The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser. — London, England, 1825-12-23 00:00:00

COURT Of RING'S BENCH. GUILDHALL, TRVIVIDAY, Dim 22. 0. tti nip its Loatiost beftre the LORD CHIEF JUST ICE aLt Special . Juries. CRIAL CON. PARKES V. criswicirr:._ This was an action against the defendant for crimi - al consigns.. boa with the plaintiff islrife. fhe Anorney-Oeheral and Mr. Chitty conducted the plaintiff's ease. Mr. &Arlon and Brougham that of the defer.dant. The Arroawev-GrYta.it, in opening this case to the Jury, put it NI a case of great injury to the plaintiff. of violated feelings, and of the most artful seduction by the defendant. It appeared, however, in the result of the inquiry, that no very great damage bad been sustained except by the plaintiff's wife, who earned to have been most unfortunate in all her smatery crornexions. The defendant resides at Ilanoam Court, near Bristol, and is a Magis trate tar that district of the county of (Bowater, and also for the county of Somerset. The plaintiff is at ptelebt in possession of a competent property, though at the time when he married he wasa traveller for a London house. Having had occasion to go, in the course of business. through the West of England, he aecidentall became acquainted with Mr. Latcham, a solicitor, near Bristol 31r. Latcham had a daughter, with whom the plaintiff formed an attachment and married. This took ewe in 1612. A thousand pounds were given, by way of fortune, by Mr. Laminar, which was settled upon her, the plaintiff's brother and fatiter..in.law being appointed trustees. After the marriage the plaintiff and his wire came to London, where they remained eight nr nine months ; and then he was induced, by the wish of 'his wife, to reside among 1 er friends, and go down to Bristol and set up business as a plumber, in partnership with one Jeffries. The 10001. which had been settled on Mrs. Parkes, Mr. Latcham was persuaded to ad sauce, by way of loan, tonesist ip carrying on the business; sot. withstanding this, they failed in 1814, and this money, for which Jeffr:es gave his bond, was entirely lost. From this period till estiy to the year 11318, the plaintiff and his wife lived together, 124 baying 170 employment, when he once more returned to London, to sae, it he could get something to do. Toward the e... 1 of this yaw, or the beginning of 1817, he succeeded in obtaining at appMi rt meste in an establishment near Soho-square, in which he wad his wills were to reside jointly. He then went down to Bristol to bring her up, but she refused to return with him. From this period be had taken no further notice of her, although her father's antes having become embarrassed, and she, with her two chit. Oren, had very little means of support; not only had he not sent for her again, but he had never ant her even • farthing to help her. About the close of the year 1819 she was in. troduced to the house of the defendant, with whom very shortly after she formed the criminal connexion for which this action was brought. They left Hannan' Court, went to Exeter, thence to Ex. mouth, where they resided some dme,and thence to Lyndhurst, near Sauthatnciton, in Hampshire, where they remained another period. 11 this time Mrs. Parkes had three children to the defendant, one of whom died. Towards the latter end of 1822, the defendant, tired with the obscurity in which he had been living, and satiated with his victim, returned to his residence near Bristei and die . isimed his connexion with Mrs. Parkes, but when pressed with the charge by a Mr. Fry, an old acquaintance of Mrs. ' P arka's, to whom in her distress she had written, her father and mother being Stith dead, he admitted that he had lived with her, and had uoly abandoned her in consequence of her depraved habits. Mr. .dry, determined to ascertain the truth of this charge, went to see tier, and found her listing indeed in a state of great poverty, but diligently labouring to support herself and children, and appear. ing to conduct herself with propriety. In the course of the year 1824, Mr. Parkes became possesst of a considerable property ; be then brought this action, anxious to obtain • divorc e , an d r id himself of his wife. It appeared that In the successive migrations • the defendant and the plaintiff's wife, they had assumed& new name at every stage, a circumstance on which the A tiorney.Gene ;al relied, as proving their desire to keep their connexion a secret 'from their friends. Mr. Latcham, the brother of the plaintiff's wife, proved the mar riage. On his examination be said, "My father is a solicitor, and at the time of the marriage was residing; near Bristol. My sister war then about 19 ; she was the only daughter; she is a first cousin 181 .61r. Parkes, her husband. The marriage took place with the approbation of her family. Mr. Parkes was then a traveller to a bowie in Laudon. He mosamsed property to about 10001. and mad* a settlement on his wife. He was about thirty years of age. Mr. and Mrs. Parkes after the marriage went to reside in London. After a few years they returned to Bri;tol, and Mr. Parkes entered into business with a person of the name of Jeffries. This partner ship was after some time dissolved, and llr. Parkes returned to London, Mrs. Parkes continuing to live with ha father arhl mo ther. In the March of 1821 her mother died, and her father in December 1822. The &leaden' has acted as a magistrate of Gloucester and Somerset. In the years 18111 and 1820, he was living at Hannan Court. Dlr. Latcham, M rs. Parkes's father, acted at clerk to the magistrates; they became in consequence acquaint. 44 Mr. LatcLam was for several months at Hannan Court. It it twalwo•yeaessisas hived aids my father.,, Ii year KM Ma. Pokes was missing from Bristol. On my fhther'e dot th I suc ceeded him." Cross-examined by filr.Seauxr rr—l did not object to the mar riage. They married on the 9th November 1811, and then went to La/am lam sure I don't know whether they were in London two or three years. When I was in London on business, I called at their house, but never slept then. Parkes, on going to Bristol, canted on the business of plumber and gluier for several months. They failed. and Parkes returned back to London. Parkes, and her two children lived several years with my father and mother a..er this. They had no support but what my father gave them. y father supported her, notwithstanding she went to Mr. Picker. ' lug's and Mr. Fisher's. I do not remenber seeing Mr. Parkes! atm he returned to London. I may have said that " Parkes be. baved like a scoundrel to his wife." 1 don't believe they lived happily together. She refused to return to London again. - I know the handwriting of Mr. Milward, the plaintiff's attorney. (The! witness here verified several letters which were put into his band.) A tter my tether's death, the eldest of the children was brought to me to support it. I wrote up to Mr. Parkes about it, and got no answer, and sent it to the parish, who sent it up to him. Mr. Cm. wicks, about the years 1019 and 1020, was under great embarrass. meets. I know nothing of his concern now. Thomas Tippett—l lived at Exeter in 1020. I remember the dAndant coming to my house in August 1820, with a lady, end intmduced her as Mrs. Humphrey, calling himself Mr. Humphrey.' They did not take lodgings in Exeter. He afterwards went to Ex- Liouth and took a cottage there; I then became snore intimately a , quainted with them. He never spoke of her but as his wife. She' had a child there; after the birth of the child be frequently tame to Exeter. He made no communication to me about leaving Ex. month. The child was brought to Exeter. The child was nursed by a Mrs. Ford. They left this neighbourhood in 1021 ; the child was left behind at nurse; the. never returned again together. In February 11122, I againsaw /dr. Creswtcke; he stated his object to be to take away the chile. I brought away the child and gave is to Mr. Humphrey. Previous to this he declared who he really was, and said the lady was not his wife. 1 had known before who she was; I might perhaps have mentioned this to him before be told me. Mrs. Sarah Gourlay—l am niece of Mr. Abraham Kenna, ; my uncle has a cottage at Exmouth. I remember Mr. Huniphrey tailing on him about the cottage ; my uncle stated the rent was 1001.; the lady wished him to take it, aa it was expensive living at an Inn ; after some time, I observed she wee in the family way ; they were there shout eight or nine months ; I saw him again in Fe bruary 1822. and he said than he did not know where she was. Mr. Clarke-1 reside in Exmouth ;in 1820, 1 was requested to attend Mrs. Humphrey, and on the 27th Nov. delivered her of a male Mr. Clarke—l am a surgeon at Crtdherst, near Southampton ; I remember a gentleman and lady of the name of Hill coming there. and delivered her of a child, in January, 1822; the lady passed as Mr. Hill's wife. 1 frequently visited them. I have su►. sequenily ascertained their real names. She is now living in a state d rest poverty, and her two children with her. She supports her. ..et by neiAle.work. I have not seen him there Ekes the 10th No. 'ember. 1022. Mr. pr,-1 taw the defendant after We Man. I showed hidi, ?Are Par►es's letters to me. Ile promised to give me M. ►tr them next morning. He did not pry this sum to me the next morning, ino lie did afterwards. Ile said that he had lived in Devonshire 9vh her. He said he had one child by her. I found her in a imtage at needle.wolk • she appeared to be conducting herself r•ith propriety. The defendant said one of the children was and ascribed another to Doctor Clarke. lie asked me for her let. terw to me ; he got them about a fortnight ago; he paid me the 204 fee her about a fortnight since. I sent the lets,* to him a few dart age. Ido not know that Mr. Creswicke possouirs considerable unies-eastriined by Mr. BCAILETT.—Before I sent the letters to Mr. Creswicke, I tried to make something of them by Parkes. I asked hint If he would not give me a aunt of money for them. I legged at Mr. Latchanes four years; while there I knew Mr. Creswieke only by name. I left shortly after Mrs. Parkes and her children came to the house in 1816. I stayed two months after she tame. Mr. ',wham was very poor. I did not have to make room for her. I had known Mrs. Parkes 20 years. Her father wns not style to support her She went first to kir. Pickering's, and then to Mr. Fisher's. I saw her frequently while there. Ilex child was put to school by Mr. Pickering, who is a naval cflieer. She ye. moaned there two months. I have heard of her inlvtr,rd getting an... little matter' of plate away. I was not in the lishit of seeing Mr. Cresenke. It was suspected, when Mr. Creswickc and lifts. Valles disappiered, that they were gone off together. I know no enng of Mr. Creswicke's circumstances. I do not 'know that lie went all to avoid being arrested. Re-evamined by Mr. ATTORIZT-GENTRAL.--Her mother held about two years after she went down to Bristol. thornes Parkes.—l am brother to the plaintiff: I lived in the know. of Mr. and Mrs. Parkes eight or nine months after they *ere matriat. I was in the habit of visiting them afterwards. tie in dulged her In every thing she could require. When my brother ...nue to bond'', In 1816, lie did so on the advice of his wife's fa tter, who said he would take rare of her till my brother got a Ctua.. matt- My I indite gut a situation in the latter end of the year 1818. lie went down to Bristol for the purpose of ininging her up. In 18/4 my brother became possessed of a considerable property. t,:rens..eattmitted by Mr. Ecnat.Err —He gas his property by s *natant relation. Front the latter end of the year 1816, or the be. gt.inmg of 1817, till the year 1820. I believe he neversaw her. He ..ever went to bring tier up again to my knowledge, nor to my knmelidge did he ever make any inquiries after her till the year I Thomas Joseph Fievetn—After the plaintiff and his wire were married, I we* in the habit of ?jettison then in town. They ap. P.seat to be brine very happily. 1 did not risk them much. By Mr. BR nutmeat... A -low did they live during the years 1817, 1818, and 1819 P The Loan Cntxt JUSTICE-Why do you ask such a ques tion ? They were not living together then. Mr. BacouGUAll—l thought this question as much to the point as that of the A ttorney-General, who asked how they Dyed during the first six months after marriage. Three latent were here pat in and read, to show the connexion between the defendant and the plaintiff's wife, and to show on what terms they were toward each other. Two of them were written in 1823, after the defendant abandoned her in Hampshire. They only related to two small sums of money which he was send. ing her, and were no way remarkable, except as showing the diffi. etilty which he had in raising such small sums as 51. and 31., which were sent on each occasion. The other letter was written in 1819, and marked the period at which this connexion first began. Its formal tone clearly Indicated that up to theffieriod of its being written no Illegal intercourse had taken place between them. The contrary was .attempted to be established by the plaintiff's Counsel. " My dear Madam—Having conferred with Mr. Latham,' think it best to defer Matilda's coming home until Tuesday - or Wednes day, when I will fetch you beth. Should her remaining with you not be attended with any inconvenience, will thank yon - to hand her the enclosed ; otherwise do not do so, but give me a line. I feel more than obliged for your kir,dness, and remain, dear Madam, your obliged Setvaut, " Dec. 25th, 19. "HUM. Cnrswtcxt." Mr. Se All LETT, for the defendant, addressed the Jury at consi derable length. He did little more than restate the facts as they had been disclosed in evidence, and argue from them that, before the Magnal intercourse took place, the plaintiff had abandoned his wife, that he had sustained no damage, and that he brought this action merely because having recently and unexpectedly become possesaed of a considerable property, he wished to have a divorce. _ . The LORD CHIEF Jr9T ter merely directed the attention of the Jury to the principal features of the case. After a short consultation, they returned a verdict fot the plain tif--Damages LIBEL. • - WILLOUGHBY v. YET-strive. This was an action for libel published by the defendant in the Chester Chruir;ek, of which he is the proprietor, imputing perjury to the plaintiff in an affidavit on some proceedings in Chancery. Mr. SCARLETT stated the CMe to the Jury. He began by making some remarks on the caution which editor,' of newspapers ought to exercise in the admission of any paragraphs reflecting on individuals, and much more how cautious they should be in making such paragraphs, which were not unfrequently contributed by in terested parties , the foundation of any rem ar k s by themselves. He complained of the general inaccuracy of the reports of law pre ceedins in newspapers, especially in regard to the technicalities and t he legal 'language used in the courts, except on some very great and interesting occasions, when more than usual care and exertion were made to give the proceedings in all their detail; he seemed to Insinuate that the reports were gene rally pregnant with blunders and inaccuracies. It appears that the plaintiff is a publican, and formerly kept a - public-house at High bury, where he acquired a considerable property. In consequence of representations by Mr. Crossley, the agent of Lord Grosvenor, the plaintiff was induced to take the Royal Hotel, Chester. The plaintiff's conduce, for some reason or other, had not been sods factory to Lord Grosvenor or his agents, and, his rent tailing in as-rear, an execution was put into the house. He applied to the Coon-of Chancery for an injunction to stay the execution, which was afterwards dissolved, anti the money paid brthe plaintiff to avoid the sale of his goods. Parties, it appears, ran high at Chester, the aironick and the Courant being their two organs. The plaintiff having procured the insertion in the Courant of what bethought a ' fair account of the pmeeetlings in Chancery, the matter wry taken up in the Chronicle for the 2fith Dee., 18'24, in a paragraph en qtled " The Willoughby Controversy," and which, in effect, called him a liar. E. Willoughby examined by Mr. WILLIABII.—I am son of the plaintiff; he has resided in Cheater since 1819. I know the defen dant; he is proprietor of the Chester Chronicle. I know Mr. Crossley, the agent of Lord Grosvenor. He Interfered in the letting of the hotel. Cross-examined by Mr. ATTORITIT-OIHrRAL.—I took seve ral papers to the Courant; they were taken by Mr. Itrilloughby's desire. I suppose they were taken for the purpose of being inserted. 1 did not pay foe the insertion. I did not reettat their ppeply in-. sertlon. They were not sealed. I did not real thong" "'t , had taken them a few days before the article entitled " the Willough by Controversy" appeared in the Chester Chronicle. Ido not re collect that I ever had any conversation with my father about them. I never heard him say " how well I have trimmed Me. Crossley." I know my father wrote the second of them. My father's goods were seized in execution by Lord Gmsvenor. The execution was suspended fourteen days duriog some proceedings in Chancery, till the money could be paid into Court. An affidavit that Fletcher, the defendant, was the printer and publisher of the Chester Chrossick, was put in and proved. The ATTORKEIA3THRRAL addressed the Jury for the de fendant. The Limb Cs= lowelertnid the Jury that as the publica tion bad been proved, and no justification hail been put on The re cord, they must of course find for the plaintiff : the amount of da mages was for their consideration. After retiring from the Court for some time, the Jury returned and gave a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages 3901. SECONDARIES' OFFICE, CoLrwair-erRrET. CRUNDELL V. WRIGHT. This was an action brought to recover the sum of 1101. 9s. 4d. for hasher Pohl and delivered by the plaintiff to the defendant. The original demand was for 1501. Ns. 4d. ; but the defendant having paid 401. on account the pbantift sought to recover the above balance. Thomas Balsam, a foreman to Mr. Kilsby, a wharfinger, proved, that in August last the plaintiff had a quantity of timber lying at the wharf, and that a number of Dantztc plauics ard 487 feet of timber were at different times taken from there by the plaintiff's carman, to be conveyed to the defendant's putmisas. James Howe, the carman, also proved the delivery of the goods to the defendant's servant. On his cross-examination he said he was not told, when he left the last load but two, that be need not bring any more. Mr. Blake, a timber-merchant, said, he considered the plaintitrs charges reasonable. The defendant addressed the Jury In propria persona, and stated that he was engaged in building two houses, and being re commended to the plaintiff, he gave him an order for the planks, and one earriage-load of timber, which were delivered ; but, in a few days afterwards, the plaintiff thought proper to send him two more carriage -loads of timber, which he neither ordered nor wanted; and he accordingly sent to him, desiring he would fetch them away, but which he neglected to do, and they had ever since remained on his premises, he having no use for them. The two last loads were delivered without his knowledge or consent, and it was therefOre evident the plaintiff wished to force him to purchase goods which he did not want. The only item in the bill which he disputed was the charge for the two last loads of timber. He then cited his foreman, Thomas Poole, who stated that he was present when the order was given. Only one carriage-load of timber was ordered, and the plaintiff was told that no mote would be wanted. After the two last loads had been delivered, witness went to desire the plain tiff to fetch them away, as they were not wanted, but which he refused to do. • Cross-examined—He would not swear that part of the two last loads had not been used by the defendant. The SecoNnattr, in summing up, observed, that although proof of the delivery of the timber was prima Attie evidence of the axle of it, yet when that ev.dence was rebutted in the manner which it had been by the defendant's witnesses, he thought the Jury could only give a verdict for the amount of the plaintltt's de mand, after deducting 591 124. 7r1., the charge for the two but loads of timber. The Jury accordingly gave a verdict for 511. litt. 9d.: the plain. tiff being at liberty to take back the Useless loads at timber. IZISOIXENT DEBTORS' COURT, TMURSDAT, Dtc. 12. • John Moore, of Mountsorrel, is Leicestershire, victualler, was brought up, and nut opposed. The insolvent, however, was mi na:cry examined by the Court as to the disposal of his property. His oral statement differed from the account given in his estate paper. In this document he had stated that he did not possess pro perty to the amount or 20f. directly, or indirectly. flowerer, from the answers now given to the questions of the Court, it appeared that the money in the possession of the insolvent, and held tor him by his wife, when added tv the value of certain articles which the Act allows to be excepted, exceeded 401. . . . . . . The CHIEF Com stiser ow it R observed that the insolvent mielit consider it a lucky circumstance that no creditor opposed his di!- ' charge, as his conduct wan undoubtedly liable to that section of the Act which regarded concealment. However, under the exposi tion which had been made, the Court could not deem the insolvent entitled to so Immediate discharge, and would, therefore, in the exercise of the discretion vested in them. remand him to be con fined within the walls of the prison Mr live calendar months, troin the date of his petition. M r. I observed, that the Messrs Hawes veto prevented. merely by a delay in the entering, front opposing the discharge of the Insolvent, and requested that they might be appointed trustees. The application was granted. Thomas Martin, whose case had been adjourned to this day, ap. peered before the Court. A decision was exretial on a point started in this ease, as to whether an assault constituted sach • species of injury as was cognizable in this Court. The insolvesit's attorney having neglected to sublimate some wit. nesses, the question wan necessarily deferred, and an order was made by the Court that the costs oldie opposing creditor should be paid by the insolvent's attorney. The insolvent was remanded. Abr. • MI Prince, the Russia Oil vender, was brought up an his petition. Mr. Davis opposed his discharge, in consequence of a bill of ex change which he held, and which was accepted by t h e Insolvent. The insolvent bad been discharged twice betide the present ap. plication. Since the latter occasion in Angina 1814, he had in curred debts to the amount of Mr. kl EAT u submitted to the Court the attested consents of three.fourths of the crediton, in number and value., which, under the circurristlnces of insolvent's recent discharges, were an indis pensable accompaniment to his petition. Mr. Davis examined the insolvent concerning the disposal of a brooch and other articles purchased from him, and the insolvent answered that they were pledged. Mr. HEATH asked what was the nature of the dein, and the op posing crodito: stated that in payment of 6441110nd and other wines sold by him to insolvent, the latter had passed to him a bill 6f ex change, which he now held. Ile also paid for the insolvent certain dues at the synagogue. At the time of these proceedings, the witness knew the insolvent arok the benefit of the Act,but still believed him to be a very honest man. The witness had been induced to give aedit by the representations of the insolvent, who alleged that he had previously received 0001. from Mr. Rothschild, who intended to advance 10001. more. Insolvent—That is a great big story. The opposing creditor repealed that his great inducement was the representation made by the insolvent, who also assured him that he posaessed a great see horse, of which he was to make "toots" for mankind. (A laugh.) Mr. Davis being further interrogated, replied that he was a tradesman, and bettglit the diamond from a pawnbroker. He re fused to answer what he gave for it: but (addressing himself to Dlr. Heath with the air of a higgler), `• I have bought some things this morning, which are now in my pocket ; and though it is nut toy business veil you what Ipso for them, I will put a price on them if you choirs: to purchase." (A laugh.) Another creditor of the name of Cohen having made a statement in opposition to the insolvent's discharge, The COURT was of opinion that neither of the opposing cre ditors had established a case of fraud, and dccidedthat the insol• vent should be discharged. NOTICE TO ATTORNEYS. In the course of the day the CII tEr ComstseroXEst observed that there was a very important rule which coner:•oed the Attorneys of that Court. and with the provisions of which they did not com ply. Ile would read the rule, and the further order which the Court deemed it necessary to add in confirmation. lie then recited the rule, dated February, 1822, which ordererl.2-" That no attorney or solicitor should be allowed to practise in this Court, who did not take out his annual certificate in some Court of Law or Equity at Westminster." The additional order suspended from practise in this Court Mum attorneys who had not taken out their certificates for the year ending the 15th November last. MIDDLESEX ADJOURNED SESSIONS, TIIUUDAY, DEC. 22. l'ollPritti — rria JURIES. John M m an ha was lo th - for assaulting and obstructing the Leet Jury of the liberty of the manor of Stebeneth, otherwise Stepney, while in the title execution of their duty. Mr. ALLEY Mid the present prosecution was of great import ance to all who were liable to be called upon to act on arch Juries, and also to the public, to whom the due execution of their doty was a great and most essential protection. The Jury for whom he appeared had discovered the scales of the defendant to bo untrue, and had therefore inflicted a penalty, as they had unquestionably a power of doing. This the defendant refused to pay, and on their :aempting. in consequence, to take away the de fective scales, he cominitUld the assault which formed the subject of the present proceedings. The beet Jury, it would readily be ad. voided; had a most laborious and unpleasant duty to perform ; and it was not to be endured that they should be insulted while en. gaged hi its doe ezezotion. He did not know what sort of defence it was intended to set up. Mr. Wm. Jolliffe, clerk to Mr. Parnell, the Chief Bailiff to the liberty of the manor of Stepney, proved that the Jurors recited as plaintiffs in the present indictment were duly sworn in at Mr. Parnell's office in the meth of April last. They were to act fee a year from that time. Mr. ADOLPUES, for the defendant--Have you any record of their appointment?—Witness. We have. ['rite books of the Snarler, were here produced, and shown to the Learned Counsel.] Mr. Anot.onus—Hieve the Jury any written instructions given them ?—Yes; each of them has a copy of the oath which lie is sworn to perform cliATIt HAW—Have they any particular place of meeting ?—No ; they 'alienable as occasion may require. Mr. Higgins, one of the beet Jury, sworn—He stated that he was the first to enter the shop of Mr. Nathan, who is a butcher, living in the neighbouthood of Whitechapel. There was a hook m suspended to the scale in which the at is placed, which caused a draught of an ounce and a half. Alter removing the hook, there still remained a draught of half an ounce in favour of the seller. Witness poitved out these circumstances to Mr. Law, their foreman, and a fine was imposed, the amount of which wit nets does not know. Mr. Nathan refused to pay the fine, upon v•erielt Mr. Is v oetarredlodiorris, glte. boodle WA* ecablinpanied them, to seize the scales:` CM his attempting so fn - do, the defendant caught hold of them, and declated they should not be taken. Finding the defendant determined in his resistance, they at last went away without the scales. Mr. ADOLPHUS—Did you produce any deputation or autho rity ?—We told him we were a beet Jury. Mr. AnoLottus—Had you any authority to produce ?.—I had a copy of the oath in my pocket. Mr. ADOLTnUb--0 yes, I dare say you had; but pray what authority did you produce besides showing your faces ?—None. Mr. Anobvirtra—Now, pray do not you know that unless you got the lines, you would have no tavern dinners ? IVltners—l have had none as yet. Sy she Ckipmedlita....Keithes Mr. Parnell nor Wain* was poi; sent. • Mr. Law, Alligitcbgan of the Jury, being sworn. corroborated the evidence drilic former witness. Cross.esammed by Mr. ADOLPIIUS—Did not produce any au thority ; has: none to produce. There was a basket of grapes in the scale at the One we entered. Ale. Nathan offered to explain, but we could sot hear everything and everybody. Mr. A Do trays—And therefore you would near nothing Witness—.l did aot say so. Mr. Anot.eatts—You have tavern dinners occasionally out of the tines?—There have never been any extravagant dinners. Mr. Atbet —r ,d you ever impose a fine for the sake of a din. nor ?—Nev-r. Mr. Annrst. - —0 na, they only dine oti . them after they are imposed. J. Rutter, a j .. -reyr.-an scale-maker, proved the scales to be in accurate to the ratent, before stated. Croes-examl .ed."..He never dined with the Jurors. He was paid for attending •. Mr. Thompe:m and several other of the Jurors were also ex amined, and , otmlietaed the account given by Mr. Higgins of the conduct of the M./. emit. Mr. ADOLOPP6.4, for the defendant, said that no one had a greater respe.it fur the ancient institutions of the country than he had, and he wovtff resuily admit the Court Led to be a most useful and valuable one, jaut then it was necessary that it should be con. fined within V. -et limits, for what would be the condition of this country 1 the luct admitted by this Jury were declared to be -right ? He wottla ask them to put themselves in the case, and suppose some dostin persons calling themselves a leet jury to enter their houses, aid, 'without producing any authority, fine them for some imaginary rgansgressions, and on their refusing to pay the money. offer to rke away their goods. Ile was ready to admit that a Court Lett dad the power of takingaway any scales or weights which they OA find to be deficient, but he denied that any in. terested party. as 4 such these jurors were, as they were to have their dinners enteJ tile fines, could be justified in levying such fines. They bad +I such power, but must summon the party be fore the Steward of Baili ff of the Manor, whose duty it would be to hear the mat. in the character of assessor, anti to direct them in the determining Of the amount of the amercement. Instead of so - - • • , f getting a dinner, just when a hook is of his scales, they get a dinner out of because he will not take away his scales. xl to be taken away not paid, and It the ground of non. to power of making, on authority subse. it defendant might might be, have used time they might be He had witnesses proper light, and he day, would st o w to, clothed in a little pervert or crewed ~ living to Rosemary g grapes in Mr. Nathan's spoken of by the Jury had • of a two ounce weight. and showed it to -• there for, hut Me. Higginai t •t arnerblg, Law.:inat eltplalned what it had been ‘' - _ Mr. Higgins re — teed, **Newer mind, I found it there." Mr:Na than and witness; expler.ed to Mr. Law, and he seemed disposed to listen to Mts.. but 'one of the Jury threw a half ounce weight violently into 0 . • scale, and, without waiting to poise it, called out that it was h-lf au ounce deficient. Upon hearing this, Mr. law tuveed to other Jurors, and said, " those of you who are of opinion titer :s l .r. p sthan ought to be fined, hold up your hands." Inur•diately 13 of them held up their hands, and Mr. Law, turning Iv AL. Nathan, told him he was lined 20s. Mr. Nathan said h• Nicol(' not pay It, ns he 111111 sure his scales were correct. and h., • • t a sixpence in one of them for the purpose of showing that it s..tricient to turn them. Mr. Law ordered the beadle to take, vex, the sc.ties, which Mr. Nathan would not allow to he dune. and scu ffl e ensit - Nl. Harriet Pitts,. want of Nathan's, gave similar testimony. Mr. Al LA: v. ly, commented with much vehemence on the evidence ae'duc the defence, and on the cruel and serious in. - juries whits; iota& on the public, and particularly on the poorer pan, h of li lye weights or balances. The CI - .MR said there could he no doubt but that the ',Pet Jury were mertsr to take away any scales which they might find 13 te deficient, and to resist them in so doing was illegal. The Jury, nikers,onsulting fur about ten minutes, found him Goilty of the ohwtruction. The CitAtitre•xsientenced him to pay a fine of forty shillings to the King. MAsottrasniti...—The Lions of the flaymarket, Paul Pry and Charles 'Fright, are expected to be rivals at the grand masquerade it the Argyle Rooms, on Thursday, the 2eth instant. The public will be able to judge be tween the respective merit s of Ch err y Ri pe an d Weight's champagne. The demand for tickets is unprecedented, and the attendance of the nobility and leaders of fashion is expected to be rester than on any former occasion. WINTER HOME CIRCUIT. SUSSEX ASSIZES, LEWES, Dzc. 21. , John Ramnicey was indicted for stealing, at Salehunt, on the 10th Nov. a • flock of sheep to the number of 19, value 30:., the property of George French. 1 he prosecutor is a farmer at Saleburet, and the prisoner occupied a field adjoining his farm. In the night of the Wth of November the sheep in question were taken front one of the prosecutor's en. closures. They were never recovered, but evidence was given that the prisoner and another man named Brown (not yet apprehended) were in possession of the sheep at the parish of Fletcling, on the evening of the 10th November, being a distance of about twenty miles from the prosecutor's farm. The same men were also trued to and from other intervening places, driving eighteen sheep answer. lug the description of those which had been stolen. The prisoner said nothing in his defence, and wan found Sentence of Death was recorded. Among the commitments in the calendar was that of William Kelly, alias Kelley, who was described on Captain in the Royal Navy, charged with violating Frances May, his late servant, at Lancing, on the 22d July. For some reason not explained, tho prosecutrix did not appear to prefer an indictment, and the prisoner was discharged by proclamation. It was stated that since the sup posed offence the prosecutrix had become a married woman. Richard Baker, alias Jones, was indieted for stealing at Rothtv field, on the 2tl of February, 1822, a bay gelding, value 201. the property of Wm. Stratton. The horse in question was proved to have been stolen from the farm of the prosecutor, who lives at Inkpen. in Berkshire. Within three days after the robbery it was found in the possession of the prisoner, who sold it at Rotherfield, in this county. Since then, and until August last, tke prisoner had been out of the way. The case was dearly proved against the prisoner, and he was found Godly. Sentence of Death was recorded. POLICE. BOW-STREET. Yesterday Emma Hicks, a woman about 23 years of age, was brought before Sir IL Himie, charged by a young man, named George Cross, with stealing a watch, his property. The prosecutor stated that he had known the prisoner for some years; and one evening in September last he visited her at her lodgings in Earl-street ' Seven-dials, and remained there until the I morning. She pressed him to take breakfast, and went out under I the pretence of getting some creases, but did not return, and he found that she had taken his watch, which was lying on the table, with her. He did not see her until last Saturday night, when he told her that he wanted his watch, and requested her, if she had pawned it to restore the duplicate, and he would for give her. She refused, and he gave her in charge to a constable, who asked her for the duplicate, and she immediately took it trom her pocket, and gave it up. It appeared that she pledged the watch at a pawnbroker'. in Westminster-road, in September, for 21. and on the 2d of December she called again at the shop, and procured 21. more upon it. The prisoner, in her defence, 'said that live years ago she was seduced from her husband by the prosecutor, and even was wicked I enough to take away the greater part of their furniture, in order to go and live with him. They remained together four years, when he left her, bat ocessiimally paid her a visit. When site took the watch she was dreadfully distressed, having parted with her clothes and every thing upon which she could raise a shilling. Sir K. Biawis asked Cross if be intended, under the circum stances, to prosecute the prisoner ? Cross said he had no pa" Icular desire to prosecute if he could have his watch returned, but that he was determined to hare it. Sir IL BtaxtE aaid the pawnbroker was not bound to give up the watch unless the person stealing was prosecuted. The prisoner said that an offer had been made by her friends to advance money enough to redeem it within six weeks, but that he refused it. The prosecutor said he had been offered security. but no money was shown to him, and besides, this was after she was in custody, and he did not know that he would be justified in accepting the offer. Sir R. BIRNIS said he had no alternative but to commit the prisoner, as the prosecutor seemed determined to goon, and she was accordingly hilly committed to Newgate. When Cross was being bound over to prosecute, Sir It. 13 t awls observed that ka would not stand. ha his shoes, at the old Lu l l s' , fora trifle. . Several market gardeners attended upon summonses, to answer for the offence of placing their wagons in the highway, in Covent garden, but the cases were not gone into ; notice of appeal to the Smslona being given on behalf of one defendant, in order to have the question argued, and the rest having agreed to abide by the decision, whatever it may be. doing, they set lout with a determination of and happening tis light upon this defendant ju , suspended for aci•ne particular purpose to one o say to themseivo, " 0, now Is the time, we'll gt this Jew," and Owthwith fine him 203., and be pay this line, falirteepaslion and attempt to tak Now it is elearVo.t the scales were not intended because they we false, but because the tine was was th d of distress to be levied on ti payment, t , trier It is clear they had no • without a r—. uceeding beforehand, and on quently ad-they got the money, flit hare kept . - • however false they ml them to the • • titicsirt till the next ti i quest oi . **Se 31, 'owis bailie of wine. 11 to call alto w J 1 , t ;transaction In its pre did trust Ors. ilk..) ••• irs decision that diej beet JariM its—aft persons " el brief authority, 'r. tt were not et liberty to p that authority wi,a William Ilasecirs awort..—ls a fruit-dealer, lir] lane, and was (11..r(720,1 who was weighing grape' scales when the p t ury enwtd. The hook spoken o been placestisiftc.de•Ty witness, in lieu of a ti Mr. fi - :feritesinf, snatched hold of it, THE BRITISH PRESS. MA RI,BQROUGH-ST4EET - - YesterdayJanicr Walters, a ruffianly-looking fellow, was charged with having committed a highway robbery, in Holborn, on the person of William Andertou, a private in the let Regiment of Grenadier G nerds Aoderton deposed that upon Wednesday evening, about nine o'clock, he was proceeding up Holborn, when the prisoner came up and accosted him, by speaking about the weather. This led to a conversation, in the course of which be asked the prisoner if he could inform him where he could sell his watch to advantage, upon which the prisoner asked him if it was silver, and upon being answered in the affirmative, replied, yes, that he would take him to a place where he would procure him a purchaser. They then proceeded up some of the back streets in St. Giles's, when the prisoner took him ante a house, in which were some persons ; he then pulled out his watch, and asked two pounds for it; on which it was handed about, when twenty shillings was offered for it, but this be refused to take; witness then put his watch into his pocket, and left the house; upon reaching Broad-street, the prisoner came up to him, and after stating his regret that he had been unsuccessful, asked to look at the watch, on which he handed it to him ; when the prisoner instantly darted amiss the road and ran down Great St. Andrew-street ; be instantly followed him, and WAS gaining ground upon the prisoner, when some man came up asd gave him a tremendous blow in the face, which knocked him down, but he instantly regained his feet, and continued the pur suit; when he overtook the prisoner, a scuffle ensued, and they both fell, but the prisoner got up first and ran off; he was, how ever, taken before he had run ten yards. The prisoner, in his defence, said that lie was totally Mimosa of the charge, for lie had never seen the prosecutor until he was takes to the watehhouse. Mr. ROE observed, that as he could not try the case, he must make that defence elsewhere, fur as the case now stood he should commit him for trial. The prisoner was then fully committed. Upon his being brought into the office, he was instantly recognised as one of the gang who some time since endeavoured to rescue a prisoner from Marsden the gaoler, who was extremely ill-used upon the occasion. Num DERI NG OF HO USES.—Yesterday a novel, and at the same time a case of considerable importance, came before the sitting Ma. gistrate for his decision, arising out of the following circumstances. Mr. Wheedle, of 5, I3entinck.street, St. James's, was summoned by Mr. Farrell, the inspector, for not causing the nu m b er to b e placed up, which the pariah had desired. Mr. Farrell stated, that in consequence of the orders which he had received from the pariah, he served a notice on the defendant to cause his number, which was No. 5, to he altered to No. 7, agreeable to the Metropolis Act for the better numbering of houses. This notice he served on the 19th of September, and had since then been reiicated, but without effect. On one occasion the number, 7, was put up, but it did not remain above two days, when the old one was replaced. Mr. ROE—Then I must enforce a conviction. Mr. Wheedle—ln the lease of my house, which is from under the Crown, the house is there called No. 5, and I am compelled to keep mp that number, otherwise I should have no objection to alter it. Mr. ingfield, the solicitor—lt makes no difference whether the Crown is the landlord or not; it must comply with the Act of Par liament. AIL Ron-1401Q only convict you In the ciity of 10s. and cost,, iitiOligh it might have been as high as 'isotar.,the clause of the Cows a ;i n k .:ll,t of 20s. per doe to b e orceu suck Do ds-elm_ _.heen given. Ste.lVllleedle then paid Ins. and 3s. 64. costs. MARYLEBONE. Yesterday Clarke, a watchman of St. Paucrus parish, was charged by James Pons, green.groccr, of CoYil-court, Charlotte. street, Fitztoy.square, with haviag committed a most brutal assault. The prosecutor stated, that on Tuesday nigitt last he badmen. sion to correct his drtghter, when her cries attracted the attendee of the watchman, wire emzred the place, and behaved in the most violent manner. Witness. who had only exercised gentle chas tisement towards the child, requested hint to leave the place, which he refused to do, hnt followed him Into the parlour, when without farther provocation he flourished his stick, and struck witness a violent blow on the head, which knocked him down, and rendered hint senseless, in which condiUon he lay bleeding profusely until medical assistance was procured. He could act identify the person who struck the blow. William Cochrane stated that he was present when the surgeon arrived, and on asking who it was that gave the blow, the prisoner confessed that he did it. ➢!r. flaw LINION said that he never heard of a more audacious assault, and asked the prisoner what he had to say In his defence. He denied having committed the assault, but said he entered the house in consequence of hearing the child cry out " murder," and " pray, father, do not beat me." On enticing the place he sprang his rattle, and other watchmen came, but them was not:mutt corn. mined. The complainant was intoxicated, and fell down against the stairs and cut ht. head. The sergeant of the watch stated that he wiopresent, and did , not see any assault committed ; hut lie believed the complainant fell against the fender while in a state of intoxication. Mr. RAW LINSON felt no doubt but the prisoner was the person who committed the assault, and told the sergeant that his conduc.e was highly to be censured for corning there with a lie in his mouth so protect the prisoner, who had confessed to the summit. It was Ms duty , to convict watchmen who committed themselves. and not to shield them. The sergeant was unfit for his situation, and he would suspend hitn for one month. He ordered the prisoner to find bail to appear at the Sessions to answer the charge. ‘VORSIIIP—STREET. Wet. Clark and Joseph Jordan, wagoners in the employ of Mr. Barthetn, coal-merchant, of the Kingsland-road, and lcnt. Thsky, wagoner to Messrs. Reeves and Briggs , of the Canal. bridge, Kingsland-road, coalemerehantl, appeared before Mr. Twyford, on informations under 3d Ueo. IV, c. 126, 6. 41 ; Clark a nd Jordan charged with receiving a ticket, and Pillley charged ith cg it to them, for the purpose of evadi ng payment of the toll of the Essex-street turnpiLe-gate, Kingsland-road. Wm. Archer, a boy stationed at that gate, stated th at on this 13th inst. about eight o'clock in the morning, the defendant Ull a . ley passed through the gate with with a wagon load of coal s , paid him a shilling for the toll, and received a ticket marked H.S. 11th. The other two defendants had not passed the gate that moraine but about one o'clock they presented themselves at Rs gate With ; wagon and four horses, on their road to Kin gs l an d, and delivere d to him the same ticket he had given to Hilsley in the morning. A boy named Taylor, in the employ of Mr. Daniel, a unma n , residing near the gate, deposed that a b out twelve o'clock that morning he was sent by his master with a message to tonti ne , arid when near Finsbnry-square, In the City-road, lee taw the do e ; defendants, whom he had previously known by sight, and h e cb. served Hilsley give a ticket to Clark, who h an d e d i t to Jordan and he put it into his bat. On his return borne lie informed me Collector of what he bad observed. The defendants, with much energy, denied the charge. ley et ed ai d ! Clark declared they had n o t seen each other on th e day They were convicted in a penalty of 10s. each and costs, ft to 1,, imprisoned one month in the House of Correction. In default of payment they were committed. UNION-HALL: On Wednesday morning, between two and three o'clock, at Smith, a constable of Lambeth, was on duty, he entered an unfi. nished house in Pilgrim-street, and apprehended two men nand Trigg and Hayes, upon whose persons were found a complete p • of the implements used by housebreakers, consisting of a bunch of skeleton keys of all sizes, turn-screws, chisels, and drivers, togeth er with phophorus-box and dark-lantern. Having lodged these tiro men in a place of security, he returned to the building, and on ex. &mining a small room, under the stairs, he discovered another m an named Tozer, whom he also took into custody, on suspicion of be, Ing an accomplice of the others. Yesterday morning the three men were brought up to this office, charged On suspicion of having b een conc ernetrin divert burglaers recently committed in Lambeth. ' Trigg and Hayes, upon whom the implements were found, merely stated in their defence that they had acc id enta ll y picked them up in the street, and that they had entered the old building for e th e purpose of taking a nap, hating been l oc k e d out of their own lodaings. Tozer then stood forward, and addressing the 31cgicrate (M. Swabey, Esq.) declared that he had no connexion whatsoever with either of the men against whom such strong circumstances of suspicion were alleged. Althoug'. said he. I an, in the height of distress, no one can accuse me of dishonest practices. fi e then entered into a very long det a il o f the respectability of hie family. He had a brother, a commander in the Ent India Cont. pany's service, another was a clergyman, and a third was to. travelling on the continent. He had himself been recently in eit cumstances very different to those in which he now appeared, h a n g been heir-at-law to Madame Storate. lie was left comiitrable property by way of a life annuity, which he, in an evil day, dis, posed of at °areaway's. In speculations, he spent the money, and ever since has been M indigence. Since his apprehension he had written to a gentleman in Tavistock.equare, who knew his tamly well, and would come forward in his behalf on this occasion. fh again declared his innocence of being engaged in the commissien of robberies, and appealed to his fellow-prisontrs whether he ye s concerned with them in any way. Some of the officers said that they bad known Teter for sone time. His apptarance at present they allowed was fat different hem what it was formerly. He lodged at a respectable house i n beth, and dressed faAlonably. The gentleman whom the accused had written t t not teirg attendance, he, as well as the other two men, were remanded ter further examination. CORONRR'S INQUEST. A Coroner' , Inquest was last night taken at the Riga of the Eagle and Child, Shoe.lane on the body of a once highly respect e d female, named Elizabeth Eames, resident at the abase hive, who dew'royed herself on Tuesday evening, by taking no las than 84 regular doses of laudanum at one drauOtt, the regular dose being 20 drops. T. Shelton, Esq. BM es the Coroner, and a re. spertable Jury being sworn, the following evidebie was adduced;_ Ann Beaforth, the landlady of the house, stated, that about half-past eight o'clock on Tuesday evening, s h e and her sister were WWI up emirs by the busbard of the - deceased, wed told them she had taken poison. They immediately sent him for a stupor, and medical assistance promptlL arrival. During the absence of the husband, the deceased told them what she had done, and idle!, that she was quite prepared to meet her fate. She, as far as ti ry knew, was a sober person, generally speaking, but she was al Thursday, Friday, and Saturday intoxicated, and on Sund.k ler husband had words with her on account of her conduct. Ile eat a very affectionate husband, and a sober man. Ile scented much affected. when he found the consequences that were likely to follow. Mr. Hall, the surgeon, said he had rendered, in company with his assistants, every aid in his power, but had they been ten minutes sooner they could not have saved her, as the draught sh had taken was sufficient to kill 50 persons. The unfortunate husband was called, and described the reasons far finding fault with his wife. Ile described her as a mast amiabi woman when free from drink ; but of late she would get intoxicate fire or six times a month, and finding she was not likely t. reform, he hat determined on not doing more than afloat' g her a maintenance. She had asked him to forgive liercon day, Monday. and Tuesday, but he h a d re f use d ; an d on pip home on Tuesday night she said, " {Tell, Eames, will to forgive me ?" 7o which he replsed, "Thy do you the trifle with me, Betsey ?" She said, " Well, then, you wont;" and turning round, drank off' the contents of the glass; and wall ing to the window, she laid, " Kiss me," and told him what s had done. He did not, however, believe her until she show him the bottle, when he ma down and called assistance. The manner in which he gave his evidence had a visible err on the Jury, who returned the following verdict :—" That the de. ceased came by her death in consequence of taking opium .• laudanum of her own accord, while labouring under a lit die sanity." _ . • LOVE ANI) SUICIDE. - I An Inquest was taken on Wednesday, it the Turk's if public.house, East-street, Red Lion-square. on Jane Perron, extremely pretty young woman, only eighteen years of ege. W , ll hangeu herself in a fit of jealous despondency, at the hou s e o f t e r mistress, Mrs. Turner, of No. 5, New North.street, on Tuesday morning. Mr. Thomas Knight, a lodger in the house, was let in by de. ceased at a little after eleven O'clock on Monday night. Deceased did not then appear particularly agitated or depressed. The nett morning, when witness came down to the parlour, he was nr. prised to find the shutters doted, and the room not cleaned op al usual. Mrs. Turner, the lady a the house, soon after went devc to the kitchen, and on hearing her scream out for assistance. hr followed her, and then discovered that the deceased had barged herself in the scullery. Mrs. Turner, widow, keeps the house No. 5, New North.snec. Deceased was in her service for about twelve months, and vre, generally speaking. a very well-behaved young woman—she kept company with a young man named Wood, and on Monday meet ing requested leave to go and see him, as be was going out awn for some months. She got permission to do so, and returned home at ten o'clock. She had evidently been in tears; but witness at. tributod her distress to porting from one who seemed to possess a command over ha affections. After deceased had let in at lodger, Mr. Knight, she went to bed la witness's mom. and sp• peareti to sleep soundly. The next moming,she arose about tax usual hour, and went down stairs. When witness got up, she ass astonished to find that the fire had not been lighted its the s subject to fsietire 1 had befallen kee. :red at findirg tint iliery, On a table these weeds, Tel of.-40. 006 .• member ins te above all. I lESI a a stranger twin —. stolen iTrO to you, dear farewell. "'Co my Mother, 4, Larkluill-lane. " To my dear, dear William Wood, 1, Princes-great, NI lane." This Setter was read by Miss Elisaheth Turner, who had floket the unfortunate girl to write. William 'Wood, s linen-draper's - shopman, out of place, On cause of this fatal calatnhy, was then examiced.—Though it Ti proved that he had been paying court to the poor girl for !tetra months, and that on Monday be had besued her about 41 der• yet with impudence he protested that he had not the OP''' . spark of affection tor the being who had sacrificed her life on account. The Co ...mar commented in strong terms on the wicladorm " rrnling with the cilia:ions of young and innocent girls, and roki Wood it had been fitter for him to have gone and looked tor stemr employment. The Jury returned a verdict of " temporary derangemett:. BIRTHS. On the 17th Inst. the Lady Jemitua Eliot, of a daughter. On the 20th inst. in Gower -street, the lady of J. H. Alazkia, Esq. of a daughter. Ono t n he 19th inst. at Baynton House, Wiles, Mrs. Walter Lena , of a son. On the 21st Mat. at Mr. Baring's house, in Piccadilly, 0' Humphrey St. John Mildmay, of a son. MARRIED. On the 22d instant, at Sr. Andr ew 's, Holborn, Esq. Secretary to the Lord Bishop of Lincidn, to Ain daughter of Richard Edwards, Esq. solicitor, of C 40 e° , Holborn. RiehaNl e n 3 1 d ; DIED. At Avignon, on the Ilth instant, the Hon. Mrs. Bong. On the 18th instant, Mrs. Catherine Mitchell, the of F. Mitchell, of High-street, Borough. At Moss-side of Mamie, Scotland, on the 3,1 instant, Aleseda Angus, aged 105 years. Printed at THE RRI TIS II PH ES.K.Otfice, by .1. IV. CAIILTV S, 181, Strand, and published by R. CAN I os, name Plor. eitting.room, and knowing that deceased was sul fits, she concluded that /something of that sort h On gain g down to the kitchen, witness was shockec the unhappy girl had hanged herself in the seullP in the kitchen a inner was found, containing 1.1 legibly smitten in a female ham's— rfirr rakftsf • 00 theri lat sF e virttiwou for ever more. Flame my friends and foes. I have been true to you ab well to you and all your triends. I parted like r ou on Monday night, as I felt your heart was I write this with trembling. Farewell to you, ,ri ~r~ Poi' ItTg vd elcc wits pm COO and test