The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1822-10-26 00:00:00

MURRAY C. TIM EARL OF STAIR.

This was an action on a bond for 2,0001.. Men
by the Noble Defendant before he came to the title,
being then called John William Henry Dalrymple;
the condition of the bond was the payment of
2,000/. within six months after the death of the lute
Earl of Stair. The Defendant had pleated several
pleas-6►st, that it was not his deed ; second, that
it was delivered not as his deed, but given to Mr.
Saunders to be delivered to Mr. Murray after the
death of the late Earl of Stair ; and also that the
bond was given on account of a gaming transaction.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL stated the case for the
Plaintiff, who was, he said, a Lieutenant in his
Majesty's service. His late father was a clothier,
and he had blare transactions with ■ Colonel
Morgan, to whom he advanced 2,000/., and for
that sum the Colonel gave him two notes for 1,0001.
each, of Mr. Dalrymple's. Afterwards Mr. Dal-
rymple, swishing to extinguish those notes, gave for
them the bond which was the subject of the
present action. The bond was regularly attested
by Mr. Saunders, whom he should call, and then
should be entitled to the verdict of the Jury.
Wm. Saunders examined by Mr. Guanev.—l
am an attorney. I saw Lord Stair, then Mr. Dal-
rymple, seal the bond about the time it bears date.
He then delivered it. I had been surety for Mr*.
Murray, and I required some security to ptotrct
myself. I kept the bond in my hands for that and
for Mr. Dalrymple, till the death of Lord Stair.
I did not keep it till the death of Lord Stair; I
handed it to Murray, the intestate, iu the year
1819. Lord Stair did nut die till June, 1821, and
Mr. Dalrymple then succeeded him. I was to keep
the bond till the death of Lord Stair. Mr. Ddl-
rymple did not wish the circumstance to be known
to his family.
Cross-examined by Mr. SCA ItLEM—The bond
was given for two notes which the intestate had ob-
tained horn Colonel Morgan. 1 told intestate that
I understood the notes were given for money lost at
play at Paris. Murray afterwards threatened au
action against Mr. Dalrymple. I was Mr. Dal-
rymple's attorney. It was the express understand-
ing that the bond was to be kept till Lord Stair's
death, and then not to be given to Mr. Murray till
the two notes were given up. I gave up the bond
to the present Plaintiff in 1819, at his urgent soli-
citation, but the notes I did not get back ; they
have never been delivered up.
The bond dated 3d November, 1813, was then
put in sod read.
Mr. SCARLET! submitted, on the authority of
the ease of Johnson v. Baker, that the bond was
invalid. and that the l'lsisitiff should be nonsulted.
The CUIEF JUSTICE saw a dist.nctiou between

that case and the present. His Lordship would not
sionsuit the Plditititi. but Mi. Searlett might have
the point reserved.
Mr. SCAIILETT then culled

Sir Alexander Dodd, who stated, that •in 1907
he. was at Paris at it restaurateur's with the Mar-
quis De Livres, who was the entertaining partner of
a gaming establishment ; play with dice t. ok pia r,
and witness and Lord Stai► (who was thrii Mr.
Dalrymple, and passing tinder the name of Man.
(letilk) lost upwards of 8,000!.; he believed Mr.
Dalrymple paid 600/. of it, and notes were given
to the Marquis for ■ very large sum. Mr. Dal-
rymple afterwards came to witness, and told him
his real name and who he was; upon which simile'',
feeling that he was placed in a situation of great
peril, from having signed a fictitious name in the
notes given to the Marquis De Lyres, and
also apprehensive of some embarrassment to him-
self from having been in his company, agreed it
give to the Marquis (to whom lie was known, as
one who had always answered his engagements acid
who had been in l'arie some time) his note, and rake
his (Mr. Dalrymple's) notes instead. This lie accord-
ingly did, and the notes were given up by the Mar-
quis and burned. N'ituess afterwards came to
England, and applied in vain to Mr. Dalrymple,
bat could never see him ; at lut, through Colonel
Morgan, who was the friend of Mr. Dalrymple,
the witness had an interview with him, Ned agreed
to wait till the lute Lord Stair's demise for pay-
ment of his claim, upon Colonel Morgan pledging
himself that witness should be paid immediately
after that event should take place. Witness dined
with Mr. Dalrymple and Colonel Morgan once
afterwards, and saw two bills, but lie could not tell
what they were ; he considered that they had not
the slightest connexion wish his claim on Mr. Dal-
rymple, for which he already had bills, but he
thought they were drawn for the purpose of raising
money.

The Jury, under his Lordship's direction, fuund
• verdict for the Plaintiff, with leave for the De-
fendant to move for • uonsuit on the point of law
urged by Mr. Scutlett.

MIDDLESEX SESSIONS, CLERCINWELL,

FRID•Y, OCTOBER 26.

BASTARDY -KISH ERIFF PARKINS.

THE PAEISH OF II AILY•LE-501111 S. JOSEPH W.

PARKINS, gsq.

This case was called on about one o'clock. There
was a full bench of Magistrates. Mr. ADOLPHUS
was Counsel for the parish, and Mr. ALLOY for the
Ex-Sheriff. It was an appeal of the Ex-Sheriff
against an ordrr of the Magistrates of Mary-le.
bone Police Office, of affiliation made by them
against the Defendant, as being the father of a
child by a young woman of the name of Hannah
White.

Mr. ADOLPHUS stated the case on the part of
the parish.
Hannah White deposed that she met the De.
fondant in the mantis of June 1821, in Hyde Park.
she was then in the service of Capt. Fosaip, of the
Riding-house in the Pink ; he addressed her. and
they had afterwards several interviews, and in the
mouth of August following he accomphslied her
ruin in Kensingtonsgardens; the result of which
was that she became pregnant by him.
On her cross-examination by Mr. ALLEY she
said. that the Defendant had connexion with her
more than three, four, or six times, but she would
not undertake to swear that it was more than four
times, and always in Kensington Gardens ; their
interviews took place on the right of the gate
nearest to Cumberland-gate, about 100 yards from
the gate, in • place not much frequeuted. She
met him first in the month of June ; be dia.
mounted from his horse. and gave it to his groom,
after which he addressed her with overtures of affec-
tion. She went to reside at St. Martin's-court after
she found she was in a state of pregnancy, and
passed herself off as a married woman, for the
purpose of obtaining a lodging; she went
by the name of Jervis, and called her brother her
husband, Mr. Jervis, for the purpose of hiding her
shame. The Defendant several times promised to
make her • present, but he never did, except 44.
towards buying a pair of boots; that was about the
third time she was with him in the gardens. He
refused to give her his name, as lie said he was •
public character, but that he lived near Temple-
bar. She found him out four months after she knew
that she was in a state of pregnancy. She never
asked him for pecuniary assistance. Her brcther
came to see fur in St. Martin's-court, but he did
not know that she was pregnant. She had lived at
Captain Fosaip's from May to October; ohs left it
on account of some difference which took place be-
tween her and her mistress, and she was glad of the
opportaoity to leave, as she was afraid that the state
she was in might be discovered by her mistress ; she
did not leave her service on account of her mistress
having lost a diamond brooch. She did not apply
to the Defendant for assistance, as she thought it
would be of no use ; her brother appeared before•
the Magistrates at Mary-le-bone Police-office; she
did not hear Mrs. Simmons say that he was not
the person which she called Mr. Jervis, and that
the person she int►oduced to her as Jervis wt.
much older man ; she might have said it, but if sh,!
did she said what was not true; site could atilerimly
swear that the Defendant was the father of the
child.

Mr. ADOLPHUS said that was the case on the
part of the Plaintiffs.
Mr. ALLEY, on the behalf of the Defendant,
made a long and üble speech; and then called the
following witnesses:—
Mary Simmons deposed, that she was the wife of
John Simmons. steel-worker, residing in St. Mar.
tin's-court, No. 11. Hannah White took a room
from her in the month of January. as a married
woman ; she said her name was Mrs. Jervis ; she
remained her tenant three weeks. daring which
time she had a number of male visitors; a person
that she represented to be Jervis and her husband.
generally called every day, and sometimes remained
until twelve o'clock at night; Hannah White told
her that he was her husband ; lie was a dark man,
and about 90 years of age ; the peroso who ware
produced et the Police-office as ber blather was,net
more than 18. and was not the person that site
called Jervis. her husb.ind ; Hannah White miglht
have heard her make this assertion, but she could
not swear that she did, as she did not make a reply ;