The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1825-05-26 00:00:00

qi

* .

may
..
one occaaioni:77r ,ten the plaintiff applied to the detelithint for
. money, she VIVI just going to Vauxhall in • co.ch, and site told
the plaintiff alle.had not got any money fot him then, but if h•
would call the nest day she would let him hare some, if she was
fortunate. . .
The witness Was.eress-examined, but nothing particular was
eyed from him.
ay wea in the service of the defendant during the da*
..4=111; plaintiff's house. The defendant received gentles
--..: abe had no other means of pig: bee living. TM
' eelle(131,-

O\
0
• aliiioemio).
• im7ntlf bad ca. there what gentleman.... ,t been in the house,
upon or eaccasion the plaintiff' called and waited in the parlour
•.. srAlst witness weht to pledge some things to raise him some
. mangey...the defendant was at that time up stains with a gentleman.
tiiir,,Tinwtstutn,„ in reply, agreed with Mr. Common-Sergeant
amie° the low which he had laid down, that if a man let a house for
Lithe putpage if a (male pursuing that infamous course of life
0 wbich thuds fendant pursued, he could not recover the rent he had
FheMr; but there was not any evidence in this case to show
plaintiffwas at all aware of the course of life the defendant
pursuing. until after she had been two months in the house.
sad his contract with the defendant could not be void unless it was
„videos In it 4 foundation. He (Mr. Thessiger) did not stand there
to defend the laxity of morals of his client, for it was no part of
the duty. of that Court to control morals. but to decide legally the
ears brought before it ; lie sincerely regretted that he should ha,ve
liteland Mere to advocate the cause of such a man as the plaintiff,
he (blr. Thessiger) felt that he was not a man who was
'to any very favourable considdation et the bards of the
At any rage, however, the defendant was not a person who
titled to a more favourable consideration ; but he would not
ler misfortunes by any harsh observations on her cha-
' , because they all too well knew that deluded and unfortunate
olom, en were frequently necessitated to publish their own infamy to
Aft world, in order to avoid payment of those debts which, in the
Airof their career of infamy, they had contracted. He trusted,
et, that as there was not any evidence of the plaintiff having
let tblshoase, for the purpose for which it was afterwards used, his
subpagrent conduct would not prevent him recovering in the pre-
sent seam.
r • • 'ilea igtaD Carr r JUSTICE told the Jury, that If the plaintiff
)pt this house to the defendant, knowing that it was to assist her in
gostituting her person, he could not recover his present claim.
When, after letting the house, he discovered the course of lite the
defendant was pursuing, it was his duty to get her out of the house,
which, she being only a weekly tenant, he might easily have done.
If. therefore, the Jury thought that the rent he now claimed had
"trued after the plaintiff's knowledge of the defendant's course of
'be defendant' -- - •.itled to a verdict.
the defendant. .drive,

'SON AND DLINCA.W.
; plaintiff, who carries on bu.
A pod., to recover from the de.
.row, damage* for the injury sus.
a libel upon his character which
ardian Society for the Protection
Sharpen," at the instance of the
in a circular sent by the
. the Society, and in which
person of suspicious character,

Mr. Swears, a Member of
ie circulars, and that a Alt%
i) shop, he communicated the
. Founds afterwards got poe.
seen br the plaintiff; but it
• Mr. Swears, he destroyed it.
di the publication, a -.inns
*eked on the defendants, in
respecting some goods which the
which they had refused to de.
plaintiff had since sold them :
'utiff complained of his name
." being a list for the, pro.
witness under.tooll.' tA
_d the defendants of having
defendant Hewitson replied,
motives for it. and if you will
bill for the one we now hold, we
list, otherwise it shall remain."
and the plaintiff's Attorney, were
e contents of the paper, but the
Illations of Mr. Searlett lest be
latter could only speak to a
the plaintiff, containing the
prove that it was the identical
in the Secretary.
said the publication of the paper
t defendants, and that the plain.
•imited• -A.+ lest •
V. YOUNG. -
danteges for a treepeaa, an asiaaa,

Plaintiff, stated, that his client
Carsitor.street, Chancery lane;
of the Court of Conscience for
since* match at Cricket was
between , called the Regency, and the
Enfield Club, __. sum, and the plaintiff was made
-holder. The match was partly played, but the Enfield
the game was whist them, refusal to play it out, and
i eir part of the stakes from the plaintiff, but be (plain-
to pay it, upon which an Lcuon was brought in the
-.sort of Conscience, to recover the sum of 11. 19s. I Id.. heirg the
sitigest the: cache recovered io that Court. The plaintiff kneeing,
_himself to be a citizen of London, and not liable to the jurisdiction
Of the Court, did not appear to the action, anti the consequence was,
• Mat judgment was signed against him. A precept was then put
Apo the hands of the defendant, Young, not to levy the debt and '
Amts on the goods of Wilde, but to take his person into custody,
sod -commit him to Whitecrota-atreet Prison for forty days,
Mama the debts and costs sheuld be sooner paid. When the de-
indent called on the plaintiff to elecute this warrant, the plaintiff
.sold him that he was not liable to such a preens, because his house
}cos within the City of London, but the defendant insisted on taking
hp • the plaintiff was therefore obliged to go to his attorney in the
morM7sly of the defendant. That gentleman again represented to
5
dehndent that the process of the Court could not ever d to Mr.
ide, aid explained the law upon the subject; but the defendant
• persisted in detaining the plaintiff, and said he would risk all
flepeoqueaces. The debt and costs, amounting to 2f. Its. 7d. were
geemetirepaid, in order that the plain tiffshoul I not betaken to prison,
bat notice was at the same time given that the present action
'would he brought. Mr. Seariett observed. that if officers acted
iggga wrong - add ineelicient authority, they did so at their own'
peril. -It was very necessary to keep them to their jurisdiction, and
that could only be dime by a Jury visiting them with damages
%entree theyebould tithatep that jfrrisdiction. at.d deprive persons
of their period& freedeat,stirider colour of a pretest which was
Nepal. . The 'alined's sermon roved that the defendant came to
,Merosestret's beisse, and that Mermen' sway together.
Theetetorney for the islaietiff preyed that the Plaintiff came to
him in custody of the defendant ; that the conversation, as stated
Sy, the Learned Counsel, then took plate ; that the money was paid,
ore trice of Wien given.
Several other witnesses were then sailed, to prove that the house
of the plaintiff is tfituste within the City.
.The collector of the tithes.for the parish of St. Andrew, Holborn,
laid the hotve was always rated as being within the city. The
tithe-rate, and consolidated rats. were hinge tbe City. and he
*tykes collected them from the pplaililt The IlediVese doddered
Seib, die boundary of the pedeiv oetetlite Oily; the sere been
thin went being in tbs perish of St. Demethe, •in the county et
Mr. Hilbert bad collected Milton races for toady yews from
the occupiers of -the house, as being within the thy.

Mr. lea an babel
delbeiest.eniflivirar"=4:o"r4ll4lllllllart daa rip of the
IMortde in wide& lid ereeetatabllldae. woo
II ideates-14f *WA* -Ibßod• aide* the Oa.
Counsel thee addrimal eM ANY. 0.4
tallll.Yt no p* lo bae* di thet
latteed was. that the *loaf man
west tong elliiker
the plaintifrs attorney, who lived in Hattenirassiem aid Om if
'ilaimeet was any wan% lit tam medal meeinli bane. wdadbvie
lbeetly within the ceteney. limbeitabLimw, nit wham* to
preen that the house was within tit emetay,, and that ass smelt
111111111 was thrrefnee legoL At ail meniey ff• be Aosta
emeedislinithis pan be centeded n• seem don neminei deenitas
M be wIN en, die taritejthe
pidadif t neenegrovalaw tdlela 11.41101dWairm _aMlwwwaw ef
the cityblorop
Mr. abeineenrY.tltwritdea, VlM** the
beau in question, IS NSA OM& WIMP 101111 AI !A-
A** one, and It abeam ~la la city
m let, be made • ee tar itsgheir 0111* tlt dietiainey of
letallems, ind dband-elat ibe ancient tide Alai isidet no both,
had beat •raginared tbeYwt be. this *Anew MOM* Ala It wee
dim* Miewnained anemia% duet dubbin be le (M 4
did net brew whether it wee dwtfrate dhe OA a /AO :LlNT.fete
of ebs one in question) wee hicsepedy timoAbei es babe within
*nmity.
111 r. Was, • law etatiowev we. allied Ma Ilimderick, but
this Maine. en his aoss.esamlasamt, midtbe bates of the plain-
tiff was always considered to be within the City.
Mr. flciltettv replied and said, that as the defendant's own
witnesses had proved the fact that the plaintiffs house was situate
within the City, it would no longer be contended that the proems
on which the arrest was made was legal ; and if not legal, it was
impossible that the defendant could make a good-earliest apse It
even in the county. The damages to which the plaintiff we. One
titled were, at all events, the money paid by him to sloe deArdapt,
and as much more as the Jury should consider the eirettinselenese
to require.
The Loeb Cater JUSTICE esid, that the single nuestien was,
whether the plaintiff wu arrested in his own house ; if he was, he
would be entitled to a verdict; but whether he was or not, he would
be still entitled to a verdict, lfor the fact of the defendant's going
into the house was a trespess, as it was quite clear the house was
not in Middlesex. Ae to the first point, it had been said the the
arrest was not made till the pieties were at the house of the plain.
tiffs attorney, in flatton-garden ; this. however, was not very ap.
patent. for when the defendant was told he had no right to arrest
the plaintiff; lie did not reply that lie had not arrested him, but
contended that he had a right to do so. it was however quite clear
that the bowie was within the City. At all events, the Jury must
give the rdaintiff the 21.115. 7d. which he had paid to the defendant,
and any further sum which they should topsider him entitled to.
The Jury consfeljed for a few moments, and returned a verdict
foe the plaintiff—Damages M.
wEST RAY v. PI E TICZ COAX.
This was an action brought by the plaintiff, who is a printer,
to recover from the defendant, who is proprietnr of Pierce Elton
Life in London newspaper, the sum of 71. 66.8 d. for work sag
labour.
Mr. SCAnt.ETT observed, that it seemed the defendant yea a
person who felt disposed to encourage that manly courage among
°urea:nu-men at home which tended so materially to make their
courag!coeseiceons abroad ; of this he had no objection, but at the
same time 31 r. Egan Should not decline paying the coats which this
laudable disposition of his necessarily occasioned him. It seemed
that in June or July last something was going on at the Fire's
Court for the benefit of Richard Ayres, and the defendant pre.
peed a hand-bill, and employed the plaintiff to print it. fhe
plaintiff knew nothing of Ayres ; he received the order of Mr.
Egan, and that gentleman he naturally looked to for his
money. The bill did not relate to a priu.tight, which per-
haps his Lordship' would say would not have been quite a
legal ground fur an action, whatever might be the utility of
the custoni ; but this was for a sparring match. which sea an ex-
ercise to which any gentleman ought, without any impropriety, re-
sort. The next item was a hand-bill, fora jolly party on the water,
for the benefit of Jem Purcell ; and there was another charge for
cards, which were to be sold at se. each. The next item was for
cards for another water excursion, fur the benefit of Dutch Sam's
son, the whole of the demand amounting to 71. 64. lki. Ile should
be able to prove that these several orders were executed by the
plaintiff at the express direction of the defendant. He had been
Wormed that it was not one of the parts of Li in London that
"Irene we. its own reward. 'file sale of these tickets for the benefit
fif the different gentlemen of the ring and the fancy, it was shrewdly
.esspeeted, were converted by Mr. Egan to his own emolument in-
Millied of the pmeeeds being devoted to the defraying the expenses
ateseidant on ;he duties which the defendant voluntarily imposed on
Palkinif for their benel't. It was quite certain that the orders were
ee:to the plaintiff by him, and that therefore he was liable to pay
mount now demanded.
The daughter of the plaintiff proved that she had called at Mr.
Egan's office in the Strand for copy of the bills in question, and
that they were written by the defendant himself, who. at the bottom
of the bills, made a memorandum of the number to be printed,
signing it with his
On crosA.exannna non, she itod she had heard her father speak of
his haeing applied to the defendant to recommend him some busi.
ness,.bot he did not say that he had asked him to recommend him
to the boxing men.
The plaint ire son, a little boy, proved the delivery of the hand-
bill. and cards.

W. Roberts, a printer. pmves; that all the copies of the hand.
bills and the cards were in the handwriting of the defendant. Mr.
Egan sometimes employed him.
Cross-examined by Mr. Bnoromax—lilr. Egan prepares the
hand-bills for them boxing men, wit .-..annot write for themselves.
They sometimes catne to witness, but be never printed an• bills fur
them without first obtaininga reference to some respectable house-
keeper, as a security fur the payment.
Mr. BROVODASI then addressed the Jury on behalf of the de-
fendant. His Learned Friend Mr. Searlett had said that if this
action had been for anything which had reference to a prim fight,
he should not have gone into it. lie believed his Learned Friend
might have gone further, font had been decided by the Court of
Common Pleas, that where any action was for the rent of a Five's
Court, for instance, that had any thing to do with encouraging this
species of amusemeet, the plaintiff would not he allowed to re-
cover. But the defence in the present case would not be founded
ueen this ground. He should show that no credit was given to the
di fendant. He did not deny any of the charges, nor that Mr. Egan
wrote the bills and gave directions for their being printed, but this
wax done merely as acts of friendship on his part towards the per-
sons for whsee benefit those bills and cards were printed, and this
the plaintiff well knew. The prevent action WAS a mere after..
thernght. The plaintiff never thought of bringing this action until
he discovered that he could not get hit money from the fighting
men ; from them he mould get only a note of hand, which he de-
clined to take. Indeed he (Ilt. Brougham) should not like
to take any thing. under their hands—neither their promis-
sots, note. nor their knocks, for the one would be very light,
and the other very heavy. He had a letter of the plaintiff's
addressed to the defendant, in which he asks Egan whether
he bad written to Purcell for the money, whether he had
heard of Mr. Ayres, and whether Dutch Sam had paid up. Here
was proof positive that the plaintiff had hitherto looked to these
men for the money and not to the defendant. Besides Mere was a
bill in the plaintiff's own hand-writing, delivered subsequently to
the defendant, for other work, and for which he had been paid ; it
was unreaermahle therefore to snppose that if the plaintiff' had at
that time considered Mr. Egan liable to the present demand he
would have settled an account of a later date, without at all allud-
ing to the former Lill, which made the ground of this action, lie
should call 'Ms witnesses, and prove that the plaintiff' had applied
to the defendant to be introdueted by him to the persons for whom
these bills were really printed, and having proved that be should
feel be hail entitled the defendant to a verdict.
Alexander Richardson called—Witness has been clak to die
defendant for three years. He remembers the . plaintiff calling on
'defendant, and saying he should be obliged if defendant would re-
commend hitu "to any of those persons." Witne:s believes he
meant the fighting men. Mr. Egan %Sid whatever he could do for
him he would. • Plaintiff called once when Mr. Egan was out, and
saw Mrs. Egan; lie wished to knew where Ayres lived, that he
might be able to apply to him for the money; at another time be
called and wished Mr. Egan to write to Purcell, for he (the plain-
Off) could not get the money, and be wanted to.know where Dutch
Sam lived. Mr. Egan said he would give him their addresses it he
should be able to flout them out.
Cross-examinesi—Witness does not recollect Mr. Egan telling
:•the wleinsiff to write to Purcell in his name, and that he might
add 19s. mere to the bill, se Purcell owed hint (Rgan) that sum.
Nor did he know wits: her Mr. Egan sold any of the cards, or gut
any profit by their sale.
hir.SCARLETT said In reply, that as the plaintiff had never seen
any of those persons whose names 'had been mentioned and who
were it appeared of most slippery characters, 'it was very improbable
that he-should look to any one but to Mr. Effan for payment, be
being the person who gave his written authority to have the bills
and cards printed.
The LORD CHIEF JCSTICE said the only question for the Jury
to consider was, whether the plalmilfdid the work In question upon
the credit of the defendant, or upon the credit of Purcell, Ayres,
and the eon of Dutch San). If be did it upon the credit of the
latter persons, then finding he could not recover from them, it was
I not competent for him to turn round and demand payment from the
detendant. II they should think the plaintiff acted upon the orders
of the defendant, then they would give him their verdict, but if not,
they would then find a verdict for the defendant.
The Jury consulted for a few minutes, and futind a verdict for the
plaintiff—Damages 71765. 6J.
A work of considerable interest and importance is an-
nounced for publication, edited by Lord Braybrooke. We allude
'to the Memoirs of Samuel Pepys, Esq., Secretary to the Admi-
ralty during the reigns of Charles 11. and James 11., and the inti-
mate &kmd of the celebrated John Evelyn. They concise of his
'Diary, written in short-hand, which has been preserved in the
Peppily. Library, at Magdalen College, Cambridge, and lately
iffeciphered tinder the superintendence of the Master, the Hon. and
PO. George 'Neville—and a selection from his Private Correspond-
Wpm with the most eminent men of ha time. The Diary, we nn-
commences immediately before the Restoration, when
r. Pepys sailed with Admiral Montague (afterwards Earl of,
flandwichy to bring over the Wing from Breda, and is continued' j
'almost uninterruptedly for ten 'years ; containing much curious and j
;almost
historical matter. Independently of the naval transactions,
which are detailed with great exactness, the pogas we hear,
*bound Mt:llEll9sta ?I:deedless of Charles If. and his Court; and
1111r.tPeppe iivlntbits of obsereatitm led him generally to record
itballsollt characteristics of the times in which he lived.

_~

-if- A.L'hi.L'w

.., . ~. lAilr INTPLLIGENCE.
.40144441.11111,11Marr1, VlltbitzsoaT, hint IS.
- vjurlii• um,
_... .:
eviargrifirs Ow rerlit &Art the Lot Cult's Jussict
Ha Commas .!aria.
e( vies um wrack oat of list this rooming, to
arthisrtatorys Twit Wog phapent, and the Conn was
_ . ' - ra rwsweta w. sanukcsnonwod.
• y .I.Tettrausti eteitdibil tp be as an* For the nonag a
• .'• • . a iv. odd, bile WlllMMatitilkile dipfplaintif Rom Miss
he the lea end occapadan of
. -.. • )"1.."' • . • . Lasalledweel.game
se;
thio . .; la -4
was, am the haw alloold
•. • • • • di ; • • a meek lbw die wee or the beams In
which sae a famishOd ear. The Learned Ceineel
• " ; e occupation and the valise of the home by two wit-
aoCnitod illniessarr, for the defendant, ROPMeltlaiiinti
isn' est, in seder to show that the defendant was a lady of
=tit JusTiet —Rot, Mr. Common Sragem,
40 plat die may, I apprehend she mast pay tor thelshasi
eh 'she Reel.
rliasit thir plaintifBita let —Burt
apprehend, my of ift'ufel
the• defendant i ha Salada/OUS occupation, he cannot
• .
no Cans Jnerrics—That, I think, will bp rather
s for pm to maks out ; but if you do, it will certainly she:
.4. CYR.
cOMMON S then addressed the Joey. It was a
pa maxim In law, that if a man furnished a female with weir-
apparel for the purpose of assisting her fn prostitution, he
sot recover the value of the goods he so furnished ; and upon
' Seine principle, if a man let a house toe female for the pun.
„pm of bet prostituting her person in that house, he could not re-
cover soy rant that such a female fright agree to pay for such
f • lie would prove that the plaintiff' knew the course of life
=the defendant was punning in this home, and that upon
' lei* spoken to upon the subject, be replied he did not case a
d-4 how his tenant got berinoney, so as he got his rent; the
pi iiv also lived within a few doors of the house in question,
and meat be swam of the defendant's course of life, and
if his breaell this home to the plaintiff, the defendant would be
...a:4*d toe Sevilla.
4 *son named Btsket, who resided in esinehall-street, proved
. t%gt he had frequentlyeeen different gentlemen calling on the de-
. lat the house in question, that she was a very fine woman,
awes a regular frequenter of the Theatres, Vanithall, &c.; he
V . plowed having a conversation with the plaintiff upon the sub.
O lot_ of the rent of this house, when plaintiff observed that de.
Want got her money easy, and could therefore afford to ply well ;
upon one occasion, when the plaintiff applied to the defendant for

. aecrued aftn the plaintiff's knowledge of
firs the defendant would be entitled to a
The Jury immediately found for the d
LIBEL
• GOLDSCIIEIDEII V. HEWITSO2
.'!'his was in action brought by the plai
nests at No. 7, Little St. Thomas A posl
'fendanta,who reside in Paternoster-row, d
*aired by hint in consequence of a libel u
;tad been published by the " Guardian &
ar. Trade against Swindlers and Sharpen,
..deresidants. The libel wn contained is
tet :••etaty to the different Members of tit,
I aintiff was represented to be a perm
• t to be trusted.
6: ` It appeared by the evidence, that a Mr
Git Sociem, had received one of these ci
. rtilsods having seen it in his (Swears') sit
,fikenistance to the plaintiff Mr. Foe
...apenon of the letter, and it was seen
limiting been subsequently returned to Mr.
tmorder to connect the defendants with tl
.-..
. ,
called who stated that he had wake
. .
pany with the plaintiff, respecting
toth them,
but
t which
he plain
'... ' esteillisudofr laputbesethrlaPerwseoedcao:fions the plaintiff
t
beofenswinigrindletetriainanadcsrshlaimnellint—m" bit
...ngthi.„)
cause And otfheit.plwaintwiffhicchhaltlheengdedef:
.I'. If we have done so we have onr motiv
. give us 1001. in cash, and another bill for
prill take your name out of the list, 01
Tba Senetary of the Society, and the i
*llse called in order to prove the content
4ormer declined to answer the questions
ithould criminate himself, and the late
liasii.g been shewn to hint by the
it question, but he could not prove t
received by Mr. Swears from the i.
Lower CHILI' JVSTICZ said dm
4t
*not been brought home to the defend,
mast therefore be called.
; ,Xbe plaintiff was accordirmly ron mites'
WILDS V. YOU NI
.1..
yao is was an-amion to recover damsges
false imprisonment.
7 V. SC AZLZT T. On If 0; the Plain
,11
lamp publican, living at
__6, Corsa
,sgui defendant wasan officer of th
.e,iiii County of Middlesex. Some time sin
..Cdon between two parties, one ad
the En held Club, foe • small sum, I
the stake-holder. The match was part!
Aide, {Meting the game was against them, I
landed their part of the stoles from th
oefuscd to pay it, upon which an 1
rt of t_ontcience, to recover the sum
—_....t._. ~.... 1,... ..... ....,i ;., that co. w