The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser. — London, England, 1807-11-11 00:00:00

GISRAI.74R, Oct. 16. On the 13th.' the Carteret packet arrived from Vcily and Malta. with the mails fur this place and w ised, in 19 days passage. tubes the Carteret left hies:bas h the French had of ,obled a large tinny so the neighbourhood of Castle of Scylla. and were only waiting for ( 1;r battering tram to commence the siege, Thee army from Egypt was soon expeited in Si iy, orders having been sent fur Me ecacsotiee of ta country. All communication between this place and Spain •, 1 0s , rigidly cut off; and the Spaniards have i s bled the guards in their lines ; and his said that s urge French army is marching towards this place w oe purpose of besieging the garrison. The greatest discontent and alarm prevail in ss i a at the entrance of the French armies into a country, and sending their own troops into many ; which is universally believed to bt a r otatory measure to the vibversion of the Go. , w ent by Bonaparte. Twenty thousand of the vt Spanish troops are also on their march to Por "III, to co-operate with the French army destined tat country. LOUIS XVIII. Its Majesty the French King resembles most gu kingly his unfortunate brother Louis XVI.; In jure that l?s is grown voty Large and corpu hs, and that he is bald, paranoias ty where it will Macalleded he was marked by the assassin who :14 at him, he is very little altered from what he ,r:eared twenty years ago. The King appeared F :ntly delighted with the residence of Gossfield, saci presented a very craning contrast to the ganess of the country which he had quitted. ha Majesty walks a great deal ; but, from his in, has now left off riding. The French in this c^untry oirl:o wish to pay Asir respects to their Sovereign, write tor per mission to wait upon him, anti are r. ceiveti agree. ably t pri7.iity and rank. Their Ser.ne High. ismer the Piince of Conde, and the Duke of. Baurb n, irft Gossfirld on Saturday. for Wai.stead. Bane; and Monsieur and the Duke De Berri,. , 0 6 3 ,:day, for London. Tne names of those of laws c•iiintry who have yet been received by the Litt ot Franoe. are ac rtillow : Non of the o i' of thleans.—The Duke of Orleauo i sttent 13..1t1:11311. Irt , ites of the 1-I,nre of C.nde s erer ,. ILO INA At^ Frvie , of ah.l Duke De 13.,urh0.., father of oe ern-to he-Lout: wed u, t !mem Duk..r. D'k.usheih • the DAN Granunnia, the D_ke De Setrant, tee Duke Do Clr...i.ta E. thaw. C.,otpte F. D . F.,cata, Campte ta!raull, enani.te C...ni.te De Jarnae, Como" taCitt , r; CileVella Do la 11... err. Mottalcur U. adirea• t;!.:As.eut De Statv".bir LIYCIIPOOL. Nuv. 7. Os Thursday the Right I-1 snourable Earl ami no% Mayor of Chester, ;;:eve: n 4 the mos t sumptuous and splendid dinners in the lowt:-hall e4A.sembty-room,at the Exchange, ever witQess inthr cry. On this occasion a temporary floor, Mot tour feet high. was crated in the Town-hall, a at to be upon a level with the Assemhlproom, ail the doors of each were taken off, that the com. psny bight have a di-Ainet view from one room to Wotan : the lahle in the Town-ball wily laid in *Wm of a horseshoe, with a table down the cen t:s,oa the middle of which, considerably elevated, tool a noble Baron of Beef, weighing four cwt. ,mounted by the Banner of England. and round re edge of the dish, " 0 ! the Roast Beef of Old foglactl. 0 ! the Old English Roast Beef.—Nov. :307.—G0d Save the King." On the same this wu also a fine Baron of Mutton, weighing sormounted with his Lordship's arms, neatly pitted, and round the edge of the dish his Lord nlo's motto. " Nobilitatis villas non stemma c4arac ur." Likewise the largest sallad we ever beheld, nest tastefully decorated, sutetonnted by the City Ares, and round the dish, `, Prosperity to the 'hide tt the City of Chester." Besides these, the L,klntr consisted of every rarity the season could Muni. At six o'clock, about 300 sat down to this magniticent entertainment. rooms were most tastefully fitted up for this princely banquet : and brides a number of chandeliers, they were inuMi reed with 3000 variegated lamps ; but what most Etraded the notice of the company iti this sleport melt. was the centre window of the Assembly nom, fronting his Lordship's seat, on which were displayed the letters G. R. in variegated lamps, which had a Ma elegant appearance ; indeed, the general effea of the whole was grand beyond de scription. The whole of this brilliant illumination ens under the chieetion of Mr. Alderson, of The inneral of the Archbishop cf Yoet will take Otte this day in the most private manner. A most daring robbery was committed at Wcl - in the neighbourhood of Hell, on Sunday tensing last. During Divine Service, some vil lains, with a ehissel, or other insttilment of that enure, forced open one of the windows in the front of the house of Mr. WI I lAA 61 Pa Ise, entered the Parlour, broke open a desk. threw the papers it contained round the rental, and took away several promissory and ether notes, &c. to the amount of °"' $OOl. The parlour door being lucked, they ' , seed it open. and proceeded up stairs, where they runiaiaged the drawers, turning over all the gowns. hart, Ste. belonging to Mrs. Yarns; after which tSe7 kit the house by the back door. It appears, ilte robbers had been thirsty at the time, fur they Lad drawn the corks of several battles of vinegar, itancheig in one of the roams. but the liquor had nut barn altogether to their taste. Several silver tea sad table spoons, a silver cream jug, and other ar *teaof plate, were in one of the closets which they had ortned. hut these articles were not taken away . FortunatelY, lite i►ills which were taken away, were et such a description, that the villains will oat he Able ut negociate them. J. Wawa, No. 16, Cornhill, informs the 11olde:s of Supplementary Tickets and Shares, not 4 ".Tiri; money. that their identical Numbers be drawn over again is the Supplementaty I oil., - Ts of only 6,000 Tickets, giving them the ta:4l..: e of the great Prises of 20,0001. 10,0001. Laos:sands, Five Hundieds, &c. Ate. Ste. with er• aly addiri ) 8 4 e.tp;ase. or trouble of thett LAW INTALLICENCE. COURT Of CHANCERY. Nev. la. :011W PICILIT dwd WIWI O. DINAH LOOM,. This was it bill brought to set aside a deed, cm entotl.4 Mired*. Ma y, and her sister, Elizabeth K►iermas, since deceased, without issue, conveying their right and title to two freehold estates iu Kent and Catrihridgeshire, for the consideration of 10471. Plaintiff and sister were of the poorest class. The husband of one was a la bourer, and the husband of the other under sen tence of transportation, for petty larceny. They were perftBly ignorant, and could not read or write. The first intimation they bad of eaeir being heirs to this property, "VAS through the medium of an advertisewer•.t in a Newspaper, making inquiry after the ' , datives of IVilliant Logan. Plaintiff, Mary, and sister, made their circumstances known to Mr. ileitis, a tavern-keeper in London, who employed a Lawyer to undertake the husiness. They did not know t:ie •alue of the estates at the time, hut bad since learned they were worth 70001. Deland:et, wile of William Logan, and only en titled to her dowry, it was stated, took :Wean owe of the poverty and ignorance of Plaintiff, Mary, and sister, and prevailed on them to assign their right and title, as heirs at law of William Logan, to said estates, at the above undervalue. . There was a bill to the same 'flea filed in 1 ibtis but from some mismanagement was dismissed with costs, which Plaintiff being unable to pay, was thus delayed in prosecuting her claim. Sir SAMUEL Romts.t. v hoped his Lordship would allow the interrogatories in the former cense to be read as evidence : his Lordship consented. The lest of the day was occupied in reading them. COURT OF RING'S RI:NWT, Nov. 10. ACTION'OF TROVER. JOSZPIS DOW/ON a. WYSS Pa L ASDIN. The Arroausx-Gusaam. moved for a Itule to chew cause why • new trial should net take place in this case, wherein a verdict had been given tor the Defendant. It was an action of ,rover, brought against Mr. Pal...kin, a merchant in London, for a quantity of staves which had been sent by a Mr. Talpin, from Danteic and Stettin. Mr. Dowson, the Plaintiff, had been a partner of a house, along with two others, Thomas Dow son and John Bar ker. Of these partners, '1 homas Dowson had died, and John Berke' had ratite& so that the partner ship was dissolved upon the 3d of May, 1806. Jo seph Dovethn,however,liaving succeeded to the be tracts of the firm, continued to carry it on as for inzily t it was intimated accordingly in 7ile and that all ii-hts of the original concern were to be settled by him. Mr. Talpin, who had before sent cargoes of staves to this house, wrtse a letter, dated lath Nov. ISO 6, which he inclosed in one to Mr. Palaskin, who was his agent, stating that he had sent a parcel of stases, which he wi.hed them to t.ske at a certain price which he proposed, mad diarelad Mr. Falaskin to deliver the staves to them, it they chose to accept of them. This letter Mr. Palaskia accordingly iutimates! to Mr. Joseph Dow son, the only remaining partner, open r Saturday, and, upon the Monday following, Mr. Palasktis agreed to accept o: them. They were demanded upon the Stith of December ; but it happened, that upon the preceding day (being Christmas, upon which no business was done) the value of staves had considerably tisen ; and Mr. Palaskin made scale objections to the credit, or time that was to elapse between the sale and payment of the goods, as mentioned in the letter. Upon this, however, Mr. Dowson, to obviate all objections upon that score, immediately put down the money ; notwithstand• ing which, Mr. Palaskin refused to deliver the Staves. The only question, therefore, was, whether the Plaintiff, Mr. Joseph Dowson, who had thus succeeded to the business, and carried it on undet the original firm, was entitled to the benefit of this offer made to the house ? The change that had taken place in the house was notorious, the depar t tore ut Barker having been published in The Gawk. as well as the decease of lhornits Dawson. Palos kin himself had ors this offer to Joseph Dawson, as the person who stood in the place of the house I so that there was no doubt as to the offer having been made to the original firm ; and it was upon that ground that he (the Attorney-General) moved for a new trial, there having been sufficient evidence of the change of the firm being known to Palaskin at home, though nut to Mr. Talpin abroad. Lord ELtatisoitoucto—" I think I should have nonsuited the Plaintiff under the circumstances that formerly appeared, but as it DOW stands, you may take a Rule to 'hew cause. If a nonsuit had taken place, I should have doubted whether it ought to have been bi anted." MANNINO, ANDIRTOD, and nos•Nieurr, e. rill CotabliSSlONAlts far ihe Watt INDIA DOCKS. Mr. &quilt Best moved for a Rule to shew cause why the verdict pronounced in this case should not be sat aside. By the AA, 46 of the King, chap. 102, sec. 9, it was stated, that where questions of doubt and difficulty orise with respect to the title of a party to compensation, on account of the damage occasioned by the erection at the West- India Ducks, as well as with rasped to the amount so to be recovered, the Justices are allowed to re serve the consideration thereof for the Court of King's Bench ; and it also direaed, that the motion for that purpose should be made within the first four days of the term. Ile now applied to the Court, in this case, upon the ground of a mis-di reCtion of the Recorder. The A& of :h) Geo. 111. chap. 69, sec. 121, stated, that by reason of the improvements made for the reception of vessels and goods at the West India Docks, certain per sons might thereby sustain damage, in consequence of business being divert'd from that neighbour hood. and thc.vt..re gave power to these Commis sioners to snake to them a just and liberal satisfac tion, by purchase, or otherwise ; and in case they cannot agree, tneu it directs that a Jury should be summoned, to ogee taio the amount of the satisfac tion so to be given. The case of Messrs. Manning and Co. came before a Jury at Guildhall, and an estimate of the damage sustained had previously come before tic Counnissieners, for tea years back, sheering what property they, during that perital. had been possessed of. Afser this had been delivered in to the Jury, it IMAM@ a question with the Recorder, whtthsr the Try 1,,04;14 glee t4teir verdict upon a.t average of thre^ years previous to the pasaing of the act in 1793, or whether it should be taken upon an average of three years subsequent t-) the opening of she Docks ! He, for the Plaintiffs, insisted, that their property was rendered of no use, owiog to the alterations which had taken place, by the ere.:ii,in of these Docks ; and therefore he should enil,:avour to chew, that it was impossible to put that con stroetion upon the Ad of Parliament, which the Recorder had done ; but that their Lordships had a right to dire& that the value of their properly in the years 1802-3-4, at the opening of the Docks, should be taken ints the computation, as well as that of the years 13078-g. The ptotits that were likely to be made. were as necessary to be looked to, as the profits thit had at:Wally been made at the time the Aft passed. The Aft did not direct in what manner the average should be taken; but. in this case, it had been aw eed by the parties, that the ge of three years should be adopted ; but the point in contro versy was, which three years were mote equitable, and just, In order to comply with the in tention of the Aa! Cou a T—.." The question seems to he, whether you are to take en average of the plaits arising from the Plaintiffs' property, previous or subsequent to the injury sustained ? Is there any other standard suggested by the Aft of Parliament, than that of the value of the property immediately before the injury ?" Mr. Besel. The Aft direfts, that the compen sation to be given is to be a just and liberal com pensation, so that it is a matter left for the Jury to determine, whether it shall be made by giving the value nt th:! property, previous to the year 1799, or the subsequent year. ? It the property had been valued in the /ear 1799, it would have been for the Jury to ascertain, as nearly all possible, what the Plaintiffs might have made of that property during the next thirteen years: because, if that property was then to be taken from them, they would be se riomly injured by the loss of those profits which might have accrued. COUNT—" The time is certainly fixed by the Mt. You are now asking two advantages, whe. Cher the docks did exist or not." Mr. Bur The gradual increase of the tom sums of the country, and the imports into the port Of London, ought alto to be takes into the Itatirlla• tion, and theretote it is enough to shew the manner in which the decrease has been produced." Suppose, notwithstanding the existence of these warehouses, your property had produced mealy the same as formerly, then row would not have been entitled to any thing." Mr. ilesT—" If these docks had not been ereaed, we would have been in the receipt of 1501. instead of 1001. per annum; and therefore they who have diverted our trade from us, ought to indemnify ut ; evidence to this effeß ought to have been received by the Jury." The &grout vt•Gemsti At. said, that all the evi dence bad been received upon the subjeft ; and the question. as put by the Recorder, was, whether the Jury were to take the value at the passing of the AR, or at the opening of the Docks ? and the Jury were of opinion that it was to be taken at the time of the passing the A.R. Mr. Bear Although evidence was adduced on this subjeft, the Recorder told the Jury that they were not to pay any attention to the increased value of the property subsequently, but only its value pre viously, to 1799 ; upon these grounds, therefore, he submitted to their Lordships, that the Recorder ought to have told the Jury, that it was no; the true and proper constru Rion of the AR t, put the Plaint iffs, in the year 1803, in the situation they were in in the year 1799 ; and, therefore, they stood is the same predicament as if the evidente adduced bad not been admitted." Lord ELLartionouctu—" I remember a ease in which a compensation Was given for a ferry, amounting to 11,0001. being nearly 50 years pur chase, upon the idea of its being susceptible of a prospeßive increase, on account of an increased population. This, however, brief; upon a subjell affording a most precarious profi:, it was fortu• nately got rid of by another construaion of the AR of Parliament. Ido not life I.ow, in this case, we can look to any other rule than that prescribed by the AR in question, which most probably bad in view, that the valuation iheuld be taken at the passing of the AR." Mr. filear if the Legislature had to intended, they would certainly have mentioned the years prior to 1799. If a man were selling a tent charge, he knows shat value to put upon it at all times. and a compensation for the loss of it *solid not exceed twenty years purchase ; and suppose a man be valuing lard for a like purpose, he would allow snore than its present value, because it would be likely to produce more at souse future time." Lord Ettatirsonouou—'. We will do the parties the satisfaßien to loot. more attentively into the AR, but it is merely oat of deference pi the quan tity of properly at stake, and not from any apparent doubt we entertain 'as to its true con.trOlion ; we will therefore take time to consider of it, before we diva's of this matter at all." ziss alma, on the Proscenium of Me Right Ncn. Jolts S6I.LIVAM P. COL. DIAPIIII.. Mr. DAPCST moved for a Rule to thew cause why a new trial should not take place, or at least be thought it necessary to make a short application to the Court. upon the subjeß of some additional evi dence which could now be produced. 'Phis matter had already been before the Court and the public, and therefore it would be unnecessary for him to touch upon particulars. He should merely state, that it was a prosecution for a libel upon M. Sullivan, which, there was no doubt. was harm less in its nature. On a former occasion the trial had been ;.ustponed, in order to give the Defendant an opportunity of producing the evidence of a Dr. Lynch, of the island of Trinidad. That Gentleman had accordingly made an affidavit in that country, but it had aftet wards been thought advisable that he should give his evidence perlionally, in crder to do away any (*semi:its that might exist. The ground on which he made this appc.ition was, that as Dr. Lynch had only arrived after the trial had taken place in September, he had not yet tv-cn per sonally examined, and. thetefore, supposiog the. Court should think prc•per to indulge tow uiniou, that 'aim". would then :are ,:pi:atUatty of at • 41E3 A7 .-:.‘ ' • • 1 1 -,.... ... leis 'hewing the ttr.th of Ws f river ama .. . 'ri .which he hdd sworn to abroad. He should nor say, that that would operate as a justification piths publication of the libel, Amt as the trial had WO postponed, on account or that gentleman's 'absentia, Ihe hoped he did not miecondud himself in oil:mita. ting his arrival to ehe Come, in order flat they' I might judge, whether any Luther havestigatioadi would be necessary. Lord ELL crJaoaouoa-dt As the testimony of that Witness cannot go to alter the case, there caG, be no rearm for a new trial, but I think be may be allowed to come into Court, upon the pronouncing of judgment, in order to stale what he further. brows of ill.: matter." Mr. GAn a ow, in absence elf the Attorney-Gene ral, stated, he had no 'Vacuity in consenting to it. atabOltfus ritusECUTION. Peace:t o. arictiasikee• Mr. Cyan sv, on behalf of the Plaiotift Mies Purcell, moved for a Rule to thew car re wily the nonsuit obtained in this case should hot be set asides and a new trial granted. The allegation in the declaration stated, that an indictment had been preferred to be moved in this Court, at the suit of the present Defendant, against the present Plaintiff: for perjury, but in which the then Plaintiff, Mr. Macnamara, not appearing, was nonsuite4. In eon sequecce of this, the present action had been brought by Miss Purcell agaiust Mr. Macnamara, for a ma' liciuus prosecution ; but owing to some inaccuracy in the statement of the declaration, the presume Illesadif had been also nonsuited. The declaratioelsell Mew what inaccurately stated, that the party (racoons' • • Miss Miceli), who had been the Defending l'e do • former Mkt:intent, was acquitted upon the morrow of the Holy Trinity ; whereas it appeared upon a further inquiry, that she was acquitted upon the Tuesday next after the Term of Easter. This was a point, however, which did not at all refer to the record ; the ground upon which he made this apa plication being, that the day upon whicl That ac quittal took place was not material. All that was rt:quisite ii such a case WM, that an acquittal should take place prior to the aition. lie support of this the Learned Counsel cited several cases, and particularly that of Pope or. Forster, in the fourth volume of 7erm leVorts, wherein such variances were not held to be fatal. Lord ELLENSOIIOUGH said, he thought that the cars of Pupe v. Foster, alluded to by Mr. Gurney, seemed to run on all:fours with this one, and there. fore it would be necessary to consider it again, and, at all everts , the variance which had created this nonsuit, might also be further considered, upon arguing the Rule now granted. il - 4 1 J .:1: I f t ry COURT Of COMMON MEAS.-41ov. 10. GILLIT e. DAWII•111. In this cause, which had excited considers d! in. terest amongst the Rocha.liar% and Printers of this metropolis, and with the particulars of which. as detailed in our report of the trial at Guildhall, the public are already acTrairted. S njeant VA tro n Rig s on the part of the Plaintiff, moved fee a Rule to show cans. why the judgment sheald not be entered up to the full amount of the sum Spei oiled in the declaration, viz. 1800 1 - and upwards, Of a new trial granted. The Verdi& of the JUry, in this case, gave to the Plaintiff every thing. mines the amount of the charge for printing, and the value of the paper, the property of Defendant, which was consumed by the fire, in the printing. house of the Plaintiff. The Learned Serpent was inclined to gnarrel with that decision, first, upon the ground that the Defendant could not avail himself of the set-off made in the demand of 51'e value of the consumed paper, and nett, upon the general principle of law— that a man has a right to be paid for work done upon all article, although that article, in the pro gress of the work. should be lost or deerroyed.—. With resped to the alleged usage of the trade, it was in the recolleaion ot the ('curt, that a Food deal of contradittory opinion had been disclosed id the testimony of the various witcesses produced on the trial ; and the Jury, in returning their verdift, did not state any recognition of such a custom, although the Court instruaed them to deliver an opinion upon that point. LORD CHIRT JUSTICe—" I smile& the ease. and. in my apprehension, the July, upon the whole, decided rightly. With regard to the general rine ciple of the law, it is true, that a mta has I right I. be paid for work done on an 'thole, although that article, previous to its completion, be deshibyed, tile. less the general usage ot the particnlar trade be against it. With respeft to the first groand of this application, I think it a strong one ; I have all along thought the Defendant could not avail him self of the set-off with raped to the paper ; but with regard to the verdid, wheal'r an opinion wse stated by the Jury or not, 1 have no more doubt than f have of my own existence, that they con. sidered the Defendant not bound to pay for printing a wot k which was consumed before the delivery or, in other words, they considered it the custom of the trade, that in such cases. both bookseller and printer should sustain their mutual le.ses.—Take a Rule." Atter some unimportant motions, the Court pro• cxedett to the trial 01 Nisi Prow causes. . BROWN, WITZPAZIPACIC, and Others. This was an alion of trespass. in the dwelling house of the Plaintiff, on the SI st of May, at Isle worth. it was totally unsupported by evidences • and the Plaintiff WAS non-sailed. teIIAIIRRA and WII2, C. VANIBLS. This was an adion of ejeament. brought by the Plaiotiffs, for the violation of the covenants of a lease under which the Defendant. as die represent.. ative of Mr. Meyer, held certain houses so Fut. ler's-kients. otherwise the Wooden World. ►etween tsoldea-lice anal Goswell.street. The lease bad been granted. in the yeas DOS. by Mr. Jones. the father of Wers. /voNamarar, whose legal hair she was. There was a pessove covenant, imperative on the Lessee. to keep the premises in constant ree pair. It appeared, that as.cut 15 year, ago, one IA the houses suffered ea's. w rahly by tire, and 0 others were so weak in their foundation, at' it necessary to lighten them by one story. garder.s, which at one time belonged to them, ccr.veried by the Defenuont into a burial•gr Several W:zneases Frovrd the decaNed star which plc masc. v,tie suffered to tall; I I a I , and the to maka ry. The em, wets ,tircunki. date IMO ; and tq►