The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser. — London, England, 1825-11-23 00:00:00

l t{ - ny. JUnl. appe..l on COUO - he paid and no. ... 7 him, . prissesoed no jurisdiction whotsoevef. He would not enter more fully at present into a re view of the topics urged by beamed Oentlemen, but would reserve his remarks for an occasion of greater leisure, ands more favourable opportunity. The grounds for his opinion ware, that this was no property that had ever been titled in the plaintiff, but it was a species of property created by a convention and Act of Parliament. It wee neither more nor less than s mete creature of the convention and Act of Parliament so often alluded to. Throughout the orgu newts of Counsel for the bill, it assumed that the plitintill had lights of property in the estate in question ; but if, as he was of optninn, that was a property entirely aested in the manner de. aerated, the title to it could only be maintained under the con vention rut Act of Parliament. The plaintiff's title was not sopportcd in this way. IVith respect to the argument of plaintiff's Counsel, that the Commissioners of Liquidation had no authority to &Wei the right of the claimants, but only the amount or their telpeetive claims, the 15th iriction of the Act fully tetanal that sesettion. The terms of that section were—" And be it further enacted, that in case any dispute shall arise between the several parties claiming etor.pensation, and that the Commissioners shag tat be able to deride between them." Viltat then ? They (the Commissioners of Liquidation ) are authorised to take the opinion nod . advice of a Court of Equity. It was argued that the Commissioners hid no authority to decide between A and B, but here was a plait' proof that-they had. in the event of their not being able, from the nature of the claim, or the lesal difficulty of the case, to decide be tween contending parties with satisfaction to thentse;ees, then, and then enly they were at liberty to lake the opinion of a Court of Lquity on the subject. Tile principal argument on which the plainting. lied wit in this manner conclusively refuted, simply by reading des libel of the Act of Parliament. His Honour concluded by repast rig, that he was satistitd in this case the Court neither possessed nor could exerase an authority to review the award of the Privy Council. For the !purpose of answering the argument, urged to the contrary, he would take an opportunity to deliver his opinion more fully on the subject at a future day. COURT OF KING'S BENCH, WE117111:(1TER, TIJZSDAY, Nov. tai. • he as it went. The general right of the fermentative of Mr. Finn,* lo enjoy the property in queskee kill been recognived, ace tae i only now *ought on the point of the plaintiff, that the right shetAld he directed to the proper channel. `Alt VlCilt-(iiaxcti.oole—You claim under the convection, )1,. Mnrne. Mr. Mount your Iforinur. 'lk Vecs, , Ces nos I-Loa—Suppose there bad been ro conven- tion etilet of Partiantent, could you have established any right of pitsirty uginest the French tiosertiatent. That ie the axis of your min argument. If yotr client has no right other than that con. veyed by the convention, site must clatm tinder it. The sot. le I TOT/ G Clf t OA L-1f we could not enforce oar ireeept under the convenTion, neither could the defendant. Mr. IVA' eiran followed on the same sida. Mr. Wittig eppearc4 for the Attorneytliennral, on the part of the Crown. which claimed • moiety of the estate, Mr. Fanning hmieg died without issue surviving. The Learned lientinuan won peokeetiog to argue the general question, when, The Vtce-CmewCELLOa observed— 1 t Is unnecessary for you, Att. Wray, to gu Into the melds. You claim against, not through, Deveteue. lit. W RAT—Ur.lcas the Court will hear me state my own case try own way, I can't proceed. The Vict-CuAeczt.con—Then I can't hear you, Mr. Wray. The Court is not on the merits, but on the question eljuris. diction. • Mr. AT—I shall consider it a good ground for an appe_l on the poet of the Crown, that I have not been heard. Mr. H Awe maid s few words in reply to the arguments of Conn. set for risfntiff. Tile VIC t-CHA'SC EL LO A, in &live:rig his judgment, said, he Ind attended to this erne serapulous.7 from its commencement on account of the novelty and importance of its nature. lie had paid all the attention he was capable of giving to the very full and inmioiss arguments of Counsel on With sides, bet had seen no- thing to remove from his mind the conviction entertained by him, attig this was a case in which the Coon possessed no jurisdiction MAIM V. BALL. This watt an action against the defendant as a common carrier. aid was brought to recover compensation for the loss on two boxes a . silk good., valued at t 621. At the trial, the delivery and book ing of the boxes at the defendant's office. Cross Keys, Wood-street, Cheapside, and of their nen.arrival at their destination, were proved. For the defendant a notice was proved, by which he dis claimed his 'tabs:ley for all packages above the value of 31. The Lord Chief Justice, at the trial, thought the case of so much am. patience, that he wmte out four questions for the Jury. The facts they !mind on three questions were framed into a speciel verdict, which was called on toe argument this day. Mr. BAILEY, for the plaintiff, said, that the special verdict band that the plaintiff' had published • general notice that he weald not be liable above M. ; tltat these boxes of silk had been delivered to the defendant, to be " safely and securely" conveyed to Seth, :recording :o their directions , and that the defendant had received the goods for this purpose, knowing the value of them. rho futesticin tor the consideration of the Court oar them facts was, I whack? the defendant. necking these boxes with • knowledge of I..eir value, did thereby, in effect, rescind his general notice of non : s'emit , •? The'Loaln Ceara' JUSTICE thought that the introduction of the rpressios safely &oda/cur.:4" would Iced to some embarrassment hireafter, -and might prevent the real question from being raised. The insertion of these words, in fact, assumed the very point which .res vow to be argued; they were an inference from facts, instead of Lel)* merely facts. air. SC•IILETT, who was on the other side, pairLithat there was ro dhow rude of law than that in a special verdict it is not stiffi canoe to lind the evidence of theta, but the facts themselves ; not in fetncei front Nets, but simply the facts. He would suggest that if/esecial verdict in this case s tould be wended. He thought it ;otter! simply state the occupation, then the notice of tion.liebtiity, thee the dmti'very of the goods, and the acceptance of them by the msfecda at, witit a knowledge of their value. With thin statement col:. -al point could come in to disturb the judgment of the Court on the real queouon at issue, whim he apprehended was this,—whether the defendant, receiving thee; goods with a knowledge of their value, mild thereby, notwithstanding hits notice, undertake for their safe delivery. gr • BAILEY cool:, not see any necessity for amending the ver /AI. He Cotdi car perceive how the introduction or the words •• safely and securely" could lead to any difficulty, or prevent the real question from being raised. Mt. Justice BATLEY—In point of fact, Mr. Bailey, you want is to take for granted the very point which is to be argued. The LORD CHttr-JcsTicL said that the case had better stand over, to have the special verdict amended, which was acceded to, though somewhat reluctantly, by Mr. Bailey. BULIINOHIM V. B/NIES. Mr. GURNEY said. that on a former day the Court had ordered this cause to arm on for trial at the sittings after the present term, Let by a mistake in drawing up the rule, as it now stood, the trial vas ordered to come on ■t the sittings after Trinity term. He, Lac-efore, moved the Court to gram a rule to show cauve why it sheuld not be amended, and why the Master should not ascertain the expenses of the defendant's witntsses, in order that they might be paid by the plaintiff, in pursuance to the former rule. Rule granted. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS. w ESTMINSTZR, TvzsoAr. soy. n CONTEMPT OF COURT. On a former day of this Term, Mr. Sergeant Witog obtained a rule Calling upon John Hunter, Esq. of Cambridgeshire, to show cause why an attachment should not issue against him for a con. tereist of this Court, in not obeying a subverts which had been serval upon him, requiring him to attend as a witness in • cause between Thorpe, Esq. v. Gisbome, for the keep of some race t;aries, which war tried betore the Lord Chief Justice of Ibis Court, at Westminster, in last Easter Term. The rule was obtained upon the affidavits of the attorney in the mini, and Oa person named Stasilog, who was employed to servo tae subpcena. It appeared by the affidavit of Starling, that a person of the' huge of Jones had given him a copy of a subpcena on the Epsom law-course, on the 17th of May last, requesting him to go and Alitt it on Capt. John Hunter, who then attended those races. :Aiding accordirgly went to serve him with the copy. At first Copt. hunter refuse) to take it, but a gentleman who was with him took the paper, and observed, " why this is a sublicena for ybo to attend on the 19th, which is the great Derby day." SJar. :tag then tendered to the Captain a guines, as conduct money, artless the Captain said, "d —n your money, I would not attend on that day for 100 guineas." and taking the copy of the stamen', :rum his friend, desired Starling to take it back again, but the de. potent refused to do so. upon which the Captain threw the copy tin him, and offered Starling money if he would go away, and say that he could not find him. •The affidavit of the attorney in the cause stated, that be had caused the subperna to be duly served on the Captain. 31v. Sergeant VAUGHAN now showed cause against the rule. He coetencied that upon the affidavits which were read by his Learned Bother Wilde, in applying for the Hula, it was obvious that no proper service had been made of the subjacea ; and until that was •:orrti it was impossible the conduct of Captain Hunter, who was a gentleman of great respectability, and who would not wantonly mem: the displeasure of any Court of Justice, could be construed icto a contempt of this Court, by treatirg with disrespect its pro.: resit It did not at all appear by the 2tE.::‘t it of Starling, that the ortOnal writ had ever been produced to Captain Hunter, or indeed met it ever was in the hands of Starling himself. It was absolutely teetotal to the very existence of a contempt of the process of the t-oner, that the party accused should be fully aware at the One he we, eflegfrd to hare committed it, that the process had real;y issued f torn that Cosa ; but to this case there was no proof that Captain Hunter had ever been informed out of what Court the writ issued, le indeed that the piece of paper was a copy of any original writ at 41 Betides. Captain Hunter bad in his affidavit denied the facts sgeeti to by bta.ling. He stated, that a shabby loose character, a sort of idle intruder at race courses, came up to him and gave him a per, but 'thigh the respondent returned to him without reading I asee:tafning Its nature. Ile denied that this person ever or Or ow him any terairry, or that be (the respondent) used the offen ell* lrestuage inipoted to him, or any langtastre of that nature. TIM hie Lensed ff•rgrant contended was a sufficient answer to the' wallbsestalhei: i.t the affidavits on the other sole ; and would riiiteeel eatial the Court that no contempt had beet, committed. the I.Urtsrt wand bear is mind that the parties applying fir 1: rule would not be left without a remedy, even If the rule be dlsettergra, as they would still have their action at la w, _ leg Wad the whet? tneritt c • the cast might b e gone into , and the • party against whom the'aeplication was now made woffidiiiiith l olppurtunity to enter into a full explanation of the circumeteners, and the 'muter be finally decided. There was, however, another circumstance which he would submit to the Court, as being suffi- Ment to enttite lion to have this rule discharged ; and that was the length of time which boil been suffered to eleueebetore the rule was moved for. had been decided in the Bench that the party who seuetit a summary punialtment to be indicted on a per • son, t.icilaut the intervention of a Jury, ought to du at, in the nest Tenn a(iPe the Flt:nee conioleinteluf wueconotatted. The Leirned sergeanrieise about to quote the case in ahleii On decision oc. mitred.. but was stopped by the Coutt, who desired Mr. Sergeant W title :o proceed in solvent of dot. rule. Mr. Sergeant Wiene said, notwithstanding the arguments of his Learned Brother, lie should conical that this was a case that called fur the most :nicked reprobation on the part of the Curt. The conduct of the respondent was, hi would submit, a gross con. tentPt of the Court in two points et view. First, there was a gross want of obeilieoce to the process of the Court, and in the second place a gyms attempt had Lien made to bribe a person while in the act of serving that pracess. Whether the service was technically consist ft not he submitted there was reationoble evidence to satisfy the Court that the pirty had full notice that die individual, who handed him the paper oft the race-courem.came to ecru him with a proems of thia Cueit. The respondent had, it was true, denied wising the language imeuted to hint, and had alto denied that Star ling had offered Min intone", but lie dig nut they that lie knew the (thine et the stamens was to require his auendauer in the Court of ' Common Pleas. or that he bail oared money to Starling with a view to suppress the service of the sulipmnu, and to induce that person to say, that he had not seen the respondent They was a most material deleet in this gentleman's effulasit,and one which he thought would induce the Court to make the rule abothite. The Logo CHIMP JUSTICE said he wan exceedingly sorry that this case was drought before the Court in so imperfect a man ner, tor if the affidavits had been sufficient to make out the cane, one of grosser contempt had never occurred; and undoubtedly die punishment which would have fallen upon this gentleman would have taught him in future not to tamper with soy man who was deputed to serve him with a Knees+ of this or any other Court. or with the process itself. But unfortunately there was not autficient proof of any conteamt against any process Liming from this Court. No person could be guilty of a contempt by rejecting the service of soy paper, unless the party was informed that lieu caper was a true copy of the original imbpoina proceeding from this Court. All that appeared by the affidavit of the attorney was, that he had caused n espy of the subpoena to be served upon Captain Hunter, but he did nut state how he had caused it to he Ammo. Cm: it app. , ered that tie attorney was not the putters who dclierred the subeena to Star. ling. The Court, however, was left to infer (for that had not been sworn) that the attorney delivered it to a man of the name ofJenee, and that Jones gave it to Starling. All that Starling said was, that he Ilad received paper from Junes, who desired Witten serve it on Captain Hunter. It nowhere, immured that Jones hatui,d over the original subpoena to Starling; acd if not, it could not be good set. vice by Starling, who ought to have had the eriginal its his pos. session. Ott the contrary. it appeared by Starlit g's own eflidavit that be gave the Captain a piece at paper which had been given to him by Jones; this was MA enough to bane a person into cot. tempt., Besides, it din not at ail nepear that the writ came front !ie Court- It was therefore impossible to get on with this case Without an affidavit front Jones. If that person bad sworn that he took the subpuut from the attorney. aril gave it to Starling, and then if the attorney came and said he saw Sterling serve a copy of it en Captain Hunter there would have been evidence of the con tempt. Hut owing to this defect, for aught that apeoarea, the writ might have nsued (pout any other Court. flip Lordship was in hopes they should have got at this fact in another way. Sometimes parties were disposed to say mere than wis convenient to them in their affidavit.. If it had been ad mitted by the respondent that he knew he was to appear on a trial in the Common Flee% that would hare been sufficient ; but all that he swore was, that he was supposed to attend on tha day of the Derby stakes. but rehere he did not say, whether in the King's Bench, in the Common Pleas, or in the Exchequer. This was theretore ineuffirient to sustain a rule of this nature. It was per. fectly tree that this gentleman had not denied one tact, which, as far as histnoral character was concerned, was most important. It had been sworn that he said to the person who went to serve him with the piper, .• I will give you some money, if you will say you could not tied me." It would have been well for the character of this gentleman if he had been able to have denied this tact, or had called the person who was in his cnmpany to have sworn that no such words were used by him. Be had certainly denied saying that he would not appear on the Derby day for lOU guineas. If the proof had been properly afforded to the Court, his Lordship thought they should have taught this gentleman that 10th guineas, and hie staying at the Derby would not have indemnified him for the pun. ishment which this Court would have visited upon him. But as that proof was defective, the rule, he thought, must be discharged, lint as his Lordship certainly considered the conduct of the respond ent such as could not be approved of, it must be without costs. Mr. Justice PARK agreed with his Lordship that the role must be discharged. The doubt that he had at first felt was, not that the party had been guilty of a contempt of Court in not attending to the subpcena, bat by therms language that he had used towards the Court. That a gentlerni.n, who, as the Learned Sergeant had stated, held the rank of Captain in the army, should have used such languege, was conduct that ought to have received every re. probation of the Court towards which it war addressed. His Lord. ship did not wonder that his Learned Brother Vaughan was wil. ling to withhold the affidavit ; he produced it with great reluc tance ; because in that affidavit it was not attempted to be denied that the party had offered a bribe to the person who went to serve the process of the Court. His Lordship therefore thought, that though the Court was compelled, tor the reasons stated by the Lord Chief Justice, to discharge the rule, yet it must be without costs. Mr. Justice Bun/meow said, that the first question to be considered was whether the respondent had disobeyed the pro. eels of the Court. It was clear that he could not have disobeyed it, because it did not appear that the writ was ever shown to him. Every body knew that the disobedience was to the writ, and not to the copy ; and the usual course was to al:ow the writ at the same time that the service of the copy was made. This tint having been done, he thought the rule must ha discharged, but, under the circumstances, without costs. Mr. Justice GASI:LEE said, that as the rest of the Court had expressed their opinion that the rule ought to be discharged, it was not necessary for hint to enter at length into his reasons for thinking that there was sufficient evidence to warrant them in making the rule absolute. If the question had been left to a Jury upon this evidence, whether the party had or had not notice that he was to attend in the Common Pleas, on the day mentioned in the writ. he thought there would have been no hesi tation in coming to the conclusion that he had. It slid appear to him, upon the whole, that this gentleman knew he was to at tend in the Common Pleas. With respect to the service of the subpana itself, it had been expressly decided that the party was cot bound to rho. the original. If the person on whom service was made demanded to have the original produced, then the 01fifer, or pe-son making the !service. was certainly required to produce it, but not otherwise. In this case there was no proof that the party required to see the original subperna; and his Lordship thought there was quite sufficient hete, on the affida vits, to have waved the showing of the original writ. There was, in his opinion, enoug . , in the applicant's 'Minhs not an swered by the respondent to show a contempt of the Court. There was so much misconduct shown on the part of this gentle man that bin Lordship would have made him a subject of Ml le min. However, he felt extreme diffidence in stating his opinion after what had fallen front his Lordship (the Chief Justice) atoV his Learned Brothers; at all events, if the rule should be dia. charged, it certainly ought to be so without car',. Mr. Sergeant Vauc.ttsst said, the case to which lie wan about to refer was to be found in 2 Tidd'a, Pear. 857, w'.ere the Court refused an attachment because the party slid rut apply for it in the next tarn slier the contempt was alleged to have been done. The LORD CittEr JUSTICE—That ought to be considered the practice of this Court. .111 r. Justice GASILEE—I don't differ remit that. The rule for an attachment was then discharged, without costs. LAKE v. SILK. This was a rule obtained by 111 r. Sergeant Bettaweitrae., to get aside the bail bonds that had been git en for the defendant, and for him to be admitted to enter coininon appearance, upon the around that the defendant had been arrested by a wmng name. He was arte.ted by the name of Stephen I'. Silk, whereas his real name as. Thomas Stephen Silk. On a subsequent day, /lir. Sergeant VAUGHAN showed cause against the rule, and contended that as the defendant was usually known by the name of Stephen T. Silk, and his cards being en graved i t that name, the arrest was strictly correct, and the rule ought to be diseltsrgrd. The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE said that their Lordships had been mirdi entangled while looking Into the eases; but in the pre sent instance they felt themselves bound to say, that thr.e buil bonds must be set aside, but it must be upon terms, via. that the defendant should enter common appearance. give an undertaking , not to bring any aetion for a false arrest, and that the rule be niada absolute withoni costs. His Lordship added. that tor the fwure, where a party should be sued in this way, the Count would nut give any relief on an application beingsmide„ similar to tbe ;instant ; as the defendant had clearly nothing like mane to entitle him to the favour of the Court. Ruleßlade üb.olute upon te►ms. and without costa. co -- nT OF EXCHEQUER. TUISDAY, Nov. ft I/Wore Me PAID etitlCT BARON:I The Court was occupied during the whole of the dny in hearing the continuation of the arguments of Counsel in the long-pending tithe case, the Shrewsbury School v. Maddock, which is of no public importuner. ROLLS COURT, DUBLIN, Pniony, Nov. 18. I.(...yz.l'itto v. SIR JOHN AuniteY, ALIMINISTRATCA Or Ji.ritsow. iota. This was a hill hied io perpetuatr t hit lentimony of nne Robert Reeves, and the case came on before the Master of the Rohs to be argued on a demurrer. O'Cow WELL, in support of the demurrer. The bill stated that the late Right Hoa. Jahn Lori Longueville was, in the year 17110, a Member of his Majealy's most Honourable Ptivy Council in Ireland, and alto • Member of the House of Commons in Ire land. That the town of 'Mallow, in the wont, of Cork, was a borough which sent two Member* to the Irish Ferhanient. That llehltain Jepliann, then of Mallow Castle, was a person of grrot propeety and influence in the said br rough, bad fur sever:A years rep esented it in Parliament, rind was enabled, by mean* of this property, to procure the otturn of M:thbers for the some His Lordship dismissed the ease, not, however, without advising 11 r. Blake to get his bills discounted, if he %visited to avoid costs said multiplied arrrsts, at a banker's rather than at a solicitor's. CHRISTIAN EVIDENCE SOCIETY.—.3It. Parham, the pm prietor of the Bello Sauvage Tavern, came to request the advice of the Lord. Mayor. lie said he had lately taken the house, and had let a room in it for the occasional meetings of a So eiety called " The Christian Evidence Society." lie did this under the impression that the name of the Society, and the gen tleman-like manner of the person who hired the room, and who called himself " Chaplain" to the Society, was sufficient proof of its unimpeachable character, and he actually believed that his house would he honoured by the circumstance. Nothing, there fore, could exceed his surprise upon learning from the report of his Lordship's observations in the newspapers, the character ascribed to the promoters of the Society. He apprehended much that the harbouring of persons of this description would bring an odium down upon his house, and he was anxious to know what means to adopt to get rid of the thing altogether. Ihe Loup Maros said he must decline giving any advice in the matter. He had certainly received a number of letters respect ing the Society, some of which were anonymous, and he could not really tell whether they came front the Mends or the opponents of the Society. Be was surprised that any one could he found who was disposed to attend to discussions so absurd as those, the particulars of which had been Lid before him. . . . One or the principal °dicers, who had watched the proceedings of the Society, slid they were contemptible and absurd. It was, he said, a miserable club, miserably attended. GUILDHALL,_ THE CONVICT A nalsa.-- - AnotberOifidavit in behalf of this unfortunate 111411, who was convicted at the last Old Bailey Sessions of stealing a horse, was tendetcd before Mr. Alderman Ansley for hlo permission to have it sworn before hint. The deponent was a very decent l o oking female, who keeps a shop opposite the house of the exciseman where the convict lodged. The Jurymen who tried Adams seem to be taking great pains to sift the ease to the bottom, for by the statement of the gentleman who now attended with the deponent, it appeared that the present link of evidence had been discovered by the Jurymen themselves, while making a personal inquiry into the character of the numerous witnesses who were not examined on the trial, but whose testimony had since been laid before them, to induce them to join in the ap plicati on to the Crown fer mercy. Mr. Brrestord, the Chief Clerk, asked the gentleman to state who and what he was, and why he interfered in this busir,eas. The gent!eman replied that his name was Edward Burchell, that he resided in Gloucester-street, Huston, and that by profeastan he was an appraiser. Alr. Btresford—have you not been seen about the Old Bailey Courts ?—Yes. Mr. Beresford—Are you not to be paid for your services in this business ?—I am to be paid tur my time. Mr. Beresfortl—Then I would seriously warn you that there may be some danger in acting u a solicitor, drawing up affidavits and _ . lilt. lierchell—T have interested myself in this case because I have known the brother-in-law of the convict, who was supposed to have perjured himself, for upwards of two years. Ido not profess to be a solicitor. I have prepared this affidavit and attended with this witness at the special request of the Jurymen. While this colloquy was going forward, the worthy Alderman ens conning over the ointents cf the document. which he now said he could not sull'er to be sworn, because it merely stated that early in September a man rode up on horseback to Adams's door, and entered into conversation with hint, ece. without stating any par. Ocular day, so as to identify it will the transaction in question. Mr. Hu: chell replied, that the day when the man rode up was clearly shown in the other affidavit., especially that of the landlord. Mr. Alderman Ansley—Well, I have not those affidavits before me ; know nothing of them. To suffer such a 1013(.1y-worded affidavit as this to be sworn might be to countenance a eklusion. The application was therefore refused. BOW-STREET: COVENT-GARDEN iiiRS:ET.--iieaccumulation of wagons and cart., not only bringing vegetables into this part of the metro. polls, but remaining in the cerriage way until the whole of their cargoes are (bonneted of, is so great, that the parish of St. Paul. Covent-garden, has determined to endeavour to put a stop to the nuisance; for which purpose a number of persons, owners of the carts, &c., have been served with summonses to attend at this office, to answer the complaint of the parish. The proprietors of several of the taverns and coffee-houses, under the Pierian, have had occasion repeatedly to complain, but hitherto such complaint.; have proved fruitless, and the nuisance still re. mains unabated. Several mee.ings of the parishioners have been held, and it was eventually resolved to summon all the intending parties. It appears that round the market is a " denter stone." and all persons selling without that stone, or de•aining their wagons. &c. longer than is actually necessary for unloading, are liable to a penalty of 405., under Mr.... A. Taylor's Act. Under this Act the parties in question were summoned by the parish. Yesterday being the day appointed for the different caste to be heard, the office was crowded to excess with market-gardeners, some of whom had been summoned, and others to ascertain the re sult of the proceedings. Mr. ADOLPHUS appeared for the parish. The first defendant called on wasJoha Hines, a market-gardener, at Acton, in Middlesex. John Stephens. Surveyor to the Committee of Pavements, proved, that on the 17th inst. a wagon belonging to the defendant was standing in the carriage-way outside of the " atone." froin about seven o'clock in the morning until nine; the interim was occupied by the driver selling part of the load to various customers: and he was confident that the nuisance to the inhabitanu was very great. Sir It. DIRNIE—You may go farther titan that, for I was obliged tha other day to turn back in consequence of the obstruction. The defendant said, he bad paid the customary toll to the clerk of the lessees of the market. NIL ADOLPitus—They have no right to demand toll of you, when outside of their " storm," as that pan does not belong to them. Defendant—lf I was not to pay than they would take my wag gon to the green yard. Mr. AnOLPHUS—They have no right to take any money from you, and if they seize your waggon, you have your remedy by an action at law. The defendant was then tined in the penalty of 40i. and coats. The other cases amid once by conaeut, till a future day of bearing. A nu r Mher of publicans and owners of tea and coffee-shops also thronged the dike, on summonses obtained against them by John. son, for keeping their houses open stirregular hours. A man named Hughes, who is the proprietor of 11 coffee-shop in Crown -street, Soho, was the first whose case was gone into. The charge against him was, that his house was open at half-past four o'clock on Tuesday morning, when Sparkes, " Mr. Johnson's man," going by. in the course of one of his usual peregrinations, walked in and asked for a cup of coffee. The witness, however, admitted not only that there was no other customer in the house at the time, but that his own request was not complied with, Mr. Hughes informing him that he was too early, but if he came in about an hour and a half he should be ready for him. On this cir cumstance being elicited from the witness'', own mouth, and Mr. Hughes declaring that his door was open merely for the purpose of ventilation, the case was dismissed, on the defendant's paying the costs of the application. Of the others, two were convicted in the lull penalty ; another was dismissed, in consequence of a flaw in the information ; and the remainder stood over till a lattr hour. lIATTON-GARDEN. PROHIBITED GOODS.—Mrs. Sarah 21fItchescn, milliner and dress-maker, of No. 12, Hanover-street, Si. Oeurge's.square, ap peared to an information, laid by the officers of his Majesty's Cus toms, for having in her posseiaion a certain quantity of laces and silks, the same being of foreign manufacture, and prohibited by the existing laws of this realm. The Solicitor for the stated the case, and called wit nesses to prove the seizure and to identify the goods, as being of foreign fabrication ; th e y cons i ste d c hi e fl y o f blond lace, netting, and plain and tiaeelled silks. The daletsdarae's Solicitac put in a plea of " Not Guilty," and attempted to prove that the articles were not the property or Mrs. Mitcheson, 'but intrusted,pro tempore, to her care, by a French milintr, of the name of Lowes, and that she, being ignorant of their contents, could not be accused of a guilty knowledge. The Solici•or of the Customs said that it mattered not whether or not she knew the contents of the boxes—the possession would warrant the Magistrates to convict her in the ggnahy. Mi'v. Alitchesan said that the articles welt all damaged, and only fit ler dressing dolls--they were literally of no value. The Customs Solicitor replied that had the doll been brought over in the same attire, it would have been equally liable to seizure and forfeiture; an imporiant hint, by the way, to ladies who are in the practice of swathing themselves in these articles until they look like female Mr. LAING said that tram recent circumstances (alluding, TO doubt, to the investigation of Messrs. Depouill's transactior.), it was incumbent on the officers of Me Customs to be very circumspect as to the proof of the article being of foreign manufacture. The seizing officer said,in the article of silk there might be some doubt, but with regard to lace there could be none whatever ; be sides, some of the silks now produced were tinselled on copper, which has never yet been attempted in this country, although com mon in France. The value of the articles seized was then sworn at twelve guineas, and the penalty which, by law, is allowed to be trebie the amount, was mitigated to ore half, which the defendant was ordered to pay within one month. WORSHIP-STREET. RESV HitECTION 111 vw.--John Gerald and Rubcrt King were placed at the bar under the following circumstances : John Upton, one of the day patrol, stated, that on going through Howton, he observed the Lao prisoners with a bundle and other things under their anus. They eyed him very cautiously. and in such a manner us to excite his suspicions. lie accordingly made up to them, and asked them what they had got, when they refusing t 3 give him any satisfactory answer. he took them into custody, and carried them to the first public-house in the neighbourhood to search them. On doing so, he found in the bundle a sack, usually called by this fraternity a skin, and two wrenching irons. In the pocket of King he found a spade, with joints in it, adjusted with so touch nicety. as to make it a very convenient portable snick, and a variety of other implements usually employed by that dis turbing corps called body-snatchers. Thrrc appearing no direct evidence against the prisoneri, Mr. OSDOHNR disibtarged &limn, although it was admitted by several of the otEcurs of this catublishniuut that they were well k.ouwn as having been some time engaged in this t►affic of human flesh, MA had before Wen brought to this office on a sitnikir clairg c . ..... - - - UNION-HALL. Yesterday one of the. crew of the Hecht discovery ship ley lirought up by the parish officers of Rotherhitht., for the pu rpose of having an order of affiliation made upon bi n , tor the supp tht and maintedance of an illegitiniatechild, horn during his absence on the late voyage with Cap,ain Parry. The i!.tfenclant, in a blunt saikw-like manner, expressad his surprise that he should be app re. handed on a charge of this nature, when all sailors, said he, hare II right to hare a wife in every port ; but, added lie , a blow of this kind will soon knock up that business in tont. Catherine Ogle, a decent-looking young woman, with a fins it. rant in her arms, upon being sworn, said that john Allen, the ger ferlan', was the tither of her child. The Magistrate, M r. CHAMBER', asked the defendant whethe r be had any thing to state against the order of aililiation ? The defendant—Yost Honour, I don't care a straw whet order the parish make upon me, for I would sooner perish than pa) a halfpenny. Magistrate—Have you any doubts as to the child being your own ? Defendant—No, your Honour, I don't call the woman's vino, in question, although I was absent from her on board his Majesty', ship lieela, upon the late voyage of discovery. Well, then, said Mr. CHAMBERS, you inust allow the pari s h all the expenses that they have been put to on account of yea ; pleasures. besides allowing a future maintenance fur the infant ! Jack Allen shook his head, and said I can't do that, Sir ; but I'll tell you what I will do, if Kitty has no objection we Mill e; spliced together. Me. C s Do you mean that you will marry her ? Yea, Sir, replied Jack, with pleasure. The young woman was here asked whether she was as wilin g her part for matrimony as the sailor ? She unaltered that she hid very strong objection■ indeed to such a ceremony, fur she tbs. covered that he had a wife and four children all living, mid pm sent in Devonshire. Mr. CHAMBERS observed that that circumstance altered the Cast very materially, and asked the defendant how lie could presume is offer marriage to a girl when be had a wife then living? Jack, however, solemnly declared that the assertion was fete ; for the only woman he ever loved besides Kitty watt an Esquire kt. but he never got spliced to her. Catherine Ogler repeated her former assertion, and said that his wife had been in town a short time back. Mr. CHAMBERS. with whom was 31r. Hedger, then dire ct : that an order should be made upon the defendant, tor the expellee attendant upon Catherine Ogle's secouchernent, and the child's maintenance during his absence abroad, which amounted to up. wards of 71. Upon the defendant's being served with the copy of the order, the amount was demanded of him by the beadle, which he retuned par. ing, exclaiming aloud, " I wish you may get it." The Magistrate assured him that he should be sent for three months to Brixton, unless he complied with the order. Jack treated such a punishment with the greatest levity, observ. ing that the mill had in it no terrors tier him ; he had rubbed through privations and hardships in all quarters of the globe, and what did he care for Brixton or Beelzebub either? The Magistrate observed, that such was his faith in the mill at Brixton working miracles, that he would vouch for it the defendant would be heartily tired of such an amusement in u few days, and. pay the money readily to gain his liberty. Jack repeated his phrase of •• I shall, over the left," when his commitment was ordered to be made out, and he 11113 sent off to Brixton for three months. One of the pari , h officers mentioned that the defudant had re. eeived upwards of 1001. that morning from the Navy Board fm wages due to him. MARKETS. [From the London New Price Current.] T u zen.t ov. COTTON-The demand for Cotton last week was very (sty both for export and speculation ; the wales amount to about 3,0414 bales, viz.:-450 Surats. 34d. a 7d. ; 660 Bengalis, 03d. a lid. ; 366 31adras, Batl, a 7d. ; 1,000 Pernams, 124 d. a I3d. ; 250 Paribas, 12p. ; no Bahia, 12d. ; 4(1 Pares. 104 d. ; 30 Bowede. Bsd. • ltd Suriname, 104 d.: 10 Barbadoes, 10 1 1. ; a ll i n bond. Bengal; are a shade higher, but others nearly at former prices. SUGAR.-There were ra:her more purchases of Muscovades last week ; but still the business was blunted, and at rather lower prices; brown Jamaican GrA. ; other browns 665. There was more appearance of business in 31 uscovatlet at the close of the market last week, but the demand has been checked this morning by the unfavourable report from the West India warehouse;; the deli. clency of stock, compared with last sear, is now below 7.000 ask , , and the deliveries, compared with the corresponding week law year. 900 casks less ; the buyers, sem are, we believe, out of stock, and purchase only for their immediate wants, evinced no disposition to conic forward. At the conclusion of the market to-iky, the purch saes, including the public sale, consisted of about Chn casks, at prices rather lower ; brown Jamaica 635. ; the Barb:Mout Surer a sold at full prices, 701. a 745. 6d. The Refined Market was in a very depressed state during the last week • brown lumps declined to gds., other goods low in proportion. "Molasses 335. 6d. a3O. The Refined Market has been very heavy this morning; Lumps may be purchased readily at 11.1 s. and perhaps a shade under; Grocery Goods are very heavy. Alolasses 335. 6d. a 34e. COFFEE.-The Coffee market was without variation last week, except in the Brazil descriptions, which were rather lower, on ac. count of the quantity offering ; large parcels 044. 61 a Ms. &1., ordinary to good ordinary, chiefly taken in at these prirTs several parcels of St. Domingo sold last week, fair qusility lid. : the ordinary descriptions of Jamaica Coffee in some in,tances gold a shade higher; all other descriptions were heavy, but without eerie. tion as to price. Theta were two considerable public ash is of Coat this forenoon ; the Jamaica descriptions were rather higher, good ordinary 571. a Ms. 6d., fine ordinary tills.; Dutch sold rather lower, middling 79a. a Ills. 6d.; 762 bags good 'ordinary Fd. Do mingo taken in at Os. lid., and for which ftG>. was offered; gout ordinary Brazil 565. lid. offered and refused. After the sale the whole of the St. Domingo Coffee was dispose;" of at 561. FRUIT.-At the public sale of nearly 2,000 barrels New Red Smyrna Raisins, brought forward on Tuesday last, a rest part sold from 56.. to 5,1 e., the quality various, very ordintuyfo tine; a small panel of very fine was sold privatel y at 141.., and in drums a: 6:kt. ; New Figs continue to go off privarely at the prices quoted t a parcel of New :Huss-turns sold from 181. to 121. ; New Jordan Almonds 101. 104 ; in Denies and Valentisa there is ru alteration, the demand is not very lied) , at present; the demand fur Fruit generally is rather improving. HEMP, FLAX, and TALLOW.-The Tallow market is again improvit.g ; the nearest price for the new is to.day Hemp maintains the late advance, 411. In Flax there are few per. chases lately reported. SPICES.-There continues to be a few transactions in Nut. mega ; the price, which had been 44. 4d., has advanced to 4s. (1. Pepper and all other Spices are neglected ; the prices nominal. TOBACCO.-There has been more business lately in Tobacco: several small parcels reported sold, 64d. aid., and a cargo of Alley. land Tobacco at 30s. per 100lbe. manifest weight. SILK.-The Silk trade continues in a very depressed state, the prices are a shade lower. OILS.-Fish Oils steadily maintain the late advance, but then is not much business doing. Rape Oil is without alteration. la. seed rather higher. NAVAL STORES.-Rough Turpentine continues neglected: it would appear the low price does not induce the buyers to ace forward. Spirits are unvaried. The importers of tar are firm, and will submit to no reduction to facilitate sales. In Pitcher Rosin no variation. RUM, BRANDS', and HOLLANDS.—The Rum market is little varied; the purchase,' since our last are not extensive, they are generally a shale lower ; proof Leeward, may be boa& st 2a. Id. Brandy is not in so much demand ; the best marks iaay x purchased at 3s. 6J. Pale Geneva Is. lid. a Is. I Id. INDlUo.—ludigo has become exceedingly heavy. - 1. S. . THE the Seortehal of the minor. —..to, wrier was try preside at thickened, and to ao4st t the vines of the electors. That said Denham Jephson, to the ear 1790, became desirous of converting his influence in the borough to his own pecuniary ad vantage, and did, unconstitutionally and illegally, propose to Rickard Longfield to sell him his influence, and he did enter into a corrupt and illegal contract to sell his influence in said town for a gross sum of money. This agreement was nubsequently reduced to writing, and commenced ns follows :—" Agreement between the Right Honourable Richard Longlield and Benisons Jephson, Esq. 31r. Jephson is to renive of air. Longlield 3.000!. and Mr. Long. Bell is to procure a pension fiat Mr. Jephson of 600 f. per annum (being the amount of his father's peneinn), within three years after the next general elestiou, or pay to Sir. Jeplison a tardier sum of 3.000. Mr. Jephson, in return, Is to throw all his influence at Mallow into Sir. nnmination as often as called upon. for the purpose of presiding at elections, and is to give Mr. Longfield all the assist ance in his power, at all times, to enure the representation of the borough of Mallow; and 31r. Jephson agrees to pay the sum of 4001. or half the expense of a petition, if any is preferred at the sa wing election by Sir James Cutter or Anthony Jephson, as candi dates: and Sir. Jephson further agrees that, us this is a mere ho tnurable transaction, carry thing is to be done at both sides that the parties, as men of honour and integrity, can do, to carry into efilet this agreement, for to accomplish the intents and pur peace of each party, and to secure their respective objects--uamely, money and pennon to air. Jephson, and the representation of Mal low to Sir. Length:ld." The agreement then went on to state, that it was to be carried into erect by Mr. Longtield executing two bonds to Mr. Jephson, each =damned for the payment of 3.000!. with interest ; and that thane bonds were to be deposited in the hands of the Right Honourable David Latouche, as a wiutual trustee fur both parties : and if it shall appear to the said trustee that Sir. Jephson has fairly, unequivocally, amid honourably per formed his part of the agreement, the bonds are to be given up so Mr. Jephson when th e y are respectively due. in order that Mr. Jephson may enforce payment of them ; but if it shall appear to the said trustee that air. Jephson has failed in the performance of his part of this agreement, then the bonds are to be cancelled. And in case Mr. Longfield shall p:ocure the pension of 6001. a year fur Mr. Jeplison within the space before-mentioned, then the lust mentioned bond is to remain in the hands of Sir. Latouche, as a security only to air. Jcpl'son for said pension during the life of Mr. Jephson • bit the amount thereof is not to be paid to or re covered by Str. Jephson, unlem he shall be deprived of said pen sion, in winch Mat the nanl bond in to be given up to Mr. Jephson on his being deprived of said pension, in order that he may enforce payment of said principal sum of 3,000!. and the interest, front the day of his being deprived of the said pension. The bill went on to state, that the said Richard Longtield, on the 16th of March, 1790, fur the complained illegal consideration in said agreement mentioned, executed two bonds, each conditioned for the payment of 3,000/.. which bonds were witnessed by Robert Beeves, his law agent. That in evidence of the illegal cannel, said Richard Longlield, by leaSoll of his influence with the Irish Government. procured for the said Denham Jephson a pension for his life of 6001. per annum ; and thereupon one of the bonds was given up to be cancelled ; the other bond was deposited in the Mend* of the Right Hon. David Latouche, where it remained for upwards of twenty years ; and the said Richard Longfleld, having been crested Baron Longunille end afterwards Lord Viscount Longuevilie, died on the ZJd d Muy, 1811. Mr. Jeplison died in 1814, and administration was granted to the defendant, Sir John Aubrey and others. These executors, in the year 1817, applied for and Manned the bond from Sir. Lutoucbe, and they Made applies. non for payment of the same to the representative of Lord In, which having been refused. an anion in debt on said bond was commenced in the Court of Exchequer, and is declaration filed in Michaelmas Term 18i3. Several pleas were filed to this declaration, which put I. issue the tempt and illegal contract in bar of plaintiff's demand: but the administrators did not go to trial on die issue bond: The bill further stated, that said Reeves is the only witness surviving who is able to prove several of the facto connected with such corrupt and illegal agreement t' that he is seventy-two years of age, and of infirm h ea l t h, an d thie. plaintiffs are in danger of losing the benefit of his testimony. The bill therefore prayed that the evidence of said Reeves may be taken and perpetuated, was to be used on sue trial that may afterwards take place between the parties. To that bill the present demurrer was tiled, stating that the said bill contained a statement of fraud and maintenance, as to disentitle the persona guilty thereof, and their representatives, from any relief in a Court of Equity; anti that the matters contained in the said bill were not fit or suitable to be discussed in that Court. Mr. O'Connell, ie support of the demurrer, contended, in the first pace, that the party might have had the benefit of the evidence of Mr. Reeves without going into that Court, because it was their fault that the suit at law was still pending. In the next place, the transaction stated in the bill was a gvues and illegal transac tion, clearly punishable by indictment ; it was it geese conspiracy on the part of the individuals who were parties to the corrupt agree- 1 meat—the one by means of corrupt influence and an undue control over a public aim, contracting to insure for the other a seat in Parliament-stand the other undertaking to procure, as a considers anon for that corrupt influence, a pension of 609!. a-year from the Government of the day. It would be no fact in the CAM, whether the person who stipulated to receive that pension, and who actually did receive it as the fruit of that corrupt agreement, happened to be poor or rich. It however turned out that he was a man of great fortune and consideration. The party here were purl deliclo, and the transaction was of a nature so unconstitutional, so marked with turpitude and corruption, as to render it un. fit to be discussed in that Court. The facts of the present 'cue being of a public nature, are infinitely more strong than any case of turpitude in private life, yet laird Eldon. in Birr's case, said that the parties being part delleto, he would not entertain the case one way or the other. The circumstances of Birr's case were these :—The defendant (Bin) being desirous to many a lady of independent fortune, applied to the plaintiff to procure him a wife of that description. Tice plaintiff promised to do so, and, in fur therance of the scheme, he gave several expensive entertainments, and invited to these entertainments several Indies of fortune. That the defendant met those ladies at such entertainments, the expense of which he promised to defray ; and that it appeared, from the letters of the defendant hinutelf, that he niight, if he wished, have married any of these women. Lord Eldon dismissed the case out of Court, as unfit for further discussion. The Learned Gentleman concluded, on the authority of the above case, that inasmuch as the parties to the agreement were mutually criminal, on grounds of public principle time Court would grant no relief. Mr. IlaTenni.L was heard at some length on the other side. He contended, on the authority of ruled cases, that Courts of Equity, even where then were wrrupt transactions, had given re lief. SATVIIDAY, Nov. 19. The Master of the Rolls gave jndgmcnt today. The transact. tion out of which this application arose, was one which his Honour declared to be corrupt, illegal, and unconstitutional. It referred to a contract between the late Lord l.ongueville and Mr. Jephson, by which the latter party, in consideration of a sum of money, and a pension during his life, agreed to secure to Mr. Longfield (after wards Lord Longueville, the other party), or his nominee, the re. Hetentation of the Borough of 31ellow. The contr a ct, sa id hi s Honour, entered into the details of a transaction which he wax bound to declare was most fiefs:haul and abominable. The Bill was filed by the personal representatives of Jephsun, !n order to perpetuate the testimony of a Mr. Reeves, a witness, aged 70, with regard to a bond for 3,0301. passed by bongfield to Jephson. To this bill the defendant had put in a demurrer, and the question before the Court was, whether the testimony ought to be perpetu ated or not.. His Honour proceeded to cite precedents for this Court to refuse the perpetuation of evideuce in certain cases, and declared that the present transaction waste iniquitous on both sides as to (Humid° either party to relief in a Court of Equity. Let them, if they pleased, seek redress in the Courts of Law. llis judgment was, that the demurrer be allowed with costa. POL/CE. 31 A NSI. -- 7Tk :" - }io LIS E. Yesterday Mr. James Blake, a master-builder of respectability, was brought before the LoRD MAYOR, 00 a charge ut felony of a singular nature. William Henry Moss, managing clerk to Mr. Bistock. an at torney. residing in 13mW.sttFet , stated that his employer had dis. counted for the defendant several bills, which had been dishy. noured. The latter, who had indorsed those bills, chose to settle them, and lodged a check to the amount of 1151. in the hands of the witness for this purpose. When this check was tendered for pays em at the bankers, it was dishonoured, and a note written upon the back of it, that the defendant had given an order that It should not be paid. Yesterday morning, as the mimesis was making out the necessary documents fur the purpose of holding the prisoner to bail, and the dishonoured c h ec k was b e f ore hi m , the defendant en. tered the counting-house, and, approaching the desk, suddenly snatched up the t heck. and rushed with it to the lire, where it was consumed before the witness had time to prevent it. The witness, on his cmas-etamination by Mr. Blake's solicitor, said he lied sued both the drawer and acceptor of the two bills, as well as the indorser, and he had the bills now in his pmsession. Mr. Blake's solicitor said. that sic writs had been issued upon two bills for the amount of GU, and that the costs produced upon them exceeded that sum by 2!., the expenses turning out to be no less than 651. The Loan Msron said, he awe not the slightest ground for the charge of felony. The complainant bad the bills now in his possession, and he might proceed for the recovery of his debt upon them, and surely he could do no more if he had tile check. air. Blake stated that he gave the check conditionally. The understanding was, that the check should be held if neither of the parties should come forward, hut lie had subsequently found that one of them had lodged security with the complainant for the payment of the money as soon as Mr. Historic's bill was taxed. Upon hearing this fact he stopped the check at his bankers', for he knew that it was estremely difficult to get money out of an twos.- ney's hinds after it once passed into them.—(A laugh.) In the morning he went to Mr. Histoek's counting-house, and seeing the complainant with the check which had been given to him for the payment of the debt and costs before him, at work, with fresh pro. endings, by which to acrumulate fresh costs, he certainly telt ex tremely irritated (fur he hail already been compelled to par double the amount in costs in one bill which he bed indorsed), and he ad mi,ted that he snatched up the check, end threw it into the tire. The atiornees clerk, as the chalice of felony was considered in atiminible, said lie was ut least entitled to have Mr. Blake held to bad fur the assault. The LOBD volt caked whether he could produce a wit. Hera to this attack. The complainant called a perfon, who said he believed the clerk, hi his hurry, had run his head aguksit tho The LORD MATOR said, that he In , ght ital. ;Lc MC before Jury :A the Seta:oua. BIRTHS. At liowsham, on the 17th rose. the lady of George Cliokr Esq. of a daughter. On the 19th ins:. at his house, in Upper Brook.smet, Grow. nor•square. the lady of Charles Tyndall, Esq. of a son. On the 17th inst. at Langley Park, the lady of Robert Harm. Esq. of a son. At Spithead, on board the Exmouth. on the 9th inst. deist heavy gale of wind, the lady of Capt. J. B. Seeley, of the Webs? army, o(a daughter, her eighth child. MARRIED. .. .... On the 21st inst. at North Hirnnts, E. B. Kemble. Esq. to Mt ter, secoctl daughter of the late Thomas Heathle, Esq. tiJbloss. U erts. On the 21st inst. at St. George's, Bloomsbury. J. Chas. WriO : Esq. eldest 50U or Ichabod Wright, of Ittpperlev, in the vat/ of Nottingham, Esq. and Fellow of Magdalen College, Oxford, to Theodosia, eldest daughter of Thomas Denman, Esq. 31. P. On the 17th inst. at Aldsnley, Cheshire. Robert Philip. F•t;• , Ileybridge, Stafordahhe. to Letitia. youngest daughter of Wil.i.as Hibbert, Esq. of Hare Hill. Cheshire. On the 21st inst. at Harrow, la his fifteenth year, William Felir Lambert, fourth SOO of Charles Lambert, Esq. of Fitzroy-mills"• Suddenly, on Friday last. Anne, wife of Mr. W. Cozens, boleti Wattington, Oxon, aged 57. On Saturday last, alter a long and severe illness, Elizabeth, 'h e a ifeofJohn Beribow, 11wi,. of Mecklenburgh.sqrae. In Glasgow, on the 16th inst. Sybilla, the wile of John Ritklardi Eaq. and only surviving sister of the late Sir Alexandzr lisckez ate. of Avoch, North Britain. On Friday lot, aged 71, the Rev. Griffith Richards, Renal of Farling ton, 'lents. On Sa:urday last, at Hyde Park Barracks, aged 19. after a short hut severe illness, William Lloyd. East. Cornet an the Royal Hoff'. Guards, eldest son of W. Lloyd, Esq. of Aston, in the coarni o f Salop. Of semis apoplexy. on the 2d of April, at Hobart Town, Va n Diemen's Land, John Msrgetta, At Knightsbridge, on the 21st inst. aged a yews. after a Jinni log illness, which .:le bore with Christian fortitude, Mrs. ki.Pels, relict el the late Mr. W. Perks, of St. HIGH WATER AT LONDON BRIDGE THIS DO Morning, 0 min. idler 111 - - Printed at TH E BRITISH PRESS Office, by J.W.Cmaror , ICI, Straad, and pabliabed by H. CAN Itoit WM .sue-~-~~.~' 1 . i I 7 a