The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser. — London, England, 1825-11-24 00:00:00

...rivior , el Mitt t apt= to the defendant for IC telling him that Mrs. Mistoeb thet AM use. owe him a farthing, and Xblld Woad be of serious consequence to her:. Us that Mrs. Brooks must be mistaken, in s t a gt., au to . = to pzir t e o t4r m t , h t e h h a ad t 4. l l e onLb l u a s r i a n ti business cm her hich be had left at thMion was for a balance of le/. on a bill of ex change. He said it was, and that he was going to have that 10/. for *e use of MI. which he had lent her; that he was not going to let her have the ate of his money for nothing. She called upon kiss again, and 'represented to him the extreme illness of Mrs. iiisiaks that all her other detaining creditors had consented to her dleellorge ; and that he wx the only person who opposed her lib,- mem. He on this suasion put himself into a great rage, and Baia ha would not send her her discharge, and that she may rosin prises, for he would not consent to her going out, unless part of the the 101. were paid (lowa, and a recuntv given for the remainder. lli aka observed that Mrs. Brooks had been transacting business in Chancery. and that she might as well have employed him to put in her answer. Mrs. Arnold saw the defendant a third time, arid at length toad him that Mrs. Brooks still felt confident she did not owe hint say thirst. and that unless he immediately sent he a discharge. he 'mold be prosecuted. He flew into a violent passion, and said he would not ; that he had other claims upon her, and that she should be and rot in gaol until she had paid him, and alto made hint an ,apology for charging him with taking a false oath. Application was then made to this Court by Mrs. Brooks, for a rule to show cause why she should not be discharged out of custody, and the proteedings set aside. Upon affidavits of the above facts being made by herself and others. the Court granted a r r t e i t t e t which it was ordered that the matters in dispute should be to the Prothonotary and in the mean time all proceedings &WI be stayed. The Prothonotary having read the affidavits, didiaamined the defendant, male his award, by which he directed lam in plaintiff Amid be immediately discharged, that all further posesediap in the cause should be stayed, and that the bill of ex chsuipi should be delivered up to Mrs. Brooks. The present wise was then commenced, and came in for trial before Lord Chid Justice Best, at the Sittings after last Term, when was given for the plaintiff. Damages, 3001. Mr. Wylde - jection at the trial on behalf of the the Rule of ' which was of suit against Mrs. that her action of the that no Justice that the , hirh ex• fit to di%plealure .131 u even not be „ Of St sought to . not positive admigpi. ...et point, required Mr. trial, against the confined to • Role He . was of the stole, Order determined. had been not the • open by the bow a•.lmit that `, of the but that T ___. Beapiat V - Mail argued that, - _ _. awards, 21110 *verb* examined the parties; so that • f n weed Isisht be said to be °budged through the d . eft dth t pieti e lnteree i t es ed. in le tte d ee i tti cg, the result w:ept...cttiw«Ata. ogrieur be lf .e. Ar c aw sea t tcoi,npeatendeedidadforthoen defendantthe other We ft weal. lend to this result, that no arbl. *wad hot OM WO the judgment of the arbitrator, by showing case i s t ig raneededlo part upon the evidence of the plaintiff. The Ilergeent submitted, that, upon principle, it would be mar iresesweshon, - 14 the administration of justice, to exclude maMall fietillielbtelogebeirttihts in a Court of Law, because, in the ealMilli WA Its* *sideway bad es neeeseitate been made use of. MIS LIMES followed on the same side, and contended die, ease, the only evidence that could be adduced of the wheineden of the snit was the rule of Court, and, therefore, es ieeWallieeit,, k must be admitted. If not, then in no ease could any ruled Ceort be admissible, for they were always obtained upost the math of the parties. The Learned Sergeant then quoted the following cues to support of hie argumeat t —Carbourne v. Rey: raid, Cooper's Reports, An; Wane v. Bryant, Barns And Cress; liep last No. p. M. In the latter ease the very question arose I as to the power of an arbitrator to examine the parties on oath, and the Court thought the general words of reference, and without the meal words expressly authorising the arbitrator to examine the pasties upon oath, were sufficiently large to empower the arbitrator to do so, to whom a discretion was given in that respect. He sub mitted that this ease mine within the decision now contended fur, sod was a direct authority for the Court to discharge the rule. Mr. Sergeant TADDY this morning argued in support of the Rule. He was prepared to show that the verdict which had been s= hi this case ought to be set aside, and • nonsuit entered. were a continued series of authorities which went to sustain ehiAourine, that in all civil suits the evidence of the parties could at either directly or indirectly be received. The Learned Sergeant ekes voted the case of Ilabenhon v. Troby, 3 Espinasse Rep. p.: as, where Lord Kenyon refused to examine an arbitrator as to SUMP "ha had appeared before him on the examination of the upon the principle that the parties themselves could not = llll4 been examined in the former cause which had been referred to the 'Arbitrator. He also quoted the opinion of Lord Chief Baron OWN* wanted in that Learned Baron's Law of Evidence, p. 30 and'el, where it was said that a verdict obtained upon an indict- NMI for a ereapsas by the oath of the party, cannot be given in enigma upon an action brought for the same trespass, " for if the pony% oath be no evidence in his own cause (as we shall hereafter elaiew that it is not), then cannot the verdict be any evideoce that is founded only on the party's own oath; for what cannot be tri dents" directly, cannot be made evidence by any anch circuity." In the ease aloe of Hathway v. Barrow and others, 1 Campb. p. 111, wideh was an action for a conspiracy to prevent the plaintifffrom obssining his certificate under a commission of bankrupt, the diffident* bad been convicted of the conspiracy, and it was pro- Pia to put that in evidence, but Lord Mansfield held it was not iteteLevidesce, having proceeded partly on the testimony of Bath way, who. if it were admitted, would in effect be swearing in his own cause. Lord Chief Justice BEST said he remembered • similar decision of theism Lad Erskine, while Lord Chancellor. Mr. Sergeant TADDY then proceeded to show that the doctrine for which he was contending was laid doom in Phillips's Law of Esidence, vol. 2. p. 820(2d edition). The Low Cant Jairricit—Brother Teddy, no man has a higher respect than I have for the very able work which you are now quoting ; but I will say of It as Lord Mansfield said of Blaektitone--'• I hope I shall never live when that book is taken as aothoriiy." Any cases which are mentioned by Mr. Phillips you pelf( course at liberty to quote. ' " Sergeant TADDY utd not mean to say Mr. Phillips was an ty ; but certainly the cases which were cited by him showed bad well investigated the subject. The Learned Sergeant elentebleted the various cases from Phillips, to show that no 1•t dam rule of Court, if obtained upon the testimony of Party,"llMad be produced as evidence In any subsequent action M abet party. As to the argument that this was the only means by which the plaintiff could show the previous action to have been Isiestnined, he contended it was not the fact. She might have the termination of the stilt by other evidence than the pro. of the rule. By force, therefore, the authorities he had sod also this last circumstance, that it was not MIN , he submitted the rule should be made absolute the verdict and entering a nonsuit. • PEARL (in the absence of Isle. Sergeant Wylde) A the tame side. Celfal having consulted together for a few minutes, -.Lied Chief Justice Bevr said, he was of opinion that there was oeleundation foe this motion, and that the rule must be discharged. HS was desirous that the rule to show cause should be granted, timaase ise lif! f•arfol that be might have pressed the point at '' the tel further than he ought; but as no Gentlemen hid made that objection, he would suppose that he had only admitted the rule to he received in evidence, ao fat as it went to show this the limy suit was at an end. Then came the question, whelhaltl chlitepeetes of evidence was admissible fur the purpose It was ith (Weed to this mese, namely, that the suit was determined. 11, ' war of opinion that it was admissible for that purpose, end be weed entirely with the masoning of hie 11*ther Lewes, timer this evidence was not admissible, it was Impossible to prove shot ISIS SOS was at an end ; foe the suit was put an end to by the rule, sad Moot capable of Wag received, then there was no proof of the alit hiving terminated. If this was contended for, the argil. • verdict was given foe the plaintiff. Damages, MO!. Mr. Wylde took an objection at the trial on behalf of the ing arcs, slee pr t :d e r o ti w oo th o a f t t tl , t e e s ß ui ue of t l byc Court, ter wl a i ga ich as ins w tm o ni f- . BMW wee determined. The Learned Sergeant contended, that as the Auk was obtained upon the affidavit or Mrs. Brooks her- shit it could not be given in evidence in any subsequent action in which she was a party, es it would be in contravention of the well-known principle In the law of evidences, which said that no =could be a witness in his own mum. Lord Chief Justice thought the Rule was admissible so far as to show that the suit had been determined ; but not further. He, however, would give the defendant leave to move upon this point, to set aside the verdict, and enter a nonsuit. But whether the defendant did or did not, was of no great consequence, for the facts which hid been deposed to were or such • nature as made it imperative on the Court to tall upon the defendant, he being an Attorney, to answer them by affidavit. In the course of the present term Mr. Sergeant Wylde moved for a Rule to show cause why the verdict should not tee set stride arid a nonsuit entered. The Learned Sergeant con- Nadia that ro Rule of Court could operate as a legal determination de a fait. It was only in the nature of an injunction which ex. ' papa the party to such punishment as the Court should deciti fit to ' maim in case of Its being violated, but no order or Rule of Court coidd prevent him, if he thought proper, to risk the displeasure of the Court, from proceeding to trial with the arse. .Rat even it it Could, still, in this ease, he contended, the Rule could not be received as evidence, inasmuch as it was obtained solely, or at least principally upon the oath of the party who now sought to nuke use of it to her own advantage. The COURT were clearly of opinion that the Rule operated not merely as a stay of proceedings, or an iniunction, but as a positive deetemlnition of the suit. With regard, however, to its admissi- bility, they were not so decided ; and, therefore, as to that point, the Rale was granted. The Court at the same time required Mr. illt to answer by affidavit the matters sworn to at the trial, and e7fl er ered &Rule to be 'erred on him for that purpose. Oct Toesday Mr. Sergeant rAt'Orl•N showed cause against the RaSrfce setting aside the verdict. The question was confined to the keit possible coulee's; it being merely whether the Role could be received in evidence, as a determination of the suit. He costended that It could, and that In cave of 4, Campb. 213,fit was decided that a Bole of this description was • determination of the snit. In a cue in I Esplnasse, p. 80, a similar question arose, and there the Court took a distinction between a Judge's Order a Role of Court, Lord Ellenborough observing that a Judge's t ' intuit! not put an rod to a stilt. but a Rule of Court would, ... ta lent a prima fade evidence that the suit was determined. isbjhalon to the receptioo of the Ruis;was, that it had been gametal Rion the oath or the party ; she, however, was not the only wow examined; and, besides, it was now too bete to open that ad of argument, inasmuch as Mr. Carpenter himself was : a d =l l by the Prothonotary ; and he was also heard by the ...iia r t ztir d t i : i t a b l e pre ßule bein g made liw abeo l l t ut l e e ; ol Z n e e fi t i t r m e bow Flfleaell,Ssence of the afirtft of t t he t p s res u i:n a t u plaintiff? The &ono cum,. JUSTICE — Had you not better wimit that the geaseal ar k Is, that a judgment obtained by the oath of the pony Mew be used by that party in • subsequent case, but that therjare esespodone to every rule, and that this is one of them ? N r. tingsemetyetronxst Men argued that., in ace of swards, , 't ic 5 r ~.., be pushed to this extent (which, indeed , had b een laslay), that, whatever might be the conduct of the party, owsver malicious the arrest, still no such action as the pceient =MU maintained. His Lordship was not of that opinion ; if that were the fact, it would leave open a door to the mos: cruel and arbitrary acts that he trusted the laws of this country 'would never let go without punishment. It had been said that bard Kenyon was of opinion that no action could be maintained for a malicious arrest, where the action had been put an end to by an award. If mom could not b:ing their actions, many petits would he railer by those who, having the power, felt desirous to exert it is oppressing others ; and it would be impossible for them to ob tain reparation. If this were so, the consequence would be, that -wiles would be deterred from referring questions to arbitration. His Lordship was therefore of opinion, that where parties had agreed to put an end to a cause in which there had been an arrest by an award ; yet, if it could be proved that there was no cause for such an arrest, the putting an end to it by an award could not prevent the party from coming into Court for redress for Injury he had sustained. It hatl been said that this was an action not to be favoured. Bin Lordship was at a loss as to what was meant by favouring an action. If a malicious prosecu tion was brought upon insufficient evidence, tile Court would cer tainly_ show no favour to the plaintiff, but would directly dismiss It. He thought, however, that when the facts necessary to sup port such an action were fully made out (no case was entitled to more than justice), yet, if the eapreacion of favour could be np plied to any case. it mighi be *Oiled to such a case as this. There could not be a doubt that a criminal judgment could not be re ceived in evidence In a civil case t this had been the law from the time of Lord Chief Baron filbert down to the present, and upon this principle—that the judgment had been obtained upon the tes timony of the prosecutor, and could not be given in evidence in an action where lie was a party. But there weto other principles equally as salutary ; and in Mr. J. Buller's Nisl Prins it was stated that a case occurred in 6 Moden. where the tea (illicitly of woman, in support of a prosecution, might be read in defence of an action brought against her husband far such • prosecution ; and the reason was, because it was necessary, and that without such evidence the party might remain wholly undefended. So in an action against the hundred the party robbed was admitted as w witness. The law of this coun try, following, as it did, the principles of common sense and jus tice in all cases, had admitted that necessity to exist. It had been said that this rule 'night have been obtained upon other evidence. He for one would not lay it down that a rule of this sort could not be received In evidence, because it was partly obtained by the oath or the psrty in the cause. The consequence would be • re. ceipt for oppression. Because such were the facilities :tainted in this country, that a party might be left in prison, and die under the oppression of this rule. It would be encou raging the most tyrannical proceedings. This poor woman, it seemed, was in a most alarming state of licalth, and.the defend ant said she might lie and rot before he consented to her discharge ; and should they be required to give up all that tide to redress, in obtaining their liberty, to whiali all British subjects were entitled ? It would be most unjust. If the party were to do this, could they ever obtain such a rule as the present ? Was it not constantly said, when applications were made to the Court—" Wby does not the party make an affidavit ?" It would, in fact, be laying down A rule which must shut out the party from being able by any possibility to obtain redress. The rule.of Court, however, could only be used in the present action to show that the cause was at an end. The want of probable cause must be proved by other means, and so must the malice. There was abundant proof both of a want of pro. bible cause and also of malice, and this rule ought therefore, in his opinion, to be discharged. Mr. Justice Pasta, Mr. Justice BUR1101:411, and Mr. Justice GASILEZ, were of the same opinion. Rule discharged with costs. The rule against the defendant requiring to answer the matters contained in the affidavits was not argued, the party not being pre pared. ,a the answer' , not con- • COURT OF EXCHEQUER, WEDNESDAY, Nov. 23. FINCH V. JOSEPH WILFRED P tEKINS. Mr. ROOTS moved for an order, directing Joseph Wilfred Parkins, as executor to a person named Finch, to pay into the hands of the Accountsnt•General the sum of 9001.; and also that it be further ordered, that the sum should be laid ow in 3 per cent. consolidated annuities, until the suit now pending in equity shall have been decided. Mr. RI:3INET., for the defendant, said there would be no ob jection en the part of his client to submit to any order the Court should think proper to give. lie wished, however, to remind the Court that, ma executor to Finch, he was liable to many actions of ejectment. The costa in these actions might amount to a con siderable sum, and he therefore hoped that the Court would not order the whole sum to be taken out of his hands. Mr. Baron GAILIIOW suggested the propriety of ordering the money to be paid into Court, that it might be laid oat in the most advantageous and proper manner fot all the parties con cerned. Ur. RUSSELL said he did not apprehend any objection to such . _ proceeding. Mr. Baron Hu LLOCK observed, that as there would necessarily be some costs to pay in such actions. perhaps the better course i would be to leave a sum of 1001. in the hands of the defendant, in order that he might be able to meet such costs. Mr. ROOTS, on the part of the plaintiff; acquiesced in Ale eterke, which was accordingly made. (Before Me LORD C irr BARON.I The Court was occupied during the whole of the day In hear ing further argurr.ents in the case of " Petre r. Wells," which has been long pending, but which is of no public interest. PREROGATIVE COURT, IVIDNESDAT, Nov. 23. [Before Sir J. Ntcwot.. Kohl LOSS OF A WILL. In the matter of Mary Drouse, late of Exeter, deceased, Dr. LUSHINGTON inured the Court, that the testament of deceased, who died in November. 1823, should be admitted to probate. It appeared, that the deceased, upon the execution of her will, which occurred some months before her death, had given it in charge to her brother, Mr. Alexander Drouse, to whom she devised WAIL and also appointed him executor. Fier household property, books, and plate were bequeathed to her sister, Mrs. Ilaaletturst, and there were some small bequests to other persons. Upon the decease of Miss Drouse, her will was produced by her brother, and read in the presence of the several persons concerned. Mr. Drouse made affidavit, that after reading the will, he had deposited it in his desk, ' but upon watching fur it soon after, discovered that it was not in his desk, and alter a diligent search, concluded it to be lost. All the parties concerned, except Mrs. Ilszlellutst, bad consented to the probate of the will, as stated by Mr. Drouse, and, under these circumstances, it was prayed that this statement of the will should be admitted to probate. The Court inquired whether Mrs. Hazlehurst had received notice of this application. 1)r. Lb axlW OTON replied that she had had notice, and replied by letter that she would neither consent nor dissent. Motion granted. CUITEIB V._CURTEIII. Dr. levsu NOTONi;;;edthe Cenrri,tiiatei will made by as TeS Curteis, late of Hackney, in the county of Middlesex, should be admitted to probate. The testator died on the 30th December, 1823, leaving his whole property to his sister, by a devise made in the following words :—" 1 give and bequeath to my sister .lary my whole property, in consequence of the cruel and murderous con duct of my wile during this illness, and at all other times." There was no objection to the disposal of the property wider that instrument, / which bad been duly executed, but the widow of the deceased was desirous that the Court should direct the obnoxious passage, which characterised her conduct as cruel and murderous, to be expunged from the will, when it should be admitted to probate. • Dr. JENXE R said he appeared on behalf of the widow, but the property left by the testator was so extremely small, that it would not be Judicious of the widow to contest the validity of the will. On her pan, therefore, he consented that it should be admitted to pro. bate, with the omission of the obnoxious passage alluded to. The COUNT was of opinion that the testament must be taken altogether, and that no part of it should be expunged. unless us validity c ould be disproved. If the widow only desired the omis sion of the obnoxious passage upon the grtmrch.f character, the will could not obtain greater notoriety than it had at present. MOON refused. EUSTICK V. itateinew. Dr. LestrINGTON appeared in this case on behalf of Elizabeth Bawden, who was cited to appear and prove the legality Ilia will made by Stephen Eusticic, who died on the 26th of June, 1823, or, in neglect thereof, that the brother of the deceased, the Rev. 1). It. Eustiek, would take nut administration to the effects of his brother. The allegation of 3I ire Bawdeu stated that she was a lady of re spectable family, Rod that a mutual attachment existed between her and deceased. which led to a treaty of marriage between them. That the uncle of deceased, Sir 31. Noel. became acquainted with the intention of deceased, which excited his disapprobation, and upon his death in IMO he settled his estates upon the deceased, with the ceradifion that he should not marry Alias Bawden. Soon after, upon the solicitation of deceased, Miss Bawden resided and cohabited with hint until his death, but no marriage took place, because such marriage would have caused a forfeiture of Sir M. Noel's will. Miss Bawden took the name of deceased, and he had frequently been heard to declare his intention of providing atnply for her at his death. When dying he was heard to say, that Mrs. Eustick (meaning Miss Bawden) would.dnd herself as well left as Lady Noel had been, for that she had sacrificed everything for him. There was a mass of documentary evidence introduced into the case. There was a will made by Mr. Et:stick in 18811, and another in 1507, which was uncancelled, and found after his decease in an apartment called the •` White Room." By this will Miss den was made sole executrix atstt heiress to all the real and per sonal property left by deceased. There was also the draft of a will drawn up by 31r. Edwards, the agent of the deceased, no the 3d of January. 1811 ; and also a deed, assigning his household, property and an annuity of Mt. • year to Miss Bawden. There was a sob sequent will triaile nit the Bth of January, 141. which was found in the drawer of a desk kept in an oflice situated about unit hun dred yards from Mr. Eustick's residence. The signature hail been taken from this will, but • codicil attached to it, dated the nil January 1321, remained complete. By this will, a demise of 400 t. was made to Miss Damien, together with the household Jur. niture, Arc. The deceased, at his death, left a brother and three sisters, with several nieces and nephews--the children of deceased's sisters. In answer to the allegation of Mimi Bowden, it Was pleaded that, for some years before his death, the feelings of de ceased hail been altogether estranged from Miss Bawden; that he had manifested the strongest suspicion of her, and the grewest dislike to her family ; that he had fret:pet:lly declared himself t 2 1,....,#.,......nua.01 64116. THE BRITISH PRESS. be the most wretched of Then, and expressed his regret at having ever become acquainted with Miss Ilawden. The Comm' inquired as to the amount of property left her by Mr. Eu‘tiek. Dr. JE N NEN stated, that there was no method of ascertaining the precise amount, as no letters of administration had been taken out. Dr. Lrsift )(wrote raid, that the probable amount of the real property was 3.0001. The debts due to the deceased were very large. Ills real property may be taken at about 1,0001. per an num. In conclusion, the Learned Doctor observed, that there were three questions for the consideration of the Court : Whether the deceased died intestate ? whether the will of 1807 should he considered uncancelled ? or, or whether the will of the Bth Jan. with the signature torn off, but the codicil perfect, should be con. sideted as the last will of the deceased. lie was prepared to can tend that the will of 1807 was uncancelled, and remained co with the knowledge of the testator, and that it had nut been revoked by any subsequent testament. 1/r. JEN xya, on the part of the Rev. R. Eustick, and the other relations of the deceased, contended that the will of 1807 had been entirely revoked, and destroyed, by the subsequent testaments, by which the deceased altered the tlispositiou of his property ; and by the destruction of the last of those testaments, which lett the de ceased without any will. The signature was torn off the will of Jan. 8, 1821, which showed the affirm retvetiedi; and as to the codicil, it must be held to have followed the fate of the will. Atter the evidence was read. he should be prepared to argue, that the in tention of the deceased had been to cancel the will of 1807, and that he had, in fact, died intestate. The depositions of the several witnesses, which were very volu minous, were then read, and occupied the Court until three o'clock, when the Court ordered that the arguments of Counsel should be heard on the next Court day. TILE NEW LONDON BRIDGE. Yesterday the first Special Session* was held at the Town-hall, Southwark, before the lord Mayor, Recorder, and Aldermen, ac cOrding to the Act of Parliament for building the new London. bridge, to determine upon the compensation due to claimants for injury sustained by their compulsory removal from the premises which must be pulled down to effect the formation of the ap roaches. The first award of the Corporation that was disputed was one of 1,2001. for the good-will of the business of .Mr. IVihnot, a alpinist and druggist, residing at No. 317, High-street, South wark. The claim of Mr. Wilmot was to the amount of 3,3001. The claims for lease, premises, and fixtures had been agreed to. The CostmoN-Switawr stated the case on behalf of the Corporation, and proved the tender that had been made. Mr. Sergeant WYLLIE again animadverted upon the outrageous injustice of giving the Corporation, who were properly the defend ants in this case, the right of opening and replying, and trying it by their own officers. Mr. Alfred Fawkes, who supplied the claimant with drugs, re presented him to be a very skilful man as a chymist and druggist, and stated' that the premises are most advantageously situated. Ile did a great deal of business in the small and lighter drugs, which formed the most profitable part of the trade. Mr. Peachum and Mr. Warburton both represented the business to be extremely flourishing ; the thoroughfare was admirably adapted to it. There were eight chymists and druggists within a short distance, and if Mr. 'l% ilmot were to remove, they would be great gainers. Many eminent physicians sent their prescriptions to him for preparation. His books from 11123 were produced, and it appeared that the gross profits as there stated, had been in that year 1,2341., from which the sum of 1801. had been deducted as salary to shopman and rent. During the last year the gross profits were upwards of 1,4001. The claim for compensation was made upon the average of the net profits at three years' purchase. The proprietor had car ried on the business on the premises nine years. The C074110N-SCROEANT, in reply, said that the complaints about the city privileges afforded Counsel an opportunity of tacit- Mg sympathy fur their clients, whose supposed sufferings were so insupportable. Now why was it that Mr. NVilrnot had given only an account of his dealings since 1823. the time when steps were taken to get the new bridge erected ? Why had he given no ac count of the preceding six years—and why had he called no shop man to speak of what was done during the last three years, and left that to be done by those of whom he bought, and who could only form conjectures upon Mr. Wilmot's own statement ? Mr. Wil mot was represented to be extremely skilful in his business ; if en, his customers would follow !nor if he removed to no extremely in. convenient distance, and no excesaire charge ought to be made for situations. The Jury, after they had consulted for a considerable time, awarded the claimant 1,5001. for his good-will, being less than one, half of his demand, and 300/. more than had been offered by the corporation. The next claimant was Mr. Parker, who is a ready-made clothes salesman, residing next door to Mr. Wilmot. He claimed 3,0001. tor the good-will. The Corporation tendered him five shillings. The COMMON SERGEANT proved that the claimant was a te nant at will, that his lease bad expired in September, 1823, and argued that there was no title to compensation. Mr. BROUGHAM said he could prove that the landlord would never have turned out Mr. Parker if it had not been for the Corpo ration, so that he might continne, but for them, in the regular re ceipt of LOW/. a year. Was it to be endured that a man was to lose this profit and receive no recompense? Mr. Parker would lose his business with his shop, far his goods merely were pur chased at the fancy of the passers by, who, if he way gone, would pass on to some other shop, without taking the trouble to look for him. It was proved that for eleven years Mr. Parker had cleared 1,0001. a year, and that his landlord had premised to renew his lease if the old bridge was not pulled down. The jury awarded the claimant 500/. CORONER'S INQUEST. CHILD FOUND IN MONTAGU-MEWS. On Tuesday an Inquest was held at the George and Crown, Broad-street, Bloomsbury, by Thomas Stilling, Esq. Coroner, on the body of a male infant, which was found. on Sunday night lying on the step of a door in Upper Montagu-street, Russell square. Bernard bl• Cormack, the watchman, stated that on Sunday night last, about half-past ten o'clock, as he was going his round, a gentleman came to him and told him there were two women very drunk in Upper Montagu-street, and that they had a bundle with them. The gentleman said he thought it would be proper for witness to take them to the watchhouse. They both immediately went towards Upper Montague.street, but could not see any women. As witness was passing Mr. Groom's house, No. 24, Russell. square (the street door qt' which is in Upper Illontagu.street), witness saw something white lying on the step of the office door. On examination it was found to contain the body of a child. Witness then went with Connell, another watchman, and the gen tleman, into Upper ;Montagu-mews, where they found two women, both drunk; witness took them to St. Giln's watchhouse, where they were examined. They had a basket, two bunches of keys, a muff, a gown, and two shawls. Witness saw another woman in the Mews, and detained her, but a groom came up and said she had nothing to do with the other women, therefore witness let her go. Shesfas quite sober. William Suitor. a patrol, stated that the women, when in cus tody at the watchhouse, denied all knowledge of the child ; they were examined by the watchhouse-keeper's wife, and, on the fol. lowing morning, were taken before the Magistrates at Marlborough. street, and discharged: Mr. Joseph Burgess, resident apothecary at St. Giles's work house, snit he could not state a positive opinion of the cause of the child's death. When witness first saw it, it was cold and stiff, and appeared as if it bad recently died. The Jury, after a short deliberation, returned &verdict of" Wil ful :nuttier against some parson or persons unknown." EXTRAORDINARY ACClDENT.—Yesterday afternoon a singular accident occurred to a man named Sullivan, a bricklayer's labourer, at the house of Mr. Adams, the proprietor of the Rose pablic-house, Hatton.wall. Ad Mr. Adams and his wife were seated at dinner, in their parlour behind the bar, they were asto nished by what they conceived a Violent knocking on the tap-room table; Mr. Adams, imagining that it was produced by some thirsty soul, who was anxious for immediate attention to his wants, gave the usual response, " coming, coming," and hastened into the tap-room, where he discovered in a corrar a man seated, with his head hanging on his breast, and seemingly in a state of extreme intoxication. Mr. Adams resolved to supply hint with no further potations ; and, giving him a shake by the shoulders, ordered him to quit the house. Ott the man's raising his head he recognised hint to be his friend Sullivan, who had been employed in doing some work in the room over the tap-room, to one corner of which a flue bad been contiguous, and the adjoining planks had in consequence become injured by the heat. When poor Pat, therefore, came to balance on them they gave way, and down he came into the tap-room on hie nether end, with no more injury (with the exception of the slight concussion) than if he had de scended the Busses Montaignes—a happy illustration of the Facile deseensus Arrant." When Pat was aroused, he started as if frotn a dream (not certainly in the attitude of Richard, neither condescending to borrow the language of Shakspeare, but using what was equally strong), and exclaimed, as he looked up through the vista in the ceiling, ••• Arrah 1 by the powers of pewter ! (a very appropriate oath in a taproom) what brought me lucre ?'"fhough he Sustained no injury, Mr. Adams strongly recommended him to get bled after so serious a tall ; but in vain. "By my showl," says Pat, " the bloat of the Sullivans is too good to be giving it to doctors • but I know a drop of something will make all right." Mr. Adams not being supplied with the infallible restorative, the " Mountain Day," was obliged to have recourse to a vulgar sub stitute Old Max," by which, however, Pat soon became so • elevated. that he again mounted in the upper regions, and resumed Iris work as bnakiz ax ever. A LaitMING IRE.—Tuesilay evening, about half-past nine o'clock, a ire brake out is the house of Mr. Ford, baker, Bridgewater-gardens, Fana-street, Aidentgate.street, anti in a short time the whole of the premises were enveloped in flames. The engines were promptly on the spot, and aided by a plentiful ' supply of water the firemen cornmeimed operations; but owing to the nature of the building, which was chiefly composed of wood, • the flames communicated to the adjoining house, occupied by flit. Lancelot, tinman, and great fears *were entertained that the de , vouring element would extend its ravages to the houses in Bridge . water.squme ; but by •the exertion of the firemen the fames were confined to the above house s, the one Mr. Ford occupied being re. . damt to a heap of ruins, and the other much damaged. The fire originated by some shaviaka becoming ignited in the cellar. POLICE. GUILDII ALL. Catherine EVONS, the cat-stealer, was again brought up before Mr. Alderman ANSLEY, yesterday, for reexamination. She hail been remanded from day to day, since Friday last, not with a view to any criminal procedure with regard to the charge upon which she was apprehended, or the barbarous manner in which she exercised her calling, but with the expectation that sufficient ground for her committal under the Vagrant Act might be obtained, by a close examination of the street-keeper, who on a former occasion brsnded her with the appellation of " a regular morning sneak." That of. fiver, however, has been confined to his bed ever since, and the Al derman now discharged her, in the hope that the imprisonment she had undergone would deter her from pursuing her cruel avocations, at least within the jurisdiction of this justice-room. Snow, the street-keeper, of Ludgate-hill, said be lost a fine torn cat a short time ago, and the face of the prisoner was somehow or other familiar to him. At all events he should keep a vigilant eye on her, if she should ever venture into his district. Mr. Long, the prosecutor, who declared he would not part with his cat for five sovereigns, expressed considerable alarm at the result of the proceedings, being fearful that the prisoner would cow steal his cat from malice it not for profit. Win. Smith, who was remanded on the charge of stealing a quantity of flour-sada belonging to 54 different millers and factors, was again brought up, that the depositions against him might be read over and signed in his presence. This proceeding occupied above an hour, in the course of which Mr. Van ex plained, that though lie purchased sacking of other persons, the whole of the 9cwt. in question, he was quite sure, had come from Merton-mill, Ile also stated, that he had given 10s. per cwt. in stead of fh., as stated by one of the witnesses at the last exams_ nation. Mr. H t7m PH nErs asked Mr. Slee, who identified some of the property as that of Messrs. Fell and Steel, how lie could swear it had been stolen. Did he mean to say it had been stolen from his premises ? Mr. Slee replied, he did not but they had never sold the sacks, and nobody had a right to cut them up and sell them. Mr. Ward, the proprietor of Merton.mill, in answer to some questions put by Mr. Humphreys, said he had only learnt since this inquiry had commenced, from the men in his mill, that it was usual to consider old useless bits of sacking as the perquisites of the workmen ; and that he had been since informed, by several large millers, that the allowance of such a perquisite was not the custom of the trade. He still said the sacks belonging to other parties, which had been traced to his mill, had been sent .here. for the most part, by the regular sack collectors, instead of his own. The prisoner was then committed for stealing three whole sacks, pieces of which had been discovered in the bundles at Trig-wharf. BOW.STREET. Yesterday a young woman, of rather respectable appearance, named Jesse 111• Cary, was brought before the sitting Magistrates, charged with stealing a pair of shoes from the shop of Mr. Willis, a shoemaker, in Cranbourne-alley. Mr. IVillis's shopwoman stated that the prisoner came in that morning with an elderly woman, whom she called her mother, and the latter purchased a pair of shoes. Mrs. Willis, before they left the stop, said she missed a pair of shoes from the parcel which she had bPen showing to them, and aln.not at the same moment the witness saw the prisoner conceal a pair under her shawl. She did not in ' form her mistress, from a reluctance to expose the prisoner, until she had a second time mentioned her missing the shoes, and then she taxed the prisoner with the theft, and the latter produced the shoes from under her shawl, and, fulling on her knees, begged for merry for the sake of her infant child. Site was given in charge to a police officer. The witness had seen the prisoner at the shop re peatedly, making purchases for the last twelve or eighteen months, and they had never before missed any thing when she bad been there. The prisoner, during the time that the witness was giving her evidence, seemed in a truly pitiable state of mind. She wept, stamped upon the floor, and clasped her hands, at intervals ex claiming. 0 God ! hut could I have been thinking of? 1 never committed an act of dishonesty before, and I do not kuow what could have induced me now. Pray, pray do not do any thing to me—Oh ! do not, for the sake of my little baby, anti my poor parents. lam a poor, deserted, miserable wretch—pray do not confine me." She had not her child with her. Mr. Ilahha asked her it she was married, and where her husband was ? The prisoner said she was married, but her husband deserted her about tour months ago. She had worked as a waistcoat maker, but she had been for some time without employment. Mr. HALts—What is your father? Prisoner—(ln a flood of tears)-0 Sir, pray don't mention his name—do not let hint know what has happened to me. An °dicer said she hail before expressed the strongest wish that her situation should not be made known to her father. Mr. HAI.LS said it was quite clear that a theft had been com mitted, and he should not discharge the prisoner without further infinity. If, on a second examination, the prosecutor pressed the charge, it would be his duty to commit her for trial. The prisoner was remanded until Friday. QUEEN-SQUA RE. Yesterday Thomas Entmerson, a private in the Both Foot, in the recruiting department, was charged before Messrs. White and Markiand, the sitting Magistrates, with unlawfully enlisting a lad named William Bassett, who stated that he was under age, and also an apprentice. The account given by the complainant, who is rather defective in his speech, was that he was sitting on Monday night drinking at a public-house near Queen-square, when the defendant, who had taken a pot of porter, asked him (witness) if he was willing to t,avc another. Witness said yes, it' the defendant would go with him to the Black Horse ; but the defendant here inquired whether he had any money, observing, if not, he would lend him a shilling for a week. The defendant then put the money into witness's hand, and closing it with his lingers, added, it was given in the King's name. Mr. MARRLAND—You should have asked him, soldier, if he was both " willing and able to serve ?" for you would then have learned that he wasan apprentice, and consequently unable to serve at all. _ . The complainant now called two witnesses to prove the facts. Robert Langan said he saw the parties drinking together at the public-house on Monday night. Heard the soldier, Emmerson, say he would lend Bassett a shilling, which he put into his hand, as witness then understood, to be paid back again on the next Monday. Mather witness, named Keane, also confirmed the above testi mony. Mr. WHITE—WeII, soldier, this is not the way in which the King wishes to have soldiers got. His Majesty would, I am cer tain, scorn much transactions with sovereign contempt. The affair is, in my opinion. a most improper entrapment of an apprentice lad, and is most scandalous to you. Bassett was then ordered to return the shilling, and for the fu ture to keep himself oat of such company. WORSHIP-STREET. EXTENSIVE SWlNDLlNG.—information has been lodged at this office for some days, that a young man of respectable appear ance Ind obtained goods from several tradespeople on various pre texts. One day he represented himself as a youth about to walk the hospitals, for which purpose he required a variety of surgical instruments ; a second, he was studying the law, and legal autho rities were a necessary accompaniment to his professional assiduity ; a third, he had devoted himself to mathematics- and in the pursuit of his various studies scarcely any profession or trade had escaped hie attention. In consequence of this information, Vann, the o ffi cer, has been industriously tracing the footsteps of this youth, and yesterday morning he was brought before Air. Osborne, the sitting Magistrate. lie is under 21) years of age, of remarkably genteel appearance, and possessing elegant manners and address. He gave his naive u Charks Iloldricorth, but it appeared in evidence that he had as sumed the names of Smith, Johnson, Taylor, Clark, and almost every name familiar to an English ear. Nearly 20 persons, highly respectable in appearance, attended to prefer charges against hint. Tailors, shoemakers, hatters, hosiers, linendrapers, jewellers, and others, presented themselves in woful abundance. Jame Smetzer, boot and shoe maker, 63, Fore-street, Cripple gate, was the first case heard. lie stated that on Tuesday last the prisoner came to his house, and desired to have a pair of hoots, and also a pair of pumps. Ile requested they might be sent home, and gave his address at No. 30, Myrtle-street, iloxton, and his name as Smith'. Witness knowing nothing of the prisoner, did not like to trust the goods to his apprentice, and therefore took them ; home himself. The prisoner opened the door, and handed witness into a back parlour. The boots were produced, tried on, and ap proved, when the prisoner coolly took possession of them, and walked out of the room, intending, as witness supposed, to fetch the money. lie however waited a considerable time, and not find ing him return, grew mousy and made inquiries after him. The landlady, however, knew nothing of him ; lie had only taken pos session of his lodging that morning, and had brought no move ables with him, stating that he had that instant returned from a continental tour, and could not at present get at his luggage. Com plainant lost no time in giving information at this office and at places in the neighbourhood. Richard Constantine, a constable, deposed to his taking the pri soner into custody, and produced tour duplicates, and 17s. 6d. in silver, together with a silver watch, and other articles, which he took from the prisoner's person. Vann produced two new snits of clothes, an excellent flute, valued at about ten guineas, which had been obtained from Clementi and Co. by the prisoner, and numberless other things which he had trued to him. Mr.. Osno itxE considering it evident that the prisoner had dealt largely In these transactions, remanded him until this day week, to give an opportunity for the production of additional evidence. An accident, we fear likely to prove of serious conse quence, occurred- late on Thursday night. As George Thomas ' Esq. was returning home from Sir Wm. Anson s, of Grnitdisburgli Hall, where he had been at a dinner party, his horse took fright, and ran away, and coming in contact with some obstruction he, with his servant, were dashed out of the chaise. 'An.. Thomas, it is supposed, pitched upon his head, and laid senseless in the road till his servant returned to him with a carriage. He was con veyed home, we regret to add, with his face dreadfully cut and one of his arms injured.—Esser Herald. THE NEW TEA COMPANY. When we contemplate the extent to which the nefariotw practice of adulteration in the article of tea has been carried, we know of no establishment to which the public in general are more essentially indebted, than to one which has for its object to furnish a genuine article, from which all those fee.. titious ingredients, which make it so injurious to healthm a utterly excluded. IVhen we recollect that illicit cat a .. blishments for the manufacture of imitation tea-leaves have not only been detected but publicly brought to justice, and that bags and barrels of imitation tea have been produced, and the offenders, in various instances, prosecuted to con viction, the extreme importance of obtaining it in its g e ., nuine imported state, and before it has been subjected to any of that counterfeit process which it is so generally made to undergo, is manifest. Mr. Accum, in his Treatise on the Adulteration of Food and Culinary Poisons, h as pointed out the following method of detecting the adulte.. ration of tea:— " Spurious black tea, slightly moistened, when rubbed on a sheet of white paper, immediately produces a blueish. black stain; and speedily affords, when thrown into cold water, a blueiish-black tincture, which instantly becomes reddened by letting fall into it, a drop or two of sulphuric acid. " Two ounces of the suspected leaves should be infused i n half-a-pint of cold, soft water, and suffered to stand for about an hour. Genuine tea produces an amber-colour e d infusion, which does not become reddened by sulphu r i c acid. "All the samples of spurious green tea wore minare t ] with carbonate of copper (a poisonous substance), and pot by means of verdigris or copperas. The latter substances would instantly turn the tea black ; because both the* metallic salts being soluble in water, are acted on by l e astringent matter of .the leaves, whether genuine or sp. rious, and convert the infusion into ink. _ " Tea, rendered poisonous by carbonate of copper, spe e d.. ily imparts to liquid ammonia a fine sapphire blue tinge. It is only necessary to shake up in a stopped vial, for a few minutes, a tea-spoonful of the suspected leaves, with about two table spoonfuls of liquid ammonia, diluted with half its bulk of water. The supernatant liquid will ex hibit a fine blue colour, if the minutest quantity of copper be present. " Green tea, coloured with carbonate of copper, when thrown into water impregnated with sulphuretted hydrogen gas, immediately acquires a black colour. Genuine green tea suffers no change from the action of these testa. " The presence of copper may be further rendered ob. vious, by mixing one part of the suspected tea-leaves, re duced to powder, with two or three parts of nitrate of pot.. ash (or with two parts of chlorate of potash), and project. ing this mixture by small portions at a time, into a pieties or porcelain-ware crucit,le, kept red-hot in a coal fire; the whole vegetable matter of the tea leaves will thus become destroyed, and the oxide of copper left behind, in combina tion with the potash, of the nitrate of potash (or saltpetre), or with the muriate of potash, if chlorate of potash has been employed. " If water, acidulated with nitric acid, be then poured into the crucible to dissolve the mass, the presence of the copper may be rendered manifest by adding to the solution liquid ammonia, in such quantity that the pungent odour of it predominates." . . These fraudulent practices it was that gave rise to the New Tea Company ; and never was such an establishment snore strongly called for, or one the success of which pre. mises to be more eminently serviceable to the public. BULL BAITING.—The attention of the University of O. ford has been drawn to the subject of bull-baiting, in con., sequence of the late baiting which took place within a few miles of that city, when a monster in human shape tore from the root the tongue of his pitiable victim, and handed it about the ring. In consequence of this barbarity, we are told that a petition to Parliament is now in preparation, praying that bear-baiting, badger-baiting, dog-lighting, and similar cruel sports, may be prohibited, under suitable penalties. Thursday morning some suspicion having been mita by the smell proceeding from four tierces which bad arrivedt in this city the preceding day from Liverpool, on their way to Edinburgh, they were opened, and found to contain a dozen of bodies of men, women, and children; it is sup. posed that they originally came from Ireland. The Magistrates ordered that the whole should be immediately buried in the High Church-yard. It was a most horrid spectacle. The tierces were addressed to respectable pet. sons in Edinburgh, wh CO could not possibly have any thing to do with the business.—Glargron , Parr. BIRTHS. On Tuesday, at No. 14, Bedford-place, the lady of Edmund R. Daniell, Esq. of a daughter. On Tuesday, at York-place, the lady of Mr. Herman Hendras, of a daughter. MARRIED. On Monday, Thomas Lupton, Eaq. or Blackheath Hill, ts Anna, third daughter of William Simons, Esq. of New OTOTt, 31ile End. On Tuesday, at St. John's. Hackney, Stephen Hobson, Esq. of the Crescent, klinories, to Mrs. William Taylor, of the former place. DIED. On Saturday, aged 76, Lady Eyre, widow of the late Lotd Ch!t: Justice Eyre. At Brussels, on the 13th inst. Mrs. Wheeler Milner, widow of the late Thomas Wheeler Milner, Esq. On Saturday, at Lincoln, of typhus fever, aged 16, Justin, second daughter of Charles IVhite, Esq. On Thursday, at his Lordship's house, Woolbeding, is the year of her age, Lady Robert Spencer. On Tuesday, Richard Alountford Wilkinson, Esq. of Rubio . . On the 18th inst. Peter Ilbert, Eaq. of Boswell }louse LW Bowringsleigb, Devonshire. EAST INDIA BIRTHS, MARRIAGES, AND DEATHS. BIRTHS. At Quiloa, the lady of Captain Charles Maxtone of the 9dlllo Native Infantry. At Calcutta, the ad) of Philip Fraed , Est. i t Bellary, the wite of Sub-Conductor 0. 11Iorten. At Fort W i lDel. the lady of Captain W. It. Costley, Barrack Master. At Calms Mrs. It. Kerr. At Hurnee, the lady of the Rev. John Cooper- 0 I Sons. At Madras, the lady of P. Vans Agnew, Esq. At Calera Mrs. Forresty. At Lucknow, the lady of Captain Smalpsge,3 ll l o of Brigade—of Daughters. MARRIAGES. At Cochin, Lieut. f. Haleman, of the 16th regiment of Sart Infantry, to Miss Amelia Rodgers, daughter of Joseph Roda" , Esq. ro At Calcutta, on Monday. 20th Jane, Henry Osborne. En. Mrs. Louisa Exshaw, relict of the late Lieut. Enka, to the Bengal Native Infantry. At Calcutta, 24th June, Mr. John Ellis, to Miss Genuine Keys, second daughter of the late Michael Keys, Esq. (AR' mond, Surrey. At Calcutta, 25th June, James Randle, Esq. to barna MO^ only daughter of the late Samuel Blackburn, Esq. At Agra, 5111 June, Mr. Thomas Lyons, to Miss Elizgetlt Hyde, eldest daughter of the late Mr. Henry Ilyde, Coothawr of Ordnance. DEATHS. At floyapooram, on the loth June, Mrs. Ann Childs, rtliel the late Mr. George Childs. At Quillon, 2d July, the infant son of Capt. Charles !dam' who expired nine hours after his birth. D On the 9th instant, at the Presidency, Black Town. An infant daughter of Mr. G. H. Mayers, aged one year and dm months. At Kumaul, 9th June, Cornet J. Jackson, 4th RegiCllntl+o Cavalry. At Allahabad, 19th June, Lieut...Coloncl Campbell, of t.ht tg Regiment board the Infantry. On board the Caro Brea Castle, at sea. 12th Jantunf...,...l' l6‘ Colonel_ Commandant James Gardner, 31 st Regiment 01 P'" N n a a Ai i ri t t v C s e cl a i hag l n i c i f u ted a agon t n w t 22 ry 2 l . y 2 ,ea d o J rsn u ,t n 3h c em , 11 0n1 1 8 na t thhs J une, Catherine H arr is, Wife o f M T ' j u a n nd e, l ca l da pt. ys h W . 11. Hari, p : gimsnt of Native Infantry. Lue 00 At Amman, 11th June, Ensign R. E. Bl ackburo, 42d Regiment of Bengal Native truantry. At Cooley Bazar, 25th May, Mr. Conductor Forster. '' ~i At Calcutta. 28th June, Lieut. Chas. Sey mour Invalid Establishment, aged 29 years. jiin At u S T ora sy t ior l , 4t rjq h J.ucniev„ilofsecrhvoiceler,a,agllen2ryyelsVrem a D . Cdlerukda, f r. dt a5,........1 Hides WATER AT LONDON 11111DOETHIS AY. Morning, 50 min. after 4. 11vemismis.111014 Printed at TIIE BRITISH PRESS Office, by J . . IUI, Strand, and published by R,CsstiOITI PI-.