The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser. — London, England, 1822-12-19 00:00:00

et to •morroli hen one of • 1 day's spot! nc•t at Fox ; I ur.day at II each day at h Atal runt lal. en o'clock. gstead Cowen e dog L with the I, by the shit *shoe. Brim 16 sad after and procee. • e front of Cr ed across the le of rak.aoh, ut . :king the wf , ;pied on the t I touter him , . Co fell uff tbe en Reynard •• for nnuther.di en horses stag countiel of , and right of • e Nlidgham 4.' f• ur fise gttii roe) ards from and Wilts. Kil : ie Niembers of tho ttas killed ow the trap, and in the distributiui mite wetter of lei I that Mr. Wti DI cation to the L.,. o degree which " biiristers of soda admitted to it. and very inferior in entlemen. The ay. are said to have are, that the coifs WILDS was ON of {SOUKS Ia illVOlifed his application inn 'A. What teems to an refusal of silk and Mr. DENIS% ti, lirneral, who. fyons enjoy on their ca rat reputation), ass r hlch the honorary meted. It is vire thholding these ap y true with rev. 'a, that nothing Olin than to turn thoin vantage, to gratify Irdiog to the r y the honorary • tree of dergea ustoin, founded . :. of the public aid as it were, dalt •bt after by clients rule were not se Barristers wen es, however seed e, would, as .Nei sod, on *sea ...r, take inceespet at •of ablejesdees • or sale of faverWelso greater facilltr se a lawyer of pp rashly acceptod..* talents which seer deism, the units,* eondary o r =l vl the.. te quaintest With oar them *NI appear occasions segaressi nee as quasar of Ito motives of the loth asaatly to des: n good ones. Woo tbedicsatlea of his to these of others ; world, wi h a • so ive II the bon Igth which etas,: are suffirlintly iti ftistitotiona et ear theta all shift ow IN, le es very wyr h. Thy disudsont of Lieutenancy, cashiering of Str ects to the remains at the indepind of mialsterial pre terangersents, sects ither parts of the indications of than The Teareller. I ,Fcrws, of Rath , removal to his are, is uoavoiti-. larch. understand that red in the Went , o disclosures of consequ entreat ation of whold: s to be inform , knowing only hope that sober suds, will ave►t Id in ignorance Sniats sr Tuesday last * lost Fr(dav week I sold in shares by iN in the preset* it are St Capital* 20,000/. Twit of &c. &v. the ext. Warranted :•anot.t.'s s.—Mr. M I N • , has deckled sdiction shall on Sundays, uid one is the moon. 'clock, as the ing his rounds a attracted by in his blood. Iptoms of life : co wound was AS his head, he so far re ," but nothing Aed down for a doubt ; but .'s Hospits4 LAW INTELLIGENCE. N!;gy 00 CHANCERY, WIDNISPAT, Dzcziassa IP. IN THE MATTER Or ROSE, a BANKRUPT. LOVID Cu►wcauoa Mid, lbat in this ewe, whieh Mr bad mentioned to him yesterday; and where the Petitioner ovid to be in a state or great distress, he had looked he papers, and if Mr. Hart would undertake not to tile ther &admit, he would hear it to-morrow. MIT would not only do so, but would further an te nut to offer any argument. D AND OTHILIS V. ST. PAUL, BART. AND OTHERS. Lordship said that his tine had been an melt occupied yesterday, that ho was unable, as ho had intended, to once judgment in this case. One thing, however, be , iecided about, and that was, that the case did nut fall a the rule laid down in Norway and Rowe. [This case • to the reading of en affidavit on the part of the Plain ledafter the answer was put in.] DICK ENSONS, BANKRUPTS. 'tr. AGAa was desirous of obtaining his Lordship's decision .1. respect to the costs in this case. One of the parties had ..n-sentedlo the creditors, that they would be liable to the . is ; if they joined in a petition to the Court. M i CuLLEN and Mr. brevet were desirous of now dis ' cluing any such interference on the part of their clients, elm had been parties to certain petitions. "Cho Loith Cassertlea said, that he would not bear any rsons who had signed the petitions deny that tact. lf, in 'e.id of signing them, they bad merely consented to them, hat fart must be proved by affidavit. M.r..MOVTIGUIr. said (after some conversation between the C...nsel) that the point now before the Court was. simply, as •o He would take the liberty of mentioning it again his Lordship, after the recess. NEWTON V. STANITORTII. Mr. KIIIIOIIIT applied fur *epeeist injunction in this ease, *Lich the Vice-Chancellor had refused to pant. His Honour is be endlerstood him, had not denied his client's right to the intensities', but thought that the matter in dispute was nut or insitiotemt yahoo to warrant the interference of the Court. abole claim, it appeared, would not amount, on a set-off, ti., re than tool. and it did not seem to him that this was of ieot importance to call for an injunction. The clients Knight, however, bad thought differently, and had kind him to apply to his Lordship. His application was . injunction to restrain the Defendants from receivieg . piney fur the freight of certain goods mentioned in tbo The Plaintiff being at Quebec in August last, there tred the ship Urania, belonging to the Defendants, tants in London. It was provided by the charter party :certain sum should be paid fur the freights with which mild load the ship. In order to make up the deliciency s own freight, he took in other goods at * higher .haa be himself had agreed to pay. When the ship sr r,..• at London, consigned to the Plaintiff's agents, the De r, 1. .ats evaded receiving the tender of the sum mentioned it ' • charter party, and obtained from the captain of the duplicate bills of lading, and procured the goods to be dep. ANA in the London Docks. They then stopped the go. ; and claimed the higher freight which the Plaintiff had •lred in his own exertions. Notwithstanding the remon /Ars !es of the Plaintiff's agents, the Defendants commenced the aclivery of the goods to the different consignees, nod had leteived the higher freight. These facts had been proved on .oetb. There was another circumstance—one of the Defend rats bad been recently insolvent, and the freight was coast. dived to be in danger. The Viee-Chancellor thought that filo Plaintiff was entitled to the advanced freight, but be did not think that the freight was in danger. It was only a - matter or account, and the Plaintiff's demand would be re doeed toy the Defendants' set-off to about tool. His Honour therdloft bad directed notice to be given to the D,•fendants, and the vise to be brought op at the next Seal. Ilia clients, nest, however, thought that by pursuing this course, the pro perty would be endangered, and chose rather to make this ap puratioo to his Lordship. - -•- -•- Thu Leas Cllllllllo4l4olllllollrbt that the value of any pro orrly is dispute should never be taken into consideration on tab applications. Take your injunctions and give the Defcn WWI/ notice that they may dissolve it if they can. TNN AND OTHERS V. BRAVLIII, AND OTHER. was as appeal from the Vice-Chancellor, who had di. r' • lan issue, but the Counsel on both sides agreed that the sis. ion could not be supported ; and they consented that - Hite ease, as well the exception to the Master's re s the merits of the question, should conic, at mice be. le • s Lordibip. It turned entirely on the construction of Seesaw, for the Plaintiffs ( who alleged themselves to t.- t erten), stated the facts. The testator, Richard 8011,. . 6. sers-atley, lace-dealer, bs a will, dated September vo,S IGO. prepared and drawn talix himself, after providing fur certain debtuieß to hh Wife the taterest of his property in Use fo r ty was not to.be sold, u 'I may wi4 st • sister, ltschsiel Beaver, and My triWie nephew, Beaver, whom I leave as executor." He also La SO his wife the annual profits of the shop trade, ~ ,esstmo the stock not to be teaselled, and to be her's for lift, sad her lame singly " Bolt," to be kept over the door ; the busfuss to be managed 'by Richard and Rachael Beaver, with 11, • re's approbation, if living. After his wife's death, the i 3. rs were to have equal Awes in the profits of the busi rx., •sr their lives, and the survivor to base the whole. They acre le be the particular heirs alter the wife's death. The dock not to be divided, as the profit or interest only was to go to them. Mr. guidon stated that under this very blue • crim, will his clients, as the next Klan, must succeed to the ..ditAsed-of residue of the testator's property. As far as any •lesta , is could be elicited from the devising clauses, Escheat and Richard Beaver bad only a life interest in the profiteer Use sksisposodin the residue of the fended property they had nu Interest stall, iouniuch as the expressions "'may sdl it" wets eat solletenUy positive to pass it to them. The be quest . l a lilt interest in Um loaded property to the wife was 1 drill e; whilst, with respect to the other parties, it was may isd.eative of a posibility. Nothing could be more dangerous ''it' f r the Court to 'make that an absolute, which at most tit a conditional gift. The words " particular heirs" sot heirs general, but merely heirs of the wife. The Tor the three persons named has only a life iutercst. st Loeb Cnudeausin—" This testator seems to have beets • r a stistocratie ins his dispositiou, from his desire to enamor ' • 4 le trading pursuits of his laasily". 'lsamu followed Kr. Sugdea ass the same side. Mast, for Foster, the nes), sof kin, acid that the will very obscurely worded, ghat the executor did nut •,• - beams to fouled his title, whether as'a legatee or ax 01 ex ingot having a beneficial interest. With rel ied: to t 1: art girths will which relates to trade, the festal r ~ .otrly Wirt to gllftird sdpport to the Itigatees by keeping ou • eh . 'The of property be evidently eunbidered . There was an indecision of purpose is • id - with regard to its ultimate disposition. " I in.iy 'sews that ho had an intention of doing so at some igid, bet that be suspended such Intention for the e.. With reforeeoe to the disposal of the shop and :, • . was quite otherwise. There tbo positive bequest ~,,i • he intoation clearly. Mc Remise s on the same side, contended that the words t spay will" did not . pass the funded property, and it re filling therefore, wedesposed ef. The will is an imperfect • .taim'est, aid es far as the fascia aro uoacerncd, Richard d iatestate. The will dues nut dispose of tlie residue ...02111 CIIIANCELLOII—" The testator meant to give his *.ve a widow's Interest iu the funds, and oleo in the stock in 'ode. No one coo believe that this paper is the maws cos. • irtril a ill." Mr. if 'sowers., for the Defendants, said, that the testator hest try accident discovered a work entitled Erery Man his owe Lawyer. from which he derived so much illumination that be immediately set about redochig his knowledge to practice, and thought no object more eligible than the label . Akio.' Of his oww will. The result of his labours was ap parent is this very siuguLsr production, which his Lordship was Do* called urns to explain. The Itailellitoulins.i.on—i.l wish the man was here io per son to dolt, for I cosies it seems likely to be no very easy Mr. SI44.OWILL, is eontioluttioo.-11is first intention was h. (ive has wife a life interest in the property, and after bcr Death to make Racibael and Richard Bearer his legatees. These ihst bad been in his employ, and had rendered him :iota efsittentien and services, which ho thus recompensed. lie created a community of in terest between the three lega tees. The trade was to be carried on by than, and he wished it to be cautioned because by it he had unwired all his pro perty. " I hlity will," Mr. Sbadwcll admitted to be merely prospective; hilt it must be explained by the whole wilt, it shews as inespinnt intestion to be carried into elect , at the Litter part of the will. Thus " particular heirs." meant the particular 'serous pointed out by the testator as heirs alter his wire's death. Skilful as this ingenious laceman had been in dinging obsettrlly over his testament, he bad not entirely disguised his intention in favour of Mr. dbadisell's clients. Mr. Parrs followed for the widow. Mr. flout fur the executor—This is the testator's will ; it n as made is lota, mad hedient in telt ; it has been formally vro%ed, sad there is evidence to prove that be was seen read in; it to his We, and beard to esptaiu bit intentium to her. 'Mere is as.. evidence to prove that be bad said. front time to time, that he intended to make Richard Beaver his heir. Now, as far as the succession to the testator's property is in truded, heir mid executor menu substantially the Num. thing. The Learned Counsel them proceeded to read extracts from the answers to the interrogatories, to prove what the inten tions of the teatbtoe bad bee.. Mr. Kansas 'ratted al considerable length on the same side. Mr. Snooty ruplied. The Lon, Cnasosuon—" Gila ina the depositions, and I dill pronounco ay opinion on Friday as weU as Isaa." • 4I tho II .110 %Cry 1. 1:110 0,110 Iletii- aiad ur in t. lave pi of dYhi was Ni silk Is▪ ola r /*- SIM nary lite hos. laity vies nM 1114 ...r, RC • uf IV y, for .4.• lr brit viNe low rind se- w'. dlrl WW Oho ay II fir It of Str Pnd- ete- COURT Obi. ZING'S LIENCR • Wormylnns WzDvisErmr, Dimmer' Is. . . - Before On Leap Can, JtsTiet and a Special Jury. MAY V. ITNwly. This was an action brought by the Plaintiff, late rester clerk of the parish of St. Matthew, tiethmil Green, to leenrer a connitmsation io damages for a libel, alleged to be published by the Defendant , au inhabit ant o f th a t par i s h, an d late one of the olerseers. The alleged libel grew out of the proceedings which had been instituted against Mr. Merceron, for corrupt pra•lices as a Justice of the Peace, and li.r a misapplication of the Poor's Rates, of a Web be was the treasurer. Mr. Merceron was found guilty on both the charges, - and received the sen tence of the Court of King's Bench. Suberviently, it wus re• solved by the vestry that the legal expenses of those prosecu tions should be defrayed bydhe parish, from e.ertain fundst hen named, and Mr. May, in consequence of that resolution of tbe vestry, paid the amount of Knight and licreeman't(the attor neys) Wis. The libel now complained of was published in too pamphlets; one entitled a "Statement of Facts," and the other a " Report of a Vestry Meeting, appointed to investi • gate the bills of Knight and Freeman's." The ilia of both the publications was to charge Mr. May with a similar misappli cation of the parish funds to that which Mr. Mercerun bad been guilty of. Mr. Scutum, Mr. TAUNTON. and Mr. Ilorr, were for the Plaintiff; and the Sotscrroa•Dzsi Lau, 31r.ttuasirv, and Mr. WILDE, for the Defendant. Several witnesses were called to prove the part which the Defendant had take. to circulate the alleged libels. Mr. Scsawrr was about to put both the pamphlets in evidence, when , The tiox - crreaGawsnat. objected that the Defendant bed not been ouinected with the identical papers proposed to be read. }resubmitted that in this, at in alt other cues (except the case of printers and publishers of newspapers) it was necessary to *hew that the paper offered in evidence was the eery paper published by the Defendant . From the fre quent failure in the proof of eases of libel by newspapers, an .4ictof PerlLunent had 'passed, wllstels autboeued the reception of a cie#y or the same title and date as legal evidence against irifler east publisher of the newspaper in which the libel was nserted; bet that species of proof was confined to news papers owl, aed clearly skewed the g e neral law was as he had stated it, and, therefore', the proof here must be consider ed,as having totally failed. The Cater Jusmca thought there was sufficient evidence to have the pamphlet, entitled " Report," ko. read in evi dence. Mr. flemassrr said, he would call a witness, and endeavour to carry the proof further respecting the " Statenitat of facts." Another witness was called, but be added nothing to the proofs already before the Court. Mr. Scaits.wirr then consented to be nonsoi led, and the Plaintiff was called accordingly. The Soticitoa • said there were two other causes in the paper by the Plaintiff, on the sane subject, against other parties. He now proposed, as is measure of concilia , lion, to put a stop, if possible, to the dissentious which pre vailed in this parish, to consent to a Juror being withdrawn in those two case s , and in the one just'decided. Mr. Scantger declined agreeing to that proposal, and with drew the record in the oases not yet called on. The Caller Jurrice said he should undoubtedly be glad if the dissentious in this parish wrre closed, but, from what be had seen of thew, be despaired of any suggestion of his holism that effect. TILE KING V. BENNET AND OTHERS. Mr. Tureens opened the pleadings. It was an indict ment against Bennet, Oldfield, Phillips, and Cartels, for keep ing a common gamiag . house , situate No. 75, St. James's street. Mr. C Fetuses stated the case for the Prosecution. The Jury had hoard from his Learned Friend that this was an indictment against the Defendants for keeping a common gambling-house. In opening this case he should not attempt to make use of any arguments to pre udice or inflame their minds. The time would come, if the Jury should tied a ver dict in his favour, when be should have an opportunity of addressing another tribunal in aggravation. The present in• dichneut was preferred by a youni gentleman named Wood rAfe, a student et law, who had lost at different times large stuns of money at unlawful games at the Defendants' house. The Learned Counsel thee called the following witnesses : John Woodruff, knows the boost. No. 75, St. James's -street. Went there in the latterend of let I; the doors were °feast iron. weal up stairs into a beet room on the first floor, which ,was fitted up its a most costly and superb style. There were twenty oe thirty persons assembled, playing at rugs et noir, In which the parties play against the beak, and sot against each safes . Witness thee proceeded to describe the game: sox peeks of (seeds are used, and every time the number comes thirellhe bank draws half the money mi the table. The beak Imam widest adveataire. Witness went six or seven ;Dame, sod lovartablt lost. Witnees sometime* plated at hesi zard. law all the Defendants at the table; they acted as niasters,giving Oirectioas, sad appearing to be at home, bar ing no bats with them, as the gentlemen at the table had. Witness west one night after play was over, and saw the four Defendants counting mosey ; one of them said to wit ness, Übe play was over fur that night, but they should he happy to see him another time. Crees-exassined by Mr. Cenwoon.—Wcot to the house six or seven times. Is a student at law in the Inner Temple. Has brought an action against these parties. Has also pro • (breed sit indictment against another gaming -house, to which he went about as often as to that of Oldlield. Never was in side tbeffleet. Never took the benefit of the Insolvent Act, and had always paid his creditors twenty shillings io the posed, tad while actions had been brought against him had always paid debt and costs. Never compromised or offered to compromise any proceedings. An application was made to Mrs by one of the parties, but he rejected it, as his friends , were determined to prosecu te them. William Smith knives the house, No. 73, St. James's-street. Had been there frequently, and seems Mr. Woodruffe there, and seen the games of realer et weir and haasrd played there refreshments of wine and spirits were banded about. Hid sees the Defendants there frequently, and can speak to hav ing been there un the ad, nth, and nth of last August. He hod been there on other days also. On one occasion witness applied to Deane to lend him pistols, and the answer he re ceived wai t. " llow can you expect me to lend you pistols, being, as 1 am, a proprietor of such a house as this ?" or words to that effect. Cross-remised by Mr. Contworie.—ls a Lieutenant in the army. Was imitated fur a fraud by the proprietors of the gaining-house after the prosecution was comineeord. Never recollects having hired a horse and chaise and not returned them ; never had hired a chaise in kin life. Never gave three daterent per sons orders to ree l ire his balf.pay at the same time ; had given security to three persons un his helf.pay, but never was indicted on that account. Had lost tout. et Nu. 75, bet had lost/J*ol. at another house belonging to the same Defendants, and is now a Prisoner in the King's Bench prison. The collector of the King's taxes was called to prove that' the house, No. 73, St. James's-street, was situate in St. JBlBMB'B.lllftel. _ _ _ Mr. Ccswoon shortly addressed the Jury on the part of tboDenisidams, and urged that, on a charge so serious as that they bad now to consider against tbo Defendants, the Jury would require better evidence than that uf tbo Lieutenant who bad now been put into the box, or the student who passed his ovesinp at ■ gaming-house instead of his study, and who came bore under feelings of irritatiuo for having lust Isis money. The Omer Jornes summed up, and the Jury, without hailttien, found the Defendant/ Guilty. TB It JUNO V. OLDTIRLD AND 0111 Mr. Pntwes said this was a prosecution arising out of tbe same circumstances, and agaiust the acme Defendants, but as 'he was persuaded (me conviction would be sultiolcut for the purposes ofJustke, be would out trouble thetours with any evident*. The Defendants acre therefore acquitted upon this iadiet• scut. THE KIND R. ROGERS AND ANOTHER. This was an indictment against the two defendants, Rogers and flumphrys, fur keeping a common gaming-bousc, Nu. as, - _ _ Mr. Woodroffe was again called, and be proved having placed at the Defendants' house several times, and lust cue• sidirable sums of money, and that the Defendants were there acting as proprietors ul the house. The home was well fre quentud. The witness had often seen the peer and the ap prentice sitting side be side at the same table. Witness was now married, and considered that by persevering in this pro secution be was making the best reparation be could Air his former errors. Cross-examined—He had called once on Mr. Rogers at bis house in Camden Town at his special request • had never offered to compromise for 3601.; Mr. Rogers had threatened him with a prosecution for an assault, and asked witness bow he could think of contending with him. It was not only bis purse hut that of the whole body be would have to contend with, a body whose joint stock purse was above a million sterling, and who could crush him ur any other person who shi.uld attack them. Mr. Smith was vale cluna'ned, and corroborated tbe testi ' ((((( ly of the last w•itaeas. Witne had, though scarcely of age, lust his whole private turtuoe, above 20,u0u1: at these houses. Mr. Conwoon brielty aildr.ssed the Jury for the Defen dants, aim immediately found the Prisoners Guilty. On Monday night the house of Mr. Thomas Cuisine, fish monger, in Princes-street, was broken into by thieves, by moans of a center-bit and an iron crow, mid rubbed of about ten pound.; in sovereigns and silver, • quantity 01 apparel, six silver teaspoons souse trinkets and other articles, with• out disturbtng.thy I t apily, wbu were horsed in sleep, COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, OvuxuALL, n ICDNILIDAY, DrCtlil•Ell 18. London Adjourned Sittings, fore the Lots Cnicr iVSTICIC and a Special Jury. CRIM. CON.-BARKER v. POTTS. Mr: Cirtrrer opened the pleadings. The damages were laid at Ten Thousand Pounds. Mr. Serjeant Laws staled the case to the Jury. In lay ing before the Jury the eiraumstances of the ease upon whteb they welt to form their judgment, be shoUld abstain from the introduction of every topic which did not strictly belong to it. Cases of this kind adotittcd of . 'eery Mkt), according to the nature of the injury sustained; but in no ease, where the husband was not the author of his own dishonour, afield it be otherwise felt Shan that be bad received a serious and a cruel isijury.. The, Plaintiff in this cue wasa Captnin In the line, and afterwards in the Nottingham militia. In Me he married a very young lady, Miss Penelope Amelia Byrne. The Defendant was a Lieutenant in the militia. Fora me time after the marriage, the parties lived in the utmost cordiality. They were first mar vied in Scotland; and, as was customary in such eases, they were married, on their return, in Yorks hire. This lady was possessed of a very considerable fortune ; and alter they had been married for some time, some unhappy difference arose about the appointment of trustees, which finally led ton sepa ration. A deed of separation was then signed, by which their fixture mode of living was regulated. But although the inter- course was for a while suspended, strong hopes were enter tained of a reconciliation, and would probably have been ac oomplished but for the interposition of the Defendapt, whose conduct for ever rendered that impossible, and bleated all their expectations. This deed of separation did not put an end to the right °faction, although it altered, in some degree, the features 01 the case; but to what extent, would be for the Jury to determine. There was no earthly reason for suppos ing that the parties would not have been united ; fur indeed it would be proved, that so strong was the affectiou subsisting between them, that every probability existed of so happy a result, had not this Defendant rushed in, acid basely snatched away the last remnant of hope. It would therefore be for the Jury to estimate the amunt of dimities. Money had been ,made-lhe standard to regulate these matters, but no sum of 'money could compaiskte for the.wound received. However, it was the only reparation Udine it was in the power of a Jury to grant. Mrs. Frances Barker sworn—l am the mother of Mr. Samuel Barker, the Plaintiff in this action. I was present at his marriage in Yorkshire: it took place on the slat August, 1516. The lady was nut ta_years of age. She was poste-awed tif a very latge property. air. Barker was about 30 years of age. lie was at the time in the Nottingham militia, where some of his connexions resided. He held the rank of Cap tain. Alter the marriage they resided with me about eight or nine months, and they lived very happily together—they were mutually kind to each other. They then went to reside at Clifton, and I never saw her after.—CA letter was put into the hands of the witness, which she proved to be the hand writing of her daughter-in-taw.] Cros.s.examiued by Mr fierjeant VAvollan—l sar - the lady before her marriage. The name given at her marriage was Penelope Amelia Barker, and ant Byrne. The y . were living at that time as man and wife. I knew the Pliuutiff bad run away with her. It was a match without the consent of her parents. Mr. Barker is now about as years of age.—CA letter was then handed to the witness, which she proved to be her son's hand-writing. —I am afraid her fortune was the cause ofl their difference. There was a farming man, of the name of Ward, present, who answered as father. I was at the house of Mr. Wool cy the clergyman, who is my sun-in-law. My dustier-in-law was on a visit at Mr. Woolley's, and it was thought advisable they should be married at tbo church where he officiated. Mr. Woolley is brother to Adairal Woolley, and was Rector of Hutton Bushel, in Yorkshire. Henry Heyman ass orn-1 sin a gardenerm i ,- 1 reside at Telco math, i n Devonshire. I know Mrs. Barker ; she was living at Bell-hill cottage, at Teignmouth, in IMO. Her husband' was not then living with her. I knew the Defendant, he lived at that time at Temouth. I was gardener to Mrs. Barker. About the time Drat saw them together, was when she took the house. She brodght with her two maids and on. lad. I did not sleep io the house. I have frequently son Mrs. Barker and Mr. Polls walkingtogether. Tbereappouted an intimate asquinatanoe between them. He appeared lobe ber ebief acquaintance. Mr. Potts lived with his motherpsd l sister at Teignmout h. I afterwards saw them in the parlour together, in which they usually sat, very near each other, his arm resting on her lap. I never saw any thing more particu lar. She left Teignmanth on the tath of January, teal. On the night she tell it, Mr. Potts came to the house. I had some doubts Mrs. Barker was going to leave, and I staid up to watch. I saw the dash of a candle in our of rooms, and shortly afterwards Mr. Potts and Mrs. Barker came out, got into a carriage which was waiting at the turnpike-road, and drove away. Cross-examined by Mr. &dent Paaaa—Mrs. Barker's mother lived in the house. The mother of Mr. Potts was in the habit of visiting at the house. Mr. Potts had been absent for some time, but returned a mouth at least before the elope ment. . John Barker,gsq. sivarn=4i'm a gentleman of the profes sion of tbe bor. My brother, the Plaintiff, was married in tell- He and his wife lived with my mother. I then lived in Loncloo. 1 did not see them until the summer after, and they lived very happily together. My impreasion was, that no man could treat his a ife more properly than my brother. About three weeks or a month previous to their separation, I saw them in Lundon,and they then lived in a most affectionate u% They were then in London for three weeks, and I I saw them every day. Cross-examined by Mr. Serjeant Yarewan—aly brother went into Nottinghamshire andLineolusbire to see his estates, and after his return they separated. Mrs. Barker had come I of age a few weeks previously., at that time a separation had not been spoken of • the first knowledge he bad of an inten tion to separate was from a letter from the lady to her bus. Mud while he was in Nottinghamshire; my brother went to live at Clifton after the separation, and his wife went to De vonshire ; I have heard my brother say be had received one or two half-yearly payments of 3001. a year from Mrs. Barker, and I bays beard him say be had slept with his wife since his separation. It was at Bath they slept together, and 1 think it was there he received the money. Mr. derjeant Yausneam—Do you know whether he gave a receipt fur the money ?—(a laugh.) I learned from him that sbe expressed a desire to return to live with him on certain conditions, namely, to have the en tire control over the property bequeathed to ber by leer father, and the entire appointment of trustees, and one of those alsoeW be, Mr. Watson, ber own illegitimate brother, in place of a newt respectable gentleinan (Mr. Hall), uue of the guardians under the will my brother would not consent to these conditions. Mrs. Barker sent her husband s ring with bar leak ; my brother is aware that the property was set tled on her for her separate use ; my brother has stipulated and is to receive the sum of stool. on a presentation to a liv • ing, provided the present incumbent should die during the lifetime of Mrs. Barker. These conditions were proposed boilibefore and after the se ration. Samuel Hickey sworn—l keep the King's Arms at Hemp. ton Court. Oa Sunday,the lath Feb. sail, I recollect a lady and gentleman arriving in a isest-chaise; 1 did nut attend upon them • they staid until Thursday morning, when they walked ouelogether ; the lady and two gentlemen came back, and afterwards she wetit away In the chaise with oue of the gentlemen. Sarah Rossim sworn—l lived at Ilamptoo Court at the King's Arms in February, 1811 I was chambermaid ; a lady and gentleman came there and remained four or hive days ; they slept in the same bed ; I bad occasion to go to the dour in the mornings with some warm water; the gentleman took the water; the bed had the appearance of two persons having slept in it. James Wright, sworn A—l remember a lady and gentleman having come to the KITSAram In February. I atteoded un them as waiter. The we've away un Thursday moraine, and afterwards return with two gentlemen. Mr. Potts went and knocked at Mrs. Barker's door, and gave her her keys. The lady and gentleman went away, and Mr. Putts went away in about ten minutes alter. Mr. !gumtree, sworn.—At the request of her uncle I went in search of Mrs. Barker. While I was sitting in the inn at Kingston I saw Mr. Potts in the street. I did sirst know him before. I went up and spoke to him ; he said Mrs. Barker was in a shop, he would call her out, and lie would then go to the homiest • military friend at Kingston. Accordingly be did no r and then I followed them to the garden of Mr. Potts's friend. Adis, a considerable discussion 1 revailed oa Mrs. Barker to comet to return to town with me. I then sent for a postehaisea . mt Went with her to alainploh Court; while there Mrs. iseras keys were put iutu the' room be Mr. Potts, and I then busreisOn her to town, and left her at - the house of her relation, in Norfolk-street, iu the Strand. Cross-examined by Mr.Serjeant I'lmm—A how-street offi cer end two friends of mine were at Kingston. • This was the case tor the Plaintiff. Mr. Serjeaat VALanAll addressed the Jury fur rho Defeo& ant. Hp said the advocate standing in his situation had • very panful duty to perform. lu the *bole course of bis ex perience lie never met a case like the present, and if there were any disguise about it it was fitting it Afield be cleared up; and much as he feared the powerful reply of his Learned Friend, still be should give him any opportunity or replying, rather than that the Jury should take our step in the dark. It was gratify lug to him that he bad not to defend a MSS is which there had been a single circumstance of aggravatios. His client could not be accused of having violated the tie+ of • hospitality ; ho could not be accused of having deprived the husband of the society of his wife ; but be would tell them, in the words of the thelaratioo, of what the husband had been deprived—it was the use and benedt of a aunt of money, amounting to i,boel. a year, settled upon his wile. This was the grummets of the charge, and this was the loss *filch this husband bad sustained, having sold thu society of his wife for a stipulated Mom of soot. a year. The money, in fact, was the sting of the ease; and when his client was branded as a se der, be would boldly say the husband was the first seducer. It would seem that the father of this young latly . bad looked with a pirophrtie spirit to the future destiny of his child, and bad pealed his fortune upon bet On her own an and weent, •• 4 The forture was the cause oranien, and he agreed with his Learned Friend that the fortune mho was the cause of tin! dis-union. And Ittrat were the circumstances of this marriage In a snug little place, called Button Bushel, in Yorkshire, this child, taken from the nursery, wu married to an officer upwards Of thirty years of age, and a terming Man of the name of tand was broil& in, and, to use words of the registry, " y consent ofJosin Ward Gone parties were mar ried." Bei ir once married, the husband wished to gel mat trot over Cho fortune, but her judgment having been a talk matured,she refused to comply, and that in fact mss Ilte real cause of separation. ion. But suet, was the natural alveoli" of the female !mart, that sometimes their fondness was be , stowed upon men quite unworthy of their regards. And here we find this lads a suppliant un her knees at her husband's feet, begging to return and lieu with lain, but because she would- net cconsent to his conditions, she is Thing o like a worthless weed away." God forbid be should stand thcre the advoeate of the unprincipled edeiterer ; but let the Jury take care that their excellent factions are not abused and that their judgments were not warped to such a degree as to render them incapable of drawing the proper distinctions. Would they then allow the present action to be converted into an instrument again to the husband, who had volunta rily deprived himself of the society of his wife. The Learned Gentleman then commented upon the es idenee for the Plain tiff, and concluded by stating, that be should liu much de• ecired if the Jury granted more than the tory smallest da mages. The deed of separation was then read to -the Court, by which Mn. Barker was permitted to bee in any place she thought proper P on conditions that the husband should re ceive an annuity of 3044. William Lancaster was then sworn.—He produced the libel in a suit instituted in Doctors' Commons between these parties. . . • Mr. Serjeant Lens replied. He often had reason to admire the various and multiplied qualities of his Learnet Friend (Mr. Serjeant Vaughan), but amongst all these qualities, va ried as they were, none did he admire se much as his extraor dinary boldness. Perhaps we are the wore surprised at these powers wbicll we ptssess the least ; and such was the dispa rity between him adll hie Learned Friend in all qualities, that where he moat trein ii his Learned Friend displayed the most boldness. la had asserted dust the Plaintiff bad liken possession of this young lady's person with a view to get her fortune; but the Jury must have ebserved, that by the will of her litUaer he could not get. the control over her fortune, nod thit Mumma h as - as e a that denial to such attimptitglion. ' He would adthit y and insignificanee or the cause of d I diff erence; b e w even admit the perverseness of the iot husband, in persisting to live separately; but that never could justify the criminal interposiliuo of the Defendant. He seem ed lobave used a must wicked speed to accomplish his base purpose, just at the moment a reconciliation was about to take place. He would then ask the Jury, has he then cries mittecl a grave offencet—does be &seer" punishment i —or has he done that which would warrant the Jury in giving a shil ling damages, which would in fact say to the Delentlant— " We commend your conduct, you have done well, we should have done the same ourselves—your conduct was not strictly legal, but still it is entitled to our commendation?" The fLOOD Ciller -lemma then addressed the Jury— There could be no doubt that the feel of adultery had been• clearly substantiated. With respect to the law of the ease, it had been held by some law authorities of great weight, that a' deed or separation deprived the husband of his right erec tion ; but he confessed lie could not admit the justice of such reasoning. If he wanted auy practical illustration of this opinion, it would be found in the present case ; for here the parties were separated in consequence of some unhappy dif ferences, more to he deplored than condemned. So strong was the affection of the wife, that she sent her husband her ring as a token of her desire to be reconciled. and eould any man say that, bat for the intervention of this act of adultery, this most desirable object would not have been accomplished What the tendency of his opinion would be he should not dis guise :it was, that an acti o n could be maintained, and was properly brought by the Plaintiff—and that was a question pc. calmly within the province of the Jury. It ass not regu lated by any municipal law, but by laws anterior to all muni cipal laws—the Natural feelings ufjustice and humanity which belong to the human heart. The Jury retired fur about half an hour, and returned a verdict for the Plaintiff—Darnages soul. POLICE. MANSION-HOUSE. TITHES OF THE CITY OF LONDON. Yesterday the important question under the Act of the 37th of Henry Viii. , as. to the right of the Citrates of the several parishes in the City of London and liberties to tithes to the amount of 25. ode in the pound on the rental of the in habitants, came oe before the Lord Mayor. His Lordship was attended by the Common Serjeant and the City Solicitor. Dr. Butt Owen, the Rector of St. Olive, Hart-street, at tended himself to establish hie dais. and had no professional assistance. The Defendaat, Mr. Gitorgo Abbot, who we uu derstuid is a thAcitor, did not when stalled epee sulasnoes, which Brazed the shun proved had been properly served. Dir. Owen shortly stated that be founded his claim against the Defendant under the Act of the 37th of Henry NHL nap. It. Although that Act authorised him to claim es. ed. in the pound, be only claimed two shillings, and now proceeded against the Defendant for • quarter's tithes at that rate, upon a rental of soot. per annum. lie had made various ap , lineations for the money to the Defendant, who had removed about three doors out of the parish without having paid it. He (Dr. Owen) now, therefore applied for a compulsory order against the Defendant, to compel him to pay the money. The Defendant, as we understood the Rev. Oentlemen, oc cupied a part only of the premises, but the law allowed him to go to every occupier of a house, unless the rent was under tut per annum when the principal was made liable. The Lord Ma yor said, as this was a question of great mag nitude to the camas of London, be bad delayed actin gupon the case in order to have the opinion of the City Law °Seers. Of the merits of the question he did not consider himself by any maths ciampetent to offer an opinion, and he should therefore be silent with respect to them. The Act of Par liament gave him the power to withhold his decision for three month, in order to enable him to take the advice of counsel. Indeed he considered that the Act obliged him , not to pursue any measures under it without taking legal !advice, as the words were, that the orders stated should be made " the LonlMayor and his asststauts." He had, there. fore, called in the Common Serjeant atid the City Solicitor, for the purpose of removing those dilliculties ra abide the case was !evolved, and those Death:men would state their view of the subject. The Common Serjeant referred to the Act, of which we give the most important words, as Ike Aet itself is bet little known, and not within the rea ds of the body of these inte rested in its operation. It appeared that in the reign of Henry VIII., upon the sequestration of Use Catholic endow ments in the City, contributions, which were considered grievous, were ezacted from the citizens for the maintenance of the clergy, and greet disoosteets were excited. Thee. dist. turbithces are alluded to in the preamble of the Aet, which states that, for the purpose , of appeasing them, an order was made by Thomas, the Bishop of Canterbury, and several Lords of the Privy Council, di/Voting the puniest of certain tithes ; and the Act gees on to re he arse an Ast sawed in the 17th year of Henry VIII. in support of the Bishop of Canterbury s order . . and bmpower jag the Lord Mayor to commit those declining to joy until they had made their pate* hut as tbo dues to the Chitty had not been set forth so clearly as might be in the order, and es great discontent, dill existed, the Act goes on to say, "And to the intent to have a fell peace and perfect end betweeu the parties, their hires, and successors touching .The said tithes gad ablations, and other ditties for ever, he it misfiled by the authority of this present Parliament, that sneh end, order, and direction u shell be made, decreed," ken " by the forenamed Archbishops, Lords and Knights, or tar siz of them, 'of and concerning the payment of tithes, oblations, and other duties, within the sand City end the Utserlies of the same, and enrolled in the Cage High Court of Chancery, shall stand, remain, and he =ea AO of Parliament ; end /ball bind as well all citi r seas gad intablistets of the stud city liberties Ow the time being, as the said peruse, clears and their citrates for ever, according to the 'Sect, purport sad intent of the Lela order and decree so be be made acid enrolled; and that every person denying to pay for his or their tithes and oblations: or other duties, contrary to the decree so to be made, shall, by the coarandaseet of the Lord Mayor of London for the thee Wier, and in his default, and negligence, by the Lord Chancellor of Regime" for the tini* being, he committed to prison, there to remain WI such time as by or they have agreed with the curate and curates for his and their said tithes, oblations, mid duties, as aforesaid." The Common Segued observed that this Act positively di rected that the decree of the Archbishop of Canterbury be fore it be taken as an Act or Portimmoot, mast be enrolled. la his opinion, the questioa depended entitely un the point whether or not the decree bed been elevated. Now, there was no evidence of the enrolment of that decree, and in his opi nion the Act was inoperative to all iateets suit purposes, without such evidence. The City Solicitor said, that he bad smirched the Parlia ment-Oleo, and found that there was • enrolment or the decree. There was no paper whatever attached to the Act, nor was there any symptom of the former existence of any seised 110 , 11111e111. Ile had searched the *archives of the Archbishop of Canterbury fur informative epos the subject. and had found in them a book which noticed the Paul that the decree bud not been enroted and gait somereasoos fur the singular and important omiss ion. Dr. Owen said the ease had already been decided in a Carat of law, and upon those decisions Ise relied, The Judges h distinctly stated the eight to exist. In the ease of Ilellam v. Adams, the enrolment wait admitted, and a verdict given es tablishing the claim. It hid been decided is three instances, bad been eteried to the House of Lords sod confirmed, and the decision had been acted upoe in the Courts below. Ho presume.) that the Lew bad Seen proper', administered ii tbose Gotnisised tit s% their doetsioas were well-founded; Soo he eobeluded that the fart of the enrolment bad bees prey sensed; fur many document' were now acted upon thatbudi been lost Many documents had recently been destroyed by the Arc at Cotton-garden. ' The Common Serpent said he was not settee of the said ewe of the ease alluded to, and asked wh.:•ber it bad bee* reported The City Solicitor said, the case was not reported, but it amounted to nothing; for the queeion, as to the enrolment of the decree was not put in issue ; it ass admitted. The Learned Gentleman remarked, that ai the deem. wai sub• joined to the Aet in the Statute Book, it appeared to turns part or the Act itself, but be contended that the insertion of the decree was unauthorised, and thaqwittmot proof of the 'enrolment it was as of no more authority than a meta : or anolation of the editors. The Common Serjeant had oo doubt that Viz Act L 34 been enforced upon the presumption that the daeree had been enrolled, but ho had no hesitation in dee laring, that if the decree was not. °Medea. the 4ait was without efficacy, and be would not advise tip Lord alayor to send a ("limn to prison without satisfactory evidence of the enrolment. From the stress that was laid in the Act upon that cir cumstance, speaking of it as the decree, "co to 1:0 mitrol. ed," he considered that there could be no doubt upon the st.hject. The Lord Mayor, in tusking over ties. den ►rentars it as a very singular circumstance ,it',)msft l ited.tbeti,,,, , of " Great men, Noblemen, . '• laion payment of tithes in the City, sf 'r . ,Ity occupied them tlicenselres. X. lendant would claim eacmption - o • ins either great or noble. • Dr. Owen again submitted thAt question . ..bet* de cided in the Courts of Ana* . snrheiently to authorize the Ma gistrate to act. The East ludie Cowpony Jtsd done tne Clergymen of the City the greatest aiw.vice by elatiog the question into a Cow t of Law, by which the claim had been confirmed. Tho City Solicitor said ttiM ju that caseation th.. question of the enrollment hid never been mist& H was the sionmit of the claim, and not the eighth, make it, that bad hem dis puted. • The Lord Mayor said that, for himself, he game no opinion upon the law of the question ; but, tinder that of lbe two Learned Gentlemen assistd him, he hod oertaiela vttY great difficulty. iu proceeding against the Ihtendant • As the question was one or great magnitude, that agitated the whole ity,and. aas loading to extenstie litigation, rt resold net be ton cautiously considered; ther - lore he would adopt the sug gestions of the two I.ae Officers also assisted him, and tato further advice from th !SC Counud also had been deeply en gaged in the subject. His Lordaliip directed that the ease should stand over ; and he suggested In Dr..Owea that be 'should come vrepared. with profe s sional a paioce. The Recorder, would be celled upon to attend. Dr. Owen mid lie had u d the &hellcat objection that the case should be most hilly canvassed. Uh brought it before his Lordship, that his parishioners might oot be put to-ea prose, otherwise he might have taken it to the Court of Es . ehuei. , no Lord Mayor was satisfied that Dr. Owen was actuate by the best toot's es. The case nes then ordered to be resumed on a future day. GUILDEIALL • • • ROFIRERIES IN PUBLIC MARKETS. The depredations committed in the public markets, by . a regularly organised set of fellows wbo attend, ostensibly, in the characters of porters or basket men, and are tochoicadv known by the mitre or ~ scuttle hunters;" hes become an sill of the most serious magnitude. Mans , of these fellows have a act of boys under their tuition and direction, and although the persons of most or them ire known, it Is impossible; amidst the bustle : and confusion in which business is dine early of a morning. for the salesmed and. shopkeepers to he sufficiently on their guard against them. Scarcely a week passes without an offender or two 91 this description being brought to this Oder, either from Newish's or Fleet marketf, and yesterday, an colit,.grey4teaded sonde hooter, mussed Jerry Hafripan, who has long . haunted Nevigatemsarkel , wag charged before the sittiog Magistrate, htr.Alderman Bridges, for an offence of this kind; ind to MO [riding amount, com mitted early on Tuesday morning. 'rho prisoner is so well known in tbe. market as.a common thief, that Rogers. a journeyinaa in the employ ~ 1 Mr. Wace, butcher, in Rose-street, observing him loitering *bout at seven o'clock in the morning; and suspecting Wall) be at his usual occupation, took the trouble to watch kin), and soon found that ho had flied lii* eye on two flats of butter standing at the door of Mr. Bowles's shop, ii peighbour. Rogers purposely w ithdrew a little, to avoid exciting the psi souer's suspicion, and shortly after paw the prisourt sere deliberately move the smaller tat ',kick was uppermist, sad as leisurely take the large ono; ,Which weighed about Soda., upon his shoulder and walk bd with it. The gene,ral appear ance of the man, the cool manner in which ho con - witted the if robbers, and the pace at which lic walked minty with his • . would - have impressed any by-stander with the belief be can employed to ponce it hemp. Roger* however kq better; sod gaze imnsodiele information of the si • at Mr. Bowles's. Jerry'i person Cu as well liniment at big neighbour's; but gaildid the hurry Of early hoar, neither ha *of any of KW servants had the transaction. Mr. Bowles himself innuediately, the prisoner, and oveeloOlt Idea in Neargate.street with flat upon his shoulder.. ~ ) . The flat was prodliCed before the Magistrate, and its con. tents, four dozen pounds 61 fresh butter, value 31. Weighted by Mr. Bowles as his property, The facts of the case being so clear againit him, the prig*. user, who, ou former occasions had been tolerably eloquent, bad nothing to offer in bisdefenee.. Several persona belongiNg to fhb market bore testiteav to the general bad eharacter.or the prisotier, paid stampribed him as one of those wbo kid a regular set of boys centweled with him, whom* tutored and encouraged to commit siati• lar depredations. Mr. Alderman Burnam took Occasion to ohnir - Mg open MO freouency and increase cif%getty depredatioas to the rnetesti poi's, which Ire attributed, in some degree, to the mildew" of the punishinasts indicted open offences of that descelp lion, and contrasted it with the severity of those fur that dead of offence on the Coalface*. Ile instanced a ease with:oniisS own knowledge, which bad occurred at Bunksglia. Tie valet of a friend of his, who had robbed his mashes se M a sas wastively small amount; soma throe or four louii-d for th at offence sentserceit to be branded on the s 'o to stand once in the pilfeiy, end really to be seat lie gallies for live years. The Worthy Magistrate did net em press himself favourable to the adoption of similar severity iss this couatry,but intimated it as his opinion that some greater. degree of puuisbinent than was now usually inflicted upon offenders of this class would tend most materially to Wass their numbet. The prizuncr liarrigals woifulty committed to Nevrgate tor BOW-STREET. MRS. TAYLOR v. MORGAN WILLIANYS AND Mr. and Mrs. Morgan ;Canals appealed apes a watearit Me former for assaulting MA. Taylor, of Llawlas.elreet. - ' teftierfur ' ' Cvent- Ip ~ and This leiter wearingiopparel, her propetiy. Mrs. Taylot.stated that. stie was a cousin titbit. Morro! Williams, ebo had lately eoltie to London from Swaim% and being . ie ad oircumitanCes from want of he Contrived tp find her oat. sb. bad assuted h ' wife as enrich al lay In her piiiter, and had met but a • ISMS . fur her kinituess, On ode occasion, having had W her 10 Violsoxes of oae of tbe minor theatre.., edlitemull Mt.. .Moreau Williams to acoonspany • ski mosiemeats. Mrs. Williams said she r NW as • 2 1440 Sur to the play, but her apparel w 12 Asa inipossible for her to obtains • : fibs (Mra.Taylor), to prevent disappoin ' . effaced tt lead her a peliste with fur apitir et ppteot spring garters for th e a „. WI • ••• Pitthlll2s/Liftbart, a raffle for the ne*, ne , to completely fit bet halt sled • a . das Z . % ;Mitre, which were scooped by Mrs; •• • is . `• attired Isessielf at her house, and promised to Winer _lash Inertly* play wee ever. She made ari assess to eeado fiat oromilassi6ea naked to strip by complaining of the cold o6slsßbe weathets, bad went home in the apparel, and pro to rehire it sort day, but from that day to the present she never could get. her clothes, and 51" rs. Williams had ever siotee constantly oohs them. Or Sitnday merging last she took the liberty of going to Mr. Williams's haw for the clothes, when Mr. Willfamv struck her;lied United her vote( the place. ` Mr. and Mrs. William. oolehtepped forward to naswee fur themselves ; when Mr. Tailor called the attentions of his !Wurship to the attire of Mrs. Williams, which aka declared was the very identical appatel that she bad lent hoe to cut , t swell with Ia the boles at, the Cohnrg, " Look, year Wor - ship" (said Mrs. Taylor), "at that bonnet and feathers, se how shamefully she has used it; and the pelisse is quits, spoiled, 1 declare." The Magistrate told Mrs. Williams; that *ha* he sum moned her to show cause why . she detained the property of Mrs. l'aylor, he did not require her to bring her borrowed plumes upon her person ; she weals' have acted sore de cently if she bad put another apparel of her owe. Mr. Morgiui Williams entered spun his defence. Be ad- Wiled thaftbe articles of wearing apparel were the property 6T Mrs. Taylor ' • be denied that be wasaulted her when she, s) carnet demandtheir restoration, and accused her of has in.; attempted 1.6 seduce Ann to lenve his wife, and go to Frame . with her, and she told him, " That she did not care spin fur . Taylot, her husband." tia also stated that Mrs. Taylor owed him a debt contracted two or three years ago, at Swan; sea of 4 las , and he detained the apparel till it was paid. Mrs. Taylor denied having wished or attempted to seduce Mr. William, ur that she owed him any claim whatever. The Megadeals, told Mr. Morgan Williams that his defenco lyts an ageavaticiuof his crime, and ordered him to be com twitted in default of bail; and he thought Mrs. Williams" mitiduei, in coming dressed out in Mrs. TM was a piece of inieuslenoe almost unparalleled. Mei. Williams to deliver up the apparel to Ms. atinter ; and in ounsequsace of her refusal, the orders to take, by fume, what she declined els matter of right, mid in a trw minutes We lady • *I - 4 4 r 1 , 6~ ~, I I Mra. Williams's ay Nes Mottles, id. Us ordered Mrs. Taylor in- IN °Soars had evils up as a WY WM almost . , . _ • • !A. - 91"-• •