The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1809-03-06 00:00:00

Lair iNniudairwir.
COURT OF CIIARC FAY, 114 tax 4
The L 041) CI A 4cE4Loßheard a longargninept,in
the case of the Corporatieo Lazars. which being
extinct, the landi dedicated to that cloteity are now
chinned by the Crown, on the one hand, and, on
the other, th.! Priucc of Wales. a* Duke of
Cornsall. his I.urdslaip stated, that he shoulJ
titre judtpaelit in the caw on Iloutla3.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, Haase 4.
Afore Lord Eu.t.xaoauuutt and a Sp:tiol Jury.
PEACOLA v. PEACOCK.
This cause excited a considerable degree of in-
terest, and the verdict which was returned by the
Jury seemed to he satisfactory. i r the highest de-
gree, to a very crowded Court.
The Dereliction, Lewis Peacock, is a very re-
spectable law-stationer, is Chancery-lane, and the
Plaintiff is his son, who brought this action to re-
cover the profits arising front a shirt. in his father's
bus;iiess since the year IBM. At that time Plain-
tiff became of age, and it was proposed by Defend.
ant to give him a share ; but, from the unsettled
state of the books, it could not be ascertained what,
in the fiatlier'e opinion, was a competent share for
the management of the tinsine,s. In the mean
time, Plaintiff received a 'weekly sum of is, which
was afterwards increased to ;RI% by way of pocket-
mosey. The Plaintiff, iu the menu time, acted as
is principal in the lessinees; the name on the door
was climitred from Pi:periek to Peacocks; ■ll bills
were made nit to NlCsisrs. L. and H. Peacock ; and
u new set of break.. were had in October, 1803, the
tour thl. riirtnership commenced. They- conti-
nued iy this way till liio6. the Non etlvray• triwing
to his father's honour fur the fulfilment of his pro-
'awe, when a di..ntire arose, which came to such a
height, that the Defendant turned Plaiittaf out of
doors, to shift for himself in the brat way lie could.
• The Defendant theta took in a partuer of the name
orfhoomm, a2-IMat whom and i)efe:alant,
t::1 tiled a bill in Chancery. On the pert of the
I)eft•ttrlaut, it was attempted to lie proved that the
Plaintiff was only a nominal partner, uad was, in
Cot, nothing inoitthan Defendant's servant.. On
Defendant's examination, however, he admitted,
that he said Mu ist:ll should have a share 'auxin as
it could be ascertained what the profits of the bu-
siness were.
Lord Et tr.anottourm, in addressing the Jury,
slid, there was nu douht lint that thel'laint id had a
right to a share, scal it would be for them to con-
rider what share, and nom what time it should
commence? lied Defendant died insolvent, Mani-
la would have been liable to all claims a4ainst time
l'ather ; and he thought it a very strange doctrine
to hold out. that the son was to have no profit at-
tached to the risk he rail.
The Jury immediately found a verdict for Plain-
tiff, allowing him a quarter of the business since
Ist October; 1603; and it was agreed that the
present partner should be disposed of by arbi-
tration.

The Court of Common Pleas was occupied all
day in causes upon Policies of lusistauce upon
Slops, of no public interest.
• PAARAON O. TAYLOR.
This was an legion of slander, for canine the
Plaintiff a sewn:ire/. C rogne, a thief, Cad a rubber.
The Plain+►f Defendisist were both if:leers of
Excise, and had a qu:u•rel about shutting a dour,
when the Defelidant culled him by tliose mimes.
Mr. Cisstatiw, for the Defendant, said, that the
Plaintiff was a 16y-finalities', t antio.g. Methodist
P►eacher, and that the Defendant, in allusion to
the 10th chapter of St. Joint, v. 114, called hint a
robber, beeaum it Is there r 011... lie that enn•reth
hat by the door lido the sheepfold, hot cliusiolli up
some other way, the same is a thief and a
The Jnry gave a verdict for the Plaintiff—Da-
mages Cue Shilliug.
' On Thuraddy, Hannah Dunn, a maid servant,
ohtaiued 1501. (images, against • Mr. Lewis, u
truss sod cotub•maker, in Ludgate-street. for an
assault. and false imprisonment; which arose in
consequence or the girl's falling, in the late severe
weather, with a basket of enlinery articles, at the
Defendant's door, and breaking • pane of gluts;
but not being.able to pay for it, though she offered
to leave the beske!, he gave her in charge to a co:.
stable, and she was dragged to the C•mpter, where
she reinuined fur seieral hours, till some friends
bailed her. •
Lord Et.t.esutottoutto, in hist:barge to the J nry.
oleierved—.. Nothing is so bad ass bad Police; and
from the recent instances than have come before
• 'use, of the misconduct of individuals employed in
the Police of this great city ; if such misconduct
is sot corrected,. the police will become a greeter
unisance than the riot and confutioa which it is
mean to check and cositroul."
The above observation was drawn from his Leeds
ship by the flippant and disgraceful demeanor of
one Kimber. a Constable; who, acting upon the
charge of the Defendant, conveyed the Plaintiff to
the Comptes., where the was thrust into the society
of several abandoned and profligate females, and
coufu•uded with the dissolute and the guilty. •
Ano!seowszsmal

CITY•DOSIAESS.

Saturday. a Special.Couit of Aldermen was held
at to complain of nn. article win. 6 up-
paired in wine of the. newsoapers, purporting to
be • report of a trial in the Court of King's lirtich,
entitled " Doing e. Lewis." iii which Lord Elleti-
borough was made to reflect upon the mal-ailini-
oistration of the City Police. The inquiry was
priucipally to ascertain whether that report was a
correct one. To this end Masers. Park. Corm'',
and Bosanquet, were called is, who. as we were in-
formed, were of opinion that hie Lordship's obser-
vations were general. and not confined particularly
to the Police of Lambe. The Lou* MAYOR,
however. informed the Court, that he had seen the
Gentleutan who wrote the report in citiesties, and
that he had avowed it to be correct in substance.—
In support of that avowal. another Gentletima, who
took uotesof the trial, was called in and exaseined
at the b4r. He corroborated the assertion of the
tint ; and the Court forming • conclusion that the
report was a correct one, passed various resolatioas
upon the subject, fur which see our first page.