The Sun. — London, England, 1822-11-13 00:00:00

UN , -Y 114i1;" _price d id, 60' 'ore.g °l 1,(3 . ti ° , 0 ---' of cwt• is 565 , cw" per ci r ' P"ql' ,os. 49 oi , . .5' 45 C , o 21 135 Cla od 1 45 ,a 155 16' (3 4 pd v:J, 3 411" 3 51 65 sip s 01; 1° 0 1 .10 5 ° lio A A t ' v j 9 6d• -----"-'' s. a • si 1 03. 0 0 0§ ;0 1 ;to I 1_,„1" ice. oa 471 0 4 00 11e 0 jail* n hip th Stri ke .1 1,0 t he cei"? I , A ll l l tio f ia r vii be Bar g ' Th. gte t __?,Ae 17, ,dam ;6 0 " I'' lye , isro2- at Bs ' al.e° " .. n as •- aT whicil Ladi es bet ° l 0 101 ! wriloP clear Esq•, jAdY °f i „‘ Tne ttet p o d. churc h ' age, 0 cis yul• atoll, II ®t Li . of; 1 i 1 4 1 ! et, ito" fes. Dabing' le' Sill' 0) NUMBER 9429. ARMY CONTRACTS. Commissariat Department, Treasury Chambers, Oct. 31, 1822. NOTICE is hereby given to all Persons de f s irous of contracting to supply the following Articles cjrt he U se o f the Army, v i z.:— ti 484 D —To his Majesty's Land Forces in Cantonments, -4rte rs, and B arrac k s , i n th e under-mentioned Counties : 41 , 13 t•lf erd, Dellis, Cambridge (including the Town of New t:4l'si), Hereford, Herts, Hunts, Lincoln, Middlesex, Ox ;311, Rutland, S omerset, Wil ts , W orces t er . v E LF and MUTTON, to his Majesty's Land Forces in I tit°l thaents, Quarters and Barracks, in the undcrmen '4N Islaisds OAT, Alderney, Guernsey, Jersey. C„ ", to his M a j es ty' s Cavalry and Artillery Horses, in I "ntents and Quarters, in the under-mentioned Conn es lA, lledlur d, Berwick, Bucks, Cambridge, Cumberland, Der- Cluucester, Hereford, Huts, Hunts, Monmouth, Ox , R utland, S a l o p, St a ff or d, Westmoreland, Wilts, Wor ,..e,ter. Fo n , tt -. `'GE, viz. —OATS, HAY, and STRAW—To his Ma- Cavalry and Artillery Horses in Barracks, and Oats, 14 4. 4"( !oments and Quarters, in the under-mentioned Coun t t rit e a - in '' : Nottin g h am , and in the several Counties in North that t he Deliveries are to commence on and for the 95 th day of Oecernber next ; that Proposals in writing, sealed up hi. a q' e d "Tender for Army Supplies," will be received at hit."l4e on or before Tuesday, the 26th day of November, non e will b e received after Twelve o'Clock on that day. r ? ° " 1, must be made separately for each County , ex el,,Pstt ' 6 1. e t.l!*: Counties comprising North Britain, all of which 11 4 , e Includ e d i n one 'fender; as must likewise the ; 01 tl ' is of Ald erney , G uernse y, an d Jersey ; and each Pr0t4,41 t4,41 Brost ha ve t h e L e tt er w hi c h is annexed to the Ten i)PruPetly filled up, by Two Persons of known Property, A il : gin g to becom e bound with the Patty tendering, in the t ) , o, utit slated i n th e p r i n ted Particulars, for the due per ttrilnce of the Contract; and no Proposal will be noticed, i t , : 3 s made on a printed Tender, and the Prices expressed Concords at length ; and should it so happen that during the t j ' nua nce of th e Contract no Troops should be supplied t tr.: i ntle of t h e same, the amount of t h e S tamps on t h e Con sl;ki Ifld Bard, paid in the first instance by the Contractor, 1,4 oe refunded to him. tirticulars of the Contracts may be had upon application (if tliese Chambers, between the hours of Ten and Four; and ie B arrack Masters in t he Islands of Alderney, Guernsey, " e„, y. Otfie's-Samples of the reTadwelve and Twao and Meal my be seen at this be tween the hours ß of. To T. TAYLOR, Esq. El No. 9, New Bridge-street, London. o oNotintb ta i ." - I , l eaVe to inform you, that ever since the orp l y r, . 90 , I had b ee n afflicted with the Lues Venereal, tVerii,2 4l its o b st i nately res i st i ng every course o f medicine eh Rui p by the most eminent of the faculty here, and un lit'tgeefse'veralsevere cour s e s of salivation, and twice dis -1/4,4 tho r i u m the Hospital with little relief, would appear to to gi,„l:l4sst inveterate nature. In tte spring of last year 1 / 4 129e x - i t . e , r had got to snch a head, as nearly to put a period 0 1 ' e ''' e ,Thee--I had a large ulcer on the crown of my head, ti s t ais t , a ea arm, and my legs were broke out in a frightful ti v ,,'e Of '„,nlY right was dreadfully painful, and had been in a 4 4 " tare;'eeration for the last seven years; my left had also 1 / 4 :tittc"." ( tes oil it, was very'much discoloured, and gave aki t arii t 3t o ct lleiating l pain, particularly when warm in lied, ti t tqe o4 . l aepriv e me of rest ; in this lamentable !tate, I '4ota Th 'e.aded by Mr. .I. Thompson, (who received . so sti, l , o l IT't by them here), to take your Leake's Patent Pills, b e e to do on the 2fith o. May; in the course of a t ut,began to receive henehit—in little more than a t, e 4 sitt er, 'Avers on my bead and arms were soundly healei.— ti u , t i I .? the sores on healed also 5, ow. rationtr der ablediscolo in the skin, s and pain in . the t ht t 'r tot e left, which, by the blessing of God, and a little t ha th ldeil ev erance in , your invaluable Medicine, subsided ; NO,et t4 " i spersin g , the skin regaining its natural hue, and Nt h , - 9 41 Pains gradually going off.—l thus became, by ri te e a t advice a n d medicine, perfectly free from all my tt 'a t l t t h "rl43lai nts—have recovered my former spirits a lid Itoe 414, 1 "dam become jolly and fat, in which state having het, 441 at n) mouths, to the astonishment of all who knew t his' l r 4 , f t , 'ass in what t e rms to express my gratitude, hut eas: the good of other suffering mortals, to make (1 4 s public as possible, as I shall on every (mica : 31,. ' l "g . you will greatly oblige, s*4 ' Your grateful, o b ed i ent, very h um bl e servan t, , A 4411.. 4 s e , High- s t ree t, Edinburgh LEA. MURK ER 4 . tk4fit Witness e s t o th e above Cure:— FltedM 1141)" into N 0.4-1 New Poultry Market, Edinburgh, i h, Old Assembly Close, Edinburgh. , ~4 4 .14 ; tl e ,„00 sold by the sole Proprietor, THOMAS TAY c'''‘,','4:l4,lNie-",",erf the Royal College of Surgeons, at his t resi d i New Bridge-street, London; where, after . a tit ,4 dire , t]fee of more than 40 years, in a practice parti i:tfte-httil `eu to the cure of Venereal Complaints and those f,' ll t 'l'Whi ( •l , th e Parts of Generation, with that inviolable O t ‘ti ' he n'of his professi :1 should always observe in e flatters himself the advice and as. , istance he aidmsters to persons taking this Medicine, will A 41 'lt, "Y discerninif Public, as an advaLtage seldom 6 rid v . b id of all Libiguity. di s Z h " , appointment, for the convenience of those ti t " l l4•aor ou t:st, at the Tovshop, No. 103, Oxford-street; te rid ge g 1. " .• S ' No. 7, sh-street-hill ; Mr. Baxter, Aog;„' -Ahlaburgh • M Callwel 's, Dublin ; and of 1 1% 4 ' ft ; ' /Yil IZ: e ve zt eon - siderab i le town in Great Britain and ma) s Iwilv 2s each, stamped, and sealed up ki t Pia' • • • • ' te thltH' 'n directions. -.thereby persons, of either - elves with ease, speed, secrecy, and safety. "-r-----!--- - - - -*-... -.:---,,- --n= ,-..,,: i`f,:ti :0...r... ** :7 :;-.: : •.! 7: ,'. k ~'-'' - r. ' ' - . .. \ 0 1 4,t ///, •‘,N `'' ' .!,: z ,' rli••••.• • , k •,,,,n>' • V , Z() '',. t , ' it ' ,•:!, ~,: r ;•,i: ' r i f,,,,. —\ * \ii-• '4 ' ' t : • . . .• t . , —..x-, -- - , t i .. „„- AI ...=:._ . ........ ,V' •r 4 . --- FA , ' W).{ l Xi -'',-.. / 14 7 - a:4/H . 111 E /V il NO WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 1822. LAW INTELLIGENCE. COURT OF CHANCERY, NOVEMBER 12. THE PORTSMOUTH CAUSE. On the application of Mr. HORNE, the further hearing of this cause was postponed till Monday, in order to afford suffi cient time for the affidavits on his side. The Counsol on the other side agreed to the postponement. The LORD CHANCELLOR said he should expect sonic ex planation of the letter which Dr. Bankhead carried from Lady Portsmouth to Lord Portsmouth. There was no other business of public interest. VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT, Nov. 12. BATLEY V. SNELIIAM. This cause was instituted by the trustees appointed under the will of James Snelham, in order to obtain the opinion of the Court as to who was-entitled to the property of the testator.— Mr. Snelham directed in his will, that after his death his pro perty should be vested in trustees, who were to pay over the in terest arising upon it to his widow, and upon her death the whole bulk of the property was to be given •to any child or children begotten by him and his wife. In case there was no such child or children, the estate was to pass to his sister, Anne Goodyear. Mr. HEALD stated, that at the time the testator made his will, his wife had a male child six months old. This then in fant was now of age, and claimed the testator's estate ; but his demand was objected to, because it was contended that the tes tator did not designate the child then living as his—no reference was made to it, and the will expressly stated that only the child ren begotten by the testator and his wife could only inherit.— Supposing it should appear that the claimant was the son of the plaintiff, a question would then arise as to his legitimacy, because his mother was the sister of Mr. Snelliam's former wife; and it was doubtful whether, according to the laws of Scotland (in which country Mr. Snelham married) a man could intermarry with the sister of his former wife. Mr. BELL argued that the intention of the testator was to declare that any children whom he might have by his last wife, whether illegitimate or otherwise, should he entitled to take under the will. He probably doubted the validity of the mar riage in Scotland, and intended to resolenmize it in England, without prejudice to the existing child. The VICE-CHANCELLOR observed, that he could mt agree with Mr. Bell in the view which he took of the case. lie could not perceive that the child existing at the time the will was made was pointed at ; there was no descriptio persona'. Mr. BELT. said, that with respect to the otherpoint—namely, the validity of the marriage—it could only be impeached on the ground that it was contra bonus mores. The marriage took place at Gretna-green, and therefore the question wofild turn upon an ' extremely difficult point of Scotch law—namely, whether the marriage was void or voidable. In England it would only be voidable. There had been contradictory decisions on the sub ject in Scotland. The VICE-CHANCELLOR observed, that it struck him that the law of Scotland differed from the English law upon the point in question. Mr. ROUPELL said, that in some cases an intermarriage with the sister of a former wife had been deemed incestuous. Mr. BELL said, the practice of the English and Scotch law differed on this point, although they both professed to take the book of Leviticus as their authority. There could be no doubt of the validity of the marriage according to the English law. The VICE-CHANCELLOR asked whether there was any proof of the marriage ? Mr. BELL replied, that it might be difficult to obtain proof of the fact, inasmuch as the ceremony was performed by the celebrated blacksmith, Joseph Pesly, who was since dead. Per haps, however, the evidence of the postilions who drove the parties to the temple of Heymen might be obtained. The VICE-CHANCEL Lon was of opinion, that it must be referred to the Master, to inquire whether the testator was le gally married to the mother of ale young man who claimed the estate at the time the latter was born. He would, however, read over the papers in the cause, and if he could, consistently with the truth of the case, make a declaration which would save -the parties the expence of a reference to the Master, he would state so on a future day. COURT OF KING'S BENCII, WESTMINSTER, NOV. 12. THE KING V. lIALSE. Mr. Serjeant PELL moved for a rule to show cause why the defendant in this case should not have a new trial. It was an indictment for bribery, tried at the last Assizes for Cornwall, when the defendant was found guilty. The bribery was alleged to have been committed at the last election for St. Ives, when Mr. Evelyn and Mr. Graham were returned on the interest of the defendant, who was a Gentleman of considerable influence and property. His first ground for now moving that the case should be submitted to a second inquiry was, that the former trial took place undercircumstances of great hardshipand oppression —circumstances which tended at once to h armss th e defendan t,an to preven t him from making the preparations necessary to the vin dication of his character. Indictments had been repeatedly pre ferred; actions had been brought against him; notices of trial had been given and countermanded ; and it was not till the latest period allowed in strict practice, that notice of trial was renewed on the particular indictment upon which he had been• found guilty. 'By this vexatious conduct he had, after suffering much inconvenience, been led to believe that no trial whatever was intended, and had accordingly omitted to prepare those full in structions which the case required, or to search for witnesses. The indictment charged two corrupt promises, one made to a person named Bennett, and another to James Richards. Ben net swore that Mr. liaise had told him if he doubled his vote he should fare the same as at former elections; but this wit ness actually swore that he did not understand the allusion, that he had no idea of a bribe, and that the conversation had no in fluence on his mind. Of this person the Learned Judge said, that if the case depended on his testimony alone, it would be entirely futile. And what was the evidence of Richards ? He stated that Mr. Halse promised him " that if he would vote for Evelyn and Graham lie should get double ; it would be a good election to him, 401. or more." And this conversation his son and his son-in-law attempted to corroborate by saying that they overheard part of it, standing in a court-yard next the house. Now there were affidavits positively stating that before this time Richard had removed from a house with a court-yard, to one which had no court-yard, nor any place where a dialogue withiti could be overheard. Bennett had said that Mr. Graham was present when the promise was made to him ; but Mr. Graham had made an affidavit, bearing on it the stamp of truth, that though he neither personally knew Bennett nor Bennett's house, as there were many voters of St. Ives with whose names he was not acquainted, he could state positively that on no occasion did Ms. liaise use such language to any one in his presence. Mr. Graham would, therefore, have been a most important witness for the defendant ; but it was impos sible to anticipate that Bennett would swear that he was pre sent, and therefore no measure was taken to secure his attend ance in Court. He (Mr. Sergeant Pell) distinctly charged that the whole accusation was the result of conspiracy, and he felt as confident as he did of his own existence, that he should be able to make good this assertion, if the Court would send the case to a second trial. The COURT said, that though they were exceedingly reluc tant to grant a new trial to a defendant who had taken the c h ance of the result, yet as there seemed reason to believe that at least the statement respecting the court-yard was incorrect, they would grant a rule to show cause. It must be understood that they did this only on the facts disclosed by the affidavits affect ing the merits, and not on the statements made by the Learned Sergeant respecting the notices and countermands of trial. If the defendant was not ready, he should have applied for a postponement of the trial, and could not now ask to set aside the verdict, because he had omitted to take this step at the pro. per season.—Rule Nisi granted. VICTII.II,I,ING-OFFIC,6, Oct. 31, I g 22. THE COMMISSIONERS for VICTUAL . LING His MAJESTY'S NAVY, 4 - e. do hereby Arire Notice, Mat on Friday, the Isth of November next, they will be ready to receive Tenders in writing (sealed 10, and treat for Fjfteen Tons of BUTTER; Thirty Tons of CHEESE; mnd One Hundred Tuns of MUSCOVADO SUGAR ; to be answerable to samples (of not less than two pouads weight each), to be produced with the Tenders ; To be delivered into his Majesty's Victualling Stores at Deptford, And also, for the supply Of certain quantities of COO PERAGE S PORES, and Town-made COOPER'S TOOLS, fur the Service of His Majesty's Cooperage at that place. The Conditions of the Contracts, which exhibit the quanti ties of the different article's of Cooperage Stores, 4c. re. quired, and specify the several periods within which the whole are to be delivered, unary be seen at this Office. Euch Tender must specify the Price in Ifrords at length, awl Le delivered before One o'Clock on the day appointed, and the Person who makes the Tender, or some Person on ins bchalf, must attend to answer when called for. AT. ;FALLER C IF TO Y. CITY, TUESDAY EVENING. An express arrived this morning from Paris, by which an Evening Paper of Sonday last, and letters of the same date, have been received. In the French capital there were no news in addition to the reports of the day before, and it was generally expected that the Papers of Monday would contradict all that had been lately circulated inimical to the maintenance of the peace of Europe. This information had a material effect in restoring confidence amongst the dealers in the British funds, and an eminent interest made very large purchases. Consols for the next settlement opened at 80i- 81., and gradually improved to 81/. Before the close however there was a slight reaction, and the last quotation was 81i In Foreign European Securities confidence has not been en tirely re-established, and the improvement, if any, in all of •them is exceedingly small. The chief variations have been in the Spanish Bonds of 1821, which at one period were done at 63, and at another their value was as low as 57. South Ameri can securities are now respected, and although little business has been done in them, still they maintain nearly their former prices. The proprietor of the Peru Loan has established its value, by giving notice, that payment of the next instalment will not be required until the contract be confirmed by the Peruvian Government. This created an advance in its value of 2 to 3 per cent. An L.ninent mercantile establishment, which has for many years traded to Poyais land, and the principal of which possesses about 1,500 acres of land in that country, a few days ago re ceived a sample of gold collected on that estate. It has been transmitted to ascertain whether its value be worth the expence of its collection. The quality is, it seems, considered good. The following are current prices of Foreign Securities at the closing of the Royal Exchange this day : French Five per Cents, 87 50, 88. Prussian, 1818, Five per Cent. 86, 861. Ditto, 1822, Five per Cent. 861 7. Ditto Scrip, Five per Cent. MI. 84 Russian New, Five per Cents. 842 5, 85 6. Ditto,Scrip, Five per Cent. 841 5, 84/ Ditto in Paper, Six per Cent. 82. Ditto Metal. ring s, Five per Cent. 82. Ditto Sillem's l 81. Spanish, 1820, Five per Cent. 68 69, 68. Ditto, 1821, Five per Cent. 59 60, 81 59, LP ; 8, 61, 7.j, 59 82. Ditto, 1822, Scrip. Five per Cent. 4 31 5, Si 6, 54, this. Danish Five per Cent 90, 91. Ditto, Mares Banc. Five per Cent. 88. Neapolitan Five per Cent. Bonds, 74 76. Ditto Scrip. Five per Cent. 77, 774. Colombian Six per Cent. 83A 4, 84. 83. Chili, Six per Cent. 81,i 24 . 2 81:i 2. Peruvian Scrip. Six per Cent. 78 84, 83, 80 I.—Morning Chronicle.) From the LONDON GAZETTE of Nov. 12. BANKRUPTS. R. Stevens, Soulbury, Buckinghamshire, dairyman, to sur render Nov. 16, 23, and Dec. 24, at twelve, at the Court of Commissioners, London. Attornies, Mr. Aubrey, Took's court, Cursitor.street, Chancery-lane, London; and Messrs. Willis, Leighton Bussard, Bedfordshire. J. Foster, Liverpool, Brewer, Nov. 29. 30, and Dec. 24, at one, at the Castle Inn, Liverpool. Attornies, Mr. Prickford, Liverpool ; and Messrs. Blackstock and Bunce, Temple. J. .Johnson, Pontefract, Yorkshire, maltster, Nov. 29, at six, Dec. 2, and 24, at eleven, at the Dolphin Inn, Ponte fract. Attornies, Mr. Blakelock, Serjeant's Inn, Fleet-street, London ; and Mr. Horner, Pontefract. J. Green, Rednall, King's Norton, Worcestershire, malt ster, Dec. 3, 4, and 24, at twelve, at the Royal Hotel, Bir mingham. Attornies, Messrs. Long and Austen, Holborn court, Gray's Inn, London ; and Mr. Palmer, Birmingham. J. Brooke, Liverpool, druggist, Nov. 29, 30, and Dec. 24, at eleven, at the Castle Inn, Liverpool. Attornies, Mr. Pick. ford, Liverpool; and Messrs. Blackstock and Bunce, Temple London. • J. Fairhead, Creasing, Essex, jobber, Nov. 21, at one, 22, and Dec. 24, at eleven, at the White Hart Inn, Bocking, Essex. Atto.nies, Messrs. Bromley. Gray's Inn-square, London ; and Messrs. Walford and Cunnington, Braintree, Essex. C. Baker, Romsey, Southampton, fellmonger, Nov. 20, at one, 21, at eleven, and Dec. 24, at one, at the New Town Hall, Romsey. Attornies, Mr. Sharp, Romsey ; and Messrs. Slade and .Tones, Bedford-row, London. T. Stubbs, Crawford-street, grocer, Nov. 19, Dec. 3, and 24, at one, at the Court of Commissioners. Attornies, Messrs. Collins and Waller, Spital-square. DIVIDENDS. Dec. 3, R. Bristow, jun. Lloyd's Coffee-house, insurance broker—Dec. 10, W. G. Peyton, Upper Thames-street, mer chant—Dec. 10, K. Leppingwell, Croydon, Surrey, linen-dra per—Dec. 3, E. Cane, Battle, Sussex, saddler—Dec. 3, R. Phillips, Ashburnham, Sussex, farmer—Dec. 9, D. Cric kett, Hougham, Kent, timber-merchant—Dec. 3, S. Palmer, Burton-on-the-Water, Gloucester, mercer—Dec. 3, J. Somer vill, London Wall, merchant —Dec. 4, J. Pycock, Doncas ter, Yorkshire, hosier—Dec. 3, J. Senols, Fenchurch-street, upholsterer—Dec. 3, D. Friend, Ramsgate, Kent, shipwright —Dec. 4, S. Youden, Dover, blacksmith, spirit-merchant— Dec. 3, W. Prest, Lawrence Pountney-lane, cornfactor—Dec. 7, J. Douglass, Loughborough, Leicestershire, merchant— Dec. 4, N. T. Haines, Nottingham, underwriter—Nov. 27, J. W. Cole, Peterborough, Northamptonshire, banker—Dec. 6, J. Pexton, Skipton, Yorkshire, innholder. CERTIFICATES, Nov. 3. J. Murray, Park Head, Sebergham, Cumberland, butter dealer—W. Walker , Ramsgate, Kent, butcher—R. Walwyn, Wood-street, Cheapside, printer—G. Jackson, Manchester, drysalter. PARTNERSHIPS DISSOLVED. D. Wilcock and F. Thornton, Bradford, Yorkshire, wool staplers—R. Clough and J. Hill, Manchester, ironmongers— D. Davies and Co., Aberystwith, Cardiganshire, bankers, as far as regards D. Davies—R. Kendall and R. Woolrich, Man chester, linen-drapers—R. Watson and R. Woodwark, Whitby, Yorkshire, drapers—J. Bligh and T. Doubleday, Pimlico Wharf, coal-merchants—T. Walley and T. Lindop, Alanches ter, grocers—J. Wiggins and A. Draper, Assembly House, Layton, Essex, school-mistresses--J. Priestly and Co. Halifax, Yorkshire, silk-manufacturers—J. Aspinwall and Co. Man chester, commission-brokers—J. Edwards and Co. Saddleworth, Yorkshire, woollen-dyers—J. Mitchinson and J. Shatwell, Sutton, Cheshire, painters—S. Thorrington and Co. Canal `Wharf, City-road, lightennan. THE ICING V. JOHN AMBROSE WILLIAMS. Mr. BROUGHAM again mentioned this case, and referred to the postponement suggested on Saturday. There had been an arrangement made between the parties, that the ground for arresting the judgment and for a new trial should be urged when the defendant was called on to receive judgment. - He understood that no prejudice would arise to the defendant by the delay. The LORD CHIEF :JUSTICE sad this was understood by the Court. BORNE V. ATKPISON. Mr. BROUGHAM moved for a rule to show cause why the nonsuit in this case should not be set aside, and a new trial granted. The action was for a malicious prosecu tion of the plaintiff' for uttering forged notes,- which was tried before the Lord Chief Jtstice on the Northern Circuit, and the plaintiff' was runsuited on the ground of variance. There were three counts in the declaration • to the first of which it was objected, that it setting out the Commis sion of the Judges of Oyer and Terminer, the word " routs," in the list of offences they were empowered to try, was omitted. Now he contended that the term " all offences" included routs ; and that, at all events, it was sufficient to show a power to try the particular offence of which the party was indicted. The LORD CrtiEr JUSTICE said, that he had taken no par ticular note of this objection, as the Learned Counsel passed on to the second count when it was taken. If the first count was good, it would answer the purpose of the plaintiff; but the Court would grant a general rule to show cause.--Rule Nisi granted. THE KING V. FIET.DER AND ANOTHER. Mr. ADOLPHUS rose on behalf of the defendants, who were convicted before the Lord Chief Jusice in Middlesex, of keep ing a common gaming -house, to urge a point reserved for them at the trial. Mr. Justice BAYLEY asked if the defendants were present in Court Mr. ADOLPlirs replied in the negative; but suggested, that as the point was saved for them at the trial, and as the Com mon Sergeant, who appeared for the prosecution, did not raise the objection, their attendance might be dispensed with. Mr. Justice I3AYLEY said, that the practice was,.on all mo tions for new trials in criminal c a ses, for the defendants to be present in persons. Supposing this point were decided in fa vour of the defendants, the Court might think think proper to inquire whether thei i were not the same parties who had been convicted there befoTe of a similar oance, and had never been called on to receive judgment. Mr. Anor.rx us said he would renew his motion when the parties were in attendance. DNENHAM V. HITCIIINGS AND ()Turns. Mr. C. F. WILLIAms moved for a rule to spew cause why the verdict for the plaintiff should not be set aside and a nonsuit entered. It was an action by an attorney for fees, brought against four defendants jointly, for defending separate suits in Chancery against each, relative to tithes. The case was tried at Wells, when the Learned Judge expressed his opinion that there was reasonable evidence of a joint contract, but a bill had only been delivered to one of the defendants. Ile (Mr. Williams) con tended, that even supposing the contract to be joint, a bill ought to be delivered to each, as otherwise one party might fix the others with the payment of charges of which they never received the benefit. The COURT intimated that there was much more doubt whether a joint action could, under the circumstances, be sus tained at all, than whether, in case of a joint retainer, separate bills were requisite. On both points, however, they granted a rule to show cause. CARRTS r. RICHARDSON% Mr. Sergeant HuLLOCK moved for a rule to show cause why the verdict for die plaintiff in this case should not be set aside, and a new trial had. It was an action brought by the keeper of a tavern at York, against an attorney employed in a cause, for the expence of witnesses entertained at that city during the Assizes. Much conflicting evidence was ofltred on the question whether the credit was given to the client or to the attorney; but the Jury at the trial before the Lord Chief Justice, found a verdict for the plaintiff. The Learned Serjeant now moved for a new trial on the ground that the verdict was against evidence. The Loan CHIEF JUSTICE referred to his notes, and ob served, that he could not say the verdict was against evidence, nor that he was dissatisfied with it, neither should he have been dissatisfied if it had been the other way. It was entirely a question of fact for the Jury, and he saw no reason to complain of their decision. Mr. Justice BATLEY said, that it would be proper when an attorney did not intend to be personally responsible for his wit nesses, that he should explain to the innkeeper that he must look to the client or the witnesses for payment. The Court accordingly refused the rule. PENN v. LADBIWOKE AND ANOTHER. Mr. CO,!MON SERCIEANT moved for a rule to chew cause why the verdict in this case should not be set aside, and a nonsuit entered. It was an action against a constable, and a party acting in his aid, for false imprisonment, tried before Mr. Baron Graham, at Warwick. The defendants pleaded the general issue, and a justification under 1 George IV., passed for the summary punishment of malicious injuries. O n th e trial it appeared that a gun had been fired through a window across a street, which broke 24 panes of glass in an opposite house, and might have done more serious mischief. Circum stances tended to throw very strong suspicion on the plaintiff; he was taken up and detained in custody, though the magistrates ultimately did not think there was sufficient ground to commit him for a capital offence under Lord Ellenhorough's act. The .Tury found a verdict for the plaintiff, with a farthing damages, which carried very serious costs, and which, therefore, the de fendants were anxious to set aside. He (the Common Sergeant ) was fully aware, that as the damages were under 201., he could only move for the misdirection of the Judge in point of law ; but he apprehended that such misdirection existed. Here there was no doubt that a felons' was committed, nor that there was good ground to suspect the plaintiff; but the Jury were not told by the Learned Judge with sufficient explicitness, that if they believed a felony had been committed, and that there was good reason to suspect the plaintiff; there was ground of defence under the general issue. The LORD Citrt:a' JUSTICE at first intimated his opinion that where the evidence did not prove the guilt of the party ar rested, but only reasonable suspicion, the grounds of suspicion must be set forth in a special plea ; but afterwards expressed doubts whether this opinion had not been too hastily given. The Coy tie granted a rule to show cause. The Judges rose at two o'clock to go into the Exchequer. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Nov. 12. GRAHAM V. NIXON. Mr. Serjeant VAUG HAN in this case moved for a rule to shew cause why the plaintiff's attorney should not have his full taxed costs, as a verdict for the plaintiff had passed for 2/. 10s. The defendant had compromised the action four days before it came on in Court, and it was now admitted that the case was after wards brought on to entitle the attorney to full costs. The question now was, whether the compromise was fraudulent ; for. if not, it was admitted that it would be binding. The Coy HT were of opinion that nothing of fraud appeared in the compromise. 'I he most which they could now do, was to allow costs as in a case of stet processus.—Rule refused. Si. JOHN V. SIR T. CHAMPNEYS, BART. The Court was occupied until nearly two o'clock in hearing the arguments of Counsel in this case. It was an application to set aside certain annuities granted by the defendant. We defer any farther notice of it until the arguments on both sides have been gone through and judgment given. At two o'clock their Lordships rose to attend the Lord Chan cellor, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and the other .Judges, in the Exchequer Chamber, to prick for Sheriffs for the ensuing year. COURT OF EXCHEQUER, Nov. 12. The Twelve Judges, the Loan CHANCELLOR, the Earl of HARROIVRY, the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, Lord COLCHESTER, and Mr. PEEL, took their seats in this Court to select Sheriffs of Counties for the year ensuing. The busi ness commenced at two o'clock. The nomination, as usual, will be submitted to the King. MOH COURT OF ADMIRALTY, Nov. 12. PRIZE. A cart-harness, 5 mules, 1 barrel of beef, and 1 barrel of pork, found in one of the West India islands by a boat's crew, under circnmstances implying a breach of the revenue laws, were, on the application of his Majesty's Advocate, condemned as good and lawful prize, and a warrant for distribution of the proceeds was directed to be issued. COMPETITOR. Dr. GosniNG, stated, that some time since this ship and her freight were arrested on a bottomry bond. The affidavit which was last court-day read to the Court, the Court was pleased to declare inFufficient, because the name of the owner was therein omitted. That defect being now supplied in the affidavit of Robert Dent, a partner in the house of Richards, Macintosh, Law, and Co. of London, merchants, the Learned Counsel prayed that in this cause the Court would direct a perishable monition as well as a decree of appraisement to go out.—Or dered. THOMSON v. FRASER. This was a suit instituted for the purpose of recovering a cer tain proportion of the value of the proceeds arising from the sale of a Spanish vessel and its cargo, which were taken pos session of by Captain. Thomson, the claimant, near Buenos Ayres, in the year 1806. It appeared by the pleadings and affidavits, that on the cap ture of Buenos-Ayres, in .Tune. 1806, by Sir Home Popham and General Beresford, the British fleet was immediately with drawn to Monte-Video, and that but one vessel, the brig Pe gasus, under the command of Captain (then Lieut.) Thomson, prciously of the Narcissus, was left behind, with a view to the _PRICE SEVEN PENCE. conveyance of stores, &c. The Pegasus mounted 12 guns, and was lying at anchor on the Bth July, when a polacca was observ ed entering the roadstead, and coining with a strong wind up the river. This proved to be a Spanish merchantman, named La Esperanza, which pursued her course and came to an anchor at a short distance from the fort, then commanded' by General, now Lord Beresford, who had directed the British colours to be taken down. Captain Thomson, who was on shore, offered to go and take possession of her in a launch or barge, if Governor Beresford would supply him with twenty men, notwithstanding the roughness of the weather, and the violence of the surf. He was accordingly so supplied, and he proceeded to board and take possession with out resistance. In 1813, a warrant of distribution was obtained from the Treasury, and Mr. A. Fraser entrusted with the agency. This gentleman was appointed to prepare a scheme of distribu tion, which if not satisfactory- to the parties was to remain sub ject to any alteration that Court should think jnst and equitable under all the circumstances. The agent had followed the pre. cedent formed by the division of the booty taken at Bienos Ayres, and had treated the capture of La Esperanza as tie re sult of a conjoint effort by the land as well as the sea forte, mediately engaged in that transaction. Dr. LUSUINOTON and Dr. DODSON maintained, .that the whole or greater part of the property in question be longed of right to Captain Thomson, instead of that paltry sum which the proposed method of distribution would as sign him. There was no effectual contradiction to what he had sworn ; he was the officer left by Sir Home Pophani charged with the execution of all naval duties after the Neptune had been removed. The Pegasus was lying in the roadstead when the polacca entered it, and the latter had been condemned as a prize. What the Court had now to consider was, how the surrender had been effected ? It was sworn that the Pegasus was lying about half a mile from the fort, under Lieutenant Bishop's command, when the polacca was ob served. The British ship had no colours but a man of war's pendant flying. As the Spanish vessel passed her she fired a musket shot, and compelled the polacca to come to an anchor on her starboard bow. In this statement Captain Thomson and Lieut. L'ishop confirmed each other, and very loose affida vits of Lord Beresford and his Aid-du-Camp, Sir R. Arbuth not, could not be said to impeach their credit. Such being the facts, what were the legal consequences? It had been laid down by a high authority, that of his Lordship himself (Lord Stowell), in the case of the Edward and Mary, to be found in the third volume of Sir C. Robinson's Reports, and in which the question was—whether salvage was due, where the vessel was never boarded by the actual captor ?—that, bring a vessel under the captor's dominion it was not necessary, though usual, to appoint a prize master. Now it must be admitted that in effecting the capture, in this instance, the merit - of Lord Beresford was very trivial compared with that of Can, tain Thomson, who was at that tiro_ in the uncontrolled command of the Pegasus. The former had taken down the Bri tish and hoisted Spanish colours; had ordered the guns to be pointed at the polacca, and had furnished the barge with 20 men trained to the use of small arms. He had deposed that the Espe ranza could not have escaped after these his arrangements, and blowing as the wind then did up the river. This was however, a matter of opinion, and the two naval officers thought diffe rently. They stated, that she came up with the wind on her lar board, and might, if she had not been fired at from the Pe gasus, have escaped down the river with the wind on her star board. Two English vessels had since escaped front the same spot, notwithstanding a heavy fire from the battery. Surely then it would be manifestly unjust to let in the garrison,. which was two miles and a half distant, to a participation in a prize thus completely captured and taken possession of by Captain Thomson and the men under his command. To adopt such a scheme of extended distribution would be to allot to Lord Beresford the sum of 125/. ; to Captain Thomson, who had risked his life in the capture, 7?. 2s. ; to Mr. Bishop, 11. 4s. Bth. ; and to each of the seamen 4s. 10d. Lord Beresford's second affidavit proved how much his me mory might sometimes betray him, but the statement of Capt. Thomson was clear an 'f', consistent. It was therefore hoped that his Lordship would direct the sum of 1,1001. or the larger portion of the proceeds, to be paid to him. Dr. ARNOLD and Dr. PHILLIMORE, on the other side, con tended that the she believed to be a hostile force, nor in obedience to a hostile summons. She yielded to what she thought was a visit or order from thepolice. Without controverting the recent doctrine. of that Court, this ci. cumstance was su ficier t to distinuish this from the case of the Edward and Mary. Captain ( Thomson had shared in the booty taken at the conquest of Buenos-Ayres; nor was it till his return to England that he set up his present claim. All that had been here done by the Pegasus was to tire a single musket-shot, and even that fact rested on the affi davit of Mr. Bishop. The Court had heretofore held, that the mere performance of an officer's duty did not entitle him to share in prize-money, and the present capture was effected" without resistance, by means of a barge and men supplied by Governor Beresford. The Learned Gentlemen submitted, therefore, that under all these circumstances the proposed dis tribution was the just and proper scheme. Dr. Ltisin NoT oar shertly replied; and the Court said it would give its judgment next Court day. EXMO UTH. We copy the following from an Exeter Paper We understand that a very handsome Piece of Plate has been presented to the Ret. F. G. CROSSMAN, of Exmouth, by many respectable Inhabitants of that place, on his removal from his clerical duties there, accompanied by the following letter : Exmouth, October 28, 1822. REV. SIR—.We whose names are hereunto subscribed, Inha bitants of Exmouth, have heard with sincere regret of your in tended removal from the Clerical duties of this place, which, in our opinion, you have fulfille I with exemplary zeal and devotion : nor can we pass unnoticed the benevolent and unre mitted attention which you have shewn to the religious and charitable institutions established here, by which you cannot fail to insure to yourself the prayers and benedictions of the poor inhabitants, as well as the esteem of your friends. We request your acceptance of the accompanying Piece of Plate, as a token of our cordial regard and good wishes for your welfare.—We are, Reverend Sir, Truly and respectfully yours, (Signed by the Ladies and Gentlemen, and respectable In. habitants of Exmouth). Copy of Answer of the Reverend FRANCIS GEACII CROSS MAN, to the foregoing Letter. GENTLEMEN—II is utterly impossible for me to offer a re ply to theletter I had yesterday the honour of receiving at your hands, in any language that could adequately convey to you the powerful impression that it has made ; and equally unabl e am I to make known, in their fullest extent, the overpowering feelings of my heart, for the munificent present of plate with which it was accompanied. Approbation so unmerited on my part, commendation for the discharge of duties so imperfectly performed, and expres sions of esteem for zeal, which your kind partiality has placed in too favourable a light, while they force from me a confession that I have no claim to them, impress on me at the same time with so deep a sense of your kindness, your regard and gene rous attachment, that neither years nor absence will remove. May I request you, Gentlemen, to express to those valued friends,whose names are subscribed the letter I have received, that this testimony of their affection has sensibly lessened the painfulness that a separation from them must necessari occa sion : my prayer to Heaven shall be that every temporal bless ing may be theirs on earth, and every spiritual one in the land of promise. To yourselves, Gentlemen, I am greatly indebted, for the truly handsome and flattering manner in which you have made known to me this gratifying communication ; and 1 beseech you to accept my warmest thanks. And I am, Gentlemen, with high respect and esteem, Your most faithful and obedient Servant, FRANCIS GEACH CROSSMAN. Exmouth, Oct. 28, 1822. ' • To Sir SAMUEL YOUNG, Bart., JOHN SWEETLAND, EMI., S. FERRIS, Esq., M.D. Within the last few mouths the ancient man . sign in Whitehall, which for centuries had be( n the abode of the Richmond family, has been raied,to the ground, and on its site several houses are erecting, which }will command a beauti ful view over the Thames to the distane i .bills of Kent az el Sur, rey. There is nothing remaining of the antique mansion cept the portico of the outer entrance, undet which the once noble inhabitants entered. Richmond House, which was built in the reign of the unfortunate CTIARLES, was the temporary resieence of his facet r cus successor. STRICTURES CURED. Y n Method the above troublesome ~ n e w „: 11 Plaint is entirely eradicated (without the use of c i' „' sit t— Caustic) if not constitutional, whether of long ‘ ll l; l 4 t4 ndin , - ' as well as all weaknesses generally at:- !t,.;'rld in a short time the whole system is re 4"tit\i' be ing one of the greatest discoveri es ever made. ttltei n L 'I'INCH; 44, Duke-street, St. James's. t.ss t;ebetable references will be given, if required.—All Let -9 paid. p p u si-paid. I:l s t w 't Cure for Bilious Affections and Obstructions in ei % . .b at T he Price of the Medicine is Four Pounds. aidl ptradislied, p rice ss. Bvo., the Second Edition of s if. IL. 4 cTIcALTREVFISE on NERVOUS, BILIOUS, f`l4 e'L e. MNIATORY' AFFECTIONS, with a new Me (',4ll 4 )l ' s Stri tures without the use of Bougie or ildt rn' 'ith an Appendix on the Diseases of Women and BY John LYnch, 44, Duke-street, St. James's. Siud by Wm. Crawford, 124, Cheapside.