The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1806-02-06 00:00:00

in di.ichitge of Lis bails, 1ti;.1.1 was accorditi&ly
dune.
The SOL IC TOR-G ENER AI, then moved the Court,
:oat the Defendants, Robert and Henry Kennett,
be committed for the present.
Mr. Justice LAWRENCE observed, that, from the
nature of the indinment, there could be no objenion
to their committal, as it might an as part of their
punishment.
They were accordingly ordered to the custody of
the Marshal of the Marshalsea of the Court, to be
brought up next term.

TNE KING V. THE LONDON DOCK COMPANY.
This was an indiament against the Company, for
not ereeting a swingin7 bridge on their docks, in the
neighbourhood of St. John, Wapping, to which the
Company lhad pleaded guilty, and the Sciticr rot-
s trt • t. prayed the judgment of the Court.
Mr. G A !MOW, on the pat t of the Company, ob-
served, that it was impossible, at the present, to
ereCt the bridge required, and he produced the cer-
tificate of the Surveyor, to shew the impossibility of
doing so. The Company were willing to do every
thing in their power for the accommodation of the
public ; but it was necessary they should have fur-
ther powers to do so ; for which purpose a bill was
to be immediately presented to Parliament. He,
therefore, hoped the Court would be satisfied only
to appoint the fine, but not levy it until the next
Term.
After sonic observations from the SOLICITOR..
Cr% ER AL, for the prosecution, the Court suspended
the levy for further consideration.
Mr. WILSON, on behalf of the Chamberlain of
Lor.den, moved the Court for a nimildiimul, to
be directed to the Commissioners of the Court of
Requests, commanding them to hear and deter-
mine a case, wherein one Mr. Bayley was the De-
fendant. The question was to u y whother he were
a broker or not ? By the 6th Ann, chap. I ti, the
custom of garbling spices was abolished, and in lieu
thereof, the sum of 40s. was matted to be paid to
the Chamberlain, by the brokers, upon their appoint-
ment. The Defendant had pleaded to this, the nom
jurisdiftion of the Court ; his not being indebted to
the Chamberlain; but admitting that, if indebted at
all, hx was indebted to the Lord Mayor and Alder-
men. This plea had been allowed, and the Learn-
ed Counsel observed, that it would not only be a
great inconvenience for the Chamberlain to sue in
that Court, but the expence attendant on suing in a
superior Court was much more than the whole was
worth.
The Court granted a Conditional Rule.
At nine o'clock in the morning, Lord ELLEN/10
ROUGH sat at Nisi Priiss, when a few causes of no
moment were disposed of.

THE ICING r. THOMPSON.
Mr. Serjeant VALCH•N rose to oppose the Rule
obtained on a former day by Mr. A cenTr, to quash
the conviElion of the Defendant, in this case, which
had taken place before a Magistrate of the county
of Rutland ; but, as Mr. AIMOTT was then in the
Court of Exchequer, he would wave his Motion
until that Gentleman returned, in order that he
might. if lac chose, have an opportunity of le-
plying.
Lord ELLENISOROUGH said. that the Labouring
oar would be in the hand of the Learned Serjeant ;
and expressed his opinion (in concurrence with that
of his Learned Compeers) that the convinion could
not be supported, as upon the face of it there was
no proof that Mr. Wingfield (at whose instance the
information was lai2) was such an owner of the
fishery in which the Defendant had angled, as to
entitle him to the penalty which had been levied.
The Learned Serjeant said, he thought the colla-
teral testimony of Ashley ought to satisfy the Court
of Mr. Wingfield's ownership.
Lord ELLLSBOROUGH.—" Such testimony is in-
admissible ; and a man cannot prove his own title
to profit by a penalty, which is to arise from evi-
dence given by himself. The title in the present
ca'e might have been shewn by deed, or other
admissible evidence. The conviCtion must be
quashed."

COMMON ri.r.As,

TMOMPSON e.
Mr. Serjeant Wt LLIA M s moved that the Rule to
set aside the proceedings in this case should be made
absolute. It had been granted on affidavits already
before the Court, that the Defendant bad not been
duly served with a Copy of Process, so as to call
upon him to defend an adion for slander, in
which the Plaintiff proceeded to trial, and had da-
mages awarded to the amount of 5001. It appear-
ed that the service of the Writ of Cap;ar was exe•
cuted at nine o'clock at night, on the 1 Ith of Sep-
tember, by a Sheriff's Officer, upon a booksaller of
the name of William Alexander, instead of being
delivered to the Defendant, Edward Alexander
Bucking ; and that the said William Alexander bad
kept the copy of Process in his possession ever since.
Serjeant WILLIAMS, for the Plaintiff, in the ac-
tion, produced affidavits made by the officer who
served the writ, and others, which stated, that on
the night abovementioned, the said officer went to
the lodgings of the Defeudant, at Woodbridge, and
there found the Defendant, in company with
V. illiam Alexander, and other persons; and that he
addressed the said Defendant on the subjed of the
business upon which he was come, telling him
that he had got a bit of red" for him, and pro-
diking the copy of the writ. Ihe affidavit also
stated, that the Deponent believes he delivered the
same into the hands of the Defendant ; and Ser-
jeint WI Lt.: rib.] contended, that, whether that were
really the case, or whether some other person in the
room obtained the possession of the instrument, it
was indisputable, that the Defendant must be
aware of the nature of it, and therefore was not en-
titled to the benefit of the plea he had urged by his
Learned Brother, Serjeant SHerl4l.at).
Chief Justice Manse 'LLD, addressing Serjeant
S0[144[111), said, upon the point of irregularity, he
did oot think he had any ground at all, as there
was not a doubt his client knew the writ was for
him, at the moment it was served. The damn; es
in the adion, however, were, to be sure, very large;
and, therefore, on payment of the costs of this :mph-
cation, the Court would feel, that it ought to allow
the Defendant an opportunity of being heard.

niNINAPn. HEMIF.

This was a case brought to trial. princit. illy for
the sake of tieciding a poi*t of pralice, of consieer-