The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1822-05-04 00:00:00

thrEiLtasNei.

COULI OF KING'S BENCH. Wurstiouta,
FRIDAY, Mat 3.
Till MIL; b. lITCWA RT.
This won au action to recover penalties nailer
the ststiste from the Defendant, for corrupting the
Electors of the Ht rough of Cainelford. in order In
induce them to return him u their Membe► to, the
House of Commons. The cause wits tried befiire
the Lord Chiaf.lmitice at Westminster, when the
Jury found a verdict for the Defendant.
111 r. Charles Pitt. the Prosecstor, now appeared
on the floor of the Court, and MOTr4I for a rule to
thew cause why there shoold not ben new trial.
The COURT decided against the applicatton. no
grouada being laid on which the Court could be ju-
stified in putting the Defendant to the 'operatic of
auswerog the rule if granted.
liiintwrost a. lITOWC.

This was an action of trespass, tried at the last
Maidstone Anises, when the Jury returned a special
verdict, subject to the opinion-of the Court.
The Plaintiff was Captain of the Lord Drams,
a packet employed by the Postertasier-Geurril iu
conveying the murk between Dover and Calais;
the Defendant war Collector of the Customs at
Dover; and the trespass cainplained of was r seizure
made by him of a telescopes in corisequeJce of the
Plaintiff' having refurod to pay a deanind of 3J.
per ton for harbour duty.
Mr. HOLLAND, for the Plaintiff, contended. that
the vesiiel was iii the ►ervice of Iris Majesty, and
therefore exempt from the duly in question, under
the sth section of the Act of 37th George 111.
Mr. CArrry contended that the duty was pay-
able by the weasel io question, as she was only par-
tially employed by the Post-office.
The COURT. referring to the words of the Act
of Parliament, had no doubt the vessel was ex-
empt from payiog the duty.—Judgment fur the

CONSISTORY COURT, MST 3.
TH3 MAID/Glll N. THE MARCNIONSTAI OF DONEGAL.
The Court having ou a former day over-ruled
the protest of Mr. Chicheste► to this Court's juris-
diction—
Dr. SWAIM' now stated. that Mr. Chichester
appeared and chimed his right to oppose the ad.
mission of an allegation which, on a former occa-
sion, was admitted by Lnrd Stowell, when that
Learned Judge had, in like minter, over-ruled
the protest.
Drs. PHILLINOIIII and ADAMS, as Counsel for
ll,d and Lady Donegal. contended, that, as this
'lion had been distinctly admitted by Lo►d
Stowell. it was not competent for Mr. Chichester
to oppose the rdmission. which he hod not opposed
in the first instance, mid after it had actually hero
admitted, which would be in effect be attempting
to rescind a deliberate uct of the Court, which
Mold only he done by sit appeal to the Court of
Arches. It was contended, that the object of Mr.
Chichester, in the present application, was to gaits
delay, with a view to frustrate the object of the
part int.

Drs. LUSHINGTON and Donors contended, with
Dr. SWARET, that Mr. Chichester had an shooter,
right to oppose the Omission-of this elicitation. of
which they hurl no previous notice ; and at was im-
possible, on the grounds they then stood (its pro-
testing against the jariediction), that Mr. Chi-
ehester should oppose, where he denied being a
party to the suit ; and consequently, until made
party involuntarily, by the Court having overruled
his protest, did lie in at.ywise■ppear but as protesting
against the legality of the proceeding in making him
a party. Ile was not insde it party to the cause
until the Court had over-ruled his protest, when,
by the citation' served upon him, he was bound to
appear, and so far his present appearance was not
voluntary, got computsinory ; and being now made
a party to a suit of nullity of marriage, which, upon
the face of it, was a collusive suit, not fur the dis-
solution, but confirmation of that marriage, the
Learned Counsel contended; that by the Court
having over-ruled his protest. he was entitled to
every privilege that lie would hove enjoyed had he
appeared absolutely in the first instance to oppose
the suit, as a party interested in the result. and the
avowed object of citing him to see proceedings was
for the express purpose of eiybling him to protect
his interests in the question. In consequence of the
admission of this alleg,itinit, witnesses had been ex-
amined upon it de Gene ease. Was it not cumpet.nt
fur Mr. Chichester to oppose ■n allegation which
might turn out to•be supported by perjury ? Was he
to have no opportunity of cross.examiiiing witnesses,
and shaping counter•questions, by way of interroga-
tories? But the Martinis and Marchioness. colluding
fur the purpose of establishing an illegal marriage.
wore thus to give in their pleas. supported by testi-
mony of their own, without the possibility on the part
of Mr. Chichester to detect the fallacy of such pro.
ceedings. If, in the first instance, he was cited ex-
pressly on purpose to oppose, and the Court hits
denied him the right of seorting to such opp►osi-
aitioo, their the suit was dot only collusive in its
object. but collusive in the course of proceeding.
The Court. by denying Mr.-Chichester's right to
oppose this ollevaiton, wot►ld overturn the esnthhilt-
ed rules of practice, and defeat the ends of substau.
tial justice.
Sir C. Roataxon observed. this question came
before the Court under verypeenliar circumstances.
both as to the questions it involved and the manner
in which it was brought forward. This Court, how-
ever it differed its sentiment from that of Lord
Stowell, the Judge would not attempt to rescind an
allegation which he had admitted, except in a case
of extreme necessity. If any irregularity had arisen,
it was competent to curry the matter before the
Court of Appeal. This Court would lake care.
however, that Mr. Chichester; who had important
• interests to protect, was not prejudiced by the
course of proceeding ; he standing before the
Court in the character of an intervenor. If any
•collusion. or suspicion of collusion appeared, he
would have ■ right to he beard, and that right
wanld he fully carried into effect. '
' • The COURT, however, overruled tW objections
taken to the adatissiou to Lady Donegal's alle-
gation.
•
We understand that the trial of Mr. Stufiltrill
• fixed fur the latter end or May. The in'th if, ope 6
Mooed as the day.---( Adißbargh.PaPer.)

.I:NSOLV' ENT DER TORS' COURT.

A merchant, named Joitorm Keinrick Buschman.
asks remanded yesterday by the Liaol►ent Debtors'
Court, fur the space of two year►, from the date of
filing his petition, for vsithhohf ug his hooka of ac-
acrouot " with intent to conceal the mate of his
affairs."

A yowl, man. named Isnac Court, once of the
firm of Tordo, Corot. and Co. in the Cll. *se ll'er•
mended lor !light months, from the filing of his
'Petition. for fraudulrotiv contracting debt..
John Failluois, a teacher of mathrmatics, was re-
mantled for five months, under the 16th section. for
imirroper conduct in contracting a debt with
butcher.

DISTRESS IRELAND.
Yesterday, pummel to • public notification that a Meeting
would be Lehi at No. 29, lionbard-strcet, to take into cos-
•i.kr•t.on she proprtet y of forming a deputation to wait spew
his Majesty's Ministers, in call •general meeting, Sm. lord
sieve the distressed pessisatry of Ireland, sad to adopt instant
meaaores Of relief by sending over pro•irions of eatery descrip-
tion, soon after twelve o'clock several Gentlemea assembled
in the chniiibera of Mr. Fortune, ie Lombard-street, sad after
waiting setae time they were informed that • commnoicatlon
had been received from Mr. T. Wilson, M.P., Mr. Baia-
bridge, fat. venthing this meeting would stupe•d their opera.
lions fur • few days. and recommending the rallies of ia
an..re 'emend meeting at the City of Loudon T aaaa ot
they, with I other dlrtingnithed personages, would
most certainly feel it their duty to •nrnd and deliver their
opinions o■ the &object. The Gentlemen aseeimbled all cos.
curved in the propriety of this measure, soul several of the
company withdrew. Those that remained lostandy ex-
p d themselves in term, of warm approbation of t:.e con-
duct of the Grntleme• who first brought forward this In-
rollout subject.

VMS ARMY.
S
Thal superb regiment, the 12th Royal Lancers, marched
from Portobello Barracks, Dublin, me Monday morning, on
their route to Sallittrobe; they are to be replaced by the
Ist Dragoon Guards.—(Preemanes Joanna.)
The Etth, or Kisg's Owe Rued eeeeee quartered i• this
lowa fur the last two years, ceder the command of Colonel
Forquharsors, marched hence em the 15th, 16th, mid 18th
lastest, for Belfast, Carrieltfergur, arid Culeralo, au their
way, it is 'apposed, to visit their native country (Scotland),
Rom whence they have Item, absent 42 years. it is only
Jodie, to say, that the cundurt of the 25th, since their ar-
rival herr, was highly praiseworthy and exemplary. The
Royal iVelbli Postlcers replaced the IStb..-(iieftemettre
Geratite.)
..1

. ,~~"

liflX/iVG.
A fella& battle, for a subscription parse of 101., wait
!aught on Wash'idol' COllllllOO yesterday. between Dada
Earley, • good fighter, and Edmonds the Hertfordshire
man, whom fame bad trumpeted faith as sa eatand ail!
man slayer. Earley fought against superior length asid
*right, anal was seciatattssi by Harry Hull sod Paddire•
James. Edmonds was picked up by (Myer and Cr.
In the lint round Edmonds made the play, boo' la was
met with the left baud in advancing, and was 110iims la
a Mow. ' •Iti
2. good equal firliting, rather in f of Earley, bal he
had the wont of • chg.., is which he was weaved me sea-
cesstally with the mist hand mad thrown.
The 3J and 4th rounds were maufelly maintained; lot is
the latter Edmunds was Soured by a eonvismiog hinge es.
der the listaer, following the left bond, which dew. Ara 6604
plralifully.
The wise (nimbi gamely for twenty usioutes, wish equal
advastages, when Edmonds gave it • tuna In his favour,
anal anoint his adversary by • heavy body.blow. This was
its the 2001 round.
21 sad 111. Bath roved themselves to a stand.silll. When
they hail d the want of wind, Earley led and woe
the battle after the 42J rousal. Bulb had a skin hall of
pusisbaseat.

..,',

• ,