The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1826-07-12 00:00:00

MIDLAND CIRCUIT.

LINCOLN, Jve.y IS.
CROWN SIDE.
The LORD CRIER' BARON, in charging the Grand Jury, ad-
verted to a case cf infanticide which appeared in the calendar, and
observed that he had a work on this subject, written by the late Dr.
Wm. Hunter, which would be very much at their service. Dr.
Hunter's able tract.would, he had no doubt, tend to remove many
unfounded prejudices an the subject.
John Armitage and John Eattsor were capitally indicted for vie.
lently assaulting John Hill, on the King's highway, on the lthh
of June last, and taking from his person a gold watch his property.
Mr. Hill deposed, that on going home towards Grantham, its
was smutted by the prisoners, who called out " Go it !"—that het
received violent blows on the back of his head from sticks and.
bludleons ; that his skull was laid open, and that in that situation
he said, " My life can be of no use to you, I have but my watch,
and that oT course you may take." The prisoniis then Tided hie
pockets, and, as far as witness knew, made off towards Grantham.
Witness endeavottred to walk home after they had gone, but the
violence with which be had been treated brought on fever, and a
medical gentleman attended him for several days.
' Armitage denied the charge, and principally relied on the fact
that he was not dressed on the day of the outrage in the dress dr
scribed by the prosecutor.
Lydia Annersley was called, and said that the prisoners lodged
with her ; but she had nothing to prove against the statement of
the plaintiff.
Several minor items were proved by different witnesses, but the
main facts remained unshaken.
The Jury, under the direction of his Lordship, pronounced a
verdict of Not Guilty

TCIVIL SIDE.
simian. V. WALLING.
This was an action brought by the plaintiff, to recover the amount
of certain goods sold and delivered.
The plaintiff is a travelling Jew, in the jewellery line, and the
defendant a jeweller in this city.
A contract was put in. and it was admitted that it was in the
hand-writing of the defendant.
Mr. Sergeant VAUGHAN, for the defendant, stated that the
watch delivered to him was certainly worth more than five pounds,
though by no means equal to the amount now claimed by the
plaintiff. A repeater watch was delivered, as if made by Johnson,
of the Strand, London. It was also to be in possession of the de-
fendant for six months upon trial ; but at the end of that time, it
wan found to be neither made by Johnson, nor calculated to keep
time. Under such circumstances, the defendant resisted the pay.
!MAI of the sum now demanded.
Lazarons examined—l live in Lincoln; I know the plaintiff.
and recollect seeing him in November last. I went with plaintiff
in that month to the house of the defendant, with a view that Mr,
Williams might buy something; he refused buying anything, but
after some time he did buy something, and after a deal of talk
Williams took a fancy to the gold repeater, and a bargain was made.
The price asked was 601., and the defendant said, " I have a silver
watch to exchange," for which plaintiffsaid he would allow 61. or
61. 10s. It was engaged to go well for six months, and if not, de-
fendant was to have any other articles to the same amount. The
maker's name was Johnson, whom the plaintiff' stated to be one of
the first watchmakers in the kingdom. All this passed before the
bargain was made.
The watch was here produced. but the witness not being able to
read English, could not swear to its being the watcl in question.
Plaintiff said after to defendant, " we are all likely to die, and I
should wish a memorandum of the bargain," with which defendant
complied. The plaintiff frequently complained to witness that the
watch did not go well ; and after, on the defendant's going to
London, he *nod itrat Johnson watt not the maker. An action
was brought by the plaintiff; the defendant offered the watch—that
each should pay his town costs, and that Williams could take
the value of the watch in silver goods, but I could not get them
to agree.
Cruse-examined—l brought the parties together, to fight it out.
I thought you said it was to make peace.
Mr.DENMAN—Such things sometimes happen.
Witness—l have nothing to gain by the business, and tame
to tell the truth. The ruby was cracked, but defendant did not tell
me how it became so. Mr. Williams never told me the watch
fill : perhaps he told me he had just got it repaired. If it were
ro: so, the watch would not go at all.
A letter was put in from the defendant to the plaintiff; stating
that Johnson, of London, was not the maker of the watch sold by
the defendant to him, and that as such he considered the sale to be
fraudulent, and would not hold himself bound to keep it.
Mr. Johnson, of the firm of Grimaldi and Johnson, proved that
the watch was not of their manufacture. There was one Johnson,
th,rty years age, in Gray's Inn-lane, but this watch was made
within ten years. It is a common watch, and I should say, that
second-hand, it might cost about 401., and new about 601.—This
Is made up in a very inferior way ; I can scarcely call it a
watch. A good watch of this description could not be made
under 701.
William Hudson, the defendant's clerk, deposed to a conferee-
don held between the plaintiff' and defendant, as to the terms of the
agreement.
The LORD CutEr JUSTICE—The bargain is in writing, and I
cannot take this evidence.
The witness resumed, and corroborated the first witness, as to the
nature of the conversation which passed between the parties.
The COMMON SERGEANT replied.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE summed up the evidence, and the
Jury fiLuid a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages, 411. 10s.

NORTHERN CIRCUIT.

YORK, JULY 10.

The Assizes commenced here to-day before Mr. Justice Pnits
and Mr. Baron fluLLocc, the former Learned Judge presiding
in the Civil, sod the latter in the Criminal Court.
CROWN SIDE.

The Grand Jury having been sworn,
Mr. Baron Hu LLOCK proceeded to deliver his charge. The eel-
ming calendar, he observed, was not of a nature which rendered it
necessary to detain them long; for although it contained one or two
cases of an aggravated kind, yet he was glad to say that the majo-
rity of the essea were not of that description. They would find that
there were some offences which had been committed under the
pressure of that distress which had recently affected different parts
of the county. The perpetrators of such offences ought to know
that outrage was not the best mode of remedying distress, and if
that conviction could not be impressed by other means, then they
should be taught by experience that the law was not to be violated
with impunity. There was a case in which an individual was
charged with stabbing with a sharp instrument, with intent to do
some bodily harm to another. To support an indictment for that
offence, it would be necessary that the circumstances of the case
should be such as would have constituted the crime of murder, in
case death had followed the infliction of the wound. It did not ap-
pear to him that those circumstances would be found in the present
ease, as it seemed that the accused had been in illegal custody at
the time when the offence had been committed. There was one
ease of imputed murder, and for their guidance in that ease he
would say, that if a man was disturbed in his house in do dead of
the night, and under a bona fkie belief that his house was attacked
by robbers, firei a shot, in consequence of which some individual
died, that was not murder in the eye of the law. There was also a
case of child stealing, an offence which depended entirely on the
intention of the party stealing. If the child were taken away
either by fraud or forte, with an intent to deprive its parents of the
possession of such child, the offence amounted to felony. In the
present case they would collect the intention from the facts submit-
ted to them.
The Grand Jury then withdrew, and soon after returned with
several true bills.

CHILD STEALING.
MariaStandeven was put to the bar, charged with having, on the
6th day of April, at Leeds, in the West Riding, feloniously led,
taken, and carried away, one William Jepson Taylor, a child of
the age of two years, with intent to deprive his parents of the pos-
session of such child.
Air. HARDY stated the ease, and regretted that he should not
be able to produce the parents of the child, as they had, since the
commission of the offence, gone out of the country.
Elisabeth Jepson stated that she was the grandmother of the
child mentioned in the indictment. On the 6th of April last, wit-
ness was at her son's house in Little Queen-street, in Leeds ; she
olowlat the shop-door, and held the child in her arms. The pri-
mmer tame up, and asked witness to direct her to a privy. Witness
did no, and prisoner went away. Witness then gave the child to a
bow of the name of Jonathan Holdsworth, and went into the
him. On her return, which was in about three minutes, both
the boy and the child were gone. The child was brought home the
same evening by its father, who had taken it from the prisoner.
Jonathanlioldsworth stated that the child had beets given into
his care by the last witness. Soon after the prisoner came up to
bins and inquired the name of the child. Wilmot told her, and

. ~
~.

li

she then asked Mai to go with her to bay the child assn
=
meats. Witness and the child accompanied thettimenee
Commercial-road, and the primer dui took dyad
arms, and gave witness a halfpenny to go into the next Mint
mediate something. Witness went into the nut strait, and as
his return both prisoner and the child were gees*
William Thacker/ said thai be knew the child in question. 011
the 6th of April last, hi was walking with hie brother, aloof eV
Commacial.road, when he sew the prisoner with the and In ken'
Witness said to his brother, " that's Williens TOMO
Priaeaer looked round, and then rim away quickly.
'Thomas Andertonot constable, deposed that he apprehended dee
prisoner, at her lodgings in Kirkgate, Leeds. It was about 4
bas, the prisoner's lodgings to Little Queen-metes. Witness mill
des,psisotier that he had come to take her up for stealing a dal-
Witness said," I did not steal it; I met It ming neer the influsoiy;
end took it up, and brought it home." Witness lifted her wiry
she had not apprised the beliman of the findifig of the child, and
she mid she had never given it a thought.
The prisoner, in her defence, stated that she bad seen the child
crying in the street, and had taken it home front motives of tee.
passion.
Mr. Baron Hut tome, in summing up the ease, obese.' span,
the absence of the parents of the child who, it appeared, had sever
been bound over to attend end give evidence. The Jury, In OW.
ing their verdict, would be guided entirely by what Wei onsidend
to have been the intention of the prisoner.
The Jury, after a short consultation, retuned a verdict of Not
Guilty.
Thomas Joanna was indicted for stabbing, on the fld of Match.
John Breckon, of Abilaby„ in the North Riding, with a gimp
instrument, with intent to do him some grievous bona
Dorothy Page stated that her mother kept a at
A islaby. Witness recollected that on the dey.siendoissills thi•
indictment, a great number of persons were drinking toolbars at
the house, and amongst them was the prisoner. A quarrel Net
piece in the house, and Bracken, a constable' was sent de:—
Breckon was the tither of the prosecutor. Upset the arrivalet eh e
constable the whole party went quarrelling away. The prissest sae
not intoxicated.
Francis Bracken, the father of the prosecutor, stated that he was
called to Mr. Page'tt house on the night of the Sid March, in see.
sequence of a quarrel which was going on there. Wititen's sera
came in soon after. The prisoner said he would go quietly base
if prosecutor would set (accompsn_y) him a little we . Pressmen
said he would, and they left the house
turned in a few minutes with a wound itettheravde, from whist' the;
bloed flowed profusely.
John Dreamt, the prosecutor, deposed that on the night is
question he had gone to Page's public-house ; saw the penalise
there. Prisoner asked him if he was e constable. Wittiest Model
that he was not, but that he was the anistobee.e.eon, and bed mime
to assist his father. Witness pressed thersoMe to go bassi.
Prisoner said that he would if witness would stet him homi. Wit-
ness said that he would accompany the prisoner fee half a mile.
They then left the house together. They had proceeded about
or 60 ards, and witness was telling the prison,* what a pity it wee
to kick up a disturbance in an old woman's Souse, when be felt
something prick him in the side. Witnesi returned instantly
to the public-house. There had been no quarrelling between then.
In cross-examination, witness denied that he had ever marl
himself a constable, or that after they left the public-house the pri-
soner was in his custody. He admixed, however, that foe the
whole distance his right hand had been plated on therprisesiVir
shoulder.
Mr. Kay, a surgeon, stated, that he had examined the prelim-
tor's wound soon after the injury had taken lace. The weans
was between the tenth And the eleventh rib, and was about half sa
inch in width, and half SO inch in depth. lc reigln have been in-
flicted by a penknife. Witness saw a penkna taken floes the
pocket of the prisoner.
This was the case for the prosecution. •
The prisoner, in his defence, stated, that before he len the sob.
lic-house he hed been so m'sltreated by the prosecutor and ethos,
that he had not the least recollection of any thing that moaned us.;
til he found himself in prison.
Mr. Baron Hut Luce, in dimming up the ease, directed the
Jury to consider whether the wound had been inflicted undet
cumatances which, if death had followed, would have constituted
the crime of murder. If it hal not, then his Indictment Wald not
be supported. It was his duty to tell them, that If a person wader
Olt illegal arrest or detention killed the individual so arresting or
detaining him, the offence, however reprehensible, and hewers:
deserving of punishment, would not amount to murder.
The Jury retired for some time, and on their return proneuhssd
the prisoner " Not Guilty."

CIVIL SIDE.
(Before Mr. Justice PAIL)
SMURFIT? U. APPLEBY.

This was an action brought to recover the sum OW., being the
amount of a year's wages alleged to be due from the defended to
the
Ilk. J. Wixt.rams stated, that his client was a eargeorti *re
had laved his time to the defendant, and who now ought Wee.:
"Us should
_be abbe
meet coirpensation for services reedwed to the defendant after
ttoheshelewpirwthieman othri'llaibefntioreff tehtlirenpflieellhitiff rad gope to somplisti
medical studies at Edinburgh, an agreement had !temente/1d km
between the plaintiff and defendant, bf which *pause was to
allow the former a salary of 401. a year as long as 14 Avid Is dips
_fondant's. service. . ' •
The brother of the plaintiff swore that an agreement bud WAR,
made in his presence, to the effect stated by the plaindra
Counsel.
For the defence it was shown, that the defendant hod takes the
plaintiff from the parish workhouse, and alter bestowing Mat os
some education, had gratuitously apprenticed bias ; and to.
fore the expiration of the apprenticeship the defendant bad seabird
the plaintiff to attend for six months the medical lectures at Mir.
burgh. It was contended, therefore, that the six months wide&
the defendant had spent at Edinburgh during his apprenHeaskip,
were a fair set oft against the short time during which the
ds-
fendant had continued to auist the plaintiff after the (aphelion of
the apprenticeship.
The Jury found a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages, lat.
WRIT OF RIGHT.
ANGEL V. ARGIL.

---
This cause is again entered for trial, and will Algot alt
at the end of the present week, as the Attorney
tained for the tenant, is expected in York on Thursday.

PRIVILEGES OF FREEMEN OF LONDON.

The Lord Mayor and Aldermen have, by the mouth of
the Recorder, delivered into the Vice-Chancellor's Court
the answer to the questions proposed in the Court of Aliar-.
men, and discussed before the Court by Mr. Shadwell and
Mr. Sergeant Spankie, about three months ago. The Re-
corder, upon the occasion, went in robes different front
those which he had been accustomed to wear under other
circumstances, and stated that he appeared to certify, ore
Mom, the custom of the City of London, upon the question
whether Sir Francis Samuel Drake wag, under the circum-
stances represented in the Court of Aldermen, according to
the directions of the Vice-Chancellor's Court, a Freeman
of London, within the custom which entitled his widow tw
the customary distribution of the estate of a freeman dying.
intestate ; and whether the settlement made upam her
marriage debarred her from such materna*, share. •
The certificate was as follows :
" We, the Lord Mayor and Aldermen of the City of Ltrodiert.
do certify, that Sir Francis Samuel Drake, Bart being intestine in
the pleadings In the cause mentioned in the annexed order. oho,
when a Rear-Admiral of the Red in the Regal Navy, wasrla-opo
sequence of Lord Rodney's victory in the Wen Indies, with mime
officers under Lord Rodney's command, pratented with din fess-
dom of the City of London. pursuant to a veld of she Orsyrt of
Common Connell of the said City of Loads% whist paid fir
that purpose on the 40th of June 1782, owl who, on Ilia ill
day of Amos+, 1784, was made a Lire of the Carmay
of Grocers in the said City of London, and swami be, and reek
the several oath. which are required to be taken by all pea.
sons who become free of the said f4ittieireeastd,wbo wen am free of
the said dig birth, or by servitut~e, by P=or othey-
wise than a%msaitL and died so ma on the
18th day of November, 1789, intestate, and without knee, leaving
his widow him surviving; was at the time of his dads a n
of the City of London, in the sense, meaning, and of
the custom of the said city, relating to the distrtbutkin kb*
of freemen who die intestate; and we further certify in ale MB'
ller, by the mouth of the Recorder, that there Is not any em of
the City of London, by virtue whereof the widow, having tbs be-
nefit and provisions of the settlement in the pleadings On allied
cause stated, is debarred ftom her customary share of the inssmash's
personal estate."
The decree of the Vice-Chancellor will consequently be
in favour of the claim of Mr. Sergeant Onalow, the buo•
band of the widow of the intestate. The Learned Sergeant
will be entitled to that customary part which will .cased
the distribution under the statute. By having married
the widow of a freeman, he gains, it is said, in this re-
spect, considerable property. The widow Of a freeman, of
course, does not lose her claim by her marriage with a none
freeman.

Mr. Beaumont's election expenses for Northumberland
are estimated at 80,0001. ' • Mr. Liddell's and Mr. Bell'i
30,000/ each ; Lord Howick, about 20,0001.
We learn by a gentleman from Gourock, that the opera-
tions for raising the Comet have hitherto been attended
with complete success. The vessel has been raised @doe
T
feet from the ground, and drawn soma
the shore. The most difficult part o[' ,;`
now over, as she is now out of the sand. ant fan
gabberts moored two and two by the stern, alongside of
each other. Across the decks are placed large logs of Oak,
to which are fastened the chains which go under the bot-
tomwit of the Comet. At low water the y are made • en
that lithe rise of the tide she is nusW from 10 to 4.e.
At h' water the whole vessels are drawn to ' ski
shore y a windlass on the beach.

l.:
ri

i