The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1824-03-15 00:00:00

TIANRIMPTCIES ENLARGED.

W. Cam '' ''''''' beech tiryariter, titan March 23 to
April 13, at eleven, at the Court House. Leeds.
J. Shaw, Wakefield, Vorkvhite, land-servelor. from March 21
to April 7, at eleven, at the Sessions Mouse, akcfleld.

BANKRUPTCY !4UPERSEDED,

J. 11. Amal4, Llanblethian, noir Cow !midge, Wamcrganshirr.
cattle•jobbei.
BA NKRUPTS.

W. WAdon, Leicester, draper, to surrender March 31. April
1. and 34, at two, at the Star Inn, Manchester. Solicitors, 31e. C.
Wood, Brascnoiscogreet, 31anchesta ; and Mr. E. Chester, Sta-
ple-Inn.
W. Clarke. Manchester, victualler. April 9.10. and 24, at ele-
ven. at the Star Inn, Manchester. Solicitors, Mr. C. Kaye, Dyers.
buildings, Holborn ; and Mr. Vernon, Manchester.
J. Preens4un. St. Nicholas, Worcester, silk-mercer. March al,
39. and April 21. at ten, in the Angel Inn, sedbury, Wormier.
Solicitors. 31r. J. Platt, New lloswell.court, Lincoln's-Inn ; at. 411
31essra. Welles and Dickens, NVorcester.

J.Cldershaw. Hampton, Middlesex, linen-draper, March 211,
27. and April 24, at ten, at the Bankrupts' Court. Solicitor, Mr.
Gilbank, Coletnamotreet.
S. Milder, Brick-lane, It'llitechapcl, tea-dealer, March 23, 57,
and April 24, at twelve, at the Bankrupts' Court. Sulicitois„
Mean. Ilodorn and Burton, Salioburynarect, Strand.
W. kilts, Liverpool, draper. April 2, 10, and 24, at eleven, at
the ott re of 31r. Mawd,ley, Liverpool. tkilicitor, Mr.
Liverpool sad lir. Wheeler, Lincoln's-Inn-firklo.
J. J. Morgan, York-street, Commercial-road-east, carpenter,
March 20, 23, and April 21, at twelve, at the Bankrupts' Gnat.
Solicitors, Mesas. Hodgson and Burton, Salisbury-strect, Strand.
J. Weetman, Liverpool, merchant, April 5,6, and 21, at one, as
the tileo-ge Inn, Liverpool. Solicitors, Mr. W. Norris, Joha-
street, Bedford-row ; and Mr. It. Norris, Liverpool.
E. M. Crosafield, Liverpool, timber-merchant. April 9, 10, and
21, at one, at the George Ina, Liverpool. tiolicitirs, Mowrs
Su-
thant and Leicester, Liverpool.
'W. Holton, sea. Bolton, nionev-acrii emir, April 5, at live, 6.
and 24, at twelve, at the White florae Inn, Preston. Solicitors,
Messrs. Buck and Startifont, Preston; and Mr. W. Norris, debt.
street, Redford-row.
W. Hood, Harclley, Norfolk, and T. Hood, Loddon, merchants,
April 8, at four, 2, and 24, at eleven, at the King's Wed Inn,
Rungay, Suflblk. Solicitors Mr. J. Miller, Ruses-rtreet, Chow-
side ; and Mr. A. Elmwood, Solicitor,
W. Riley, Birchwood, Derby, coal-merchant, March V.. 24, and
April 24, at eleven, at the Saracen's Head, Lincoln. Solicitors,
Mr. Styan, Lincoln's-Inn-tields; and Mr. Moore, Lincoln.
E. Elverston, Ilford, Essex, linen-draper, March 16, April 3,
and 24, at ten, at the Bankrupts' Court. Solicitor, Mr. Hurst-
Milk-street, Cheapside.
T. Aspinall, II ipperholme corn Brighouse, Halifax, York, stone-
merchant, April 7, at seven, 8, at eleven, and 24, at nine, at the
Magistrates' Room, Weld's-end, Halifax. Solicitors, 31r. R.
Dattye, Chancery-lane; and Mr. 31 stocks, Halibut.

March 23. T. Barker and F. Hudson, !fop Ground Brewery,
Stratford, Essex, brewers, at ten, at the Ilankrants' Conn.
April 3. IV. Ogilvy, jun. 0. Mylne, and J. Chalmers, Jeffrey's.
square, merchants, pe ten, at the Bankrupts' l'ourt.
April 3. P. Ihlglims and E. Winslow, St. Ilary-at-Hill, ship
and insurance brokers, at eleven, at the Bankrupts' Coutt.
April 3. W. Hickman and D. Timothy, Leicester-square, ho-
sien, at twelve, at the Bankrupts' Court.
April 3. J. Sinclair, it .same, warehousemen, at twelve, .11 the
Bankrupts' !,hurt.
April 3. J. Ramsay and R. Forster, Old Broad-street, mer-
chants, at ten, at the Bankrupts' Court.
April IU. C. Humphries, Bishopsgate-street, linen.draptr, at
ten, at the Bankrupts'
April 9. J. Enock, Birmingham, bruslidnaker, at tiertm, at the
Wool Pack Inn, Birmingham.
April 9. 11. Isbell, C. Chapple, and R. D. Isbell, 31ilbay, De.
TOP, burritos. at twdoo. a 111 beatley's lintel, Derooport.

CE II TI FICATES—A ra t. 3.
It. Packer, Tokenbause.yard, Lothbury, becket—J.
Bankude. Southwark, coal merchant.—E. Gratwiek, Milton next
Sittingbo►n, Kent, innkeeper.—E. Blunt, Cornhill. optician—lL
H. (ribbon*, Fitch-lane. l.omhill, merchant.—S. Wood, Pouwick,
Hereford, dealer.-11'. Johnson, Liverpool, merchant.

PARTNERSHIPS I)ISS9LYED.
J. Duckland, sen. and J. Dockland, Jun. St. John'e.square.
Clerkenwell, and Cheltenham, tuners.—O. !,tione and K. Jesuit";
Derby, linen-dtapers.—W. Creed and J. ('reed, woollen-drapers.
—W. S. Hill. E. Howell. and M. Hill, Bath, milliners.—E. Hil-
ton, W. H. Hilton, and T. M. Young, Newcastle-upon-Tynr,
merchants, so far as rewards T. M. Young.—A. Thwaates and J.
Thsraites, Norwich, whwesale drapers.—E. ETWIS and H. Milne',
Leominster, attorneys.—T. Monett and G. Acworth, Chatham,
attorneys.—S. Howell and J. Smith, l'h-ltenhant, timber-mer-
ehants.—J. Townsend and J. Kirk, Nottingham, haberdrshers.—
J. Johnson, J. O. Johnson, and J. Moore, Liverpool, tuenlants.
—T. 3l`Guilbg and R. 3PGuffog, Preston, drapers.

T e 'average price of Brown or 3fuscov-..d0 Sugar, computed
from the Returns made in the week ending the 10. h day of
BUJ, is Ms. 50. per cwt. exclusive of the Ihities of Cu, tom.
`-aid or payable thereon on the importation thereof into Great
ritain.

Average price of Com from die Returns received in the
ending March ti, 1824.
11'iieut. ' Barley. I Os:.. Eye. Bean, p,a,.
I d. 1 S. .1.
65 7 36 9 23 5 41 5140 11 :P., 11

MEETINGS OF CREDITORS.
AT Till ■AR[RUPTS. COURT, SAIIINGHALL-STAZET,

Te-MOIIROW.

i

J
I
A i I

!M.

N

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
OOURT OF CHANCEI—MNiviDAT, MAses 11

EXPEDITING THE BUSINESS.
PARKER v. SEAT.
b his ease the 'parties had been desired to communicateinch
entettiiincuments and proceedings, as, by presenting a clear and
New or the tarae, might enable the Coen to pronounce
ke ullimese decision.
The LORD Chrmettol, on craning into Coen, adverted to
tkineass, observing, that he had asked that such paper• might he
laid before Inns as were necev.tul to facilitate his judgment. The
halleilOrs conceived they had complied with his wishes upon
the subject, by sending him, not only the voluminous pleadings,
bill, Answer, 'mile on, but the arhele of the depositions, including
a mash tarpapers of 'meth bulk and weight, that literally, he could
not MI them from one pert of the room to another. 'What he re-. 1
- mired W. such • statement as was usually put into the form of a
aearrangtd as to bring the whole subject under his eye. Ili
laud/hip 'said, if the Learned Counsel, Mr. Heald. had any cu-
riosity, he should be gild if he would just step into his room, and
look at the papers which had been sent for perusal.
Mr. Iry ei.c.-3ly Lord, my curiosity for seeing unnecessary
papers has long since subsidod.
LORD CHARCELLOR.—And so has mifie too. If these papers
had been sent to me in such a form that any reasonable man could
have as ppened it possible for nit to have got through them, I
wield Kin devoted to their examination whatever time might have
Deers neressary.
Mr. lt re VRATETU said, the material portages 'Mould be se.
levied and arranged, in the way whist; doubtless his Lordship
had contemplated, when be had directed the papers to be sent
to him.
The Loan rnewct etraa.--I wish you would go into my room,
and look at them ; or vest may take than away ; but that you can
fitly do in sense+ or a cart.
Mr. Sour. roa-Ge emus now came into Court, Lid pressed
the necessity of this ease being promptly disposed of.
The I. Den Citawceetoanbaerved, that he should have had no
great trouble in recalling all the-material points, if they had
keen stated properly in the form of a brief. His Lordship invited
the Learned Solicitor-General to walk into his mom, and take a
survey of the papas he was expected to read before he decided.
Mr. SOLIEITOR-OZIERAL said, he was perfectly aware how
pp1111:ng such • mountain of papers must be.
boars CHAWCELLOR.—I remember *hen John tee Was
hiked to draw an indictment, he said he had much rather draw a
lemed.wheeled waggon ; so I may thy I had rather draw a breed.
wheeled waggon, provided it was empty, than attempt to lift these
7which hare been left for me to read between this and
4,":1%, next.
SMITH'S B.iNKRUPTCY.
Mr. Exton? requested this matter mieht be heard, as it related
to the production of evidence at the ensuing York A Isbell. His Lord.
ship,perhapa, would permit it to be mentioned to him on Monday.
-et Westminster, previously to the business of the House of
Lords.
LORD CHANCET.LOR.-1 will not allow the parties to attend
me at the Wiese of Lords. I can no more undertake to any that I
shall have two hones of leisure rime between this and my attend.
arse at the House of Lords on Monday, than at any other period.
To the reasonable requests of Counsel and Solicitors, I am always
anxious to attend ; but unfortunately Counsel and Solicitors sup-
pose I have just such a portion of my time to spare, as may suffice
to dispose of the particular business in which they are immediately
concerned that is not the case.
i'ICE.CHANCELLOR'S COURT, Mutest 13.
HAMMOND v. GOTHER AND OTHERS.
Mr. MATTHEWS stated that this was a bill tiled against the
'defendants, to compel them to a specific performance of a contract
they had entered into, to grant a lease of some land to the plaintiff.
"lizerdlefendants sere the trustees of a Society which had been
for the purpose of erecting a Dissenting Chapel in Water-
loo-road. which was to be denoininsted " Tle New Jerusalem
Temple." The trustees finding that they had not sufficient money
for into effect the intentions of the trust, borrowed a con-
siderub e sum from a gentleman named Jenkins, who was to have
the security of a mortgage on the lease of the land on which the
!Chanel was built. Subsequently, however, they determined that
so save expense the lease should at once be granted to Mr. Jenkins,
but with that resolution the owner of the laud declined compliance.
The lease V:10 accordingly ntade out to the defendants as the true.
tees. After the chapel had been built in May, 111:10, it was found
that there remained a small portion of ground which might be let
out to advantage, and • board was placed on the chapel, Intimating,
'that such portion was to be let on a building lease. The plaintiffap-
plied to the defendant tioyder, as the person named on the board, and
k was agreed between them that he should become tenant of the poi.
tiara of land in question for 75 years, at • rent of 141. per annum.
The plaintiff was then let into possession, and a memorandum of
thagereement was drawn up, but was subsequently destroyed by
the plaintiff, who trusted to the religious character of the defen-
dants for its punctual performance. The plaintiff proceeded to
(mid a four-room house upon the land, pursuant to the words of
the agreement, and drew a wall across the ground, separating the
hod he renttd from the chapel ground. Before the house wan
busily completed,
, it was found necessary to lower the chapel-
ground, and it was then discovered that the workmen had no way
into the road from the back part of the chapel, but through the
chapel itself. The defendants had not provided for this in the
agreement: they bad not reserved a right of way through the
plaintiff's ground, and they were therefore obliged to go through
to chapel on every occasion. As they had not granted the lease to
the plaintiff, they then refused to fulfil their contract, and alleged
Is. reason, that the plaintiff had not built the house in the manner
aipelated. On this point there was contradictory evidence of
opinion; but the plaintiff relied on this circumstance, that the de.
ftdants had seen the work as it proceeded, and bad not made the
tightest objection until after they found the inconvenience arising
limn the want of a reservation of right ever the plaintiff's land.
Mr. TRESLOVE and Mr. Cntwo, for the defendants, contended,
Test, that this being the case of a charity, the plaintiff ought to
hawejoined the Attorney-General in the snit; and secoodly, that
was evident the defendants never could have meant to deprive
themselves of the benefit of • tight of way from the back of the
chapel into Cornwall-road; and they also contended, that on the
plaintiff's own evidence it was clear that this objection had been
made before the work was completed, for one of the witnesses
stated it to hare been raised " at or about the time of finishing
the house." Lastly, they insisted that the house was not such
a Vailding as offered a valuable security for the payment of the
sent reserved; and in support of this they referred to the testimony
• •f one of the defendant's witnesses, from which it appeared that the
Sore was built of old materials, and was only fit for the residence
sat people "of low condition. If a plaintiff came into Court to
compel specific performance of an agreement, he must state that
rt truly on the record. and must prove it as stated, and iyeunelat he must *hew that he bad performed his own part of
it. This the plaintiff had not done ; he had not shewn that he
had built the house in the time limited by die agreement, nor
boat it was such a building as would at the expiration of the term
be of any value to the plaintiff's lessors. They again urged that
vas impossible the defendants could have intended to deprive
themselves of the way from the back cf the chapel to the Cornwall.
Road, the more especially as there was a school on that side of the
chapel to which there were no other meant of getting but through
Ilia Alva itseV.
tie . 14. HANCELLOII.—This is a bill filed by the plaintiff'
sp qirry into etiect the terms of a parole agreement, entered into be-
tween himself end the defendara Goyder. The terms of that parole
agreement were afterwards reduced into writing, and adopted by
tl.l defendant. It is very plain on the evidence what is the nature
,g this case. since the agreement has been partly carried into effect,
by the plaintiff' uilding a house upon the land agreed to be demised
'to him. the casters have found it inconvenient not to possess
right of way over that land, from the chapel into Cornwall-road.
At one time, indeed, they appear, by the evidence lying before
the, to have actually entered into a negotiation on the subject, and
dffered certain terms to the plaintiff; • thing quite inconsistent
eith the declaration made at the bar, that it was impossible they
mild ever have intended to deprive themselves of the right; for by
that negotiation they, in fact, acknowledged that they possessed
an such right under the agreement, nor had ever reserved any.
The *hole of the one hail arisen merely on the inconvenience al.
luded to. It has been said, that the Attorney-Ueneral ought to
have been made a party to this suit, as it relates to a charity. In
the strict and literal arceptetion of that word it may relate to a
charity but there is nothing In this agreement the Coot does not
passess the full power of carrying into execution ; and it would be
err- mischievous indeed if the Court could not enforce this contract
widimo making hint and all the subscribers parties to die suit. It
has been also atatertea that the plaintiff' should chew that he has
samplied with the term' of the agreement, before he OM call upon
the other party to carry it into effect. I same with that promo.
p; but in this cue I think he hat sufficiently shewn his cum.
tte. lie has proud that he has built "a four.room house,*
HI the very terms of the agreement; and though the parties differ as
to the eminent' the house, yet I cannot take that into consideration,
illitere the defendants have limited themselves by such a very etnie-
hil and indefinite description. Under all tile circumstances, there-
lure, I am of opinion that I must grant the prayer of the bill, and
...impel the defendant.. to specific performance of their contzazt.

CHARGE OF ATTLINIPT TO hits iIrta.—CASTLE or
EXETER, \{A.Cte I.—Thornes Matthewa, a IlllpelTillnirrary gturd
of the Exeter and Bath Mail, was charged before E. P. 1.y0a4 Esq.
under Lord Ellenhorough's Aft, with luring attempted the lire of
John Carder, the reachman. It appeared front the evidence of se.
vend• possenormi, that en Saturday night lad, when the mail was
about a mile on the western side of Collumpton, the cosshman
sthrperl and took up a persor named Browne; soon after a quarrel
ofcurred between this yerson and the guard ; 'the latter called to the
ccischmanlo step. which being disregarded, the order was repeated,
aid the guard struck the complainant several times with a whip.
The iromplainanr then gave the reins to a lamenger, got off the
'box, went to the hack of the coach, and asked the guard the meant
nig of his buldoct. The guard was deseendituz from his seat, bu-
immediately resumed, and took a pistol front the box, which he
presented Ss complainant's breast ; a scuffle ensued, and the pistol,
Fen to the gmund, but the guard recovered it, and, as the amelnoan
was going towards the horses, which hail begun to turn aside front
Soares& the guard cocked the pistol, presented it at the complain-
,thcand snapped it; the dintetruck tire, bet there was no tapirs:
se. Both parties then resumed their meats, and the meth pro.
el on the journey without farther impediment. The coachman's
's of the affair was to the same Ores, except that he did Oct
hoof snapped. The pistol was produced in Court, and was
s be 10e,14-Tbe prisoner will ►emanded fcr funkier cxami.
.—On Friday last the prisoner was fully committed for trial
ensuing .►sneers, under Lord Ellenborough's Aet, " for at.
•-• to shoot, ahasby Inurdei might have ensued.—Torodoe

lENT ASSIZES.

WESTERN CIRCUIT, Wiren RRRRR , Shim l&

The bent Assizes for this county finished this afternoon, and the
Judges (Ale. Justice Burrough and Mr. Sergeant Bosanquet) set
off for Salisbury, to open the Commission this evening there, for
the discharge of their impdrtant duties to► the county of Wilts.
There were eleven criminals sentenced to death, or bad that
awful sentence recorded against them ; but they were all reprieved
before the Judges left the city. Had it not been for the assists:nee of
Mr. Justice Burrough and .Mr. Hamlet, there would have beet
some difficulty in the deli-eri of the gaol from 'peptise a number'
of prisoners, and many of the trials being long.

DELME

„.......
This cause excited a considerable degree of interest, from the
circumstance of Mr. Sergeant PF.LL being brought down by an
especial retainer tie the defendant.
Lite question between the parties was, whether the soil between
high and low.watcr marks, whereon the defendant had erected a
wharf at Fareham, was parcel of the manor of Cams, After the
cause had been opened by Mr. °melee, and several witnesses ex-
amined,
The Learned Jr DOE suggested a etmpromise ; and it was ulti.
mately agreed between the respective Counsels, that the defendants
allnuld acknowledge the manorial right of the plaintiff to the land
in question, by the acceptance of a lease (extending it thirty-five
feet, and reserving a quit renn renewable on the payment oft
fixed line; and that each party should pay his own coats.

THE KING, ON THE PROSECUTION OF ATKINSON W.
The Jury having been sworn, Mr. Anaw. as Counsel for the
prosecution, stated, tha this was an indictment at the de-
fendant, far challenging Mr. Atkinson ; anti, as it arose between
two members of one family, he had the satisfaction of informing
the Jury, that enarreagement had been entered into, which would
render their interposition unnecessary. That the defendant's
Counsel, Mr. Williams, had very properly (if he may be allowed to
say so) suggested, that by Mr. Carters entering into recognizance.,
with su fluent &menet, for such period as his Lordship might direct,
no further proceedings should take place.
The Learned Jr no E. therefore, ordered that Mr. Carter shonld
enter into a recognizance for 5001. and two sureties in 2501. each for
keeping the peace, and being of good behaviour towards all his Ma-
jesty's subjects, and especially towards the prosecutor, for the term
of three years.
The defendant and his sureties having entered into the recogni-
lances in Court, the matter was settled.

CARTLI, ASSIOWEE OF THE LATIL POIRTSMOUTII BANN, V.
PAUL, AMU:FIE Of SIMS, A AAWILAUPT.
This case Wall abandoned by the defendant.
'Verdict fur plaintiff, by consent.

lIARTLET v. WILILIWII.

This ins an actionlß damages, arising out of the defendant 1
having commenced business as a tanner, colt to plaintiff's i
premises, by which he complained of many inconveniences and in.
price to his property. But after Mr. Wilde, for the defendant,
Wid commented on the facts, it was agreed (with the concurrence of
the Judge) that the affair should be arranged, without troubling
the Jury to decide on its unfits.
BREACH OF PROMISE OF MARRIAGE.
SAVAGE, JUN. r. GODF AEC AND 1.71.0 R.
ISpecial J ?cry.]
This action, for breach of promise of marriage, had for many
days excited the expectations of those who are fond of fun—it being
thought that many circumstances of a laughable nature would be
elucidated in the coarse of the trial. On this account, and because
numerous friends of boa parties attended to hear the issue of the
cause, the Court was brim full of auditors. The facts which were
submitted to the consideration of the Jury were chiefly as follows :
The plaintiff is in partnership with, or at least in the employ of,
his father, a respectable hair-dresser at iternsey. The defendant,.
Mr. Godfrey, is the son of a grocer and tallow-chandler, in the
same town, and was married to die lady who is the cause of the
proceedings, and whose maiden name was Mary Ann Fryer, in the
early part of last year. The plaintiff had, for ten long years, paid
his addresses to bliss F, and, as will appear, received from her
reiterated promises that he was the happy man. The defendant
had pleaded the Statute of Limitations, but did not resort to it on
the trial. At the time the plaintiff comineneed his suit—not the
present suit, but his suit of love—Miss Fryer resided with an aged
'aunt, by the name of Jones. The old lady was averse to the coo.
flexion, and the young couple were therefore compelled to have re-
course to secret meetings (in the cow.house, Ike.), through the as.
istance and confidential exertions of the servant, Miss Elisabeth
Judd—only forty-eight years old ! This handmaid of Cupid, and
the plaintiff's sister, a very decent and reputable-looking young
woman, clearly proved repeated promises by Miss Fryer, to marry
the plaintiff, immediately on the death of her aunt. About Christ-
mas, 1822, Mrs. Jones died; and her will, which was proved by
Air. Godfrey, as her executor, left Miss Fryer the owner of some
few thousands of British coin. The plaintiff, delicately refraining
from personal intrusion too soon after the death of poor Mrs.
Jones, sent his sister above-mentioned to Miss Fryer, with every
expression of undiminishtd affection. Miss Fryer repeated her
promises—never to be fulfilled! :'ut why? after ten yeah of
fidelity, what potent cause should change the mind of Mary Ann ?
Mr. Godfrey had read the aunt's will, and he fell in love with the
faithless legatee, who, too susceptible of his insinuating attention.,
withdrew her favour from the anxious Mr. Savage, and placed her
changed affections on her aunt's executor. The courtship of her
second (we should say *ext admirer) was much more brief, and
much more effixtive than that of the deserted plaintilE In the
May, of 1823, Alias Fryer became Mrs. Godfrey'—" Savage's
occupations gone." His ten years' siege had all been spends
vain, and his patient declaration, that he would gladly wan, " if
it was twenty years longer," was now of so avail ! Every promise
that Miss Fryer had made, even the solemn vow, sanctified by
a kiss on the Bible, after he had been treating her with rum and
wine, were all violated, and the plaintiff had no consolation, sign
Iwhat the laws of his country might afford. 111r.8avago is about
thirty-fire years of age, and earns eight shillings even Ossek ; mod
Mrs. Godfrey is in her fortieth year, arid of a constitution—not
quite so strong es her pocket.
No witnesses were ..alled on behalf of the defendants; but severe
remarks on the evidence were made, in a vein of acute and ironical
argument, of above an hour's duration, by Mr. C. F. Williams,
their advocate. The Jury consulted a few minutes, and then
compensated Mr. Savage, for his twofold loss of Mrs. Godfrey and
ber money, by a verdict for plaintiff—Damages 4001.

BYIINI, WIDOW, V. ,PORTZE.
Catharine Byrne is a bomb-boat woman, and John Porter. some-
thing in that line. Mrs. Byrne had obtained great popularity in
her profession, and was applied to by defendant, in March, 11121,
for an introductory letter to the crew of the Sappho, !hen just sr-
rived in Plymouth harbour. A Mrs. Mullens was to sell the goods,
and the profits were to be equally divided between her and the
parties to this action. The sons of Sappho were jolly fellows,
and Mrs. Mullens soon found herself • gainer of SOL ; 801. of
which she retained for herself, and paid the other two shares to the
defendant, in trust, the himself and Mrs. Byrne. The cause of
the present action is too apparent ; the widow had not received her
" 2111., **justly due to her as the primum mobile of the whole con-
" cern. The testimony established the inteioity of Mrs. Mullens,
and the justice of Mrs. Byrne's demand, which was acknowledged
' by a verdict for the plainutf—Dal.iagesM.
The rest of the causes were either settled without any trial, or
disposed of without any investigation worth public notice.

MIDLAND CIRCUIT—LiwcoLx, BIARCII 11.

[flfore Mr. Dawn liuLt.ocK.l

PARCEII V. DAVY.

This was an action brought by the plaintiff to recover aimpensa-
tion in damages for the loss of the service of his daughter. The
appearance ut the young lady WM, extremely itreposseraing, and when
put into the witness lax, her very modest and amiable demeanour
excited strong symptoms of sympathy in all who beheld her, ex-
cepting the seducer and his father. its Parker is the only daugh-
ter of very respectable parents ; she it between sixteen and seven-
teen, but appears much older. Her features are pale, but pretty
and interesting, and her dress was exceedingly neat and becoming.
When first placed in the witness box she was bathed in tears.
During the whole examination she conducted herself with great
F-priety, and without the least appearance of affectaion.
4r. C , jun. opened the pleadings. V
Mr. Sergeant AUGHAN then addressed the Jury nearly as fol.
laws:—'lay it please your Lordship,--lientlemen of the Jury,—
In rising to address you, I do as you that 1 feel • more than
urdtnery degree of analog far the issue of this ee"ee•l, tet the
present occasion, Gentlemen of the J urv, represent a eery unhappy
and a very miserable father—a father who is weeping over the ruin
ef a young, amiable, and beloved daughter, eflecied by the most
atrocious, the most foul, and the most fraudulent means. There
ate 00 cases so distressing to the administrators of justice as the ad-
judication of offences of the description of the one now under your
consideration. Nevertheless, distressing as they are, the ends of
justice and the good of society imperiously require that they should
neither go unnoticed nor unpunished. The Gets of the case are in
a very narrow compass, and I shall lay them before you from the
mouth of the unfortunate victim herself. The plaintiff, Gentlemen
of the Jury, is a tanner, fernier, and militate'', in the Parish of
licawby, near Brieg, in this county, and the defendant is a farmer,
in the vicinity of the settle place. Living near to each other, the
timilies were on terms of great intimacy. The defendant is a very
young man, Gentlemen, and it is scarcely credible, that one su
green in years should be so grey in vice. He is now married ;
and at the very niernent that he was endeavouring to accom-
plish the ruin of me client's daughter, he was actually on the
point of marriage with another woman. This, Gentlemen, is
pretty strong evidence of the d.ep atrocity of the defendant's
conduct. This is sonnahing new in the annals of iniUnty. Such
conduct—ouch monstrous, smut perfidious conduct, is surely not
the character of the present age.
,It is not, indeed, like the
character of any age. It is new and unique in itself—it
stands alone, without a parallel. Finding he could net accomplish
his ends by the oulinary means of seduction, he told his unsuspect.
ing victim that her father, who was averse to the connection, would
never give his consent, unless she becam4 pregnant. lie coot-
pleted her ruin ; and the family had no suspicion of this man. He
wet in and out of the house whenever he pleased. He possessed him-
sell of the poor girl's affections, completed her ruin, and then east
her. away for ever. Gentlemen, it is not probable - it is not in
nature, that a well-educated girl could be se abandoned as to yield
to the connuisidon of such • crime, without laying had practised
span her acts of the most consummate viUany. Yoe this base, fur
this frandful, and for this most unmanly action of the defendant,
you, (ientlemen of the Jury, are called upon to award damages.
1.011 are not, however, calltd upon to give any thing to the daughter.
You are culled upon to make satisfaction to the unfortunate, the in-
,' jured father, which, as far as money an give satisfaction, it is your
duty to give. If any of you, Gentlemen of the Jury, are fathers, to
those fathers I now particularly address myself, and I ask you what
your heeling, would be, provided yet were pieced./ in tine situation

.
ar mj =bane &hit ? *hat money would tolyal In be so
situated? And if so situated, what money would be a mina=
compensation for year accumulated wrongs ? At this moment of
time my client's daughter is not seventeen years of age, but she
is a perfect woman in her appearance, and has been so foe two or
three years. The econaintance of the parties took place when she
was not more than thirteen or fourteen years of age, and it conti-
nued to the spring of the last year,
when be accomplished his par.
pose and abandoned her. The length of the adman/ proves that
she was not easily porrailed upon. If my Learned I nentl should
put quations to the unhappy girl—questions which will oblige her
to repeat her tale of infamy, and thereby add another sting to her
wounded feelings, you, lientlernen of the Jury, will know to
whom this conduct ought to be attributed. You will know that
my Learned Friend =opted it solely in conformity with his in-
structions;_ and you will feel, that it will add not a little to the
enormity of the defendant's guilt. The I.earned Gentleman con-
cluded in a strain of animated eloquence, calculated to aggravate the
crime of the defendant, and eaodtiate she sympathies of the Jury
faith client.
lam 'Neter, exandood by Xt. Clarke, jun.—ls the daughter of
the plaielif, who =idea in the perish of r,:swby. Knows Thos.
Davy. Has known him four or Svc years. Is about sixteen years
and a half old. Davy was intimate with ha brother, and came to
see him when he was ill. Began to pay her particular attention
about three or four yeses since. He visited her as a lover, to marry
her. Has no sister. lean only daughter. Davy continued to pay
her attentions till last April. Their intimacy was known to her
father and mother; but her father objected to it. She at length
proved pregnant, and was confined the 20th of last December.
Davy told her that her father would never give his consent unless
she was pregnant. The defendant married the 19th of May last.
Did not know that he was going to be married. The woman be
was married to lived at Boston.
Cross-examined by Mr. REAnza—lle was seventeen years of
are when he proposed to marry ha. This was about three years
nlin• Her father always csoected to it, but her mother did not.
Her mother never shut the windows when they were together.
Never was locked up by bee mother with Davy. Ile always CAME
after her father went to bed, but her mother eat up till he went
away. Never went to ll,igg to fetch him, or sent the servant girl.
Went into the defendant's room once when she was at his father's,
' but went fee apples, and did not know that he was there.
Re-examined by Mr. Caesar, jun.—She went to a chapel at
, Saint, where she sometimes met Davy, and they walked home to.
I gether. Her mother naked Davy why he came to see her (witness)?
and he said that he intended to marry her. He is now living upon
a farm of his own at lledbum.
By the JUDDE —Davy's wife lived at Boston before he married
her. Did not know how far Boston was from Brigg. Lit is about
' tifty miles.)
Mr. Sergeant VAUGH•Y—That is my we.
Mr. READER said, that he had seldom seen the talents of an advo-
cate more artfully employed than by his Learned Friend upon the
present occasion. His Learned Friend had said much about pro-
! treeing our daughters; but the Jury would recollect that we had
sons as well as daughters, who stood in need of protection. He
would contend that the defendant, the person now bete.: the Court,
had been trapped by the fisgrantandimprOer conduct of the young
wunian's mother. If a young nom was placed in the situation
!of his client, it was scarcely possible that he should mime.
The Jury would recollect that the case rested solely upon the eel-
-1 deuce of a girl full of resentment, on account of the detendant pre-
-1 ferring another woman to her. It was not probable that a boy of
seventeen should make proposals of marriage to a girl of thirteen.
The main features of her evidence might be correct, but all the
minor points were made up out of Court, as his Learned Friend's
speech had been made up is Court—or, perhaps, out of Court, for
he had some doubts upon the subject. It was the mother who laid
the foundation of all; aml would the Jury give large damages,
when the mother had acted with such flagrant unpraptiety, and her
father with such blameable carelessness ? He felt certain that
they would not give such damages as would ruin the young man,
who was a mere boy, and indeed the most moderate damages would
satisfy the justice of the case.
Dlr. Baron lluxt.ocx charged the Jury. He said, in eases like
this the amount of damages must have reference to the conduct of
the offending party, as well as to his property. The Jury had
heatd nothing respecting the property of the defendant ; they
would, therefore, give such damages as they thought ought to be
laid upon a man who had demeaned himself in the way be lad
done. Hale Jury. believed her evidence—and there was no Manses a
disbelieve it, for if it had been untrue, a number of witnesses might
havebeen called to contradict it—the circumstance dello leaßag
quaintance of the parties before her ruin spewed that she was ma
won. The conduct of the female always ought to betaken hie
derstion. Where there is levity and improper baaviinr,
damages ought to be considerably less. The defending%
in marrying soother woman, just after he had . the
ruin of the plaintiff's daughter, was a peculiar hie
ilidtict,
offence. The mother, it appese, approved o the eansedost,
although her father disapproved pt it ; but he saw nothing =na-
tural or improbable in that. She might think she was paireeing
her daughter's happiness, and the father might be eta different
opinion. The parties were young, it was true; they. =ski re.
collect the defendant had made a proposal of to the
mother. The Jury would not indict vindictive damages,lat such
ss the offence deserved.

After the Jury had consulted for some minutes, one of them
rose and addressed his Lordship. He raid their only difficulty
was respecting the property of the defendant They were not aware
whet his property amounted to.
Alr. Baron II u m.oca •. I cannot assist you. The fact is not
before she Court ; therefore the quantum of damages must be
estimated by the quantum of injury.
The Jury again consulted foe a few minutes, and returned a ter.
diet—Damages, 1001., costs See.
This verdict, which world probably hose been much more severe
had the Jury. known that thedefendant is a rich man, appeared to
give satisfaction to a very crowded Court. •

,
ant, and ii
t)) neon. Bn
eeeded on
114 il ; enxount ol
see the pi,
found to I
natian.—(
at theenal
aemptlng
. •
r . '