The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1824-12-02 00:00:00

LONDON SESSIONS, Wz) N umAy, Dec. 1.

This morning these Sessions eommeneed, before the Right lion.
the Loin MATOIL, the fir:comma, Aldermen Sir J. Su•w, C.
SMITH. MAGNAT, TROMPSON, &c. Ace.
The Grand Jury being sworn,
The Uccoawea delivered his charge.—fle was happy to contra.
tul3te the Gentlemen of the Jury that the calendar exhibited nu ease
or peculiar aggrwvation. They were of that common description
which occurred every day. There was however one ease to which
he would direct their attention, which wu a charge of perjury.
As there were T.l Jurymen in the panel, it would be their duty to
agree by • majority es to the propriety of sending the accused
fur trial. It was for the Jury to be reminded, that
in eases of perjury it was neresury they should have be.
lure them more evidence than the single unsupported oath of the
*miser—therefore, if bis evidence was not supported by the testi-
mony of anr•her, or by books ur documents, it would be their duty
to Ignorethe lid. Having made these few remarks the Learned
Sewn* would dismiss the gentlemen of the (inlaid Jury, who
would no doubt perform their ditty conscientiously and rueritori.

Jobs Jour* and Flizokdi, Ids wife, pleaded Guilty to the charge
of keeping a &orderly house. In consideration of their haviuti
already 'alibied three inonthe imprisonment, they were senteacid
to a farther imprisonment of three months only—the nnui to be kept
to haul latioar. _

C:: les fiosetter and John Davis were indicted for atmulting
Jah.es llavi+, a watchman.
The etkUDIOW SF.IMFAIT mwned the ewe few the prosecution,
which. he said, was ioatittited by the City Authorities, to protect
their watchmen in the execution of their duty.
Ale. BOLLAID then calltd the prosecutor, who stated that he
was taltinyi Ili:menet to the watch-house for assaulting a fenele,
when Mims interfered, and they both tell upon hint, and beat him
unmercifully.
Another watchman confirmed the statement.
The Jury found them loth (:silty, and they were sentenced to
one mon.h's imprkonnicat. They had already been in conlis.e-
ment fuer months.

A NEW QUESTInRAIVTED TINDER THE LATE

V.MHANT ACT.

J. /raison and J. Nlnith, lad been convicted before the present
lord Mayor, tirdit the Lot Vagrant Act, u rogues end yaw:bonds,
and arnieneed to hard Labour for three months, and they now ap-
peared mous their amulet against that conviction. The ease of
.11&WC. Hudson was first called. The conviction was 'mil, which
shed /4. g/T4lng taken place upon the ground that he beings l
supcied person, and a reputed thief, did on the tsd of November,
yerywreff a certain street, called liolborn-bridge, with intent to
commit felony.
Mr. Law, es his Counsel, took exception to the wording of the
cmivicaion, and contended that to Xenia/oat a certain street on a err.
fain day, wasnot sense in the English language—that to frequent was
to go °Gen, to resort to frequently, and nut to be in or at a place ;
and although he might allow the possibility that if aperom was se-
veral times in a certain street on a given day, he might be said to
have frequented that sin tt on that day, yet here the evidence proved
that the defendant had never been seen in that street before that
day. and only orace upon that day.
Mr. 11101. La will replied in an argument of considerable length,
the object of which waa to show that the term, " to frequent," was
not so limited in its definition as Mr. Law contended, but that it
was continently used to signify to go to, or be at a place. If Sir.
Law's meaning of the word was the correct one, then, as flute were
upwards of 400 streets in London, a reputed thief niit,ht be in a
diatinet street, for the purpose Of coinniitting felony, on one day—
change his walk to another street upon another day, and so on
through a whole year with impunity, without exhausting his mini.
hey of strata, and no conviction mild take plate under this Act.
A keg consul:anon ensued, and in the end the It renal PER de.
livered it as the judgment of the Magistrates, that the conviction
must Le affirmed. _

In delivering tl.e judgment of the Court in the other case, that of
Smith„ the evidence and the objection being the wine, the lir-
connEn sold, the Act made the offence frequenting any street,
from which he inferred that if they had berme been seen in any
other street, that would embrace the word jtyquent, and complete
the offence if they were again seen with the same intent in another
ss r( et, although thry might never hare been in that latter street be.
fore. The Court, taking into consideration the time they had been
is eti%totiv, sentenced each of that to a further imprisonment of
seven act La.
Mr. Law hoped the Court would take filll minutes of the wi-
dener.. dim he might he able to bring both the facts and the law
before the Court of King's Bench, if he could devise ail legal
anctlittd for so doMg.