The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1826-08-02 00:00:00

!lONE elliCwr.

Ltwrs, TUESDAY, AVOEST 1.
CIVI I. SIDE.
[Before Mr. Justice Llo La 01(1) and Special Juiiit.l
THE NINO v. SADLER AND ANOTHER.
:
This was a Customs' ProseeCtion against the defendants for
toctithing two of the Smuggling Preventive Service on the t.
Afset a trial of considerable length, the dsfendanta were d
Guilty.
THE KING r, DORIIAM AND SIX OTHERS.
This was an Excise prosecution against the defendants foe a tint
at !lasting., and for assaulting Ann Shawford and others, on the
213th of December last.
Mr. Sergeant ()totem, Mr. MARREAT, Aft. tIORVEY. sod
Mr. llor.La NI) conducted the prosecution, and Mr. Anomrlitts
appeared for one of the defendants only. The others 101 l DO .
CtUnmel.
The case, as opened for t!..e Crown, was represented to be Mut
of the most outragenua and tifngllKENl ever stated In a Cohn of
Justice. It appeared in evidence, 'that on the 28th Of Methane
last, a woman, named Sbawford, had been brought ogee ftem
Battle to Hastings for the purpose of giving evidence in tuptort OS
ale or seven informations lodged with the Justices, for offences
against the Excise Laws. Some of the butnblet C/66411 Of naadeelps
(*Met was designated by the king's Sergeant as the mobs Hinfarebt.
place in Cite county of Saws) felt erwrilderebly gad.' by thus 4..
peerance of Mrs. Shawford, and knowieg the pyrpose for which
she was brought over, determined to molest her is her way no the
Town-hall. A considerable numser of persons being collected.
the magistrat es dery ted a body oftonatables to prcitect Art. Shawfold
from the Swan Inn to the place of their sstung. The moment
she seared, the erowd commenced an attack upon bet and the
constables with mow-balls, and pelted her violently. The
women were most active in the affair. some of whom proceeded
to tear her clothes from her back, and in a few moments she was
almost denuded ; her cap and bonnet were torn from her held.
These acts were accompanied by language of gross inst.:tire ana
abuse, and the officers had great difficulty in preserving her front
bodily injury. The officers themselves shared in she vinseneAg:
at length antecede!. in placing her in the Town Hall. The
Cubans was stated to him beep the most conspictsous in the Mu-
rage. Acts of violence were a.so attributed to two other of Lb, fe..
I male defendants ; and the men, three in number, were sworn to
have been present, aiding and encouraging the wombh to carry on
the attack with vigour. One of the officers had Lis little finger
slightly scratched, and 'nether narrowly escaped from a snow-ball.
which was supposed to have been charged with a piece of stoup
bottle.
31r. ADOLPH es addressed the Jury with vigour and ingennity
on behalf of his own client, and incidentally touched uplas the
caste of the other defendants.
The Learned Jtinox summed up the case roe the Jury, vacs
having retired for half an hour, acquitted all the defrndanta ex-
cept the widow Borham, against whom the/ r.t steed a Ilit4r. t
of Guilty.

I

COHEV r. Lgiata.
This was an action for words impating•robbery 0 the plaintiff.
The defendant pleaded the general issue
Both parties were persons of the Jewish persuasion. living at
Brighton. Before the case was gone into, pacific overtums were
made by the defendant. and it was ultimately arranged tiros ate
apology shoold be made, and that the defendant should pay the
cost. of the proceedings.
Mr. Sergeant Taimyr, on behalf of the defvodint, stated pub.
licly, that his client did not mean to use the words impaled to hin.
in the sense In which they had been understood by the plaintiff
He regretted extremely that the plaintiff should have construed the
words, as meaning an attack upon his integrity. He now retracted
the expressions, and apologised fur the language into which ha had
been Letrayed in ah unguarded moment.
Mr. MARGYAT, far the plaintiff, art-cried the apoldgy, sod
said that as the sole object of the plaintiff was to vindicate his cha-
racter, that object would be obtained by the concession now maths
by the defendant, and therefore the Jury need not be troubled
with the case.
It was then agreed that the Jura, should be dbratarged from
giving a culler.
aortic bARTIT. x 944. Cltrt TAM V. GOIMIMITII.
This was a gat tam action, by a country gentleman and a Ma-
gistrate of thin county, to recover a penalty of 5/. under the statute
5 'tnn. c. 14. for keeping a lurcher clog, the defendant not being
qualified. The defendant pleaded the general issue, ail debet.
Mr. MARTIVAT and Mr. LONG conducted the plaintiff's Cage,
and Me. la tk a wet at the tiefeha wee,.
1t appeared that the plaintiff; who is a strict preserver of game,
lives at Mark Lye, in the parish of aVarbleton ; and that the de-
fendant lives with his mother, a byick-maker in the plaintiff's
neighbourhood. In the autumn of last year, the plaineff hearing
that the defendant kept a lurcher bitch, sent a peremptory' towage
by his gamekeeper, requiring him to dispose of the dog, ataatapead
of an action for penalties. The defendant, willing totm*, With
ite
the mandate, raid, that if the plaintiff wouldprocuta him.
chaser, he Would readily part with the dog at toe Price elf'
neas. This sum was thought too much ; a guinea was offe
the defendant at last agreed to sell the dog for SOs. A perebassP
was procured on these terms, and the defendant parraW with his
dog. It seemed, however, that the bitch had two puppies,
and it was then insisted that the puppies must also be
parted with. To this the defendant hat to objection, and he ac-
tually disposed of one of them to satisfy the commands of the
plaintiff; but in the month of February, the plaintiff, finding
that he had not ported with the other, proceeded with the pre.
sent action for keeping the mother, in the month of October pre-
ceding, although the animal had then been sold. There was
not the slightest evidence to show that the defendant kept the
lurcher for the purpose of destroying game. The only evidence '
tending that way was an admission made by the defendant ta
the plaintiff's gamekeeper, after the action was brought. The
gamekeeper called upon the defendant, and told him that he had.
seen the dog hunting a hare, on a particular day, in a airectiou
towards the plaintiff's house. Upon which the defendant said,
he wished to God the gamekeeper had shot the anin al.
and then he (defendant) would not taws got into trouble
about her. It had been represented that the dog had been in the
habit of killing a great many hares. The defendant said he be-
lieved she had not killed so many as had been supposed, but was
willing to do any thing in compliance with the plaintiff's wishes.
It did not appear that the defendant had used the dog, or had kept
it for the purpose of killing game. He had indeed inquired of the
tax-collector what duty he should have to pay for keeping a sport-
ing dog, and what for a dog not used for sporting. Ile was tut:,
and then desired to be charged with a dog which he did not mean to
use for the destruction of game. Some loose expressions were give!,
in evidence to show that the defendant had boasted of the prowess
of his dog, which lie said coula destroy seven hares in an hoar.
Mr. Gir na EY, in an animated address to the Jury, contended,
that the defendant was not liable to the penalty sought to be reco-
vered, miles% it distinctly appeared that the defendant actually
kept and used the dog for the purpose of killing game. All the
evidence for the plaintiff tended to negative that the defendant had
any such purpose in keeping the dog in question. The game leas
might be an essential part of the jurisprudence of the country—
nay, as some people thought, the frame of society could not be
maintained unless they were strictly enforeed ; but as they were
highly penal. it was the duty of the Jury to take care that the
party accused of violating them was clearly brought within their
operation, before they subjected him to penalties wbich must
doom him to a gaol. It appeared to him that there was some-
thing oppressive in the conduct of the plaintiff towards the de•
fendant. The plaintiff was a man of fortune, and a Magistrate ;
the defendant was a poor man, living on the bounty of his mother.
Nothing could be more compliant or yielding than the conduct of
the defendant, in endeavouring to satisfy the demands of the plain.
tiff. The very moment he uttderatood the plaintiff to be dissati.-
fied with his keeping a dog, the animal was disposed of ; but truly.
because lie dared to resist his further demands, then he was to tin
dragged by a most expensive proceeding into a Court of Justice, al-
though the original cause of offence had ceased. Instead of sum-
moning him before a Justice, a qai tent action must be brought,
hoping.. by double costs, which the Statute gave, to crush the de-
fendant in his mastimption. Such conduct in a country geatlemse,
whose wisest policy must be to live on terms of kindness and ma
teetion wilt his inferiors, savoured strongly of oppression ; and ne
minted that a Special jury of the county of Sussex would not, be
their verdict, sanction a proceeding founded so little in justice anal
humanity.
Mr. Justice flot.Rorn charged the Jury, that in point of law
they could not find the defendant guilty, unlace they were sa.
fished that he had kept or used the dog fur the purpose of killing
gatne.
The Jury deliberated a few minutes, and found their verdict far .
the defendant.
The business on the Crown side ended on Saturday, with the as-
sistance of Mr. Sergeant ',awes, who tried several prisoners fur
Mr. Baron GUAIIAM. The causes were all tried by three o'clock
this afternoon. when the Assize. concluded.
The execution of Daniel l,eany, for the murder of Beniatra k
Russell, has been respired :ill Thursday. Hannah Russell's exe-
cution has been respited .bie die.

SINGULAR OCCURRUNCL.—About twenty-four yea:.
ago, a female in Kilwinning, then only a few years mar-
ried, lost in her garden her wedding-ring, and though :lE.-
gent search was made for it, at the plan. where she wa:.
sensible it had been lost, and the part digged every yea!
since that time, it never e )uld be found. iVithin titcstl
few years, however, one of her daughters, who has see:,
just about as many summers as the ring has been lost, ha%
ing occasion to do something in the garden, was so fortunate
as to find the ring. It is singular that the young W 011134
who found it was only within a short time of seeing t:
light of this world when it was lost.