up some oyster- Teem', for the accommodetion of such persons as might wish, at a sate tenor in the evening, to take a supper of flak, which perhaps they noel l not conveniently have at their own lodgings. Thedefend air. was a man of affluent circumstances t he carried on the busi !Iva of a jeweller and silversmith, and added to that a share in a livery. reble yard. He was a man of taste, and he thought he had proved bioverif no by the seduction of a woman who it was stated was pawned ni many personal charms, and perhaps too he !nigh t imagine that he had confirmed his claim to the title of a man of taste, by apisearing here in Court to-day ; but when he heard what wild he mated against him, perhaps he might be led to imagine .Hilt his taste would be shown by withdrawing. The Loan Curer lorries said the defendant was very 111- 10 veiled to appear in Court upon such an occasion an the present. (The dr fendant, taking the hint, a short time af.erwards withdrew, ' weilie due lammed Sergeant was tweaking.) • Mr. Setgeant VAUGHAN, without hayit,g o b serve d t h e e ff ect of his Lardettip's observation, proceeded. The crime of the defendant. •bodiefni 32 it was in the eyes of every honourable man, seemed to have been a source of !exultation with the defendant. He looked t upon Lis crone not as a crime, but as a fine adyeature, as a benne fertrute. and forgetting alike what was due to the opi n ions o f 'llpßiely, aid even to the feelings of di: woman whom he had .aduce. l to become the partner of his guilt, he hcasted to the synefd, of the r criminal intercourse—he seemed proud of stand ime before the Jury this day in the character of a sedueer,-end Illf of etting them and the public what be teemed gram ly to imagine was a day's amusement—aye even at the expense of hieloritne Ise liked it. The plaintiff lived in Holborn, and the defendant carried On the ,business of d silversmith and gun-maker, in a 'house *seedy opposite. This circumstance, if it had not induced tea indium , that afterward' took place between the parties, served greatly to forward the views of the defendant in obtaining that in t.macy which lie had remind only to abuse.' The plaintiff was im3. of a mineral water manufacturer, and he had taller in love wets thin lady when they were both under age; in fact, the mgr. air . 414,11 had taken place during their rminprlty . . The lady was selle ilaeghter of a respectable statuary, and on aeconnt of the re spectnbility of her family. the affection that esebsiated het wean the parties. and the hope that their union would render them happy, that onion was consented to by their friends while she was yet tinder age. They were secordinely married at Hendon ; the lady received the sum of 30111. as ber portion, and the plaintiff wcs established in that butanes., which he now tarried on. The de. ferdant, it would appear, had seen her while she was engaged in misting her hushend in business, and hail no doubt been induced, by that eircumetance, to endeavour to gain ilie friendship of the husband, in order that he might the more securely attack the virtue of the wife. The husband was a man of much simplicity of man lier and mind, and the advances of the defendant were vary favour ably received. In a short time the defendant had so far succeeded in his plan, that from visiting the plaintiff as a c ' ustomer he now visited as a friend, and used to take his supper with the husband end wife as a private acquaintance. In this state of things', it was found that as the constant confinement of business but taken some effect on the health of XI Pedley, it was desirable that she should have the. aivantage of taking a little fresh air before the bustle of the evening's business came on. Of this necesetty the defendant immediately availed himself, and having a gig of his own, he expressed a whit, as any other friend might have done. to afford Mrs. Pedley the pleasure of a ride in the evening. The offer was of course accepted, and the defendant drove her out, the plaintiff riding on horseback by the side of the chaise. There was nothing on the part of the plaintiff that would lead them to &peon he had in the slightest &mire been guilty of improper negligence of his wire's conduct. There was nothing that was not eonsletent with the atrletest propriety and decorum; such at least was the cue while these parties were in the presence of the husband. An op. portunity now occurred which gave the defendant increased facility far the performance of his wish. As the plaintif carried on the business of • shell-fishmonger. it became necessary that he Mould get up very early in the morning to attend the fish market. But as people who get up early were of course obliged to go to bed early, and as the great business of the shop was principally transneted in the evening, it became necessary that some arrangement should be made by which the husband and wife might divide the 'shouts of the day. By this arrangement the plaintiff went to bed about ten o'clock at night, and the vile took upon herself to conduct the business to the closing of the shop. The defendant knew of thit arrangement, and he lamely tnok advantage of it. Ile would come over in the evening, stay till near ten o'clock, when he would bid them good night and return home, as if with the intention of re. tiring to rest. Instead of doing so, however. he would go into his own house, which was exactly opposite, and from which he bad • complete view of the plaintiff 'a bed-mum. As soon as he saw the light introduced there, he knew the plaintiff had retired to rest, and waiting only till he observed that light extinguished, he would then return ; and introducing himself Into theTttelour, it appeared be at last so far saweed& in ingratiating himself into the good graces of this lady, that he finally =mph: hed his purpose. All these eircumunnees. known to several other persons, were unknown only to the plaintiff, until after he had, by accident, (theoremd his dishonour, when this light was poured in • fiend open him. The accident to which he alluded was this a-0o one occasion, the plaintiff went out in the evening to see a faientl,and said he believed he should be absent for some length of time. iv thanes, that friend happened not to be at home, and the plaintiff returned Im mediately. He then discovered, to his a stonishment, that his wife was absent. She returned some time afterwards, soil her confusion immediately betrayed her. Her face discovered her mind; her ronerience reproached her for her guilt, and she trembled before the husband whom she had dishonoured. He demanded en explana tion of her conduct, and not satisfied with that which site offered, he declared his determination of sending her back to her parents. Although the circumstances of her guilt were known before, yet no Information of it was conveyed to the husband until after the disco very. Of those circumstances, howeverathere would now be abundant evidence. The actual deed of adultery of ionise took place in secret, but though there were no supervisors of the parties con. duct grossly gaping on, yet evidence would be given sufficiently strong to show that the criminal act had taken place. That evi. deuce, disgraceful as it was, seemed to be en agreeable to the de. fendant, that he appeared to wish to hear it to-day. 31r. Sergeant STANIIE. who conduce& the defendant's ease, here said to his Learned Brother, " he has gone out of Conn with your client." .Me. Sergeant VAUGHAN not replying to that remark, proceeded. —The defendant had boasted of his illicit intercourse with Mrs. Pedley, and had uttered that boast in so gross a manner that he (31r. Sergeant Vaughan) cnuld not think of roaming the walls of this Court by its repetition. The defendant had more than once expressed his conviction that he was favoured beyond the husband, and In saving that, he had employed terms too gross to be mee. tinned. One expression, however, of the defendant's might be repeated, as it was the least indecent of any he had uttered on the subject. .On one occuion, he had gone with her to •a notorious house in Cnandos-street • and on his return, he met a person whom he knew, and to whom he made this observation ;—" Ah, Bill ! I shall kill you. if yen tell of me; but I know you won't; for you know that a slice off's cut loaf is never missed." One act of adultery was capable of being proved, and the discovery of that had been as accidental as the discovery afterwards made by the husband. A servant of another house having been out till a very lane hour, wished to make some communication to a servant in the plaintiff's house, and going for that purpose to the door, observed the glimmering of a candle ; he peeped through the key-hole. and claw a candle on the floor of the parlour. and he paw something else, which proved beyond all doubt the guilt of the parties. He ob served, in a comer of the parlour, the defendant and Mrs. Pedley in a situation which need not be described. They had, it ap peared, taken the prevention of placing themselves in a corner of the parlour which could not be (sheered by anybody passing up or down stairs, for there were lodgers in the house; but guilt could never hope to escape detection, and careful as they had been in every other respect. they had forgotten that though ifergas not possible to see them from the passage, it was not impossible to see them through the shop. The detendant's conversation bad always been full of boasting of his crime, as of an achievement : and he made no 'meta of his boasting to any person but the plaintiff. On one occasion he came into the hum and asked toe Mrs. Pedley, and being told that she was in bed, he desired-to be admitted to her bed-room, observing, that she had much rather are him than her husband, and he did actually go up to her bed room, though it did not appear that any criminal intercourse took place at that time. Still, however, that circumstance showed how anxiens the defendant had been to disgrace that man whose friend. j ship he had sought for the sole purpose of dishonourirg him. Linder these circumstances, it would be for the Jury to ask thetheelves to what damages was such a plaintiff entitled? Was there any imputation on the character of the wife before the defendant be came acquainted with her? No such thing—she had ;Tarried her husband purely from affection—he had treated her kindly, and. till the defendant stepped in to blast their happiness, they were happy. If there had been any previous disgrace upon the cha racter of the wife, or. if the pliintiff had so negligently conducted himself as to Induce the evil, then undoubtedly the plaintiff could have no title to compensation; but as neither of these things could be said, at the wife had been chaste and the husband affeetionate, and as both might have been happy, but for the crime of the de. fendant, the. Jury must afford to the plaintiff all that compensatinn which damages could afford. They were never exercising their functions more wholesomely than when on such occasion' as these, acting as the constitutional guardians of public morals, they taught, by the amount of damages which they gave, this excellent lessor, that crimes of this kind were net only highly disgraceful, but equally unprofitable. %Valiant Chassey, the parish clerk of !Tendon, produced the certificate of marriage between the plaintiff and Anna Maria Nicholson. The marriage took place on 110th September, 11119. Mrs. Nicholson. the lady's mother, was present. Thomas Steele—l am a boot and shoe maker ; 1 know Mr. and Mrs. Pedley : I have known them since their marriage ; my ac quaintance with them continued till within the last six months ; when they lived in the Blackfriars-road I visited them frequently, sometime three times a day, for they were then very near neigh. boors of mine ; they lived on the best possible terms; I always considered them a very happy couple. Cross-examined-1 hey left the Blackfriare-road abont one year and a half since ; I am a married man ; my wire visited them ; else in net here ; she is incapacited from attending by illness. Mrs. Anne Page.-1 am a married woman. I have known the plaintiff and his wife four year; ; I have seen them frequently ; they always appeared to live very happily; the husband was very . 'kind and attentive to his wife, and she seemed to return his affix- Lion ; I thought them very happy ; within the last director tour months, I have not frequently visited them. Fross.examined—l nin na_relatinn ufaheirs ; I have never seen on heard of' the Plaintiff striking his wife ; I have been sit their house as often as twice a week, but nut foe • long tittle. By the JUDGE—I do not knew of any seperation having taken place between Mr anti Mrs. Pedlcy. John Callaghan—l am clerk to an auctioneer; I lived in the plaintirs house nearly ono year and three quarters; that time will have expired next Christina* ; they always teemed sell happ N y. . Cross-examlned—l am cleat to Mr. edby, who is the landlord of the house—the plaintiff was only a lodger, the shop being part of their apartments—they had only one room up stairs, it was a bed-rnam , _• I am there on the premises all clay long ; I have seen the plaintiff a good deal ; I always considered they lived very hap pily ; I never saw anything to the contrary ; the pieintiff ones not keep a gig ; I don't know that he goes very frequently to boxing. matches ; Mr. Nedby's office is on the first fluor; my opponent. ties of seeing them were by passing in and out ; there were ladies who used to visit the family; I have seen Mr. and Mrs. Palley go nut with their friends on a party ; I know a lately of the name of Morgan ; she slept at the plaintiff's house one night: they had no other room than one bed-event except the Little bank parlour; I do not know whether a bed was made up in the little back parlour that night, or not. - George Alexander Twhtive—l live with my father, who is a cat pet-manufacturer. residing in Holborn nearly opposite the pinintiff ; I know the plaintiff ' and defendant two or three years ; in Febnsary last I had some difference with my reciter, and went to live at Mr. Pedley's ; lie interfered, and made up the difference between my father and me, and I returned to my father's house in • few days; I have ever since been a frequent visii..cr at his house; the defendant lives nearly oppmite the plaintiff; lit June or July last I went Into the plaintiff's house, and saw the defendant put !Assent round Mrs. Pedley's neck and kiss her, and also put his band nn an improper place; I soon after saw the defendant and Mrs. Pedley in a pony-chaise, in Chaneery.lanc. in the evening the next morning, as I wars passing the defendant's shop, healed me in. and said to ale. " George, mind you due% tell Pedley what you saw last night—if you do I'll close both your eyen—you know • &slice off a cut loaf is never missed.' " I was at the defendant's' house a short time before, wqgn he showed me s hank.note, and said, " George. If ou wanfwfinoney, this is a that s and pounds note." li e also t otal me that the stock in hir .1. on wits worth two thousand poundi. I her: also seen the defendant put his hand on • • . . THE BRITIS PRESS. tholower part of Aire. Pedley's person ; it was outside her clothes, filways thought the plaintiff and his wife lived happily together. Crolis-exainined-1 never saw any person take any liberties with Mrs. Peltier, or kiPe her, but the defendant. I revel saw the plaintiff strike his wife, nor heard hits say that he had struck her. Thomas Corby examined—l keep a lirery-stable t I have had conversations with the defendant respecting the plaintiff and his wife. He told me one evening that he was going to give Mu. Pedley n ride, end that alto would give him [we cannot repeat the expreettion.l On another occasion be said to me, I ion going over to Penley's wile to-night. as soon no he goes to bed. He generally goes to bed about ten o'clock, steel always know the time by Pee ing the light in hie hed-room. The neat morning he told me that he had remained at PeNey's till three o'clock in the morniag,and that Pedley was such an ass.—th is quite impossible to repeal . the horrible expresaion.l Cress-eaanlined—l served the defendant with the copy of a writ about four months ago. but did not moetwel with the action. About two months ago I was in the mom of a pittillethouee, in the evening, where there were a conidelerehle number of persons pre sent : the defendant was there, and sung a song t the plaintiff came in and sung also. lie.examined—l believe the plaintiff did not know that the de fendant was in the mom when he canine into it. lie staid but about five minutes he was much pressed before he sung the song ; he did not go near the defendent, nor was he one of those who pressed him to sing. It is probabie tic did not FCC the defendant when he firoteame into the morn. DaMel itl•Cabe—T have lived as shornan with the plaintiff from June List to the present time; the plaintiff and his wife ap peared to lite very lovingly together. Mr. Burch frequently came to the house. and dined with them as a friend ; Mr. Pedley gene. rally went to bed about ten o'clock, as he got up early to go to I Billingsgate; I have seen Mr. Burch frequently shake hands with 11r. Pedley, and big him good night, when Mr. Pedley was going to heal, and after he hail gone to bed, come over again, and sit with Mrs. Pedley; I generally left the shop about twelve o'clock, sometimes sooner. Mr. forth has frequently been with Mrs. Ped. ley in the parlour when I went away for the night. I never told I Mr. Pedley that the defendant used to come over after he had gone I to bed, and stay with Mrs. Pettier, till he inquired of me, after ' Mrs. Pedley had gone away. Croes-examined—l never saw Mr.Pedley gn to bed and leave Burch or any other man with his wife. Mr. Pedley went to one horse-race and one fight. since I came to hint in June last. Mrs. Morgan was at Mr. Pedley's on a visit for a fortnight, in June last. I do not know whether she slept in the same room with Mr. and Mrs. Palley, or in the parlour. Irroome was called. The Dom: Cuter Jett Ties observed to Mr.ffergrintVeughan, that hothnught it was unnecessary to call any other witnesses to prove the adultery. Mr. Sergeant VATIGIRAFf said he only called Ole present witness because he was another ahopmati of the plaintiff's, and if he did not call him, it might he said he Mel kept hint back. Loin CalrF Jthirtev—Well, you may put him in the box, and let them cross-examine him if they phrase. The witness we, then sworn; and the defenilant's Counsel Raked him whether he hail ever peen the plaintiff strike Ms wife, or knew them to quarrel ; to which he declared positively that be never had. This WAS the plain.iff's case. Mr. Sergeant Speetwie addressed the Jury for the defendant. He was surprised when he heard his Learned *Friend au this was his ease. It wee certainly a case which lie could wish had never • been brought into a Court of Justice. Indeed it was most desir able that, for the nuke Of public decency and rood morale, there could be some restraint put to such cases. His friend had alluded t o the case of yesterday; but that was a case marked with such treachery and baseness as called tbrth the strongest feelings of die. • gust and horror against the seduction end perfidy that had been ' practised. Yesterday's case was that of deep tragedy, but this day's was one of farcical buffoonery. There was nothing ben of artful sedndion, leading to the heartless abandonment of a family. It wise case which even did not afford his friend an opportunity for the indulgence of his luxurious imagination, nor even for the indulgence of a single quotation from Shakspeare, or any other fa vourite poet, which, on other occasions, he was in the habit of using with so touch effect ; but, in this case, Übe wished to indulge in qnoution or poetry, he would be obliged to resort to the New. erne Calendar, sr St. Giles's Pastorale (a laugh). Hie friend was wise to repress any indulgence in observatioo, and leave the cue to rest on the facts. He appeared, indeed, to slinnk from the men. bast of the plaintiff's vocation, and instead of saying that he kept an oyster shop, had recourse to the circumlocution of saying he was ' a dealer in Isbell-that. The case was brought before the Jury as bare of all circumstances by which they might form an opinion of the state of domestic happiness in which the plaintiff lived with his wife, and the lees he had sustained by being separated from her, as could be cooceived. God forbid he should say that the happiness and feelings of p3rsons in any class of society should be violated with impunity ; but every husband was bound to discharge the du ties which God and nature imposed on him, by the proper protec. ' lion of his wife. Great evil was to be apprehended from Juries giving es cessive damages, which, instead of being consolation for the loss of his wife's society, might make it a matter of congratula tion, that he had ever experienced a loss which was so much over paid. The only evideere of the defendant's erimittaltty was given by persona who could not speak to any conclueiye fact. It was true some of the witnesses had said enough for large inferences, but the Jury were told that he would be traced with the plaintiffs wife to the door of a brothel; that they were seen through a key-hole, tee. ' Instead of which, evidence had been given that his poor, vain, I petulant client had boasted of having received favours from the plaintiff's wife. Now his rule was never to believe the man who nukes such a boast; becauee if the fact were so, that Renee of honottr that newer entirely deserts human nature would prevent his disclosing it. When favours of this nature were really received, I they were never boasted of. Ore witness, a youth, had told them that the defendant had shown him a 1,0001. note; but that was a foolish beast to a credulous boy. One enuld rot live in this town without hearing from others that there was such a street as Chandos-street; but elthough it had been opened to them that his client and the plaintiff's wife would be seen there st a house with a key, the only evidence given was, that they had been seen in a gig in Chancery-lane. There was a sort of delicacy observed by hie frien is in the examination of their witnesses; and when he saw a curtain hang up between the Jury and the evidence, it struck him that it might be for the purpose of concealing that there was nothing beheld. A witneis had stated, that the defendant had boosted. in vulgar language, of his intimacy with the plaintiff's wife, but it was evidently an idle boast, that meant nothing, and • only proved that hits client was a man of loose talk, but not of criminal conversation (a laugh). The plaintiff's oyster shop was the natural resort of loose fish. Ills friend, Sergeant Vaughan, I had said, that the defendant proposal to give the plain. • tiff's wife a drive out, to refresh her before the ?walnut!' of the eveninge but there was no eviderse from which they were to con. elude that criminal intercourse had taken place during those drives. A Learned Judge of that Court had said that a boast made lot jest was not to be taken in evidence against him who used it; and vats it likely that the defendant would have said gravel!' what would Rx him with damages in an action ? In all his ex perience of saxes of this nature he had never seen such a lack of evidence to prove that the parties lived happily togelher. Instead . of calling the clerk of Mr. Nedbv, why not call Mr. Nedby, who, from the circumstance of his living in the same house, must have been able to speak to that important point ? Why not eall Mrs. Morgan, to whom he had alluded ? It would be an un due disparagement of the clue of onc'ety in which the plaintiff `lives, to suppose, that if they lived happily together, they could not call persons of their own clam of moral and religious feelings, to speak to their state of life. The evidence of one such female friend would outweigh a regiment of such witnesses as were pro.. duced. As far Mrs. Ann Page, she might as well, like her name sake in the play. have said " Mum," as the evidence she had given. His friend hail told them that the lady in question was handsome; but the Mies in these cases were always represented handsome, as if' their favour was a great distinction to be paid for at any price, by the foolish men to whom it wan granted ; just as it was said that the fascination of Captain Macheath's character had excited young men to imitation, at the risk of being hanged at Tyburn. The Loin Cent F JITSTICE—it would not be sufficient to run the risk; they saeold undergo the punishment. Mr. S,:rip.s:tt S PA NLII: c lies been said that the Imitation has been even carried that length. It was not a good mode ofereloaing the society of a wife. fora Imettand to he getting up just as hie wife was goieg to bed ; that was, for terrestrial beings, rather too close ah I nitation of the heavenly bodies, ore of which rose when tho other set. It was not a proper puformance of the duty of a husband in the due protection of his wife. He had been brought up at the feat of that °mallet, Mr. Chitty, and by him e had been taught that defect of fences might be piee ded in justi. fication of a trespass. The plaintiff in this meld! his handsome wile sitting in aa oyster shop till between twelve and one o'clock. with a gas.'ight before her to render the attraction greater, while her husband use sleepirg in the cock-loft. He rho uld not have left his wife in the midst of nyeters, spruce, and prgrr beer ; if a lady., left in such a situation, with a gaslight to attract, a poor fellow ran every risk of supposing that it was a place where oysters and love might be indulged in to satiety. The has. band does not perform his duty who leads his wife into temptation. A great philosopher, and indeed, common sense, said, " If you wish to keep your family pure, you until protect them from the temptation to become impure."' He could not see what society the plaintiff had lost; lie and hie sire. it appeared, seldom came toge. cher, and this yes evidently the • plaintiff's own feeling ; for what could they think of a husband who could 'remain singing in a pub lic-house with a man who had deprived him of his wife? if he welt a meteor any delicacy, he would have fled from such a scene as from a serpent, tasked of enjoying the defendant's song, and giving hirown In return. That one set spoke volumes of the feel tog of the plaintiff towards his wite—he showed he was not the pro-'' teeior of his wife's chastity, nor felt its lees. When the Jury gave • deranges, it should be to a man who was injured, and felt the inju- , Tv ; but it wee defrauding virtue to give to vice that mud that be tonged to virtue only. There was nothing in this case that could I lament the most munificent giver of damages in giving compensa tion to the plaintiff', who, it eid not appear, had really suffered any Injury. If men had such wives as the plaintiff - a, they were hound, even the the sake of others, to pay attention to their conduct. Ant I If Juries did tint discriminate between the different claims of plain. tiffs In (such Isaacs, thy wrul,l sine Westminster-hall into a bro ker% shop, where wives would be sold under the solemn adjudica tion of a Court of Law, Metes(' of helm whistled off at Smithfield with a halter shout. their Decks. The defendants in such actions resembled the foolish man mentioned is the Proverbs, to whom the wife sees, bread cateu in secret is sweat, but, it is added, her aeon are in the depths of hell. if theJurt had sons or brothers, could they conceive a greater miifortuoe In life, than a young mutt to he brought into Court under such calamitous circumstances—his cha racter degraded, and his prospects darkened ? If, in addition to all this, they were to give damages, they would aggravate misfortune into complete ruin ; and was he to get reparation in damages, who had exposed his wife ie the most regardless manner, to the ruin of a young man on his entrance into the world, and had only found that her society was of any value to hint when he came to demand its price in a Court of LAW ? The LORD CIIIF.FJuST re e, in charging the Jury, observed,that in many cases there was no better test than ridicule, because, if the cause was really ridiculous it made it appear so; but if there was nothing ridiculous in the cause, the use of it must aggro. vale the damages it was intended to diminish. One observation he would make in the outset, that if Corby's evidence was true, whatever damages they should give, no man would think it too much for the scandalous, the infamous conduct of the defendant. The first question for their consideration was, had the adultery been committed ? On that paint he thought the evidence so full, that he had prevented the production of more, to prevent the reperitfon of disgusting details. The defendant had been proved to have taken the most scandalous liberties with the plaintiff's wife; and it had also been proved that the de. fendant had made use of expressions which could leave no doubt on any man's mind. Corby had deposed to expressions used by the defendant the most beastly that could be uttered. The adultery being fully proved. the only question was, the amount of damages? The evidence of several witnesses proved that the plaintiff and 611 wife had lived very happily.-- The servants, as well as other witnesses, had been cress-ex. amined as to whether the plaintiff had not been brute enough to strike his wife. They had all declared that he had not, which showed that the imputation was a wicked contrivance. If, when ' the plaintiff' had retired to bed, he had left the defendant with his wife, be should, in that case, whine them to give small da. magem ; but it was proved that the defendant always went away before the plaintiff retired. and returned when he was satisfied he could do it without the plaintiff's knowledge. An attempt had been made to prove that Mrs. Morgan had slept in the same room with the plaintifi'and his wife, but there was no evidence of that being the fact, and it wits fair to presume that site slept in the parlour. Another fart had been proved in reduction of damages, that the plaintiff had gone once to a horse race, and once to a fight. With respect to the former, be could not gee that any moral blame shold be imputed to the plaintiff. It would certainly be a bad practice for a tradesman to go to horse.races, but he did not think that a tradesman who was assiduous in his business, could forfeit any portion of 'his claim to the respect of society by an oc casional indulgence in such a recreation. With respect to his having gone to a tight, he thought the ease was different, and he greatly lamented that tradesmen had the example of persons in higher stations to countenance them in that brutal, disgraceful, and cowardly practice. Nothing, he thought, could be snore dis honourable to the character of Englishmen, than to look on with satisfaction at danger which they did not share, and arbich was not encountered for any necessary or honourable purpose. It had been proved that the plaintiff went into a company, and drank and sang where the defendant was present. There was no evidence that he knew the defendaht was there when he entered fhe thorn ; but still he should ha* retired as soon to it became known to him. It showed he clidVint ati as lie ought, when he could be jovial and sing in the pinery« of the destroyer of his wife's honour. Nothing, however, could he an bad as the delbridant's conduct. His coming to Court that day showed that he was a person likely to use such language as had burn deposed to by the witness, and weld bear to near the investigation of a case of which his own most disgraceful I conduct was the subject. The next question was, what had the plaintiff lost ? There could be nothing mid against his being as rand of his wife in June as his was before, because he was not thenacquainted with ber ; but what could they think of the women who mold appear equally . loving to her husband, after having dehesed herself by a connexion with such a beast as the defendant ? And they were to remember that it was the value of her society they were to estimate. On a due consideration of the whole of the case they would award such damages as in their con sciences they thought right; and whatever damages they gave, no one would pity the defendant. The Jury were a few minutes in consultation, when The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE said, I forgot to mention, that with respect to the defendant's ability to pay damages, it has been proved that he said the stock in his shop was worth 2,0001. and that it was a 1,0904 note he showed the witness. Foreman of the Jury—My Lord, he might hare owed a great deal of money at the time. The LonD CntEr JUSTICE—True, he might; that's a sen sible observation. The Jury, atter a few minutes' consultation, returned a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages 380/. The Loan CHIEF JUSTICC—That is a very proper verdict; I highly approve of it. Foreman of the Jury-3ly Lord, we were afraid he would net be able to pay more. COURT OF ARCHES, SATURDAY, DEC. 3. HALL v. HALL. This was a suit of divorce brought by the wife against the hus band, upon the ground of adultery. The case had been tried in the Consistory Court, when sentence was pronounced in favour of the wife. Upon that sentence an appeal was brought by the hue. band ; and the qnestion now came before the Court in the form of an exceptive allegation, put in under the following circum stances : In the original suit the deposition of a material witness, named 1 Ann Tuckey, was admitted ; and subsequent to the sentence being pronounced, Mr. Ball made application to have an exceptive alle gation admitted, founded upon facts which had come to his know. ledge subsequent to the proceedings. This application having been granted, the allegation of a person named Garratt was admit. ted, who deposed that he had heard declarations from Turkey which went to prove that she cherished malicious feelings. and had vowed to injure the person with whom Mr. Ball was accused of having com mitted adultery. Interrogatories were put to this witness relative to certain declarations he was said to have made : to these interro gatories he gave a negative ; and further exceptive allegations were now offered by Mrs. Ball, to the effect that Garrett, in denying those declarations, "bath untruly deposed." Dr. JENNER moved that the exceptive allegations to impeach the witness Garraa's testimony should be admitted. Dr. Burt/tsar objected to the admission of the exceptive allege. titans, upon the ground that the interrogatories put to Garratt were I improperly put in such a stage of the proceedings. The original interrogatories put to Garrett were—" Did you not open. the gates of the Mockwell brewery so late as eleven o'clock at night, to let out Miss Penney, Mrs. Ball being then absent ?" " Don't you know that Min Penny has come to the brewery, and remained there all day ?" " Have you not known the people cry out, as Miss Pen ney passed in and nut of the brewery, • there gore that e•---g' " To these interrogatories Garrett replied in the negative. The Learned Doctor now contended that these interrogatories were put in an improper form ; they should have been put thus—" Did you ever declare that you had opened the gates of the brewery," &e. The Learned Doctor, in conclusion, contended that it was not competent to admit Interrogatories on exceptive allegations in this manner, and that it was a defect that the declarations of other wit. noses were not put in. Dr. PHILLIMORE followed at the same side, and argued that improper interrogatories had been permitted, after publication, and that the contradiction to Garrntt's testimony was not sufficiently specific. The declarations alleged to have been made by him were said have beep made in the months of July and August. at the house of a person in Stockwell, Surrey, and at other times. Such allegations were much too general, and on these grounds he contended that the exceptive allegations should not be admitted. Dr. JENNER, in reply, insisted that the Court should not shut out any testimony that went to prove the inconsistency of Garratt's deposition, and that the allegations now offered were a direct nega tive to his testimony. Dr. LttsuirroTOX was engaged at the same side, but declined offering anything in addition to the arguments of his Learned Friend (Dr. Jenner). Sir JOHN' Niertor.t. said, that as it was considered material to impeach the evidence of Tuckey, by roving her declarations, the Court must also bold it material, it' the exceptive allegations containing Oarratt's testimony could be impeached by anything of sting the credit of that witness. As to the degree in which Gateau's testimony may be affected, if the declarations alleged to be made by him were proved, that was a question for future con sideration, and dependent on circumstances. Upon every rale of pleading ht thought the exceptive allegation was admissible, and that the Court would be shutting out justice by refusing to admit it. It would certainly be desirable that that part of the allegation 'honk' be reformed, in which it was pleaded that the witness Gar. raft lead made certain declarations, in July and August, at Stock well, and at other linter. Exceptive allegation admitted. INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, SATURDAY, DEC. 3. Mr. Poxxocx opposed Edward Sharp's application, on behalf of Mr. George 51'Kenzie, a member of the Metropolitan Society for the prosecution and opposition of Insolvent Debtors. The peti. tinner, who is upward+ of 81 years of age, carried on a manufactory of whalebone in Clerkenwell, and the opposing creditor, a merchant in lloundsditch, by the evidence of whose clerk it appeared that on the 14th of March lost the insolvent applied to bins, and selected whalebone to the amount of 131. 31. ltd. which was put into a cart ; he then tendered a bill of exchange for 184, which witness refused to take, or to let the goods go with ready money unless the employer corsented. The insolvent and the shop-lad then went to Mr. 31'Kenzie's private residence, to learn whether lie would let the bone go on the proposed temp—on their return they both told wit. fleas that the insolvent was to take the article away, for which he was to pay in a few days ; he took it accordingly and never paid for it. Thomas Dawson, the shop-boy, denied that be delivered the message ascribed to him, but admitted that the insolvent took biro into a wine-vault and treated him, when some conversation took place which he did not now remember. • Mr. hl•Rensie deposal, that his positive orders were, that the bone should not go without ready money, but he contented to keep it as selected for two or threat days, for the insolvent's convenience. Mr. llowsrigto, the Solicitor to the Society, consulted with the opposing coeditor, when the latter declined to press the Court to pass judgment. 1111 r. Pottocx said that ht was instructed to say, that owing to the insolvent's extreme age (of which fact his client was not betose aware), and the smallness of the amount of goods obtained, he did not wish a revere judgment. Ile (Mr. P.) thought, however, flu t age was rather an oggravatlon than a mitigation of the offence ; the tiaud was certainly not very extensive, but it was committed with 'great delibesation. The insolvent in his delente'ssid, that when he took the arti4es Attunes: l - sway he intended to pay for them in a few days, oat dash which he expected to receive from a customer ; but about thi l ir esi tu the person absconded, and went either to the Cape or Mr. Commissioner Ilnwx m, in passing judgment, r that whatever might be the clemency cif the opposing ore c h t , o 44 . Court was bound to notice a fraud like.this, without refereti'ct the amount or the age of th e . party committing h. The Cou rt h only one course to take, which was to leave the insolvent for a c e , tain period at the mercy of Mr. M`Kenzte; the judgment of t Court, therefore, was that he should be remanded for lour cul t , months. at the suit of that gentleman only, who had power to rate the insolvent if he thought fit to do su. 1,01 POLICE. BOW-STREET. It is worthy of remark that three professed gamblers har e , at the bar of this police office on cnminal charges, within the I three or four months, namely, He nr y Whi te, the surgeon Z forgery, John Berger, alias De Clljbrd, for a similar °fierce s; , Jock - eon, alias Be Illelheirn, on Friday last, for stealing diarno which he had given in pledge to pawnbroker% 111 r. li m i t , pawnbroker io the Strand, was one upon w h om this last m' 1 honed individual played What ingenious mode o f ro bh ery, ynd the first who discovered the trick. H e i mme di ately peoeute,,' warrant to be issued against Jackson, and it was put into the hze, of Bishop, who ascertained that the axtrsed had tied to p ry whither the officer followed him, but remained for a conriderat; time In Paris without being able to find the lugUire. A t length, however, walking one day in the th e 'loyal t o met the object of his snatch, disguised in an immense b roae : This hat, and a rely large pair of green spre tmes This disguise could not deceive the penetraing eye of Ih s h o , who at once knew him to be his m an , an d accosted him fii. miliarly by name. but did not tell him that he was after lie Having ascertained where he was to be fo u nd, Bi s h op endeirow, to obtain the sanction of the French authorities to bring N ot ~ England, but the crimes with which he stood charged were en. considered of sufficient magnitude to warrant interferenc e an it te part, and the sanction was refused. Bishop then, determined t ,' try his best, went to Jackson 4 4 upon the bounce." as the p i t o phraseology has it, and, showing his warrant, said he mast co t , with him to England. Jackson, however, was no novice is si It matters, and he refused to come, end Bishop, after keeping ii, In custody for some hours, was obliged to leave him at In k .4 few days ago he had the temerity to return to London, sa t t h i was soon taken into custody. Mr. Harris received notice to a t , rd, but he declined, and it was hinted that a compromise had ta m place, as far as his rase was concerned. _ On Saturday James Wilson, the driver of the hackney chart No. 17, was summoned to answer the complaint of hlr.Arti o ki: proprietor of the English Opera House, for refusing to take ti z from Charing-cross to Golden-square. Mr. Arnold stated, that late in the evening he called the de. fendant's chariot from the stand at Charing-cross, and dented to be driver. to Goiden.aquarc. When the defendant mounted tile box and started, the horses, instead of going straight on, rap up to the watering-house close by. The defendant immediately began beating them in a most unmerciful manner, and this he moneyed, even atter he got them past the house at such a furi ous rate that the witness called to him to desi s t, for that he was in no hurry. The defendant made no reply. but beat his hors es more seventy than before, until he came to the corner of Suffolk.street, when the witness, determined to suffer it no longer, pulled down the front per and called out " you d—d scoundrel, why don't you cease, did I not tell you I was in no hurry ?" No 'imam had he said this than the defendant pulled up, jumped off the box, anti opening the door, mid "I am d---d if I drive you another font of ground, and so get out. You hare called me a d—d scoundrel, and I will hare sa. tisfaction." iVitness did not know what tort of satisfaction he meant, but certainly felt some apprehension that he would take it on the spot. He got out, and the defendant then demaneel a shilling for his fare, which witness refused to give him. on the ground that he had not performed his contract, but the defender,: refused to let him go, and pushed him several times- A crowd got about them, and witness gave him his card, which he read and re. turned, saying " I do'nt care for your card—l wo'ut have it—l'll have your money and satisfaction too." Witness at length pie him a shilling in order to get away. The defendant, in answer to the complaint, stated that it vet late at night when be was called, and his horses were tired enti thought they were going home, and it was absolutely necessary to flog them. He had no sooner commenced doing so, than the corn. plainant, who was very drunk, put his head out and began with you d—d scoundrel, you --- thief, you infernal rascal," awl continued a whole string of similar abusive terms, and therefore ha IRIS determined to take him no farther. Mr. Arnold denied saying more than " you d—d scoundrel." Mr. MINESIULL said he never IRIS a more impudent fellow than the coachman had shown himself to be even in that tom, and he certainly should have fined him in the highest penalty of 31., but for the circumstance of Mr. Arnold having condescended (and he, Mr. liHnshull, sincerely' regretted that he had dens ern, to use the expression which he bad himself admitted haring used. If a gentleman so far lost his self-command as to use an abusive epithet, it gave a sort of license for retort to a vulgar ram me he could not reconcile it to his duty as a 31agistrate afterwards to punish the one when the other escaped. Fined IN. and costs, the lowest penalty. WORSH 1 P-STREET. Mules Hold:worth, the youth who has been several times exa mined on elus , ges of swindling, was on Saturday fully committed for trial. MEETINGS OF CREDITORS, AT TER COURT OF COMRISSIoNENS OF BANIERRPTI t DAS►NGUALL-STREET, TO-MORROW. THIRD MEETINGS. e. Burnett, W. S. New London -street, merchant . It Madden, W. Portsea, Hants, carpc::ter - li !Lolling, R. Chapel-street and New-road, timber-merchant I Harris, G. W. and Evans, C. Southampton and Patna, linen &opera ' - 1 - - Patterson, W. and Elliott. W. Basinghall-street. merchants 10 Wilson, •0. Constitution-row, Gray's Inn-road, working. jeweller - - . - -11 l • Wilson, J. Hing-strec , . merchant - 12 SECOND SIEETINGS. Damara, %V. Sudbury, Suffolk, linen•draper 12 Habgood, %V. Sr. Johli's-streq, Clerkenvell, grocer . Knife, J. Jun. Harp-alley, Fleet-mark-T. broker - 11 Alaidlow, J. Portland -town, Regent's-park, builder - 11 Alaltby, T. and liuckland, R. 6uuer-I..ne, lace•manufac. tureis - - - - II Nutting, J. High Holborn, umbrella-manufacturer - l2 Stratton, H. Chapel-place, Stratford, Essex, wine.merchad II Wooster, J. K. 3fiddle-row, Holborn, straw-hat-manunte• .. Curer 10 - . . Yoram, G. Mary-street, Hampstead-road, potatoe-salernan 11 FIGST MEETINGS. Brewster, T. AVade-mill, Thundridge, Berta, miller Gay, J. late of the Quadr.nt, Regent, engraver Hansen, J. Clare-street, Clare-market, linen-draper Oliver, W. Ilamilton.place, liar?le.bridge, builder Oliver, J. M. Ilidinpsgate-street Within. shoemaker Richards, G. St. Martin's-lane, dealer in watches Tkes L. and Bury 'l'. Bucklersbury, warehousemen urner, R. London-road, blacking-manufacturet White, J. Holland-house. Isleworth, schoolmaster Bentley, J. and Beck. J. enrnhill, watchmakers Frowning, T. and R. A. Belviderw.wharf, Waterloo-bridge, timber-merchants 11 Bochsa, N. C. 13ryanstone-street, Fortman.equare, mane. . it II . it le . I li . 12 composer Cianpbell, J. White Lion-court, Cernhill, merchant Fentum, J. Strand, shopkeeper Sutcliffe, 13. Cheapaule, warehouseman 12 12 Rather a novel circumstance took place in this town (Shrewsbury) on We Inesday evening. As the Holyhead coach was passing opposite to Maxon's warehouse, on its way to the Lion Inn, the leader was seized by the ticost by a large dog of the bull and mastiff kind, which conti nued its attacks from one horse to the other (notsitb• standing the repeated attempts of a crowd with sticks sod other weapons to disable him) till the coach reached Hii• street, when they succeeded in destroying him. Two d the horses were considerably injured—Shrewsbury Chro nicle. MARRIED. On the Ist inst. at Caton, near Lancaster, John Fell. Epq. of Illverarone, Banker, to Isabella, daughter of Samuel Grego]. Esq. Mayor of Lancaster. On the 14th ult. at the house of the British Minister at Nark': Sir James Carnegie, of Southesk, Bart. to Charlotte, seta", " daughter of the Rev. Daniel Lysons, of Hoopes& Goad ,is , t he county of Gloucester. On Thursday last, at Brooke, Isle of Wight, ThomasJois 111..chferd, Esq. of Newport, banker, to Mary Stoddard, daughter of the Rey. Thomas Bowerman, Rector of the framer place. On the let inst. at St. Mary's, 51arylebone, Baron Lorentz. or Miss Mills, daughter of the late James Mills, Esq. of Jamaica; the ceremony had been previously unformed in Scotland. On the 28th ult. at St. Luke's, Chelsea, William Bowman EM of Slaane.atreet, to Anna Maria, daughter of the late II Outs Cox, Eq. On Saturday, the 34 inst. at lit. Margaret's, Westminster, Ale!' ander Robert Sutherland, of Parham/rot-street, M.D. to 3latir. eldest daughter or 11. L. Tho. , tas, Esq. of heleei:et'±____.......dacc• DIED. At Edinburgh, on the 27th November, John Kelt', Esq• oftlw island of 31 miens, and of Lodger s Surrey. On theld inst. at her son's house at Camberwell, Mr. Martha Jackson, relict of the late Mr. Thomas Jackson, in her [Whyte. On Tue.day last, Charles Dlissett, Esq. late of Bernanhstrret , Russel-square.On Friday, the td Inst, James 80rt21e 2 fLL .... ...t............0 7 aged • _ - HIGH WATHR AT LONDON BRIDGE THIS DAY. Morning. 23 min. atter 9. I Nvening, 68 min. after 9. _ - Printed at THE BRITISH PRSSS Office, by J. W. CAal lll9 181, Strand, and published by R. CANNON , MN 10'w• p~~. t SO G' B za in, - " - .. , •.•P "71►