The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1826-07-28 00:00:00

1
Ine neighbours,. lied failed, and were offering !even sbillinp and Pirkit, the property of the plaintiffs as assignees,) with this die.
inzpeAtee In the par& keener may, that the legitimate Pulpit appeared to be " printed
Crosa.examinen—After the defendant -had told me, I told him and published for the 'summer( of Kaight and Lacey, Paternoster.
that I had already heard the report. In fact, I had heard ft about row," while the spurious edition ptafessed to be published "by
three oiclock that afternoon. The plaintiffs have carried the same Knight and Lamy, laateter-row." This was the publication
collectable eppeararce since that time as before. The defendant complained of, and to restrain the defandant from publishing
• at present a /salaried clerk to Mr. AVa•son. I cannot say whe. which, the plaintiff's had filed their bill, and instructed him to
Are he is at the point of death ; but he is very ill, and has been an apply. to the Court for an injun
ction.
i.e tat last six or eight month-. ' 3lr HORNE commenced his argument in. resistance of the tno-
i • written evi.
Re-exismined—A report of such a minim might tareince great tion, by remarking upon the fact, that there was no
inconvenience to some establishment.; but not to such an este- I deuce to prove that the sale of the copyright, proposed in the do.
Was:Meat en M mum. S poses% They received no injury at all. I fentiant's letter, bad ever been completed. The affidavit of the
lave not seen the aefenaant driving gig lately. am sure the defendant, Robertson, denied that he had owed 30/. to Bentley ;
defendant doe% not keep a gig- and further, that be had no recollection of the particular lite-
Therhas Smith lam an auctioneer. I know the defendant. I Tall work offered for sale by him to the bankrupts, in the letter
SSW BHP on the 20,h of march lest. Defendant came to me. arc' read to the Learned Counsel, for it was not specified. nor did he re-
mit' •• Spines are elating 7s. 6d• in the pound." I and "Do member having received the damage of 120/. referred tn.
you ray so P" Ile muffed, YES, and A give you a hint." The VICE-CHANCELLOR thought there had been no case made
Cross-examined-1 em certain that the defendant did not Ley out for the defendants. The memory of Mr. Robertson appeared
to he very defective, for it had failed to remind him of his having
that what lie ml' me was a report.
Marin bovie—l am • ship and insurance broker. I know the written a letter containing as plain a proposition cf sale as had
tlefemtant, anti saw him at the Recharge. at Sunderland, between ever been stated. No sufficiently strong reliance could therefore
-eleven and twelve seek& on the 28th of March last. I heard him be placed upon the defendant's memory in contradiction of facts
sior to Winter,' Spence, •'‘ The Spores have failed, and have been positively sworn to. The injunction prayed for must theretore be
offer-1-g 7s. Cal. in the tround to their ereditore." granted.
John Tindal, a elerk of the plaintiffs, stated that the plaintiff* Mr. Floater hoped his client would be paid the ISOI., of which
bad unstained considerable injury from the report in qttestion. he had not received a farthing. •
Hebert Spire, the son of one of the plaintiffs, confirmed the sc. 31r. HEAL said the mosey had been alreadZy
NE,.I
MOCK Or last witness. He knew that one of the partners hal been THE MECHANIC'S 31A0A
enamelled to go to London, Leeds, Manchester, and some other MAIOY AND SID EY V. ROBERTSON.
alos, in coneequence of the report. Alr. Hasten (with whom was Mr. BOOTH) said, that the par-
This was the case for the plaintiff. ties in this case were the same as in the preceding one, with the
Mr. Wreeteels addressed the Jury for the defendant. The omission of the late defendant, Aleikleliam, who had nothing to do
weeds laid 13 the declaration having been proved by mnre than one with the present suit. The case of the Pulpit ushered before his
witness, whom he Was not in a situation to contradict, it became Horton, that of another literary work, in which it was his duty to
ed. duty to address them on behalf of the unfortunate defendant, submit a motion similar to that which he had just made, and in
.. and to address to them such observations as might tend to reduce the which the Court had just acquiesced, namely—an injunction to re-
which, as the case now stood, they would undoubtedly strain the defendant, Joseph Clinton Robertson, from printing and
awa . In the first plats, it gave him pleasure to observe, that not publishing a certain literary periodical work, called the Afcclianlea
start In the statement of te Counsel opposite, and still less in the Magai.ine. The affidavits upon which this application rested, wore
evidence which had been called to support that statement, had there extremely voluminous, and the points in dispute were matters of at.
been any reason to preseme that the defendant had been actuated count, but the substance of the whole might be comprised in a very
by any towards the plaintiffs; for not only had no witness brief statement. It appeared that, in the month of al ay, 1823, the de-
attempued to prove such a circumstance, but the Learned Counsel fendant was possessed of a certain perindical work, called the Me-
had, in his opening speech, distinctly stated that he had been at a ilianie's Moraine, of which he was the sole planner and prolific-
loss to conceive under what motive the words in question-had been tor--and that he entered into an agreement with Knight and
uttered; a difacu ey which could never have presented itself to the Lacey (whose assignees the plaintiffs were) for the printing
mind of the Learned Counsel, if he had had the slightest reason to and publishing of that work. lenight and Lacy undertaking to
surmise that the defendant had been actuated by spite or reeentment, supply the necessary capital, the defendant to furnish all the matter
Ile ("Jr. Williams) tsegeed not to be inisunderatood : he was not to be cont fined in the work, and that the profits should be equally
urging so senseless a topic as to say, that if a man, under any cir- divided between them. There wby the as a written
parties, agreemen
an t to the
dditional
same
euenstances, circulated expressions which were calculated to do in. effect, subsequently executed with a
jury to another, he was not liable to the party who might receive covenant, by which Knight and Lacy undertook to pay to the de.
injury from those expretudons. But, between a speech made with. fendant, Mr. Robertson, a sum of 231. on the first day of each
out a motive, and Rope' ch made with the malignant design of ruin- month, " towards his share of the profits." It was also stipulatel
fig the credit of a neighbour—between the inadvertent careless cir- that neither party was to sell, -assign, or otherwise dispose of, his in-
etilation of a report, without malicious intention, and the invention tercet in the publication, without the consent of the other, during
mad circulation of a report with the express design. of gratifying the continuance of the connexion : moreover, the agreement was not
private resentment—theta was all the difference in the world, to cease until six months after the date of any notice to that caeca
ws it regarded the moral quality of die act, and there ought which either party might give to the other. Shortly after di: date of
es be a very wide difference in the amount 'of damages award. this agreement, a conventation occurred between the parties, in which
ed by a jury. The defendant in the present case, he admitted, , the defendant proposed to sell to the bankrupts his share of the pro-
had much better have been silent—he had better have spared fits arising from the work, for a tixtel sum of 001, a year, Knight and
.the circulation of what he had beard ; but he (Mr. W.) put it to Lamy having the power reserved to theneof renewing the agree.
them, whether it did not seem, from the evidence, that the de- mcnt for a further term of two or three years, a• the expiration of
fendant, acting with the inadvertence of youth, had carelessly cit. the time then proposed, but it slid not appear that thus agreement
culvert that which he had heard, but that his conduct had been had ever been ratified. In the year 11;25, the defendant, who had
perfectly distinguisheble from a &sign to injure his neighbour. in the interim several money and bill transactions with the bank-
He new invited the attention of the Jury to the distinction which rupts, on account of the abehaaites Magazine and other literary
uppenrcel with respect to the language of the defendant at the diffe- works, became, as they (Knight and Leery) alleged, their debtor
rent heun in the day on which he had given utterance to the report. in a considerable sum • applied to them for an advance of 2aor., for
apneared, that in the early part of the day the observation of the payment of which, and the sum of fidta. which Knight and
tat defendant had been directly affirmative, that such and such an Lacey asserted he already owed them ; lie agreed to mortgage
event had happened; but it appeared in evidence, that after Mr. to them all his interest anti property in the work in question.
Gray had informed the defendant of what he had seen at the bank, The bankrupts having assented, a deed of assignment to this
ard enutioned him agairst giving the report a further circulation, effect way accordingly (hewn up and duly executed; a clause in'
then the expression of the defendant had been changed. and he had which bound the defendant to pay half a year's interest on the
efterwards„ instead of making a positive allegation, merely stated whole sum (MOO at the rate of five per cent. per annum, on
the circumstance as a report. Then, with respect to the damages ; the then next ensuing 18th of April, 11120, and the principel sum
on the face of the declaration (in which the plaintiffs undertook to with the other half year's interest, that would have accrued due on
estate the Injury which they had received), two persons were sped- the 18th of October following (next), and in default of such pay.
fied. who, it was alleged, had wt . held their custom from the merits Knight and Lacey were to have a power of selling the defer.
pininaffs. in consequence of the report circulated by the defendant. dart's Interest in the publication, to reimburse themselves for such
That was the allegation. but not one:word of evidence had been aavances. By another clause both parties were bound over not to
adduced in support of it. It was also alleged in the declaration, print CT publish any work. with the same title, or tending to the
that • person of the name of Pattisun had called in a debt of 401. injury of the original publication. Under this agreement, the par-
sooner than he would have donetati it not been for the report in ties and their assignees continued to act until the sth June last.
messtion. How had that allegation been supported in proof? when the defendant, Robertson, took the printing and aublishing of
'Why did he (Mr. W.) mention this? In order to show that it No. 146 of the work from the plaintiffs, and gave it to Mesita
was a strong confirmation of what the witness Andrews had stated, Hunt and Clarke, in violation of his agreement. The ground
atm• though persons of doubtful credit and auspicious substance upon which this step was attempted to be justified was, that the
might have been affected by such a rumour, yet it had made no plaintiff's had failed to fulfil their part of the agreement, by with.
impression (and he, Mr. W. rejoiced that it had not) on the firm holding from the defendant the sum of 25/., originally (in Sept.
•sir el stable credit of the plaintiffs. That was a weighty eonsidera. 1824) stipulated to be paid him monthly, on account of his share
lion, when they came to inquire into the damages to be awarded of profits ; but that agreement lie (Mr. Heald) would contend, hail
against the defendant. The defendant, be wee aware, must pay been put an end to by the mortgage, for the defendant could not
awe damages ; if he could not pay in purse, the law said that he claim the payment of that sum on account of the profits, on which
.must pay in person—that was, that, if he could do no better, to Knight and Lacey (and through them their assignees) had a lien,
gaol he must go, in order to repair to the plaintiffs a damage which until the mortgage eheuld have been paid off. If the plaintiffs
had been purely imaginary. He (Mr. W.) feared that the de- (the assignees) had failed to fulfil any part of the agreement, an
etsedant would fill into neither alternative. In purse he could net action would lie against them, but he submitted, the defendant had
pay,—for whet compensation could a salaried clerk mike to the no right whatever to transfer the property in question to any other
plaintiffs? and, in person, lie never would pay in this world, for poison. On the other side he contended, that six• months' notice
•he was fast withdrawing Into another. It was, therefore, not idle should (by virtue of the cgrcemcnt of 1824) he given by either
.pideelamatioa, or imaginary surmise, when he said that the de- natty to terminate the connexion. and that in fact such a notice
ttr.dent would neither pay in purse nor person ; s.nd, as the de. had been given to the plaintiffs by the defendant. That a notice
,tondant was not able to pay damages, it was a matter of consolation had been given was true—but it bad only been served about three
ftbst the plaintiffs did not stand in need of them. months since, so that even, under the agreement itself, the defend-
lit. Baron H L LOC summed up the case; and ant was not justified in transferring the publication from the
The Jars,. after withdrawing fora shunt thee, returned a verdict plaintiffs before the expiration of six months, prescribed by the
fur the plaintiffs-A/images, 30/. agreement. Under these circumstance., lie trusted his Honour
wee id- grant the injunctien in the terms prayed for.
Mr. BICKERST ET it, for the defendant. commenced by remark-
ing, that his Learned Friends had carefully kept out of view sonic
very important facts connected w ith the case—facts which lie was
sure, when they came to be known, would induce the Court to
refuse the application just made. Ile fully admitted die agreement
of 11124, but he contended that that part of it which bound Knight
and Lacey to pay the defendant 251. per month, &c. had not been
abrogated by the subsequent mortgage, for though, by the terms of
that mortgage, the defendant was bound to pay the principal suns,
together with a second half year's interest, the period will
not arrive till the 111th day of October next. With respect to
the mortgage deed, the defendant had sworn, that at the time
of its being presented to him for signature he did not owe Knight
and Lacey the sum of MOO/. as stated by them ' • for at that time
many of the items included in the account consisted in the amount
of bills accepted by them for the defendant, which were not then
at maturity, which they had never paid, and for which he was
still liable The defendant's affidavit further stated, that previous
to his signing the deed, he mentioned to Mr. Walter (the at-
torney of and Lacey), that he was not indebted to them
in the amount stated; to which Mr. Walter replied, that " it did
not matter—that the covenant to whirl, he (Robertson) objected,
was a thing of comae, by which he (defendant) could not be in-
jured." The defendant added, that he signed the deed without
having consulted Isis law adviser, ignorant of its consequences, and
that these facts had not been denied by Walter. The defendant fur-
ther went oii to swear, that he had not at any time a desire to depart
from the strict letter of his contract, but that he had been coat.
pelted to take the step alluded to in consequence of wilful
act of the assignees, by their non.felfihnent of Knight and Limey's
agreement. Ile stated in addition, that shortly after the plain.
tiffs had been appointed assignees, they had refused to become re-
sponsible for-the printing of the work, being ignorant whether or
not it would be productive of profit, which rendered it necessary
for the defendant to give security to the printer for a certain period
of titne. The plaintiffe, it was true, afterwards undertook to gua-
rantee the printer. yet they slid not pay to the sale of the work that
atectit.on which i: required, in consequence of which the sale had
been reduced front eight thousand numbers weekly, (which it
had reached when the plaintiffs were chosen assignees of Knight
and Lacey) to about half that amount. The defendant farther
swore, that on the sth of' June last, he sent tothe plaintiffs
the manuscript of No. 140, of tho Merhaniet Magazine,
and that the same was tendered to them with a demand of 251.,
which had become due to hint, under the agreement of 1824. al-
ready referred to, with which demand the plaintiffs refused to com-
ply, on the ground that they had no funds. That, in consequence,
he did, as charged, take away from the plaintiffs the publication
of the work, but that he hail given to them repair notice. The
persons to whom he had transferred the publication (Messrs.
Hunt and Clarke) were to keep a particular account of the pro.
cecds of the work, in order that an account should be fur-
nished to the plaintiffs, anti that they should be paid suclt share
of the profits as they should appear to be entitled to. From these
facts he (Mr. Bickersteth) trusted the Coact would see that the de-
fendant had done nothing that had not become absolutely necessary
for the protec Mu of this; interests, which it could nut be denied
he haul in the work; when, moreover, it should hr considered that
the plaintiffs had gone on with the printing and publishing of a
work with the same title ; that there were, in fact, two Mechanic.?
Magee aces before the public, lie hoped the Court would be of
opinion that the plaintiffs were not entitled to the injunction for
which they prayed.
Mr. HEALD, in reply, said that Mr. Walter was prepared to
contradict that part of the defendant's affidavit which related to the
execution of the mortgaged deed. The plaintiff's themselves denied
that the sale of the work had been reduced from 8,000 to 4,000
numbers per week. IVlten they were appointed assignees they
(Mind the weekly sale to be 6,000 number, at which amount it still
continued. ••
The Vi CE.COANC EL eon said, that looking at all that had been
stated on the mat of the plaintiffs, it appeared to him that the de-
fendant)! intention laid been to act honestly in the fulfilment of his
howev how

LAW NOTICES.

COURT 01, CHANCERY.
TES LOS•SEANC LLLLL LITCOLN'S INN HALL, Trizs DAT,
♦T TEN.
• Rematch! YAlons. •

VICE-CRANCILLOWS COURT.
MOSS MU LLLLL ,IX LINCOLN', INN, TBI% DAY, AT

■ALV.PAST
RealllSll2lMOtiOal, after which Cause Petitions.

LAWINT'ILLICiENCE.

COURT OF CHANCERY, THURSDAY. JULY 27.
fhe Loins CHANCELLOR observed, he should be obliged to
hare the Court to-day at half-past one, to attend the Recorder's
Report. His Lordship mid he had given so much of his attention
rothe cases reported by the Recorder, as to disable him from giv.
Lig any judgments this morning.
CAPES V. HUTTON.
In this cue Mr. KtetonT moved for an injunction on Vasil of
thspluintiff, to restrain the defendant from acting comrary to the
conditions contained in his articles of clerkship. It appeared that
thl plaintiffs are attorneys practising at Epwortle, and the de-
fendant, who was articled to them, stipulated in his, articles that
lie would not practise for his own beueht within less titan ten miles
of Epworde. It appeared. however, that immediately after his
weeks bad expired, and he had been duly admitted, he opened an
ofice in Enu °rile. in opposition to his late masters. The present
Didion was, iherefore, made for the purpose of restraining hint
trinn acting contrary to his age. ement.
In the moose of the case tits Lon° CHANCELLOR made several
oust rations to the effect that he thought an attorney could not
Utter into a contract to bind himself not to prude in any particular
Placa.
The LonD Cumecrtvoft desired to have the affidivits handed
pp's° him, and said he would dispose of this ease on Saturday.

VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT, Tnunsmy, JULY 27.
COPYRIGHT—" THE PULPIT."

,VICOV ANIt;;ID Ifl.ll V. DOBIL117601( AND ,IFAXI.EIIAAL.
M r.ll EAI.D said, that in this ease he was Counsel for the plaintiffs,
who are the assignees of Knight and Lacey, of Patermiattr-row,
booksellers and publishers, and, on their behalf, applied to the
(*vet for an injunction to restrain the defendant, Joseph Clinton
Itoinrison, from asAgning disposition of, or exercising any right
ettiatow to, a wcetly publication called The Pulpit, and for
restroloing the defendant, Meildeliam. from publishing or selling
est.!, iminhers of the same work, to do which he claimed a tide by
4idtoe of en assignment by the other defendant. The Learned Oen-
tioosna stated, in support of his application, that early in the year
BM, the defendant Mr. Robertson conceived the idea of the
penes:Mal work in question, and wrote, and caused to he printed
and published, on and for his sole account, several Numbers of it. '
Ott the Stlith of May following, he disoostd of one-third of his
pioaerty is this work to Knight and Leery, on account of their
undertaktog its publication.
Mr. Robert-
Mr. HORNE hem interposed, and said his
son, had so disposed e one-third of the profits arising from the
pitbit:nti,m of The Poll* by the .plaintiflh, to whom the whole
lenordsoion of each number .wu sent foe ante;
but that Robertson
Mai lICV. r relinquished his right to print the 'work.
Mr. Herm° resumed- In fhe year 1824, Knight and Lacey be-
came purchasers of The Popit, and from that period down to the
beenning of the prew:nt year, when they unfortunately failed
to htt,:iness, they had enjoyed and *ltemised the right of ex-
altative proprietorship in the pebliestion. His clients, in the year
Irtg4, !stormed to give 111 r. Robertson bOL fur his copyright,
isseion the defendant (Robertson) refused; but, by a letter, which
doe Learned Counsel r ad, he expressed hie desire that Knight anti
Loco; shookl lic:roine the purchaser*, offering the copyright,
Att. Pr a sum of 1501. To these terms they agreed. There was
ea dud of assignment. it was tree, but the bankrupt (Knight)
perfect' the hare, and stated that ade:it or
the

THE BRITISH PRESS.

POLICE.

=Ma as It *as now made: but at the same time he Pinney re-
commended Mrs. Palmer to prefer hills of indictment agalost the
Offending parties at the Sessions, both for the fraud and the assault,
Ihlch Mrs. Palmer expresatd her determination to do.

ROBBERY OF THE BIRMINGHAM COACH.
BOWATREET.—testerday George Archer, alias Bartlett, anti
James Foyle, were brought before Mr. HALLS, and underwent a
very long examination, charged as acceisaries in the robbery of the
Birmingham fast Coach in Anvil last, of a parcel containing n 35/.
in Bank notes, the property of Messrs. Bolton and Watt, engineers.
at Bitmingham.
The circumstances of the robbery have been already detailed in
the journal.' at the time of the examination. and subsequently upon
the trial of Edward Archer, at the last Old Bailey Sessions, for
stealing the parcel. Since he has been on board the hulks,
in pursuance of his sentence, information has been obtained by
Rutliven, the officer which led to the Meiling of warrants against
tke prisoner, G. Archer, who is said to be the father of Edward,
' and of Fode„ who was at the time of the robbery a clerk in the
booking.office at the Spread Eagle in Gracechurch-street. They
were examined ten days ago, and remanded until yester-
day. Archer was a stage coachman. Foyle is a very young man,
and his connexions are extremely respectable. His brother and se-
veral gentlemen, his friends, were in attendance yesterday.
Witnesses were called to prove the safe delivery of the parcel in
qrestino, to the guard of the post-cost. at the booking-office in
Gracechurch-street, and its sitheequent ahoraction from the coach
lon the journey ; and Mr. harkman, the clerk, who delivered the
parcel, and told the guard what it contained, swore that Foyle
stood by at the time, and beard what wits said.
It was next proved by winnows from the Dank of England, that
on the 12th of April, the day after the robbery, the prisoner. George
Archer, went fo the Bank and tendered 391)1. in notes. forming part
of those stolen, and obtained sovereign"' for them. Mr. Kingston,
one of the bank clerks, saw him upon that occasion for a consider-
able time, and swore rosilively to his person. He brought the
notes Ina small bag. He also got cash for seven 01. notes. He
gave, as his name and witen; " Toobe, Henley-upon-Thames."
John Dortiegton, a fishmonger in Britannia-street. City-road,
stated that just before the termination of the cod-fish season, which
acids in Alay, he sold the prisoner Archer Rome cod-fish, which
was tent by his desire to the King of Prussia, a neighbouring
puldle.houic. The landlord refused to take it in at first, but did
eventually. Witness knew the prisoner as Mr. Archer.
Ales. Pugh, a butcher, proved the same fact with respect to some
beef-steaks.
A 1 r. Smith, the Inuellora of the King of Prussia, proved that
Archer and another person dined together at his house in April
last, upon cod-lief' and beefsteaks; and that Archer had a small
dirty bag with hint. Ho could not identify the other man, if he
were to see hint. lie recollected Archer, when he ordered the
(timer, telling him (witness) that he was going to pay or receive
money somewhere. and that he would come back and meet his
friend to dinner, and did so.
George Ruthren, the officer, deposed to his apprehending E.
Archer, at Lewes, and seeing the prisoner George in the same
them with Edward. On the 10th of July instant, the prisoner
George was apprehended by Sedger, a patrol, and brought to wit-
ness at this office. Witness said," flow do you do, Mr-,Archer
Feu did not expect to see me here so soon.' He replied, "My
name is Bartlett, and tit Archer; witness said, " 0 yes, it is.—
you remember being at Lewes when I took your son." He said in
answer to this remark, that witness did not see him at Lewes. for
lie was not there. On the 12th of July, witness apprehended the
prisoner l'oyle, at Hull, in Yorkshire, where he was still in the
employment 01, Mr. Chaplin, the coach proprietor, at his office
there. Witness said he had come on very unpleasant business;
that his name was Rutliven, from Bow-street; and that he came
to take him for being concerned in the robbery of the parcel, for
which young Archer had been convicted. He also told him that he
had got old Archer in custody. He said be was quite prepared to
Witness said to hitn, " I know all about it-1 know where
yon received 200 sovereigns as your share from old Archer—it was
at a public-house where you dined ;" to which he replied, " You
must be a strange man to say 110." Witness said, he was quite
sure lie was right, for that old Archer had shown an inclination to
tell all about it. The prisoner said he knew nothing about it, and
witness took him to the House of Correction. Ile expressed
a wish to have his books sent to him, in order that he might make
them up, and,witnese staid he would bring them. Witness went to
his aparunents. where lie saw his wife, and she liCraled some books
to him. Ile saw Alm. Foyle take a small book from a deck, and
she was going towards the door with it, when he said, " Perhaps
this is one which he wants," and attempted to take it from her.
She held it very tight, until he said that he must have it, anti she
then let it go, and buret into tears. In that book he found a letter,
addressed " Ale. Archer, butcher, Plummer-street, • City-road."
The following were the contents :—" Send word where Neil is
gone, and tell George to write To me by the post, to be left-at the
Cross Keys, Hull. There shall be a good berth for him when he
comes on.—July lath."
The letter had no signature, nor was it sealed. Ile also found a
card on which the same address was written, with the addition of
"By steam-packet—carriage paid." Mrs. Foyle wrote on a piece
of paper as follows, and gave it to witness ;—" Tell all, I entreat
you—it is only adding to your trouble to act falsely. Take care
of your health. Get the money from Air. Searle and Mr. %Valk-
den, and Mr. Chaplin will, I um sure, act with mercy towards
you. Write when you get to town." This paper witness took to
the House of Correction, and read to Foyle; and the following
morning lie, unsolicited, said to him, " It is the first time I ever
did anything wrong ; I am very sorry, but that old rascal Archer
came several times after me, and seduced me to it. He asked me
if we did not carry a great deal of money at times? I told him
yes; and lie asked me which coach carried most. I said we sent
a good deal by the post. Several meetings took place before 1
knew what he meant, and when I did I shuddered at it, and have
not known a happy moment since." He added, that when Archer
first came to him he wanted a situation as coachman. Witness
said, If 1 have been rightly informed, I know where you dined
together when you received the 200 sovereigns." The prisoner ad-
mitted that witness was right, and said, that after he had received
the money lion Archer, the landlord, Swath, was invited in to
dinner. Archer carried the money in a bag. Witness asked him
what he had done with the money, and lie said he had laid it out
in purchasing a coach and tome horses for Mr. Walktlen. Wit-
ness recollected having seen him band a pocket-book to his wife,
and he went back to the house to search, but could not find it. Ile
asked the prisoner if he had any money, and he said he had, and
that it was in his pocket-book, which lie said was in a secret
drawer in his room. Witness found it there, and found In it
1351. in Bank-notes. In the course of the journey to London the
prisoner remarked that lie was without money; upon which wit-
ness said, that probebly, upon .application to the Magistrate, lie
would have the 1311. given up to him. Ile replied. " No, 1 don't
want P. It is Air. Chadin'e money, let him have it,"
This was the whole of the evidence ; and Alr. BUTLER, for the
prosecution, prayed for the committal of both the prisoners for trial,
Foyle as an accessary before, and Archer after the fact.
Air. HUMPIIIRIES% for the prisoners, contended that there was
not legal evidence against Foyle sufficient to warrant his committal,
and spoke in strong wens of condemnation of the mode in which
what was called a confession was obtained.
Mr. Ilara.s was of opinion that the case must go to a Jury, and
the prisoners were fully committed.
The extuninatiou lasted the whole of the afternoon.
BARKERS AND BITERS.
IIeTTON-CAnnere.—Yesterday, Abraham Solomon., a mem-
ber of the Istaelitish fraternity, and Sarah Solomon.. his daughter,
a pretty, though somewhat an Jewish lass, were brought before
%1 . L. Roo Llis, Esq. charged with an assault of a %try aggravated
nature.
Airs. Palmer, a highly-respectable lady, residing at Wands-
worth, who was the complainant, stated that her son, who was at a
boarding-school in Westminster, had a few days since played
truant, and goon off on some childish excursion, in company with
another lad of his own age, not more than ten or eleven ; and in
order to supply themselves with pocket moniy, they agreed to dis-
pose of their clothes, and having applied- for advice on this im-
portant matter, in the very worst quarter. namely, to an itinerant
Hebrew salesman, whorl% they hard call rig " Clo, do, old do,"
they were brought to the defendant's shop in riald.lane, where they
were readily supplied with tattered apparel, in exchange for their
new suits, receiving, by way of barter, a few shillings each, with
a strict injunction not to tell their friends where this accomnriode-
tion hail been obtained. When the boys had spent their money,
they were comPelled, of course, to return home ; and young Palmer
confessed by whose instrumentality he became so metamorphosed.
Complainant being determined rot to submit to so shameful
an imposition on a child, immediately proceeded to the defen.
dant's house, along with the boy, who pointed out Solomone,
as the person to whim he hail sold the dollies, which were bought
only a few days bets-re for 4/. 10s. and in lieu of which he had got
only Gs. and an old suit not worth more than 4s. or Is. at the lu-
men Itles. Palmer, being aware tf the persons with wham site
had to deal, endeavoured to induce •them to return the clothes by
the offer of a bribe, and told Solotnons that she would give a sove-
reign, at the same time returning the old clothes, thus leaving him
a ditticeur of 14s. for his bargain. Soh:mons himself appeared in-
clined to acquiesce with this 'novo al, but after consulting with his
daughtei, who appeared to be a genuine get m of the Sliylock fa-
mily, he determined not to abate one farthing of the price set upon
them, 93 If sold to any indifferent purchaser. Airs. Palmer then
remonstrated on the injustice of their conduct in purchasing from a
child in the first instance, and the twofold injustice of refusing to
return them to the parent of that child, after so fair an*offer of re-
muneration had been made. But the Jew was no less a biter than
a barker. Ile protested that "he would not give up the do'
without he got as rimer) monieh es they would bring." Mrs.• Pa-
lmer, at this time, had the boy's coat in her hand, and expressed
her determination to take it away, and let them seek redress in a
court of justice, if they thought proper. But unfortunately she did
not recollect that she was then In Field-lane, the stronghold of the
leraelitish tribe. The coat was wrested from her grasp, torn into
ribbons before her face, and she was kicked, cuffed, and abused,
until she sunk in a state of exhuustion in the street, and finally
effected her escape by the aseletance of two or three men who hap-
-
11/145111,. 'time

ROBBERY BY A SERVANT.
4111.110 n On olt - IlLET.—Yesterday two men. named Sprunt
and Carty, the former a potter to 31essts.II ilton, wine-merchants,
the other charged IN an accomplice. were brought to the office for
stealing thirty-two wins-bottle and a hamper.
Framis Hill, the callarman to lilessrs. Hilton, stated that he bad
been 111 for the last few days, and was excused by his employers
from attending the warehouse; that hie wife is a brace-maker,
working for a shop in the neighbourhood. On Tuesday evening,
his wife having some domestic concerns to attend to, asked him to
take her work home for her, and in passing his master's hou'c lie
saw a hamper given out by Spruen, the yorter, to a man who
walked away with it. Having a suspicion that all was not correct, I
he watched the. next evening, and at half-past six o'clock saw
('arty go into the warehouse, and in a short time after Spruen came
to the door and looked about him ; after which Carty came out with
1111
a hamper on his shoulder, and went to a dealer in marine stores in I
King.street, where he put down the hamper, and knocked at the
door. \illness went up to him. asked him what he had in the
basket, and gave hint into custody.
Mr. Hilton Raid Spruen wan their porter, anti in consequence of
the illness of Hill, the care of the warehouse had been entrusted to
him. As no one lived in the house, the keys of the outer door
were left with him, to make the place properly fast. Spruen was
not authorised to dispose of any of the stock. Witness hod looked
at the bottle store that morning, and could safely swear the bottles
belonged to him. Of the hamper he could not speak KO positively,
hut had no doubt thit• was his property also. As to the other pri-
mmer (Carty) he knew nothing of him: he was not employed on
the premises, and had no authority to remove any bottles. A hat
had been left in the warehouse, which he suspected to belong to

Carty ; he knew it wan not Spru'en's.
Lovegrove, the beadle, took the prisoners into custody. Carty
told him he had the bottles of Messrs. Ililtnn, and had a receipt
for the purchase • but on searching hint no such document was
found. He picked up it hat in the warehouse, which he produced.
The hat was placed on the head of Carty ; it fitted very well,
and Carty owned it as his.
Spruen made no defence.
( arty said he was a labouring man out of employ. Spruen told
him lie had some empty bottles to sell, anti he thought there would
be no harm if he made threepence per dozen by Ilia labour in aell.
ing them. Spruen told him where to go. Ile thought the bottles
belonced to the porter. lie wan to sell them and give Spruen the

•
money.
The prisoners were both fully committed for trial, and Messrs.
'ton and Hill bound over to prosecute.
AMBLING.
Robert Macdonald and William Read, two servants out of plate,
were brought iron-. St. James's watchliouse, for assaulting James
putlvr, footman to Captain Barth, at present residing at Simmer's

Hotel.
Butler said he met the prisoners in the Cock public-house in
Illarkct-street, St. James's. on Wednesday evening, where be
played with them at bsgatelle and won a shilling. About twenty
minutes after ten he left the house, followed by the prisoners ; and
after some dispute aboutthe fairness of the game, they both as-
saulted him, first one and then the other. Ile called the watch,

and gave them in charge.
Air. ROE desired that Smith, the landlord of the pablic.house,
might be sent for, to lay an information against him for suffering

gambling in his hots e. -
In a short time Smith came. Mr. ROE asked him if he would
have the case heard then, or have an information laid against hint
Smith chose to have the case heard then. He had been convicted
twice within six months for keeping late hours.
The prisoners were brought from the bar to give evidence of the
gambling.
Smith said that he did not know that a bagatelle board made him
liable. Whenever he found any playing for money, he tock away
the balls. Persons would come in ut times and play for liquor.
Ile did not serve them on Vi'ednesday evening, and did not know
they were playing. His wife and servant went into the room.
Mr. Ron told Smith he was answerable for the acts Of his ser-
vants. Lie kept the hour.., anti had no business to suffer gambling.
Here were two men brought to the rifle.° for rioting in the street,
through his permitting gambling, and another hindered of going
on his master's business. lie could rot plead as an excuse that he
did not know they were servants. Capt. Oarth's footman had livery
buttons, therefore he could not be mistaken.
Smith was fined 3L
Mr. ItoE off...red to Huller for the other two to go out with him
and mate up their business. This the fuounan refused, and Mr.
Roe discharged them altogether.
JOHNSON'S INFORMATIONS.
Two informations by this well.known character were yesterday
dismissed, and the Informer saddled with the expenses.
One information was against Mrs. ittifehrit, the owner of a
Turnham.green stage, for carrying eight outside passengers, all of
them above eight years old. Johnson's witness swore that the
youngest passenger was a lad about 14 or 15 years old, seated on
the conch-box.
John Knight, the driver, said he took un the child of Mr. Clark
in St. Paul's Churchyard, to give him a lift to a friend's at Turn-
ham.green, and put hint inside. When he got to the Spotted Dog
in the Strand, tour ladies wanted inside places, and he removed
the child to the coach-bus, placing him between himself sod an
outside passenger, as he was too young to sit by himself. lie had
no other lad that stage.
The father of tot child attended to prove the age of his son, who,
he said, would be eight years old next Michaelmas.
Johnson inquired the dress of the boy. Snuff-coloured clothes,
a straw hat, and black silk neckerchief. He admitted that to be
correct, and the information was consequently dismissed.
The other was an information against fleorge and Ambrose
Wallace, proprietors of a Fulham stage, for carrying outside lug-
gage, contrary to the 511th rho. 111.
Some of these stages are made with a boot before and another
behind, in which case they must not carry outside luggage, or else
fewer passengers. This stage, and many like it, has no boot be-
' hind • and the question was, whether luggage put on the foot-
, board of the dickey conies within the nieaniug of the clause
imposing a penalty for carrying outside luggage. In this case a
passenger had a small bus of glass, which he said he carried in
' his lap.
Johnson's witness swore it was on the place where the feet rest,
therefore could not be said to be in the boot, and was outside

luggage.
Mr. George Wallace maintained that it was an open boot, and
produced a very accurate model of the coach and horses.
Under the peculiar circumstances of the case, Mr. ROE dismissed
the information. There was a material variation as to the size of
the box.
MR. POOLE AND MR. ELLISTON.
Utrtow-ll Al.L.—Yesterday Mr. EUision attended at this office,
having just arrived from the country, in pursuance of the notice
left at his house by Glannon, the officer, to answer an alleged as-
sault committed on the person of Mr. Poole, on the night of Fri-
day last, in Vauxhall gardens. Mr. Poole, it appeared, had been
engaged the whole of the morning at the Sessions House. pre-
ferring his bill of indictment before the Grand Jury against the de-
fendant. When, however, he heard that Mr. Elliston was in at-
tendance at this office, he repaired thither immediately, where it
was decided by the Magistrate (M. Swabey, Esq.) that the corn-
plaint should be heard, notwithstanding the proceedings that had
been instituted elsewhere.
The motive then took their stations in the place allotted for com-
plainants and defendants. Mr. Elision commenced an apology to
the Magistrate, accounting for his unavoidable absence from town
when the warrant was granted against him on the complaint of Mr.
Poole, in the course of which lie stated that several absurd para-
graphs had appeared In the newspapers of what had occurred a
few nights ago at Vauxhall-gardens, all of which were exagge-
rated. and lie could only account for this circumstance by the
knowledge he had of the, very considerable influence Mr. Poole
possessed over the press.
Mr. Poole smiled at the latter part of the observation used by
Mr. Elliston, and said that he was not at all aware of his having
such mighty influence with the press as had been just insinuated.
Whether it was the case or not, he could most positively and con-
atientiously declare, that he had not written any paragraphs on the
*abject at present under investigation himself, and he also dis-
claimed any knowledge of the person by whom they were written,
or the manner in which they obtained insertion.
The AIAOISTRATE observed, that he had nothing whatever to
do with what had appeared in the newspapers on the subject. His
-duty was to hear the circumstances of the alleged assault, and to
bold the defendant to bail if necessary.
Mr. Poole then proceeded to detail all the facts of the assault
committed upon him by the defendant, as they have already ap-
peared.
Mr. SwartrY—You will make oath, Mr. Poole, that Mr. El-
liston attacked you in the first instance?
Mr. Poole--Certainly he did.
Mr. SWABEY—Ind that previous to the assault no ill language
was resorted to on your part to excite Mr. Elliston to commit a
breach of the peace ?
Mr. Poole—None whatever. lam not conscious of having given
him the slightest provocation. So far from that being the case, I
was not aware of his being in the Gardens, or indeed in London,
until he darted upon me on the night in question, and committed
the unfair assault upon me.
The :Magistrate, addressing Mr. Elliston, said, that if he had
any thing to cffer in justification of the complaint just made against
him he should be happy to hear it. Perhaps it would be the better
way to refrain from entering into any defence in the present stage
of the business, mid merely put in bail to answer the charge at the
Sessions.
Mr. Elliston thanked the Magistrate for his !ingestion, and said
that he should wish to reserve his defence until the case came be-
fore a Jury. He now availed himself, :however, of alluding to a
• ' circulated r . _

•
- •
ti
-al
4
tl
to
ft
13
to
ni
fa
tt
of
a
is
11
P
0
a
t.
6
or
it.
L• Qt
1m I
111,
411
re,
Lb- V
ht.
up
rs-
Ale
111
L
o,t
or •
11
to Ja
the ti
On 3
two
de-
er
pro' 41'1
11
100
•
,e'a.
ni to
ii
,I,e
• tit: ti
;
7.
It
11
1
4
. II
a 11
a 11
o, Or
.74 t 7;
l.t.
re. by
cf,ril,
re.
EF
ntr ni
111, At