The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1824-12-16 00:00:00

F=JiaNKJEOPii - =sir ws•

LAW

COURT OF cnAscEltr, Wrmtrstuv, Dzc. 15.

THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL, AT THE •ELATI.IC or THE

CORPORATION OF 1.1V1:11P ((((( 1111111-TAN,

The SIILICITOr-OnxtuAi. moved that an injunction be issued
at,ainitt the defendant, to resttain him from buildinetany work upon
a particular spot which may impede the navigation of the river
Mersey. There cou'd he no question *boot the ntris.liction' as el.:
authority of the l'orpuratitio was admitted to reach intichbeyond
the spot in question. if the defendant were allowed to continue his
works. the port of lAverpool wouhl be seriously injured, as the
force of the back-water would be weakened, and it tvotilo not be
sulk' nt to carry off the anuvial matter. Linder time circumstances
he hyped the 'nun would grant the injunction.
3lr. Row PE t.t. followed on the same side.

fur the defendant. had strong doubts if this
were not a ease for law. It should be first ascertained that the
building ronipla'ned of was a tttt Issnee at all. The pmner:v in
i was pnyate. The defendant was tt...rcly a Le,sce ; his
interest reached no farther.

The Loan (11ANcze.t.0t said. the question was not whether
there should he a trial at law, but whether an injuectittn sitould
not be granted in the me antime. lie was of opinion it ought. and
the Attorney.teeneral should give an undertaking that the action
would be btanig.it as speedily as possible, and the donratiot he sub.
ed to a Jury. Lorthihip. alluded to aimiLi- eases in which
a writ of tut quid danspion was muted t perhaps this writ should
issue iu the per. He mentioned the various structures erected
upon the river from Vauxhall to the Isle al Dogs, and wea of opi-
nion the injunction should he issued.

Mr. Hai) I: L ;:said, there was thin difference in thecastaniluded
to : a Committce was foron.l to ecnnider she wharf and other
work. which are to he erected nron the hank of the Thanes.
The Loan VII ANC'S:Lyon said, an to the wharf, Ice, to which
the Learned Gentleman ali•eled, he we: uncertain whet h•v it was
a writ 0.l gaud dawns's', or worm siatnW th! An Act of
Parliament would perhapi h • neeensary to give the plan effect.
To an arplication made to his Loroship, an he NSF lining. for
an injunction. he replied, that so much minehief had arisen from
cr perle injunctions upon incorrect affidavits, that he would never
grant another except under particular clue:l:stances.

VICE-CHANCELLOR'S corriT, IVstxxspAY, Dtc. 13.

IS It RICHANDSOV. A WWWWW trPT.

This was a case which had bees frequ oily beforetbe Court. and
the present petition related solely to the question of costs, on which
*object the Counsel were to-day heard at thine length.
Thel,' le c -Cu e Wgivisig judgment. said that the case
had come before the Court on the petition of Mr. Rawlinaan. an
soignee under a commission of bankruptcy that hail issued against
James Richardson. But the commission having been soiree-
quently superseded. en the ground that it had been fraudulently
concocted between the banknapt sod Mr. Buckley, the solicitor
under the commission. the bankrupt and his solicitor having on
that occasion offered no defence, the Coen was bound to 100 at
the case made in favour of the supersedeas as proved, a conse-
quently decreed the costs against certain parties, one of whom was
the solicitor, Mr. Iluckley. Mr Hawlinson. after having in his
petition set nut these facts, continues to say, that the Solicitor had,
notwithstanding, commenced an action against him. as assignee,
for the costs under the Commission, and that the Messenger to the
Commission had also brought another action for his costs. The peti-
tioner alleged, that as the Solicitor was a party touts 'Vaud upon which
the Court ordered the Commission to be superseded, he was not In
• condition to ground any demand, in a matte: that had proceeded
from his own wrong; and therefore that he (Itawlinikin), on whom
the of of awal4nee had been thrust, in total ignorance of any
collaraion, ought to be discharged from all liability. The same
argument also is held with regard to the demand made by Gibson,
the messenger. ‘Vhen the hot petition was debated, the Court.
inasmuch as by formally ordering Buckley to pay the costs, had
decided that he was a party to the fraud, it would not now permit
him to raise a claim arising out of that fraud ; and at once ordered
the proceedings to be staid. lie then had no doubt uto the legal
jurisdiction of the Court on that point. Gibson, however, having
been a party to the petition, and the question of fraud against him
oat having yet been tried ; and as it appeared that an action was
then pending between him and ,Ir. ltawlinsen, by which the
question would be brought to issue; and as the detente would bo
just as good in law as in equity, and the viva voce rumination
of witnesses being a better mode of Eliciting trutb than the affi-
davits of parties, the Court would leave that question to be tried.
and reserve the matter of costs till after its termination. Buckley
still persisting in his action, he must take it as proved to the satis-
faction of the Judge and Jury, that Gibson was a party to the
hand. Now arose the question talents, which he had reserved on
a former twcasion, not on account of any doubt that he had with
regard to the jurisdiction of the Court, but because he did not wish
to give any decision until the matter had received its fullest and
most impartial consideration. It was new quite clear that the
Court had but one way of proceeding with rete.ird to Buckley, al-
though, since the trial., and the last hearing of the petition, it ap.
purest that affidavits had been tiled, under the hope ofindreing
the Court to alter the decision it had felt it its duty to come to.
However anxious the Court might be that every case should be
thorougly 'investigated, yet it ass also necessary for the general
ends of justice. that it should be bounded by certain rules. It
was foe this reason that be could not now look at the affidavits,
more especially as no ayplicon had been made to explain
Cost any
pan of the case,and the tst would not now permit it to be al-
tenet, when the onla quad* Twinning fur duisio• was that of
costs. Ile was of opmiun that Buckleyirthe solicitor, must pay the
costs. lie also assumed that Gibsommight have been a party to
the fraud ; anal many toots had been expressed as to the juris-
diction of the Court with regard to this messenger; but he thought
that the Groat Seal had power to deal with all parties who were the
instruments of the Coon in cameo( bankruptcy. and he tberefote
did not consider that soy rational doubt could be maintlinegt as to
that point- He. however, should not decree the costs against him,
as the action had beat COMOLGACCII by him when knobs= filed
his petition.

COURT OF EINITS BENCH, WIDIMSDAY, Dic. 11.

&Pre the LORD CHIET JUSTICt and Special Jurist.

GAMBLINU-HOUSES.

TL[ XING 1. CRoCILTORD.

A Special Jury ;C:1,; Lin in this
cage, hut—
Mr. ATTORNEY-GENERAL mid, that in this cage no one ap-
peared for the prosecution, and he should decline proceeding
with it.

The Loun Cntrr JITST ICE than directed the Jury to acquit
the defendant, which wag eoue acconlingly.

ORME r. tILOCEiOIIII.

A Special Jure was also sworn in this ease, but no Counsel ap-
peared for the plaintiff.
The ATTOUNEY-IiF.NERAL--1 understand, my Lord. that
Mr. C. Phillips and Mr. Patte.‘on hold briefs, but they hare no:

appeared.
211 r. Se AR LETT—Perhaps they have instructions to disappear.
The Lout, Cu try ft —Lvt Mr. Phillips he sent for.
Mr. Pitt Lt.' rs immediately arrived, and told his leadship he
was afraid he could not powerJ. as some of his principal witnesses
were not in art nilance. Perhaps. therefore, your Lordship would
allow us to withdraw the record. I know it is a fatuity. _

. -
The LORD Cum. Jusricr:--I have no power. The Jury
are sworn. and I can do rothing unlcss the other party consent.
The AT T Olt NT: V lENC AL—This is Data Cast, my Lord, in
which I feel inclit.cil to grant any fe7nur.
The Loan Cntri• Jusrlet. -I believe I have the power to dis-
charge the Jury, but as I have never yet exercised that power, I
see no necessity for my doimr no it: the prevent cane.
The Counsel for the plaintiff then observed that they would pro-
ceed with the ease.

Jr. Paxet:SON opened the pleadings. John Frodham Orme
was the plaintiff. and %Valiant Crorktiird the defendant. The de-
claration stated that one Ceorye Lane Fox lost at one sitting at dire
the sum of :SOUK in a house belonging to the defendant, and with
defendant's knowledge, and that the gab, George Lane Fox was
thereby entitled to recover hack the said :AWOL together with treble
the amount for penalties. There were three other counts, charging
the offenc; in various shapes. The whole amount of penalties sought
to be recover-11 was Illtl,lXo/.

The defendant pleaded the general iwue.
Mr. 112. PHILLIP/ said he felt it di'licult to proceed in this ewe,
as material witnesses had absented themselves, though subparnsed ;
he should call his witnesses on their subpar-Ix.; and if they cattle
the Jury would hear his case touch better trout the witnesses that;
he moult relate it.

.....
Horatio. Earl of Orford, Edward Ilughes Call Ilughes, and
Edward 3hiont, Esiirs. were then severally called upon their sub-
-Ist-ens. but 041 not answi-r.
Thomas (Ample was next called. and answered,
lint Mr. Po Lira said he could only prove the parish in which
the defer.d.int'a house was situated.

The Loan (111E1 611. AT ice then inquired of Mr. Phillips if
he wished fu call any furilm witnesses ?
Mr. U. P1111.111.3—N0, to y Loot. We have ealbal several,
who, if they had attended, could, fully support our case,
but as they have declined ar.sweting to their niunes, I should not be
jUitt i Hal in precceding avy further.
The Louu Cuter J ST IC E—Thcn let the plaintiff be now

The Attorney-Cc:tend wished his Lord.hip to rertirr that this
WWI a fit cri‘e for a Special Jory ; but his Lordship looking at the
nature of the action, would not intrrfere.
IL'ltl3llN.t CONVERSATION.
Gil %HAM 1. 111t1RY.

This was an action brought by the plamtiff, an artist, against
the defendant, a naval ollieer, for criminal conversation with the
plaintiff's wile.
3ir. CAIII.DELL opened the pleadings, and 31r. SCARLETT
stated the time. •

The plaintiff. Mr. Graham, wan an artist, and warried his wife.
a fort iy,m lady, to St. in's Church, in the year Intl. They
were each about twenty-two years of age at the time it the mar-
riage, and shortly after they went to Italia. In Min they returned,
and after living some time together he agreed to leave her, and went
to Scotland to see stone relations, front whom he hail expectations.
He could not allow his wife to accompany him, In consequence of
the great contrariety in their tempers and opinions. During his ah-
senee he desired a friend. Mr. Laing, to pay her fifteen shillings a
week, hying the one half of the little property he enjoyed.
Laing, the friend of the plaintiff, called upon Mrs. firaham during
her husband's absence, and was surprised to find her going by the
name of Rigby. and living at No. 5. Albany-mad, near Walwortb.
Rigby W 33 present at this intessiew, when Mr. Laing ealtril bee

by her name of Graham. II: paid her a second visit in the name
or Grialatin for sh: ago; , taken iii? hit, band's name.
Sitbwetiti to this tef,li the nr.ree of fir3ll.llll, :11:!1:111
lived as elan and wit( hetet' se. was :is' rose ea.liag for
h'avy ,li-m- bee.. is • lie show that the tlef.taial t
tiny fnowleili: of the irligh.ry eras committin,:.
WI re iiQ agNrr Va', Circnur.lll:.c..{ ; ;QV. at :he ptiin.
sill' felt hir.istlf 'mum! to evnt ,Inngvr r.f any arliriMl9l
who might, if this action wt -c not lirou,iii, et some tune or re
enjoe a proyeniv to wi..ett t'in' were not et: Oh!. There was lei-
therfy an opinion is, 1.1. that r hen I:sei ice sep.:rated by de. d. an at.-
' lion like the present would lie but that i'oneine bud tot t•irire
' been altogether exptoJed. The parties were peer dinner their en.
Itsbitatimi, and the o'd was et alivd, that " %Viten Comte
cable to at the deo., 2:.,: cat riwl,rw." Tlietigh the
plaintiff' cou' not lire .n pc.ire with his %ire, that tains' no
Justification • 'ler adultory. :t was tint rely the provtare ot the
Jury to extit. the alanitecs, and he itsk.al no mor7 than what try
felt were lot. ell in jtroi:e. Ile dial iiot wilt to opea thin are as
railing for via (tier de: anil he lel it altogether to the
satistiod that ry smile con,rit C.,ita I urge their duty.
I)avid ladle ex:in/tin, t by Mr. St AR • lia n Reel:tinted
a ion his une. They were magi i at St. Marr:4',,,
in 181'. -chain was a nottrait ;•aither„ and is of a Seereh
tautly. After if e inarrirge •ioy lived in m 7 h0n..... The latk's
inure was Kr kth... Slit w i a f reipirr, but at taunter Lnow
not. Thee efiers. anis left IQV hr ~'r. 40 hem .war, :bout =L yer ••
of mile When he ortrrie.:, nc' +he v. 15 eho..t the 44,11 e lir'.
CriilalTl 14-,.t to India at a painter; the:e he rctuoined.h.l
the year 11,20. They writ- to nee exir return, from
l'orts•ronth. and ladged. coming to t•,,,er, in Villiers-street,
for a illort time, sell then removed to .10!, .-tr:nd. They had one
little boy. Mr. Graham than want to ..i.r:eland. IV hile here he
bed no mole% :molt but a oat f gee: to paint *,lass. I knew
his mother. but I knew no•hne of hie cape htiona there. on
learnt**' town fel' Scorieol, lie desi..ell me to pay her kis. a weak,
witichl i• ;a her up to June lest. 'Slue ai'oaance was as much as
his cirennistances could a torc. el le lie, at the Albany-road,
rear Il'atwortli. I einsi there twit': cr ttl,iC..! a year. I saw Mr.
Right' fur ti' • Or-t time l'iott; the :nd I. understood Mrs.
Graham to call hint Mr. Rigby. She told me he wax a lodger,
and that his name was Rigby; 1 cal:NI lat bereft, him,
Graham. and on Peeing him at the minor. I atik.t! if fir. Graham
was at home. I knew ate p:rson as Mr. Rigby, the
present delendaot. The s:enat' dins I sent to gee her. I inquired
in the neighbourhood, het Mrs. Graham ei uhf not be heard of.
I delferit.ed her after by her foreign accent, and I as old she
passed by the nau.e cf airs. il:athy. tin the Mile day I went to
see her, and mentioned the di iiicelty I had 'it findiag he". hut then
amid nothing more. The house where it, y lived was No. L. In
April 1023 I made title disecw. 7.
Cross-examined litr Mr. 'Cut ESSIGE....-1 knew Caroline
fieiet-
ling before the marriare. Graham lodged at my house When site
mote to have her pertro:t taken. Ido it know if that was his
first introduction. On their return from ledis, they lived together,
from September to Ifeeember. Ile told her he hail received an
unpleasant letter from India relative to his wife, which annoyed
him so much, that lie iiirrt ely knew what he was about. Ile told
me the letter related to brim oprieties Of c induct on her part. Ile
also stated to me that lie could not live Iv, h her any more. She
assented to receive th-: t 'ts, a week. I paid her up to June last,
and Mr. Graham is still indahted to me fur the advances I have
made. I don't think Ain,. saw Mr. flrahani after Decem-
ber MN. She told toe she wea keeping a lodging-blase at N 0.5,
Albany-rind.
fly a Juror—The pa ants were made sometimes by me, and
somatimes she called, Will some:inns I xent to or called on
James Ledger. examined—l hidge at 3, Albany-road. and went
there its April. tam. Rigby, the (Intendant, passed by the name of
Graham, and Mrs. Graham as his wife, There were two bed-rooms;
I occupied one, and Mr. and Mrs. Graham the other. I could not
distinctly overhear what passed. Ile itsuaily 'oohed the street
door, and after that they Ishii ivert to bed together. lie generally
called her "my dear," and they passed as man and wife. I have
seen Mr. Laing when ha called to site Mrs. Graham. Ales. (ha-
haat told me that ,Si!. Graham was her second husband.

.
Cross-examined—Both sleepir.g.rooms were on the first floor.
The two rooms adjoined each other. The sittirprooni was down
stairs ; I don't know what Mr. Rigby is ; I heard he had a situa-
tion under Government, for which he had a small compensation.
By the COUNT—There was no servant kept'
Ilenry Lyons examined—l lodge at the house, Albany-road,
and being out after 12 o'clock one night, lie came down to let me in.
1 apologised for being late ; he gave me a light, and he then went
to sleep with Mrs. Graham. Ile said he had been twenty rein in
the navy and had a pension. Ile answered to the name of Graham,
and used to call Mrs. Graham, Caroline. She told me he was her
second husband.

Cross-examined—l thought he wan a captain in the navy, and he
never told me he had only three shillings a day. Ile had all the
appearance of a sea-faring man.
Mr. SCARLETT—We have made inquiry, and find he has been
purser in the navy, and has only three shillings a day half-pay.
Thomas Saunders exinnined—l lodged at No. 6, Albany-road,
from the 11th May, 1824. When I first applied to Mr. kigby, he !
told me his wife was net at home, and begged me to call again, as
he never interfered about the lodgings. I called again and saw the
lady. but I did then knot: her mini... I now know it.
THISSIGER, for the eefendant, contended, that this action
could not be sustained, and that the eaten ut Harris and Caulfield
and Warren and Timbre!, supported his position.
The Logo Cuter JraT!CE—l do not think the sepeatien in
this so complete, for she might have her suit. I think the action
maintainable the question of damages is a different matter.
Mr. Tnrssratr.a then addressed the Jerry. Ile observed that
he had but few observations to offer, and those observations would
go to mitigate the drenages. He admitted that crimes of this
nature deeply affbeted all men in society ; but there were infinite
shades of guilt, and the guilt in thin case was of an trivial a nature
as could be imagined. The plaintiff here sent her out to the world
with a scanty pittance, which lie subsequently withdrew, and with-
out throwing around her any sign by which the world may know
that improper liberties ought net to be taken with her. The defen-
dant did not know that the Indy wan married, and the Jury were
not to award damages an for the breach of morals which defendant
committed, hut for the injury which the plaintiff suffered by being
deprived of the society of hi, wife, He shouhl not trouble the Jury
I further, relying confidently that they would only give nominal
damages.
The Lon:lettere JCSTIOE observed to the Jury, that he eon-
sidered the plaintiff entitled to a verdict, but left the question of
damages entirely to their consideration.
Verdict fur the plaintiff, damages Is.—Costs 40n.

LIBEL.
TIARRI3S JAY.

This was an action for libel, brought by the plaintiff', art attor-
ney at Hereford. against the defendant, one of the partners M a
banking.house In the same town.
Mr. Cross opened the pleadings.

Mr. SC.4 R LETT Sated the close. The plaintiff; an attorney, re-
sided at Hereford. and was respected by all who knew him. Ile
Was often l'nder Sheriff of the county, and now brought this ac-
tion for libellous words which were published of him by the
defendant. The libel consisted in a letter written by the de-
frridant, and addressed to one of his partners, then in London, with
a view, no doubt, that through his agency it might be widely circa_
laud. The plaintiff bad had a law-suit with the banking Gnu of
which he was a partner, the particulars of which it was now unne-
cessary to state. It was enough to say, on the present occa-
sion, that if the plaintiff's remarks were confined to that suit,
or the circumstances growing out of it, the oresent action never
would hare been brought. %alien parties are at law, each generally
thinks himself right; and allowance should be made for the
angry remarks or bitter expressions which often fall front the
defeated party. Rut in this case, the plaintiff completely
yelled oat of that controversy; and he (Mr. Scarlett) thought
that toleration idiould cease on the part of .he plaintiff, and that the
party so reviling and so injuring another should be called
to make a reparation in damages for such unjustifiable conduct.
Th..: defendant wrote the libellous letter to Mr. Garratt, imputing
in it the worst motives to Mr. Ilarria, and at its conclusion express-
ing ft wish that the law or the Almighty would rid the earth of
such a wretch as the plaintiff! The letter of the defendant com-
menced with an allusion to the plaintifra sending the notes of the
defendant to their bank for gold—it went on to call the plaintiff a
" blackguard"--tn impute to him that he acted unfairly in his
agency to a gentleman of the name of Western ; in fact, that he
kept back two of his rentals; that plaintiff had taken up ore of
the blackest causes out of revenge ; and the charges were ironed
up with the prayer he just alluded to—" Surely the law or the
Almighty will soon rid the earth of the diabolical wretch." All
these charges and libels were evidently directed towards the plain.
tiff. W'as all this, he asked the Jury, to be tolerated, and this too
addressed to a profeioional man ? If the plaintiff had given any
just cause of offence to the defendant, he would too he surprised at
his irritation and at some coarseness of language ; but when
atrocious calumnies were undeserved iy heaped upon him it was ne-
cessary that he should appeal to a Jury Mr their protection. The
falsest facts had heel invented for the worst purposes, and the per.
son who did so should be held responsible for the iojury the
worked another. It might be said that the letter was confidential.
as from one partner to another ; butt he was inatrucied to say the
case would won appear very tharent intie^d. With these few
preliminary remarks ire would proceed to call his witnesses. It
wan nut admitted that the plaintiff was sworn as an attorney in
1817.
.Me. John li'right examined by Mr. Tauter ON—I have acted
as the agent of Mr. Ilarrias, who is upwards of ten years an two._
ney. I have no doubt he has martitted during that time. I first
knew him in 1817. 1 remember the cause of Cruise v. Tusker-
ville ; but I have no distinct recollection of what pa-sod reLttive to
it between plaintiff and Cruise. flanks was at my Mom
before that action was brought. I conceived 11r. Harris' was the
attorney. In that action the record was sent to triaL
Cross-examined by the A TTOR EX L Ital.—l don't knew
specifically 'hat plaintiff was an attorney beyond my being his
agent. In lied 2 I understood dial II xrrias acted as Coder-Sheriff:
I was not concerned for him as agent to the Under-Sheriff. Sly
impreasion is. that Mr. Smith was the Under-Sheriff when Cruise
brought his action.
Saunders examined—l produced an examined copy of the
record in the case of entire V. Tivskerville. John IV right is sta;ol
to be the attorney. It was an action on the ease.
.Me. John Wright again examined—The debt was 3001., sad the
damages found were :1871. . . . .

The ATTORN CV4/I:NERAL—The declaration states the sum
at 4,0001.

The Loan emir Jvatice—You know that says nothing.
Janin Riekits exarnined Ds Mr. Cuogs— I Tuned 3 farm of Mt.
Western in lte2, and paid the tents to Mr. Harris*.
The AT TOMIY•UXI( LIAL—To save time, 1 Shial admit thir.

web:

John Montt examined (a letter put Into his hende)—l received
this letter ; it is Mr. Jay% writing.
The I. tire was put in and rvi.d.
(7rooi.extuniny At the 111111. I received this letter, I was in
p.trtuership with ear. Jar. lam tint a partner now with him. I
don't Liao if TiivkYville was indelvtod to our lur.imt at cite time of
tai' action. We advarecd him money. hut I can't .::y it we tetrad
a difficulty in getting it back. In April 11 there were ilifP.reweew
between toe and IlArrisit. ll'e had large apectalaions in the funds'.
aril had about the accounts. I did net then entertain the
,t uric ion of .Mr. Hawks. I did not chew the letter i-ntued iately
on r:ceiring it, for it could not give me a worse (-nil:U.:3 vet hiss
that l hint ..Derry. Tile letter eas vuhvequeudy produced in July,
in a hanktoptcy ease. I pioduced the Later a id; a view to
an 110cm:inept upon it, but not to any thing in the bady d it.
Harris.' Juke,' for the letter and promised to return it, but Denr did
marl it. It was not sheen until fifteen months after I rewired it.
Isv chr I a:n not on good terms with llamas now. Idu not speak
to him.

Re-evamired—l had shewn the letters to many fiicuda of mine
berate it was produced to the l'onimissionen. I VIM dasired lt.y Mr.
Iledrnh ant, rate of my partners, to produce it—rather I was dared
to do . The letter was taken away ; some person asked nvi fur.
it, Imt I had it not, and some person said the gentleutau who took
it has gone nut.
Re-eress.rvamined--Soine of my friends bad seen the letter be'
fore Apia,
TI e letter 11'34 hex read.
This we. the rue fw the plaintiff.
The 411 -itin'it:ll•4;et4Eß•l. said for the defendant, that it watt
not a little rairriinlinary that he should come here, beforr s fuddle=
sex Jury, rather than a Jury of Ms own county, whn might be ae.
quainted with h!, chancres. If any one of the Jury had his ekes
ratter asssiled, to wham would he apply foe its sindleation ? Wrig
to those who knrw him—to those whose goad ottivion he calnefs
if thr plainnt' wished merely to vindicate, would he nat be raddled
with tine militia and ohe verdict ? l:crniul> he would ; Int what
would ire Jury ray when he told them that the tiny nett anion
to be gird was one I/ this same plaintiff, agsinat Mr. l'advnlsam,
tt,c other partner of .Ir. Jay ? l'he ties was, Mr. !Junin. this at,
tomer, knew the least damages would car.costa, and thcrefon br
brought these actiona. The letter complained of was a ecT.fidential
letter, written by one partner to another, on a matter of business.
Harriu had drawn cheeks on the defendant's house; he dM not Ilke
the transaction, and he made such observations to hit Ptivlnef as
the circumstance.s edit for. He world not go the tz:)g,h cl say-
hey, it was a lettu to be publicly circulated; but it went at less
cut flown the damages. How did the !temente tits light Why,
Carat quern ,tet el* his prows and than *hewed tit lettet, Cer-
tainly nn yen respeetahle course of conduct. How did rants. get,
the letter ? Why, it was produced ha'ore the Canurrisaternn, oat
for the purpose of seeing its en!liellltt, but to see an 'hielladiseat
upon it. relating to a totally different subject. fie Markt bet oar
that Harris* purloined the letter, but he would ask who ore it
publicity—who wished it to he spread far and wide throt.git the
agency of the plablicprese ? Why Mr. Ilarrim himself. Under
such circumstances, then, he was sure the Jury would may give
3lr. Harris' a farthing damages--the full amount to comps motto
hits for his character.

Mr. dcARLETT—Aa Psy Leered Friend has !atrctlqcvl P. new
and important fact, I have a right of ►eply.
The AT aoaarmr-Ozataaa—Tbe ears, palm win jusdfr
what I stated.

Mr. SCARL V:TT—I Shall not now 'mkt upon 'the I:fit. bet 1
giro my I.mtne,l Friend notice, that in future I Ault earr e it.
The ATTOII NET-GENERAL— If my Learned litiend wi!l adhere
to the :tame nay I can haire no uli!etion.
The I.onn Cutrr JI:,TICE lets the amount of drr,gea td
Jury, •liu rata:tied a verdict fur the plahtlff.—Pcmagts

111.11111,511 o. 1110DENTIAM.

.....
This was a case similar to the het. The plaintiff' oat the tame,
and the defer.dant was • partner of Mr. Jay a, the defendant in the
last ease.

Mr. scsecrvr.—We shall not trouble your Lordship with
this ras-. hut will withdraw the record.

TI • Lump Litter JUSTICE.—And you ict very properly.
puirovr v. DUNHAM.

This was an action brought by the plaintif to recover °striper-
sation in damages for a trespass committed upon hi. premises.
Air. Buoy ottau stated the case. The plaintiff was a gentlemart
of high military rank, and at the period of the trespass was la-
bouring tinder severe illness. It appeared that a judgment bait
been obtained spotlit s son of (letters! Burton in 18i7; but in
1817 Captein Napper Burton died. There were, however. same
late proceediags, in which the name cf Captain Napper Burtos.
were Franglit before the public, and the defendant fancylng that
this gentleman must be the Captain Borten, without further in-
quiry sent an officer into the General's house, in Hemet-squaw
where he then lived ; not satisfied, however, with that, they mail.•
inquiry if the General had not a country House ; they aseArtaire
hr hail, and although there was enough to shew them that tF7
tieneral was out their debtor, they went t, the country hnese,
there they periOrnied the same operation as in the town house.
The bailiff never went to consult their employer. They remaire
in the house, ordered tires, refreshment, and other conveniences.
with all of which they were furnished. This is no trivial wrorg
no little injury ; it was gross and culpable negligence, and th.s.
case of its being a mistake could be of no avail. It was not be-
cause the defendant said he was mistaken, that such conduct shodkd
remain without puni.hmet,t. For if the Jury passed this matter
lightly ever, they would ea.+. of them subject himself to In
nnuoyed at any time by bailifis. who thought they might es-
-1 cape under the idle and frivolous plea that they have been Asks-
taken. The real defendants in this tone were Hurd and Jolinsor.
solicitors, who were the last persons that should have permitted
I such carelessness. _

Bourge rammed—l sin a servant to General Burton t
lives in the parish of St. Mary.la.bonne. I remember th'
evening in question. The defendant came to the house, an':
asked if General Dorton lived there, to which I replied he di:i
They then gave me a card, chid I brought to the General, who
answered, "he did not know what it meant, but let tlfern gene
their mind in writing." I told them this, and they, sald
was no neceso!? for 461 so. They then asked 'ne if th.
General did not thep at nis cOuiiiry noose! I Pot, nor a:"
this time of the year; and they then asked me where it was
situate. I answered. "near Highgate." They then went to
General, and arm en a piece of paper, "1l e have a 4:sto!..s
against the goods of General Hutton, at the suit of Hutd
Jelin3Cll." They spoke in tl lotot vnire. Dunham then wet.:
out, and left the other man in possession of the hence.
haul did not return that night. The General did not retire to
rest till nearly twelve o'clock, his usual hour being from eight to
nine o'clock. A few days before he had received a gun-shot
in the side. Nest day* person of the name of Gray rime to dys
house ard went into the parlour, Mit I do not know what ruses:.
The bell rung, and Gray said, " Mind, William and Cook,
this happened through a mistake, the General being of th-
same name t and I am now come to take the man In possmicy
away." The General put his finger up in an angry way, and sai:t
it was very odd they should take a General for • Captain. The
men then went away.
Cross-examined by Mr. SCAALITT.--i di,/ not take down i t
writing what the men said. I do not recollect the General saying
that they must go to Hornsey, and ay the same to the servants
there. The man remained in the dining-room all night: he ha.l
no bad. I do not know either of the General's sons. I think
this passed on the tith of January, in the evening, and the 7th, 4
the afternoon.

He.examined—The General's bowie wu very handsomely fu:-
°Med could not be worth less than 7001.
Winifred Hone, a servant in the family of General Bator,
corroborated the testimony of the lest witness.
Mary Atkins, examined by 3lr. D. F. JoNts—Thit witsses
lived in the service of General Burton in January 1&„;., sad de.
posed to she possession taken of the house and furniture, under an
execution. Kavanagh was the man who came.
James Atkins, the husband of last witness, confirmed her state.
mem. He saw the warrant, aad the names of Hurd, Johnson, &an
Dunham, were contained In it. _ _

Micha;l Kavanagh ezamineJ-1 was sent by Mr. Dunham to
take pun/talon of the furniture of General Burton's Louse at
tiornsey.

Cross xamineJ.— I remained there from eight or nine o'clock in
the evening until three of the next day. Mr. Orly own* there and
explained that something was wrong. Mr. Gray then dischargval
me. !le said something about a mistake. 1 had a vary goad kati
and the people were very civil to me.
Re.examined—l had a good breakfast, luncheon, and dinar.
Mr. Baocutram.—And all this before dinner !—Ves, 81r, and
we parted very good fliendv.
Mary Atkins again called—She made no charge to Gerterat
Burton for what she gave Kavanagh. The General wished wee ter
make a charge, bnt I left it to his own generosity. •
Cross-examiuede—this was immediately after possession was
taken.
__

William Henry King examined.--We are attorneys for the
plaintiff: We were applied to on the Bth of January to proceed
in this case. Captain Napper Burton has been dead about Ire
years.
Cross-examined.—We did not sue out the writ till May Isar.
I think we were preparing for the action from the fint instrfsetioes.
We wrote to Hurd and Johnson en the 28th April. 1 knew the
liencml's sons, and have known himself for twelve or thirteen
year..
The plaintiffs ease closed here.
Mr. Susi'E'er addressed the Jury for the defendant, and re•
marked upon the unusual course pursued in this me. in calling
the plaintiff's attorney to price that he had received instructions to
protect In this action. Iledoubted much whether any instrtietioc4
were given to Mr. King on the ikh Jammer, but upon that point he
should not ray more. The fact wry, the Cruet:ll had a son, spur-t
whom a judgment had been taken for NUL and upward.. ; and the
temporary possession of the house arose merely through mistake.
the party imagining that of the two persons hearing the same
name. it might turn out that the judgment could be satisfied, and
that the person would also prove to be the defendant to that judg-
ment. With respect to the defendant sending to Hornsey
did his duty, for how was he to know that the house in
not a furnished house, and as yet he (Mr. Searlett) was ;
know whether it was not a furnished house rented by Gen.
ton. But bow did the ffenersl himself act upon the owasion
wily liken man who knew it was only a mistake. A letter s
written to Hard and Johnson on the subjeet, and they immediate
expressed regret at the Mreumataner.„ adding, that if it app.-
they were mistaken, they would sincerely apologist. Upon
they were satisfied, and the bailiff.; were immediately withdi
The (fewest felt no inconvenience himself, but only
as the servants knew of the execution, and generally
tongues, that the apny should be made at both the 1
the prensce of the datreat persons. Gametal Button, as

i~

I,

i

~,

ey, he only
n town w. 4
at • lOWA V.
metal litt,-
111110 S ? E. • •
letter
nunediatelv
appearr.l
port anquiry
withdraw...
My relate.:
tad
houses, t t •
Y a man e:
4