The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1825-07-16 00:00:00

liirestersed with Mr. Carter, and gave an account of what hatioC•
currcil. They said they had fallen in with three carts, and mare-
' sensed the men who were with them as all tall, stout men. They
said they were as stout as White, the inn-keeper, who is a tall and
very stout man. Witness asked them if they knew any of the
melt, and both Clarke and Cheatham said prat. Wolfe is a small
man; he has always borne an excellent character.
Crane-examined..—Witness knows Wolfe these many years: is
positive Cheatham and Clarke both said the men were stout.
Wm. Mortis sworn—ls gamekeeper to Mr. Drummond, and
was so in January last; wax out on duty on the !Gib of that
month, and heard carts passing; in each cart were two men, and
one walking behind ; the carts were heavily leden ; knows %Voile
these several years ; lie is an honest, industrious person.
Mr. Powell examined—llas known Wolfe seven or eight years;
was watching a horse on the 18th Janastiy, and met three carts
about six o'clock, on Bewley 31anor ; the carts wc-e utak drawn by
three horses, and were loaded but witness did not know with what.
There were men with the calls ; Wolte was not among them ; it
was dark, but must have known Wolfe had he been there; there
were only four men with the carts.
George Woods proved that the defendant worked withlhim on
the I;th and 111th January, and remained with witness till ten
o'clock at night on the 18th, in company with another man named
Ilawkesworth.
Jittnesllawkesworth corroborated the statements of the last wit-
ness, and said, after parting trout %Vocal, s itness and %Volta weut
home together to Wolfe's mother's.
Mrs. F. Wolfe said her sun, the defendant, slept at home on the
18th January.. . . . .

Mr. John Barney gave the defendant 3 good character.
Mr. Sergeant t ',DE replied.
Mr. Jos:ice LITT I.EDALE charged the JJ•v, who immediately
returned a veriliet of A vs Guilty.

OXFORD CIRMIT.

Ozronh, WrnxEsDAT..
These Asaires commenced this day before !Ir. Justice Bun-
stout's, on the Crown Side. and Mr. Baron °ARROW, at Nisi
Prius. There were nine civil causes entered foe trial, and the ca-
lendar contained the names of 20 prisoners.
CIVIL SIDE.
Before Mr. Baron GrAatow.

roartk w JUI3.•
This was an action for money lent by the plaintiff to the de.
fendanr.
The loan of the malty and the rromise to repay it were proved
by a person of considerable provincial celebrity as a man of the
fancy. who was called `. Black Will," from the colour of his com-
plexion, and of his enormous whiskers, this gentleman stating
that he was In the shop of the plaintiff, who was a barber, and to
which he went to have his whiskers trimmed, at the time of that
conversation.
In his cross-examination by Mr. JEnvzs, Black Will rated
that he never knew that the money was lent for the purpose of
backing the Cheltenham Champion against the Chelsea snob, nor
had he ever heard of inch a match being made; he also stated
that he Ilid not stake money on fights, he was not rich enough, but
he admitted that he sometimes sported a pound or two.
JLIIVIi admitted that he could not answer the plaintiffs
cue.

Mr. Baron GAIIIIOW then directed a verdict for the plaintiff.
CROWN SIDE.
Before Mr. Justice Flunaoron.
Jaws Mills won charged with stealing a tea-pot, the property
of John Brotherton.

The prosecutor proved that he missed the tea-pot from a scullery,
and found it again at Mr. Bayes's, of Banbury.
John Bayes proved that on the day after the robbery, the pri.
loner sold him the tcaltot, the witness being a broker. The pri-
soner said he had sonic things to sell, and the witness asked no
questions.
The prisoner said he hal bought the tea-rot of a man he met
on the Banbury-road. Verdict, Guilty.
There was another indictment against the prisoner, for stealing •
tea-kettle.
Mr. Justice Bunaornst observed, that on this other indict-
ment he must be either tried or an acquittal taken, by the prose-
cutor's calling no witnesses ; for, by a recent statute, though a per.
son had been sentenced, and received the benefit of clergy, he
might still be indicted for any previous offence at any time after.
wards ; so that the benefit of clergy was now of very little use to a
man.

The prisoner was then tried and convicted on the second indict.
ment.

TIIVESDAY.

CIVIL SIDE. -- •
Before 31r. Damn GAIROW.
WILKINS Y. WELLS.
,Mr. WRIGHT opened the pleadinga.
Mr. Cultwoop stated that the plaintiff was the butler at Mag.
dalen College, and the defendant a hatter, carrying on business in
the city of Oxford, and that this action was brought to recover a
sum of twenty pounds, which had been advanced by the plaintiff
to the defendant. In the year 1823, the plaintiff, who had tine
sons, had formed a plan of placing ore of them as an apprentice to
the defendant, and they had arranged that the lad should go on
liking for some time, and if it was found that he and his intended
master suited each other, he was to be bound as an apprentice with
• premium of sixty pounds. Atter he had been for some months
on his probation, the defendant requested the plaintiff to lend him
his draft on a house in London for 201., which the plaintiff accord.
ingly did. The proceeds of that draft were the subject of the pre.
sent action ; for soon slur that, instead of the indentures of appren.
t whip being executed, the defendant sent the lad away, and cold
he did not suit him. This the lad's father was much aggrieved at,
and asked tor the 201., but this the defendant insisted on keeping
for the board and lodging of the plaintiff's lon fur thr time he was
aid' him on liking. This claiin, the learned gentleman said, he
was sure the jury would not sanction.
Mrs. Morris stated that she carried on the business of a confee-
tioner in Oxford, and that the defendant told her that he had re.
ceived 20/. on account of the plaintifl's son, but that he had sent
ham away because he did nut suit hint.
Henry Wilkins said, I am the son of the plaintiff; who is the
butler of hlagdalen College; I was to hare been apprenticed to the
defendant, but was not in fact ever bound ; I went on liking; I
staid a-year and a quarter; I served him In his business, and
then he turned me away ; my father sent me back, but the de-,
fendant said I should not come any more.
Cross-examined by Mr. JE6VIS-4 don't know that I was to
have been bound for seven years ; I went on liking for a month,
but I never knew or heard that my father could not conveniently,
raise the money for the premium ; I was then about 13 years of
age I was lodged and boarded for a year and a quarter in the de-1
fentlant's house.

11.1 r. JERVIS, for the defendant, contended that his client had a
fair right to retain the 201.; for that he hoarded and lodged the
plaintiff's son for a year and a quarter, and that was at a time
when his services could have been of little or no value.

Al'. Baron °ARNOW observed, that this was a most momentous
question for the rising generation, ifs defence like the present was
allowed to prevail. Here was a man with several children wishing
to find one of them a proper master to teach him a trade; and to as-
certain whether the habits of the lad and those of his intended maa-
ter suited each ether, he was put upon what is called •• liking,"
and the lad continued for sonic time without a final arrangement
being come to, and then it was that the plaintiff; in the expectation
that he should soon have to pay the defendant 601., advanced him
2W., and after that the defendant is to be allowed to say that the lad
does not suit him, but he will keep the 2W. for his board and lodg
ing. Now upon what calculation did he claim this? His Lordship.
had heard persons in the university say, that it was better to be a
college cook than a :Haste, of Arta ; but he doubted whether this
college butler(great as the emolument of his office might be), liar.
lag a family of children, would a„„t-ree to Ore 201. for a year and a
quarter's board and lodging for • -boy of 13. Indeed the doubt was
whether as he turned him away in the manner that lie did, the lad's
father was not en.i:led to a compensation for his services ; but it
was his Lordship's decided opinion, that the defence had not the
slightest foundation in point of law.
Verdict for the pla:atif—Dantages 201.

REX v. - EVANS, ESQ.
This was an indictoent preferred against the defendant, &Mattis-
tries of the county of Oxford, ter an assault.
On the suggestfon of Mr. Tirirrox; who conducted the pro-
secution, the case ir:s referred to Mr. Sergeant Pcake, who was to
hate authority to order what should be done between the parties.
LATIMER v. - RATSON, ESQ. LATE SHERIFF OF OXFORD.

SHIRE.
Mr. TAUS Tom stated, that this action was nominally brought
against the respectable gentleman whose natne appeared as de.
tendant an the cause, but was really brought to try whether an exe-
cution was duly levied on behalf of Mr. Mute, who had in fact in.
demnified the sheriff for what he had done. In the course of the
year lill9 Mr. Charles Richardson bad recovered a judgment for
WllOl. against hia (hate the Duke of Marlborough. It was no
secret any where, much less in the county of Oxford, that his Orace
was In much pecuniary embarrassment. About three years after
this Mr. Richardson stied out an execution on that judgment, and
the 2> herifithen levied on the goods of the Noble Duke, and seized
the household furniture, the wines, and whet was most important his
tineeollection of exotic plants, which he had brought together at great
act, with very great taste, and which he cultivated not only by the
hands of his servants, but, as they had all heard, by his own
manual labeur. These had been all assigned by the Sheriff to Mr.
Richardson, and Mr. Latimer, the plaintif . llowevcr it was after-
' wards arranged that the former should sell the latter the pictures
and busts at 7U01.. and the exotics at 72u/. Of these Isle. Latimer
toak possession, and also kept a man named Wilson in possession
of the other effects. Now it would appear that three months after '
this, Mr. Neste, who was also a creditor of the Noble Duke, sued
oat another execution, and levied on this property as if it had been'
the Duke's. Now, if the case stood as he was instructed, they
would be satisfied that the property was not the Noble Duke's, but
the pliontiff?r,; however, the detandant had to contend that it all'
bekrgcd still to the Duke.
The judgment and execution at the suit of Mr. Richardson were
then put in.

:ohn Berrirnan, is Sheriff's officer, proved that he levied on the
property in question to satisfy that judgment, and that he placed ■
person in poaseasson.

In his cross•examthstion he stated that he had discovered some
eencealed cellars, and had there found four or five hundred dosen
Y rench wine ; and that the Duke's house-steward had the keys of
the wine-cellars, as well these as abets, and the man to possession
had no keys of anything.
There were severel witnesses called, and the defence was, that
Mr. Lau hner's property In the edicts was merely colourable, and
that they still belonged to the Duke of Marlborough.
The details or the ease did not possess the slightest inmost.