The Sun. — London, England, 1814-03-16 00:00:00

.LA IV N'I'VjAT.;j;ENC E. COtSRT, OF CHANCERY,. NlAgor WILLAN V. BiTEMAN AND OTHERS! Sir Samunr ROMILLY,:,OII 'Monday, mewed that the Itiitinction which had been granted by the VICE-CHANCELLOR it this case, restraining the defendants, tilLt he coming in of the answer, from printing, - puriliSlting, selling, &c. a Work by'Dr. Bitetnan, intituled,'" A SynopSis of Cutaneous Diseases, according to the Urger of Dr. Willan," should he dissolved, - the defendants having put in V full and perfect aitswer. The Bill had been • flied and the Injunctioh' granted,' on the ground that the publication in -question Was an infroiga ment.of;Jhe copyright of the plaintiff, Mrs. Wit , lan, in t N 6 -) Works of her late hoShand, Dr. Wil lan ; the one intituled, « A Treatise on Cutane ens DiSeases," and the other, " An - Essay on Vaccinat - fon.'"Che defendant, •Dr. Bate,an, in -his answer ( pleaded the licence of Dr. Willan, in his life-time to Dr. Bateman, to !n 4e . ' use of the amblications of Dr, Willan, which •vere large • 'end expensive, in a smaller Work on the name subject which Dr. - Milan wished Dr. Bateman , to publish ; but, in addition to this, he denied that his smaller Work was a. copy, or colourable • copy, of Dr. Willan's Work, but a bona fide abridgement of it, which he or any other person had a right to make. As to that part of Dr. Bate man's 'Work which was charged in the Bill •to haVe been copied from manuscripts of Dr. Willan, which the plaintiff bad put into Dr. ,Eateman's hands after Dr. W's death, in order that he .might advise the plaintiff.whether they were fit for pub lication, tile answer denied the charge,, and ac . counted for the appearance of similar passages in the 'defendant's Work, by stating, that Dr. Wil lan ha:', in the_ course of the year 1811, read peaCtical lectures to Dr. Bateman on the subject of Cutaneous Diseases, of whieh he had taken notes at the time, some of which be. had embodied in at, Work in question. That Dr. Willan was himseJ - interested in, Dr. Batetnan's publishing his Work on Cutaneous Diseases, the Learned Conn-el interred frOm this circumstance, that on Dr. Willan's feeling himself under the necessity of resigning. his practice, and going to Madehat o n account of Itis, health, he recommended Dr. Bateman as his successor, he, by an agreement in writing, 'admitting Dr. .Willan to a participation in the profits of his practice as a ,Pbysician. It was therefore' for the interest of Dr. W. that the character of dr. Bateman o.3,toskio in diseases of this deseription, in which he particularly excelled, should stand as high as . poiaible.. Mr. SuapwELl followed on the same side. Mr. HEALD, on the part of the plaintiff, Win support of the Injunction, argued, that the two defenCes set np in the answer were somewhat in consistent with each other. If the work published by the defendant was only a bona' fide abridgment of Dr. Willan's.. work, what, occasion had he for a licence frpm Dr. W. to publish it._ No such licence, however, he submitted, could under the Act of Queen Ann, for the protection of literary property, be proved, unless by a writing under the. hand of the, party conferring it, attested by two witrtasses. That there could' have beep no such licence in this case, he inferred from the fart of Dr. Willan's carrying hi-s,ciwn unpublished manuscripts on 'this subject along with hint to Madeira; whereas, had he wished Dr. Bateman to publish on cutaneous diseases, it was- natural to suppose, as the Most effectual aid he could have given him, that' be; would have left those manuscripts with him. Indeed, it 'seemed quite out.of the question, that Dr. Wihlan, after having incurred great expence by the publication of his own four guinea work, with . plates, should have wishet( tO see It superseded by . Dr. .oatcman's Work, published at 125., That the Synopsis of Dr. Bateman was not a bona fide ,abridgmek of the larger Work •of Dr. Willan, but a..copy of particular parts of that _ 'Work, with coloarable . alterations and transpogi tions, he proceeded to sh'eiv, by.reading a variety of passages from the two Works. One part of ,Dr. Willan's Work, namely, that in which lie gave e history ofAle various diseases, with a collectican of.cases in each, r .. which had come undeilis own observation, was no doubt wholly omitted in the publication of Dr. Bateman, but still that could not cowtitute his Woik an abridgment of , the Treatises by Dr. Wiliam, the _substance of . which, Os far as necessary for the purposes of Dr. Bate - inan's,' Work, had been freely and liberally • adopted by . him into his own publication.—From 'comparing vari;ins parts of Dr 13ztteatatt's Work with the ,impublislied • manuscripts left by Dr. Willan, and which, it was admitted, had been put by the plaintiff, immediately after , Willan's death; into the hands of Dr. Bate.- Man, in order that he might advise Whether they were or were, not'fit for publication, 'the Learned Counsel Contended:that it . was evident that an equal freedom had been used by Dr. .Bnternan with those unpublished manuscripts ; and .that though they cvere:rrot,.as he had advised the plaintiff, fit for publication as De. N,Villan's, still he had no hesitation in allowing them a:place in ills own Work. Against this part of the publica tion in question, he admitted, therefore, there could not be a doubt but that his Lordship must Continue the Injunction. It could not be alleged tlratDr. Willan had given a licence to•Dr, Bate `men to publish his (Dr. Willan's), manuscripts, which he had taken - with him to Madeira, in the 'op of being epabied, by a favourable change in ' - _iris health, of himself preparing them for publica tion, to the effect of completing his great WOrk on , Cutaneous Diseases • an d it was'next to impossible that any reading over by_Dr..,Willan of those ma nuscripts toDr. Bateman, he taking notes of them tlle time, could have enabled him to catch not only the whole of the substance; hut in many in stances the very language, and even the pcculiari -oe-of expression to the extent i n w hi c h they were here 'found.. It was-to be nhserved . , that the Bill epresSly charged De. Bateman_with having copied the manuscripts confidentially entrusted to his ''care, and that he did not in his answer give kpo filtivedenial to this charge. - Mr . :BURNELL followed on the same side. _ RONILLY, in a. very eloquent reply, took occasion_ to vindicate the conduct of Dr. Batethan from any imputation of • supposed ingratitude 'to r Dr. Willan, whom Mr. Heald had represented As his patron, or to his representatives; on the con= ,teary, 'he conceived that Dr. Bateman 'had acted with the strictest hobour and 'liberality towards the family of DrAN'illan, having at a period, when, according to Mr. - 11 . eald's own statement, there was no tirospect of the reciiverY of Dr. Wiltan, entered into an agreement' with that Gentleman, •by which Dr.. Willan's•farnily was to be entitled, for the spaceof six years from thatdate, to 3 share of the fees to be received by Dr. Bateman frArn such patients as Dr. Willan's, or their immediate connections, as shoyld employ,,D):„ Bateman. That neither the one nor ibe other of those Gentlernen acted improperly in entering into such an agree ment, he presumed could not here he meant to be contended. It .Would • not surely be said by, the planitiff in.this case, that Dr. could haY.e been capable of recommembing Dr. Bateman to his patients, if he had not, from long expe rience of his skill and abilities; known him, to be a person well qualified to he his successor. Dr. Bateman, too, must be presumed not to, have been unconscious of his Own qualifications TOr him, therefore, to have rejected the proposal olsoemi r trent a professional gentleman as Dr. Within, to introduce hitir into . hiS extensive practice, even though accompanied by a_ pecuniary reservation, would have, been an excess of delicacy' which could hardly have been looked for. The state 'ment made by Dr. Bateman, in his answer, as to the licence given by Dr. Within to him to pub lish n Practical Synopsis of his work, and his communicating to him the ,contents of his manuscripts, of which Dr. BaSeman , took notes, did not depend on the oath of Dr. Bate man alone, but was confirmed by the production of a note Irmo Dr. Willan, inviting him to come to his house every morning, in order that he might have-a practical drilling on the subject of Cutan eous Diseases, in order that .he iMr. might have a fright; or, in other words, might go abroad .for his health. A paper, containing a • classification of cutaneous disorders, drawn up by Dr. Bateman, and corrected. in the hand-writing of Dr. Willan, by which he,-in part, changed the classification in hisAawn work, was also produced ; and he (Sir S. Romilly), now held in his hand a letter written by . Dr. Bateman, to his mother, at the time, bearing the post-Mark- of; 741:August 1811, giving an account of this very transaction, and of the licen,ce, , nay, of the wish. ,expressed by Dr. W. to him that. he would make a pub- , lication of the kind, promising him all the assist ance in his power towards its completion:.Thaire face to Dr. Bateman's work, too, gave exact l y a, similar account of the nature anti object of the publication, giving to Dr. Willan all the ,merit to which he was entitled. Mr. Heald vas 'mistaken in supposing tiiatDr. Bateman built on the license from Dr,Willa,n, as being an assign► Went to the copy right ofDr. 'Milan's works. He did no such thing, he only claimed it as au authority to him to pub lish , the Synopsis in question, Dr. 'Milan being of opinion that such a work coming from Dr. Bateman would conduce to their mutnal bonefit under the agreement.into winch they bad entered. He contended, however, that, independently of the licence from Dr. Willan, this was not a copy, or colourable copy, of Dr. W.,'s work, but a fair abridgement ; as fair as was Mr. Serjeant Haw kins's Abridgement of Coke on Littleton. ____ll}e_Lo.i4nTC NCELLall—an zoi att. on zit the whole case, could not sati s fy himself' that the work ,complained of was a tair abridgement of Dr. Willan's work.- The question then was;- 1-41 Dr. Bateman a licence from Dr. W. to pub lish this,-, or, any other work ? That. he might have such licence, without having it in writing, his Lordship had no "doubt: From looking at the defendant's"answer, he saw it sworn, in three different places, that the publication complained of was made not only with the licence, but by the desire and on the suggestion of Dr. W. who was interested in the professional reputation of Dr. Bateman , to which there could not be a doubt ,that such a Work would 'not a little contribute. Now, when his Lordship looked to the agreement between these parties, ,he could.not but See that this was a defence, not resting on the oath of D. B. alone, but one -which was materially cenfirmed. by the connection betWeen.*the parties, arising upon that agreement. The - note, and also the paper containing the classification of.diseases treated of in the - publication in questionn, corrected in - Dr. W.'s band-writing, went far., too, to shew that Soule such Work as the .present, the publication of which, as sworn to by Dr. Bateman, would tend to their mutuarallvantage, was sanctioned by Dr. Willan. These,. at least, were circum stances to go to a Jury, for them to consider whether, coupled with the oath of. Dr. Bateman, they did not shew that a licence had been given by Dr. 'Milan fog= the publication in question. On that part which concerned the manuscripts, ; his Lordshißentertained the greatest doubt, not seeing it stated on the face .of the answer that they hack .been so - read over,to Dr. Bateman by Dr-Willan, as to have. enabled him to take copies of them, which in the publication in question they in a '.great measure were. Upon the whole, his.:Lord•• ship's present impression was, that a trial. ct law should be directed, in order to ascertaisi.tbe ques tion, whether Dr. Willan did or did not give to Dr. Bateman the licence contended for in his an swer; and that the answer of Dr. Bateman, after it lad been made so complete as to be satisfactory to the Plaintiff, should on that trial be received in evidence, the agreement, in this case, not being of such .a nature that it was likely there should have been any third parties present at the making of it, or at any of the consakations" resulting out of it. His Lordship should read over the bill and answer again before he finally disposed- of. the matter, but these were his present impressions.— He thought, also, that the publication of the work .might be allowed in the mean time. 'an ac count ,of _the • sales being kept; This was not a case in which a pliintiff could be entitled to much favour-in a Court of Equity. Lieut. THOMAS WRIGHT, of the. 734 regiment, serving in New South Wales, has been dismissed the service, pursuant to the sentence of a Court Martial, for various instances of neglect of duty, and unoflicer-like and ungentlemanly conduct, in drinking rind playing at cards with the principal .Superitlteudant of COuvicts at Syduey, VIE POLICE. GUILDHALL.---Philip Johnson, of Dyer's-build ,ings, a master tailor, charged his. apprentice with at,tempting to set fire to his house on Tuesday se'nnight. The complainant, about' half-past. eight o'clock in the evening, was .sensible of a smell pf burnt wood, and perceived the stairs and' the shop at the top of the house filled with smoke; bliCfinding no fire in the stove that.stood in the shop, imagined' the smoke to proceed from his lodger's li'gliting a fire. He then went out, and upon returning. at 12 o'clock, " was informed the house had been on fire. The fire, it appeared, took place under a pan in which the stove stood, and where several staves of a tub and some paste board were found.—Several witnesses were exa mined, but the charge was not at all brought home to the prisoner, who admitted his intention of running away from his master, in consequence Of frequent disagreements ; but had delivered himself .up when he understood he had been charged with having attempted to set fire to the dwelling. The Alderman (AINsLIE) ordered the prisoner to attend to-morrow (this day),-buf not to be de tained in custody ; observing, that his compliance would be no inconsiderable presumption of his innocence: Anne Watlin and Mary Barnet were charged by George Rimmington. The complainant, ‘vho is a linen-draper, stated that the prisoners came toge ther into his shop, and made a small purchase. Just as they had left the shop, he saw something balky under the cloak of the prisoner Watlin, which proved to be a, piece of lißen which was lying in the shop when the prisoners came in,— Upon searching the other prisoner, Barnet, a piece of gingham was found', which,, however, was not the property Of the complainant. The' Magistrate ordered the gingham to be advertised, and the prisoners to be . ' remanded till Saturday; • with the view, that should the -lawful. owner of the piece of gioham come forward to Claim it, both the prisoners might be committed for trial. Bow-ST RELIT.---Yesterday Benjamin Warren was brought to the OfEee, and under Went a Second examination, charged with feloniouSly stealing bank notes, to the amount of - 275/. and a draft for 300/. on Messrs. Towgood and Co. bankers, the property of Wr.•Arron Bray, a hOrse dealer, of Red-lion-yard, Holborn ; who, it appeared; (vent t 6. Oundle Fair, in Northamptonshire, and went.to bed thc.re on that night, at the Swan Inn, atthalf-pa§t ten o'clock. There being no key in his 'bed-room door, he could not lock it, and for security he put his pocket-book into his breeches pocket, and placed them under his head, be tween the Mattress mid the bed. On the fol lowing morning he missed his breeches from the place he put theni in, and found. them at the outside of his bed, at tine corner, his pocket-book, which contained the above proper . - ty, having been taken out. Tho prisoner, wino was on the spot, was 'suspected, and. having left the town after the rabbery,,he -was pursued and taken by the prosecutor at Dancer's Hill, where the prisoner delivered to Idm a - 1001. Bank of England note, one of those which had been stolen, and acknowledged that he had purchased a horse, for 251. with part of the remainder.--The pri soner was committed for trial. - ..Iz.n.r.rrhotia 111 "try P rir and Ann Rose, were brought to this Office, by Salmon; who had detected them in taking illegal insurances in the State 'Lottery. Mr. Hesse, the Secretary to the State Lottery, attended to prove that the prisoners are not licensed to transact bu, siness in the Lottery They were committed as rogues and vagabonds till the Sessions. • - CONFESSION OF MURDER. MONMOUTH, MARCH, 94--Abont 27 years ago; the body of a young woman, named Mary Pritchard, was found in a mill-pond in-the neigh= bourhood of Longtown, in the county of Here ford, with many marks of violence thereon, and a Coroner's Jury being summoned, after 'a patient investigation, delivered a verdict of Wilful Mur der. The deceased had for some time lived ser vant with Mr. Gilbe -- rt, of Cluddock, and two young men, - John Davis hnd James 'Jones, being her intimate- acquaintance, suspicion fell upon ,them, and they were-in consequence apprehend ed. Jones having formerly lived ;at Mr. Gilbert's with her as a fellow-servant, and being known to be her lover, the public opinion that he was the perpetrator was very strongly expressed ; but his mistress (Mrs. Hopkins, of Irelandon) swearing that he was in her house all the evening, that he went to bed before her, and that he did not rise till after she was up ; and this being corroborated .by a boy who swore that he slept, with him, arid that to thF best of his knowledge he was nht out of bed till he arose with him to go to their usual employment, he was discharged. Davis also proved his innocence.. Some time after this Jones,' committed a rape' on a child of eleven 'years of age, and fearing a prosecution, he left that neigh bourhood, and took up his residence . :in Mon mouthshire, when he Inarried,' and had five dren, .but his wife had been dead some years, and be is now in the decline of life: Being at length severely afflicted with illness, and fearing the approach of death, he sent a few days since for the Rev. Mr. Sayce, of Trellick, to .whom he made-a full confession of the murder. He ac knowledges that he retired to rest with the bOy . before his mistress went to bed , that when, he thought all thefamily 'were asleep, (having pre viously appointed to meet the unhappy girl, who was pregnant by -him), he stole , out of the' house, committed the horrid deed, and. - returned to his, bed without disturbing any one, having been hut ; a few minutes absent. -.He still lives, though in a very tveak state, and' appears much- easier in his • .mind since the confession, but very little hopes , arc entertained of his recovery. His present re- . silence is onPenalth Common, near the Hargoed, about three miles from hence. The body of a new born child having been found in, the Teviot, atHawick, woman named Janet iVeems, who is suspected to' be guilty of the murder, and of concealing her pregnancy, was apprehended on, Saturday week,—The matter is under investigation. DtTLII\T-, MARCiI 14. COURT Or KING', I!ENtrI I MAncrt The /lon. F. CAVENDISIT against Sir T• TE" c " 4 PMLUS. METCALF, B a Ch id J. NEAVE; O GOULDEMIO, Esqrs. Directors of the Globe 13- sarance Compan!). This ryas au action o f assumps it on a policy of • insurance, brought by the plaintiff to recover compensation for the loss and damage he sustain' ed by fire, on,the night of the 3d of July, 1 51 • ; The principal averment i n th e plaintiff's de.c 1313 , - ; tion stated, " that on the'3d,of July, in the :;'-'°! of our Lord, 1812, at Clontarf, in the ConOtl: °1 , the City of Dublin, part of the plaintiff's dwelb il , house, and the furniture and prmted'bookS io P ty , vane use, contained therein, were burned and O n „ smiled, lost and destr o y e d by fire, which' was °;',, casioned by misfortune and accident, and wi°l4 out any kind of fraud or evil practice wids ° ever," &c. The property 'was insu re d' f or 10,000/.---- 411e plaintiff laid his dam ages a t 12,0001 . an d t he t ie ' fendants' pleaded the general issue.' The unprecedented length of this important a" ( 1 interesting trial, which occupied the time and t'en'tion of the Chief Justice, the Right lion. DOWNES,' and a Special Jury, for 13 (lays, from Wednesday, the 23t1 of February,, till a late hour on Wednesday, the 10th of. March, l'en d ; r it quite impossibl e f or us t o l ay a f u ll an d detai'e.ti report of the speeches of Counsel,' and the ev v deuce on both sides, before our fleaders. The Material isitte which the Jury had to was, whether the plaintiff hiinself were guilty the fraud of burning his own hoUse, or bad O l e , spired 'others to c o m m it t h at act ;or `I),G Om. it were consumed by acc id ent , or by O l ' o 't evil-disposed persons, without the knowlei.4.',e ;0 the plaintiff. The Jury found a verdict fyr defenlants. • RXECUTIOI‘i OF QUIGLY, On Saturday last, Francis - O' Neil, other Quigly, was executed at the front of Kihnainl'3' gaol, pursuant to his sentence, for the rob ber (- of the- Rev:. Mr. Errington. He beh a ved 01 ca great firmness, and was a s i ncere pen i te nt ; admitted the justice of hi s sen t ence ; an d d e cir c t i, that Kelly, who b a d been - executed in tae, of November last for the sane robbery, was' nocent 'cf the offence for which' he sufferea.4 although a young man, was a robber, and at the head of a most dariog banu that infested this city, and which , have been p 0 broken up. ' METEOROLOGICAL JOURNAL. BY R., BANKS,- PHILOSOPHICAL INTSTRUMENT MAKER, STJ,-1...,„, Thermometer. l IV eat!) er • ' i ' • .=. l - - • , ~- - 1 ~-,:. ,4 -. '''i '; t ..' :;----'::',. .• • .") ...,:, I • P-• 3.- • •- ''''..3 .5 :" • _.,--.• ;.,."' , ... ~-., 7 :-,.., p 1, . • -- Ic, ,•:;, I ' -4 ~ .i c-, 1 v. c= 1 1 'iamb ') -' I (-• I ‘;-- ' ' inebes ' . • 1 F•'' •'•• 5•• 35 1351,37 132 29,70 ' I Fair I.': . •' 6 - 3-1. 30 135 25, ...74 ' Do. cioco , .7 o_ oo iwe 0t . . -- . -- ' Loc. ,--- . • - , 5,,,,., , ,V 3 1,30 :'1 134 27 .70 ' Sn o w ~, 9 130 .32 134 29 .(Z9 I:4. .'- ~ - 10 3l 33 35 30 .67 - Do. 1 e v . 1 l - 32 35 3i5 28 .50 . Do. __...... _.._.:.-----:—• „c .... .. . . BIRTHS. _ _ . J., On the 4th inst. at Evington, Kent, the Lady 0 f . ,; -' 1 J' • • Honywood, Bart. of a son. of' On the 9th-inst. at Pitkellony, Scotland, Mrs. • Man i ' tO ° 'son. , `On the 9th,inst. at Lathallan Lodge, Roxburghshire, Lady of,ColonSpeas, el of a daughter. . C. ltV On the 11th inst. at Edinburgh, the Lady of Jame' cart, Esq. of a daughter. . •At Stoke. t 4 Lady bf Captain Sayer, of a son. socid i On Friday laSt, at Beaumont Cottage, Chertsey , the Lady of John. Hamilton Cdlt, Esq. °fa daughter. 4 off' S On'aturday intrniog, in Montague-street, RuS;x ll, ' . o f the Lady of William Stnderson, Esq. of a son z.llO 11,q. On Sunday last, the Lady - of M. J. Lemarehand , ~ ii Ooodgrove Cottage, near Ripley, Surrey, of a daugil te ( e P 4 ' . On Monday last, at his house in Devonshire-place, t of colonel J. B. Taylor, of a daughter. .../.°4. MARRIED. • .1/5' 9 t% On the 10th ingt. at Mullingar, Ireland, J. L.. g' l , oo or ey - Capain in the._ East Essex Militia, to' Mary Emnes, ); s tr! , o l daughter of Atibort Jones, Esq: late of Mansion,l lollse Ge:;%4, On Tuesday last, at StChad's, Shrewsbury, NlAso l ; ler ,p Letlthridg - e, to Frances, widow of th e late Charles . DIED. , . . A it ~.1 . ..,„5 ' - On the 29tii a( January last at,AugnaelaY,.in tre`,, .11 , ' very advanced age ; the Rev. 1)r. William Sturrocht '-‘.. of con of the , Diocese_ of - Armagh. . it„.„,lit -On Monday se'nnight, a t St. Coluinb, Captain m''' 11 ~i.i• the Royal Navy, aged 71. . fu . l' i .o In 'February last,. at the General Hospital of thf f .. , J j ' Army, at Fontarabia, to - which h e was attached, •" - 1 , ~ Macgregor, M.D. - r t l l4 4 >` o t. On the 25th ult. at Monymu s k, S co tl an d, the 11 0 "„* . L 's ''' • der Duff, Minister of that P a ri s h, in t h e 73d year "• il'‘' .nd 38d of his Ministry. . .- , JA ' On the 4th inst. in North Castle-street, Edinburg" , • Blair, Esq. aged 82 years, - 'il li r On Thursday last, 'lr. Duncan Hay, of Pall-ga• •,' i : i!•' On Sattirdw. , , ,- ..st, Mrs..:'3artholcallew, relict of ,:a1 ) . °1 • oc thOlotnew, R.N. • , LS I ' j'' The smile day, at PenzanCe, Thomas Hugh, acre( ~005.4.: wai, for many years Sexton of -that Parish, and 1.4 ,`,",. .1;,,,e his eccentricities. Complaining lately of " the boa",••i;t , times,',.' he declared, in support of his' •argontelt" 'o,' ' ‘. „, , i, hthl nut buried one . LXV ma sou/ for noWards of a ni °l , ' ' ' Ve'' On the 12th inst.' Ges.rge; only son of. Ralph `—' 0 1 ' Esq. jun. of Toft,_ Clieshirou i , St ' '''''.'4 l'he same day, at IstingtOti, aged 21, William, e•,„` 4 „iii1; 14 ,, 1 !10 Major-General-Marshall, of the Hon. East 4.(-6 3 ",,j op r , Service Conti on the- following day, aged IJ, S °l '" l '' sfc," daughter ot the ,e, , ,i e r- On Saturday last, at her sort's, Combe-place; S'' s ", P Shiffner, relict of Henry Shifter,- F.Sq. of Pontr) .l3 ' - ' lie fordshire. • ~ Tesc I On Monday last, at Bi s h atn Berkshire, 'llr. J • , L' . 4 6P , niacker, aged Ell. • ' , - - - • t '- i g I V The came day, Wm. Cox, Esq. of Guildfuril-stre e i i 3Oi On the 140 hest. at his house in Great 0rr:10 13,1 7' bert Weskett,.Esq. in his 91st year. , . • PRICE OF STOCKS t.ESTERD2 ,I ' . Bank Stock, shut Duna stock, . Navy 5 per Cent. 97ii India Bonds,- ss: F r. Irish 5 per Cent. Ex c h eq: Bilk, 29 ',.,_ . 4 4 par Ccn 4. shut Oinniunk, ;NI 2044 ' ' OO 3 per tent. Red. shut ' I:uperial And. 1,1 1 : .3 per Cent. Cons. 74104 Cons. for (Jill Ain' Bank L. Ann. shut , 71i 7i ........,.. „--- - 4 Cf. ° "f r ol" LONDON : Printed by J. B. CARS - PAIRS, N°•,,y 131 froic' buildings • and published by W. A—SCRIPPS , ":„Icly cl ie b at the SWN-OFFICE, No: 112, Strait ; wher e . . j ares, , int:4lls, Ordgrs, Letters (post-paid), &c. wust Ix '''