The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1825-07-30 00:00:00

• .`

totem twelve tad one o'clock. The Cable day after the prisoner
was gone, the %ostler of the White Hart come to our house‘betweeal
one add two tf&ek, and M ennettence of a communication from I
him, I was sent to nuke inquiries it the London Inn, relative to
the mimeo. After making inquiries I returned home. On Fri-
day mistmer took the horse away, and on Sunday 1 rode to South
Moulton, where I found the prisoner at the her. It was about
nioe in the morning when I arrived, and found him in bed in the
tieorge Inn. I inquired after the horse, but he made no reply. I
went down stahs to look for the hone, and afterwards found it in
isseesion of a horse-dealer, Mimed Fry. resident at South
3entikon. South Moulton is 26 miles from Exeter, and is in•a
different direction from the Boniton road. I am cert tin the home
I found at Mt. Fry's is the same which was let to prisoner by
my father. We have had the horse three- years in our stables.
which ennhles me to swear to it. The prisoner was taken on the
he of May.
Crowv.eaamined.—l am quite cure the order was for the horse to i
go on the Floniton road, and not on the north mad. Prisoner act
off from the White Bart in the direction of the Crediton road, anti I
not of the lloniton road. Crediton is eight miles on the n srth
road. I found tht -prisoner in bed at South Moulton. and he re-
turned to Exeter with me without making any attempt to escape.
I left prisoner in his bed.mom while I wort to search for the horse.
There was a female in the prisoner's room taking care of him, as
he appeared to be ill at the time when I entered it. She remained
offer I went away to look for the horse,
Re-examinett—'rozer, William Lee, the prisoner, and I. all re.
turned togethet to Exeter. When I returned to the George I found
the prisoner gone, and Tozer shortly after retook him. There was
no constable. I did not recoinmend prisoner to go away, Pei/enter,
went away on the Tiverton road. I was absent from the George
about a quarter of an hour, and in the interval prisoner had guile.
I saw him again in about an hour and a half in custody of Tozer,
who eaMe to South Moulton, after I had gone to 31r. Fry's. Tozer
overtook anti brought him back to South Moulton. We all returned
to Exeter on horseback. When we arrived Toner took prisoner tea
publie.house,-and he was committed to prison on the next morning.
Prisoner,on leaving the White Ilan onFriday,took the Crediton road.
1
When I saw him do so I was not near enough to hsve stopped hint if r
had wished. 1 left prisoner in bed at the George, having first
asked him about the horse; I did not recommend hint to leave the i
town.
William Fry.—T lire at South Melton, and am a horse dealer.
I know the prisoner at the bar, and saw him at the George Inn be-
tween eight and nine in the morning of the 30th April. In curse.
quence of the ostler of the George coming to me and letting me
know a gentleman at their bouswitad a hone to sell, I went to the,
inn, where I mew the prison 4. ntrisoneeproposed to sell the horse
very
deep, because it had thrown .and hurt biro very mucb. I
asked If the horse was his oiso.lind he said it was. The ostler went
opting to inform the prisoner I had came, and I then went up and
found him in bed. Prisoner said his name was Ryder, and that he
Bred near Exeter. 1 bought the horse, and paid the prisoner seven
guineas for it. He asked whether I thought the horse worth LW. ;
I said not, and hid him seven guineas, which he agreed to take.
I had first seen the horse, and observed its knees were broken.
This was on Saturday; next morning Mr. Slugtbal came and
claimed the horse as his, and 1 delivered it to him. It was the,
tame as I bought from the pawner.
William Lee, hostir to Mr. Slegford—l found the prisoner at
South Moulton, and renamed to Exeter with him.
,Cross-examined—Pries" ter and the rest drank together on the
road. Prisoner made no attempt to escape. I did not hear on our
insithe money was paid back, and the matter made up.
William Mugford.Prisoner hired a horse front me to go on
the Honiton road; my son afterwards received it at South
'Moulton.
John Tozer—l am a horse dealer ; when I arrived at South
Moulton, on Sunday, the Ist of May. I found the prisoner had
gore away, and in consequence of some information I received,
I borrowed a fresh horse and pursued him. When I had ridden
two miles on the Bristol road, I found prisoner in a little house
on- the road side. Ile was sitting by the fire place, between
three or four men. I told hint I wished ft: !Meal( with him ; he
rose, and I took him into another room, and brought him back
to South Steelton in my custody. When I arAved there I ap-
plied to the Chief Magistrate to commit him, but be refused, on
Ike ground of its being out of his district. I then ,brought mi-
lliner to Exeter. .
Cress-examined—l heard he was on the Bristol road, and found
him on it. I searched evel7 pot-house on the way, asd finally
found him advanced two miles on the Bristol road. I g„tre the
prisoner a glass of liquor on the road to Exeter. and we fee: our
horses together. I was told the prisoner had gone the Bristol read
by coach, but I found him on foot.
This was the case for the prosecution.
The prisoner being called upon for his defence, at first declined
saying anything, but afterwards stated. that he had had every
opportunity afforded him to escape on the road from South
Aloulton to Exeter, and dras only prevented from attempting to
do no by the repeated promises of Tozer and Mugford, the latter
of whom told him it was not his inclination to prosecute, and
that the matter should be accommodated, it' he (prisoner) wrote
to his friends and made an arrangement to refund the price of the
home. Mugford and he drank much upon the road, and remained
behind, partly in consequence of being intoxicated, and prisoner
was left alone in the company of Tozer, who prevailed upon him
by promises of not proceeding farther in the matter to make no at-
tempt to escape.
Mr. Justice GAST:LEE charged the Jury, and in doing so called
upon them to dismiss from their recollection every circumstance
connected with the prisoner, which might have occurred in the
course of the proceedings had upon the occasion of his farmer
trial. The present ease was to be decided on solely with a view
to the facts now developed in evidence, and they were not to carry
back their minds to any previous proceedings, or mix up the his.
tory of the transaction with that orally preceding one, of which they
might be cognisant. The prisoner at the bar was placed before
the Jury on an indictment which charged him with having fele.
nionaly stolen a hone, the property of Slr. Megford, a resident In
this city, and in considering and determining how far the piscine:
Was, or was not, guilty of the offenceattributed to him, they should
pay strict attention to the intention of the prisoner at the time pfl
hiring the horse. It was neceseary, before they could find him'.
guilty of the felonious intent, that the Jury should be satisfied that
the prisoner, at the time when he procured 3lr. Mugford's horse
and rode off on it towarthethe Crediton-road, contemplated thecom-
miseion of the crime afterwards alleged to have been carried into
effect. If he entertained nosuch intention in the first instance, and
yet at a subsequent period, unmindful of the trust reposed in him,
had converted the animal to his own use and absconded with it,
then, although the prisoner had committed a very serious breach
of confidence, he could not be considered guilty of the felony ire.
petal to him. The Jury would consider this point, and reflect upon
the distinction to be taken between the felony and a simple breach
of trust. The Jury would have to consider the intention of the
prisoner at the period of hiring the horse, and whether he then pro.
determined or subsequently adopted the idea of illegally converting
the animal to his own use. In the former Case, as he had stated,
It would be a capital felony ; but in the latter, only a simple
breach of contract. With regard to what the prisoner tad relied
upon in the course of his defence, namely—that the younger Mug.
foal had held omit promises of not proceeding against him, and led
him to entertain hopes of escaping the consequences of a prose.
cution, it did not amount to much, because the horse wan the
property of his father, and he had no right or authority to enter
Into any compromise, even if it were competent for him legally to
to do, which it was not, as the Jury knew there were serious penal-
ties attendant upon any attempt to compound a felony. The Jury
would also recollect this statement rested upon the unsupported de.
claration of the prisoner.
The Jury shortly deliberated and returned a verdict of Guilty.
The prisoner, who had regarded the Jury during their consults.
tion with the moat intense anxiety, seemed entirely deprived of self
control when the verdict was given, and cast himself forward on
the front of the bar in the greatest agony.
Mr. Justice GAR E LEE then proceeded to pass sentence upon the
prisoner in the following manner :—llenry Percival, you have been
convicted on the cleareet evidence of an offence of a most serious I
nature, and which has of late become one of such frequent oecur-
renee, that it has been thought necessary to make examples of the
unhappy persons found guilty of it, and carry Into effect the ex. j
heme sentence of the law, which has been for some years permitted '
to fall into disuse. This is the situation in which you are now un.
happily placed, and although it grieves me much to see at the bar a
person like you, so much distinguished ,by appearance and educa-
tion, from the unfortunate persona who generally stand in X similar
tituation before the Court, yet I cannot see any reason to convince
me I should exercise a sound discretion in the discharge of my duty,
did I forbear passing the sentence by law provided against persona
convicted of the offence of which 11l Jury have, by their verdict,
found you guilty. You have produced no witness to beer testi.
peony to your former good conduet, if that were possible, and
you do not appear to have been driven to the commiesion of
the offence by the pressure of urgent want or distress. It is
hot my wish to refer to the previous proceedings of the
morning. or to recur to the circumstances that transpired in the
course of your former trial (the offence with which you were
then charged not being legally proved, perhaps through the acci.
dental absence of a material witness) : but 1 cannot avoid sayiag
that those circumstances are not of a nature calculated to createany
favourable impression in your behalf. However. you are now to
receive‘entence for the offence proved against you, and of course, in
passing that sentence, I cannot permit my mind to be influenced
by any former accusation. Unless you have it in your power to ad.
vance such satisfactory evidence AS will convince my mind justice
may yet be satisfied by a remission of the capital punishment, and
the substitution of an alleviated sentence, 1 cannot flatter you with
the expectation of a mitigation of the punishment consequent upon
the award of the Court. If any such circumstance in extenuation
of your offence should exist, it wili afford me great pleasure to be
enabled to lay them before the proper authority, which I will
add is always most Featly to pay attention to well.founded re-
presentations of that nature. I repeat, I shall transmit them to
his most grac:ous Majesty, the delight of whose heart is to make his
reign a reign of clemency and mercy, as far as those are con.
'Went with the general safety and well-being of his people. and ,
the due protection of their mutual interests. But if that is not the
ease, and you should not have it in sour power to adduce the
Circumstances in mitigation to which "I have alluded, 1 cannot ,
/latter you with any hope or expectation of mercy ; and it becomes
my duty to advise you to prepare yourself for the execution of the
sentence I am now about to pronounce. Being aware of the un-
happy nature of your situation, it is far from my intention to tinges.
ewe it by any unnecessary remarks. I would merely entreat you
to make the best use of the necessarily short period for prepam. j
tion that is likely to be allowed. You will receive every requisite
attention, and be attended by persons who will endeavour to
you for the great change It is extremely probable you will
endergn; and I sincerely trust these efforts, added to your Quay,
may be sufficient to procure for you that mercy in the other
world shich yqu can scarcely expect to be extended to you in this.
It now only remains to pronounce the extreme sentence of the
law; which is-.that you. IlenrY Percival, be taken hence to
the.y!pce frotfioylepcn jou case, and front that to a piaci of exact-

tion, to be thaws* appointed, end there be hangzti by the neck;
till you are dead—wed may the Lord have mercy on your solli."
During the time the Court was employed in pronouncing sen-
tence, the prisoner, who had cart himself forward on the front part
lof the bar, with his face butied in hi. handkerchief, appeared to
be affected with strong convulsions, and sobbed audibly. At the
conclusion he remained motionless. and fixed in the sante position
for several seconds, as it unable to stir from the arm, and on the
; gaoler and turnkey attempting to rouse and remove him, fell WM6
ling in their arms.
---- •

OXFORD CIRCUIT.
SHROPSHIRE ASSIZES, JULY 28.

These Assizes commenced this day before Mr. Justice BUR-
ROUGH on the Crown side. and Air. Baron GABILONV at Nisi
Pella. The calendar contained the names of seventeen prisoners,
and twenty civil causes were entered for trial, of which three are to
be tried by Special Juries.
CIVIL Si DE.
Before Mr Baron Ganaew.
WARRANTY OF A MORSE.
110MERAY V. VOrNTNEY.
Mr. CADireF LI. mated, that this was WI action on the warranty
'of a hone. The defendant sold the horse to the plaintiff,
and warranted -him quiet in shafts, and tit to draw a one
t horse cart ; however, he should prove that so far trom being
1.0 that the defendant himself said that the horse was the
I" most wild random devil he hail ever met with." The
plaintiff roan the son of oat of the Magistrates of the county or
Worcester. and the defendant was what was called a horae-joblser,
and sold the plaintiff the bone, with this warranty, and no sooner
did the plaintiff put the horse into harness than lie began kicking
most violently, anti had nearly killed one or two persons who were
near at the time of the experiment. The plaintiffoffered to return
the horse. lint the defendant said, .' Why, I told you the horse was
the very devil, and you would huy hint ; and as you would do so.
you took your horse as you take your site, for better for worse."
(A laugh.)
Lawrence Domfray, the cousin of the plaintiff, said, that he saw
the defendant, who recommended hint to buy the horse, for it was
a strong and free one, and very quiet in the shafts. The witness
told this to the plaintiff, who went for the purpose of looking at the
horse, and when lie did so. the plaintiff asked if he had sold the
horse, as he had come to look at him. The defendant said he had
not, and they went to see the hone. The plaintiff' said he would
like to buy the horse. and tisked if he was quiet in shafts. The de-
fendant staid it was A EVIVMS tihnfter. and that his reason for parting
with him was, that it was a free worker. The defendant offered to
put the horse in harness, but the plaintiff said he would take the
defendant's word for the Italia being quiet. The plaintiff' then
bought .hint at 171. and took fiat away. On the 3d of June the
hone was returned, the plaintiff' telling the defendant that
the horse was of no use to him, for he could not get him
into harness at all; to which the defendant replied, " Why
I told you of all his faults. I said he was a wild random
devil, and no one could manage him, for he run away with my
cart, turned it over, and very nearly kicked it to pieces, and you
know that I recommended you not to buy him." And turning to
the witness added, " Did not I say so ?" but that he (witness) re-
plied, " you said no such thing," which was the fact.
Cross-examined by 31r. TAUNTON—I situ not much used to
horses. I sow the defendant's housekeeper, and two men and
some women, washing at the time of the deal. The defendant said
the horse was hasty' with lads, but he did not say anything about
mad.hrained or kicking, and never said that lie could not recom-
mend the horse, nor that he was to be taken with all faults. The
plaintiff said if he could get the horse for anything tinder sixteen
guineas, he would give Inc a guinea. I certainly did ask the de-
fendant to return as. out of the 171., and if he would do so I would
give him as. of it, as that would reduce the price to under sixteen
guineas, and I should get the guinea I was promised.
Ile-examined—The persons whom I have mentioned as present
were not in the same room with us.
. _ . . . . .

Joseph Wilcox proved that the defendant had previously recom-
mended the horse to him as one of the best lie ever had for labo•
rious work, but would not do for the plough, as being a free worker
he might run over the other horses, and lame them ; but the reason
the witness stated why lie would not have the horse was, that he
found outthat the horse was a notorious kicker; and on his saying
to the defendant that he did not want to be lamed, the defendant
said he was glad of it, as he should sell the horse fur more
money.
Joseph Dail, waggoner of the plaintiff. proved that he attempted
to put the horse into a cart, but that he kicked so violently before
getting near the shafts, that the witness was obliged to desist, as
Wr never saw such an animal in his life.
Tats si TON objected that this evidence did not support the
dee Aration, which stated that the.warranty was that the horse
wow!, work well in a one-horse cart.
nRIOTI GARROW said he was extremely sorry to turn a
phintih'round on such an objection in point of form, hut he was
bound to do an; for the plaintiff had charged that the injury arose
to him fetat,r . the defendant falsely warranting this horse to be a
horse lit to o. •w a one-horse cart. Now, it was proved that in the
warranty nothi,:e Was said of any ant at all. His Lordship then
directed the to be nonsutted.
Oa the Crown side.

nothing of interest occurred.
...

LA V INTRIZIGENCE.

COURT OF CHANCERY, FAIDAt, JuLr

WARD 0:7 THE COURT.
Mr. AGAR stated that this was a case which required the imme-
diate interference, of the Court. The circumstance* were these :
a young lady a minor, (whose name did not transpire), who might
; be considered a ward of the Court, had eloped with a young gentle-
man to Gretna-green. and had been tl•ere married. A petition had
been presented to the Master of the Rolls, for the appointment of
guardians to the young lady's person and estate, and her mother
and another person had been appMated. The mother died some
short time since, and the yciing lady, as he had stated, had eloped
and married. On the return of the
patsies front Scotland the
guardian asked them for a certificate of the TV.lll'iage• which, how-
ever, they had not got. They then sought to har: bans Publisbod.
in their parish church, which. however, the guardiat. thought it his
duty to prohibit. And he now brought the care bcfb.-e the Court,
rot with any hostile intention, but merely for its interferfnm He i
(Mr. Agar) had looked into sundry cases, but Elie found M. via that
bore exactly on the case in point. Those nearest to it were mat of
Lord Shaftesbury, and that of Lord Raymond, the latter case rt.,
ported in :)11 Forester. In this case, Lord Talbot decided that the
Court had power to interfere, but then a bill hail been tiled the day
before the petition was presented, which was not the case in the
present instance.
The LORD CllAwctLT.on—",lv doubt is. whether it would not
be better now to file a bill. I fear if a marriage at Oretna-green
be good, and I believe it is as good as a marriage can be, our pre-
sent object is to take care of the property.
Mr. A omt—The property, my Lord, is not much. I believe it
is about 3001. in money, and an estate of 2001. a year.
The Loon CIIA NC I.Lott—The guardian has acted properly in
bringing.the Matter here, and he had better file a bill to take care
of the property.
Mr. lIF.ALD—My Lord, I appear on behalf of the young man
who has married the young lady. lie is most desirous that the.
property shall be settled upon herself, and is ready to do all in his I
power to further the views of the Court.
The Loan CHANCELLOR—I think the Court had better direct
another marriage to take place. No doubt the marriage at Gretna-
green is a good marriage, but then there is often great difficulty in
proving that it hat. taken place.
Mr. HEATH—Then when the guardian has arranged for the
protection of the property, the publication of the bans had better
go on.
Mr. AGAR—The guardian is not certain that the marriage has
taken place, as he has seen no certificate. .

Mr. HEATH—Then there is btill a stronger reason why the
bans should be published. It can do the lady no good to be un-
married.

The Loin) CHANCELLOR—If this is done, the proof of the
marriage will be undoubtedly more easy. Those marriages at
Uretna•green are often !main:tied by persons who have no right to
perform them ; but they are still held to be good marriages. I
will see if Lord Talbot has made any note of the case of Lord
Raymond, in his manuscript notes, which I have at home, and I
rill let you know to-morrow.

MELLISH V. MELLISH.
This case, which which has been so often before the public, was
again argued.
The LORD CHANCELLOM advised its being referred, and said
he should regret if this course were rot adopted, and he should be
obliged to deliver his judgment.

VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT, FRIDAY, Jutr 29.

WELSTEAD r. SIMMS.

Mr. SUDDEN, for the plaintiff; moved the Court to restrain the
defendant from collecting certain monies due front the East India
Company. as balance of freight on the ship Oeneral Harris, and
also to call upon him to pay into Court 8,0001. which he had already
received on that account. The bill was filed by the plaintiff, who
was captain of the ship in qiiestion, and owner of six sixteenths,
against the defendant, who now possesses the remainder of the
shares, as he had bought them up of the former part owners. The
ship was chartered by the East India Company. for six voyages.
On the two first voyages the owners received dividends, after
which the defendant became managing owner; he had never made
a dividend, and had refused to settle the accounts. Now, the affi-
davit of the plaintiff completely explained the reasons of the de-
fendant's conduct. The defendant was partner in a firm which sup-
lied the ship with cordage, which, besides being exceedingly high '
in price, was also excessively bad. The defendant had besides sup-
plied the ship with flour, sails, &c. and had paid the suppliers with
cordage front his own stores. He had, during the time of his
management, received upwards of 200.0001. for freight. and had
not accounted for a single penny. Now his client calculated that
he had lost;10.000/. merely as the interest of his shares. The'
Learned Ctionstleatered into further particulars of the extravagance'
oldie defendant, and of his refusal to make out his accounts. He'
then asked what could the defendant say in answer to this? All':
that Ale said was, that it was usual for part owners of ships to
supply them with what they wanted for the voyage, and that so
far from having any dividend to make when the amounts were)
made up he had no doubt that there would be a balance due to him.
Now, observed the Learned Cont. this would be a good answer, if
the defendant himself had not been the managing owner as well as
the supplier of the articles, and with regard to there not being
money to divide, he must deny it, for at the end of the fifth
voyage, after allowing for all manner of charges, there was a
balance of' 40011/. on hand. and yet the defendant refused then to
make a dividend, en the pretence that it would be wanted for the:
next voyage. Cookies all this, the defendant had by some ma-

niteutre obtained possession of was 11,000/. sine the notice of mks,
Lion, being the half of a sum due from the East • Witt Comm y
Under these circumstances he hoped his lloncur would gra:t; tt
motion. .
The Nricx-CsrawcELLoi said he did not exactly understsnd
the principle on which the motion was made. The defendant was
managing owner, and in that character entitled to receive the ta.
lance of freight. The object of the motion was to restrain thc.z
rights-as
tnanufing owners; now, foe this purpose, it must be
out that a can. derable portion of that balance was due to the
tiff, and that being due, that it would be lost to him by urda.-
means when a settlement of the accounts took place. He krew
no other prircple on which he could grant that motion, and as
did not think that it had beeu so made out, he could not ?chest
them in thiirway.
Mr. SUODEN admitted the force of what had dropped from his
Horeur.
The Vicx-CaiscEts.on thought he could send it to the Master
as a matter of account between the parties.
Mr. HEALD, for the e• iendant, said, that he had no objection
whatever, for that it was for the interest of all parties to lt..se th,tt.
settled as speedily as possible.
Mr. IfoRNE, in order to remove any bad imprc ssiol from the
mind of the Court, in consequence of what they had heard, begger.
to state that no dealings that had taken place with this thin h,,d
been the least irregular, nor had the 800th. been obtaintd by ar!`
manceuvre, but in the usual way.
After some conversation between the Learned Counsel, it itai
finally ordered, by consent of the parties, that a decree should tit
, taken to have the accounts settled before the Master.

MARKETS.
CORN EXCHANGE, Fainar, JULY 29.
The supplies this week consist of 3,830 sacks Flour, 4,470 qua-.
tern Wheat, 1.930 quarters Barley, and 10,170 quarters Oats.
Owing to the continuance of tine weather for the harvest, we had
an extremely .dull market for Wheat, and even the best samples
scarcely mat stained the currency of Monday. The best Maltiag
Barleys were full as dear, but interior stained samples were heavy
sale and cheaper. Higher prices were demanded, and in some it.
stances obtained, for Oats. Beans ind Pease rather dearer.