The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1825-11-16 00:00:00

DuRIE V. JONES.

Mr. HORNE wished to know whether the Court meant to alter
the intimation it had given upon Mr. Palmer's petition in this
muse, that he might be permitted, at a distance of more than
twenty years, to bring in • claim against the late Mr. Bowes's
estate.

The LORD Citasic ELLOR said, he did not mean to alter the in.
timation that the Court could not permit Mr. Palmer to go into
the Master's office with his demand, but he meant to slate the rea-
son• he had for reusing this indulgence to Mr. Palmer.
Mr. HAU T did not wish to give the Court the trouble of stating
its reason, fir pronouncing judgment against his client, because he
was sure that those reasons, whatever they might be, would be
found to be reason* not to be quarrelled with.
The Lon n CHANCELLOR said, he decided upon the petition
upon general principles.
Mr. HORNE then asked if Mr. Hart was was satisfied, and now
understood judgment to be given
Mr. HART said yes ; his client would have to be content to lose
2,0001. for the rake of " general principles."
hlr. Ilona; E next submitted, that Mr. Hart's client ought to pay
the costs of this application, It being an appeal from an order of the
Mast" of trio-
Mr. HanT certainly hoped the Court would not think this a case
for costs. •
31r. Hon sr E clearly considered it a ease for costs. The Court
Rad decided that 31r. Palmer had DO right to touch the turd, and
ROM COMA were given with the judgment, the funds would he
dsmnified. He only naked the coats ou " general principles."
(A laugh.)
His Li:intim', refused the application for CONS.

WELI.F9LF.Y V. TIIEOUILE OF BEAUFOII,T.

The SO I: 1cfT011:4 riE it ai w— an truc teti 06 uy, that 1f hie
Lordship did not wish to retain the affidavits he had in this case,
respecting the reference to the Blaster, that the parties were anxious
to have them returned.

The LORD CHANCELLOR dlid, he had them at home, and
would bring them into Court tomorrow.

VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COVRT, TUESDAY, N0v.13.

NUM V. TOIMAN.

This was a bill flied by the plaintiff, John Whew, a soldier, who
had served in the Peninsular war, against the executor of his late
master, Major Lawson, for the amount of a legacy of SOUL. Three
per Cents. devised to him by the deceased.
It was admitted in the defendant's answer that the plaintiff was
the person to whom the legacy was left as described in the bill. It
was farther allowed that there was a sufficiency of a
hi ussets to dis-
charge the bequest. The money had been paid m Court, subject
to the Vice-Chancellor's decision as to its application ; but it was
submitted on the part of the defendant, that the bequest was re-
stricted to the use of the plaintiff's children after his decease.
The VICE-CHAS CELT-OR—I have read the terms of the bequest,
and it appears to me that the plaintiff takes a life interest, and his
children are entitled to the reversion.
PUFFING AT AUCTIONS.
wowxisovar v. ADANTIMAITZ.

This was an application of a rather curious nature. It watt a
bill filed by the plaintiff for the purpose of compelling the special
performance of a contract entered into by the defendant m a public
sole by auction, held at Appleby. in the county of Cumberland.
Mr. HEALD appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. St:Grin: (with
whom was Mr. Locavr) for the defendant.

Mr. HEALD proceedelf to argue the case in support of the
A contract had been entered Into by the defendant, a Dr Adam-
thwaite, who was a schoolmaster In the county of eumherlar.d, for
the purchase of certain common lambi at Wateby. in that county,
with the manorial rights thereunto belonging. The contract took
place at Appleby, and was entered into at a public sale by auction.
where the defendant appeared by his agent, rind subsequently cure
forward as a bidder in his own person. and purchased the estate for
a sum of 1,0001. Defendant refused to fulfil his contract, on the
ground of a fraudulent and deceptive sale. It was alleged that
several puffets were employed at the vale; that the defendant was
in that manner induced to give more for the hind than he-would
otherwise have done; and that the sum at which it was purchased
was far above its real and intrinsic value. The estate eonsipted of
between 800 and 800 acres of common land, in the neighbourhood
of Appleby, with manorial privileges attached. It was stated in
the plaintiff's bill that it was the practice at Appleby to appoint a
' bidder in behalf of the vender. in order to prevent the property from
being sold below the value which the latter set upon it. IVhen the
amount which the vender was willing to accept had been bid, it was
then customary for the auctioneer to throw down his hammer on the
table, and declare "it was a sale." From that period it was '
derstood that no farther bidding. except bona fide real bidding, was
to take place. In his answer the learned defendant admitted the
existence of the custom, but urged that in the present cue a person
employed by the vender continued his biddings after the auctioneer
had declared " it was a sale." On the part of the plaintiff he was
free to admit, if this allegation were true, it would vitiate the We;
but the contrary was proved to be the tact in the evidence taken in
the cue, from which it clearly appeared that no bidding, fictitious
or otherwise, took place after the public declaratine of the sale.
The facts were simply these :—The defendant was a learned Doctor,
who kept a school near Appleby ; he was very anxious to obtain
the style and dignity of lord of the manor of Wateby ; and. with
the view of effecting his purpose, employed a person of the name
of Bradley as his bidder for the estate in question. During this
time and while the sale was going on the worthy Doctor was engaged
regaling himself in a room adjoining the sale room. Bradley was
first instructed to bid 600/.. then 11001.; and finally the learned Doc-
tor came forward, pmpria pertona, and bid 900 guineas. Pre.
sinus to this the biddings had proceeded at 101. advances each
time. The Doctor's agent had bid 7001., the vender's- agent
bid 8001. against him, and then came the learned Doctor, and nt
once rejecting and despising the pu-tillanimous advance of DM hid
800 guineas. advancing 40/. at one step. He appeared determined
to be lord of the manor, and lord of the manor he accordingly was,
having been finally declared the purchaser for a sum of 10001. The
estate wan knocked down to him at that prim, Init. as it appeared
afterwards, suspecting he had purchased, his lordship rather too
dearly, he repented his bargain, and refused to complete it. Ac-
cordingly, he attempted to rely:, himself thorn its conditions, by
saying he had been prevailed on to purt:base it too dearly by Mee
and fraudulent nit ans. That the eirctimiunneea might have taken
place en a moment of hilarity, he was not prepared to deny, but the
defendant had not stated that in his answer, and was not therefore
untitled to the benefit of the plea.
Mr. SUODEN emir for the purpose of explaining the state in
which it was alleged his client was at the time of the ode. It was
the custom (rather a strange one) in that part of the country. to
hold those aides by nigh:. They were frequently protraeted till a

' late, hoar. and the present one, as it appeared in evidence, did hog
terminate till twelve o'clock. The defendant had had a party 4:-
' friends to dine with him at his own house, surd in the evenlag tad. _so
journed to the place of sale. This most be held suthcient to sie..k.
count for the circumstances of this extraordinary affair. .
The evidence taken in this cause, which was very volumdl ,
was then read, and bore out the opening statement to •consi t
intent.
Mr. St:opt w„ for the defendant, contended against the validity
of the contract. Feveral puffers Itad been employed. That was MX
a necessary defensive precaution made use of to prevent the land
being sold below its real value, but to enhance the priori fmudi•
lently on the purchaser. If such a proceeding had been resorted
I to, the Cou:t could not enforce the rphial performance of &contract
s• obtained. To the irregulerity, attendant on the sale he was use.
disposed more particularly to allude, or follow the exeoipl of the ,
loather side, in the way in which they treated the iuteropentnee of
I the parties. Even the plaintiff's witnesses only repstsetitert thy
value of the property at about 5001. and yet the price had beau
raised to 1000/. on the defendant. It was amnion land, and upolt
enclosure the lord of the manor would only be entitled to one.sia..,
teenth part, something le.r than 49 acres; the annual Inifit ut`'••4
which, after deducting expenses, would not amount to 31. Tile L.
tice to the auctioneer relative to the stmt at which the land was to
' be sold was spoken of in evidence, but neither it nor a copy of jt
had been produced. Mr. Horton Bradley. the agent of Dr. it dorm
thwaite, was int authorised to bid 1308/. for the land, then he was
empowered to advance as far as 8001. • hiving dune whicb„hia ptia.
eipal mote into the room and offered 800 guineas. This he might
be supposed to do in the way of a cleneher, and to secure the estate,
supposing the opposition to arise from real bidder.. He should
have observed, that after having been with the Doctor, and subse-
quent to receiving inatructiora to &drones to C9Ol. Mr. Honors
liradley met Wright the auctioneer in the passage—for the harbor
were Ong in and out of the room at intervals dining the safe—and •
there he understood from Mr. Wright. and was led to believe from
his statement, that a sale hied been declared. Ott entering the
auction room, he proceeded to bid on the faitlfof Ibis ondecstatid.o,-
ing, but soon ascertained from the persons present that ibirsaki
was declared. This produced a squabble, terminated by Dom* .04
Adamthwaite's entering the apartment, and bidding in the mans 41,,
nor described. With regard to the puffers employed. Besgme..-e, t
was the principal one, but there was another who sra4
bidding without the knowledge of the auctioneer himself. 't
was Captain Hammond. He was applied to by Briggs to pu
he refused to continue that office any longer. No sum hid
tamed or ripdointed is a limit to Briggs, *became into the ruse
with a carte blanche. and might ha* proceeded as far as he thought
proper. Doubtless he did go AN fares he thought the Doctor would
follow him. Exclusive of the defendant, there were...it:ly two other
bona fide bidders. These were. Perkins, who had bid 50014 'ewd
l'hostipson, who had °fined a little more than 500 i. This otbers
were, !Smiley, the defendant's agent, and Hammond and Briggs, •
the two puffer's: so that it appeared the real hiddings only amounted
to 500/. or a little more, which wee tbe.true value of the propeity.
Nevertheless, it was sold for 1.0001. to Dr. Adamth vane, he bait 6 :
induced to believe there were several real bidders in the non, and
Chet he might have miscalculated the Willie of the lard; Thitt vele
evidently a trap laid far the defendant, as was clearly apparent fin*
the fact, that when the sum offered amounted to 9041!., the ant,
donee,. puffer. proprietor—in fact, all the parties left the room, for
the purpose of ascertaining from Mr. Thompson, who acted as the
defendant's banker, whether, in ease the estate were kitocked down
to the defend**, he would advance the necessary sum as a deposit.
On linding,Thourponn consented to do so, they retuned ; and, aft*
a little more time spent in putting, they induced the Doctor to bid
10001., on which the auctioneer, thinking he had gone hir enough,
laid his hammer on the cubic, and declared the defendant the per.
chaser. Under all these circumstances of fraudulent intention and
deception on the pan of the plaintiff: conslderhig too the state of
the Doctor, and that he was the defendunt not the plaintiff in the'
present cane, be Dusted his Honour would see reason to dismird
the hill.

The VICE-Cntewoteeon—What were the respective biddinga
of Captain Hammond ?
Mr. LOVATT—Thq are atated generally to have been from
about six tower's handed pound's.
"l'hertoo-Ceteetzt.e.oei—That Is the most important fact,
and the one on which the ease must turn. You complain of a se-,
mid miller. • Hammond Is the seemed puller. You say you arc
defrauded by his means. Now, if Dr. Adamthwaite gave an
authority to his agent to bid to the extent-of 8001. bowie he dee
fronded by means of Hammond's biddinge, which do notation to •
have exceeded 700 f.
Mr. LOVATT—The first authority was to bid to the amount of
6001.
The VICE.CITANCLI.I.PR—Yes. If previous to the enlarge-
ment of Mr. Bradley's powers from 6 to 61101. Hammond seas a
bidder, that is, if he was a bidder at a sum under 001. the choker,-
stance of his bidding may have led to the enlargement of Bradlefe
authority, and then the defer lent it defrauded. But if where's*,
the defendant is not defra4ded by him, and it not by him, then rot
by the other : for the custom admits of one puffer. Now I may
reasonably enough conjecture liemmeed's bidding% commenced
somewhere between bOOl. and 0001. beeeuee at a little above beete.
the bone Ale bidding terminated, but the Coon can't go neon con-
jecture, and it is not in evidence. It severe Hammond was ',o-
ohed to by the voila to bid, in order that the estate might rot be
1 depreciated in value on some future occasion, from appeathm to be •
knocked down at this tale. at too low a price. Tn present this pre-
rtlico to its "16114-B1 i Ags tees to Hammond. " Oh. tlen't.tet *Mire
ought in an low as 0 or 7001." and accordingly Hammond ad-
vances on the biddinga of the puffer, and nut of the buyers. I re-
peat, that in my opinion the case tune on the circumstances ot.
Hammond's bidding berme the land reached the price of 6001. or
after. If his biddinga commenced before. then a fraud (perhaps as •
unintentional yam, yet virtually a fraud,) was cottnnitted on the real
percher-ere.
Mr. HEALn nhserved, that he had in his opening exculpated
Capt..fientenond from any intentional participation In the freed
charged to have been committed bT the other side.
Mr. LOVATT—It appears that both Hamaised and Briggs were
bidders front 000. to 11110/.
The Vice-Cweectaeot.—That .is perfectly immaterise-e
It is no matter who were the bidden at those cones, for Bradley
would. Wording to hie instructions. have bid against Briggs
alone. np to 0001., and, of eantee. Briggs woeld have bill upon
Bradley's advances, so that it matters not whether Hammond was
then a bidder or not. In my opinion there ran be no objection
to the employment of a punier, as retch is the understood cet;tcren or
the country white the transaction took place. Dr. Adamtheine
must hare known well enough that somebody was bidding on the
pert of the vender till such time as the auctioneer, in whom (and
halt as Mr. fengden Itippomet in the 'stiffen, the discretion he rested,
striker Its hammer on the table and " declares e sale." In this
case the vendee communicates his intentions as to the property
.a,
the auctioneer, who goes on without declaring a sale till the be t&
dirge amount to 1000!. If you will, you may suppose the propesey
to be not worth •20111. ; that is net material. A than who goes to
auction Is understand to go there smart bid on Isis own opinion of the
value of the property. If he has Mood an erroneous one it is hie
own fault. But if fraud lee employed to deceive him and lend hien
into the formation of an erroneous opinion, then the conuac ne
obtained is void. In the present instance, if Hammond never bid
for theland till after it had reached the price of Wet., and 000►
had been mentioned by the defendant to his agent, there was no .
fraud. Adamthwaite hail already autherleed Bradley to bid to the
extent of 8001 and could not have been ildleenced by Hammond's
biddinga, which had not yet taken place. If, on the ,conne-y.
Hammond's biddinga commenced before the defendant exceeded
his order from 6001. to 11001. it was extremely material. and filtered
the whole complexion of the case. As no Cll,tolll of the venue,
authorized the intervention of a mecond puffer, Hammond's Diane
stood ter real one., and as representations of his idea of the valeta
of the property. In eof these biddines (euppostne they
preceded the amount oft ) Adamthwaite mmet have mired km
order from 1,00/. to 0001. If he heard Hammteel, a gentleman a
reepeetability property. arid Information (sn it appeared he wee)
bid np to MK the defendant might naturally enarlutle his own
estimate of the value of the pmpery incorrect. and J etermine so
advance In Ida offer*. If This was proved to hare or:7.arrA, I have
no hesitation to say it would have been a fraud, mid the ('octet
would not have confirmed the contract. But if this was not .tbe
cane. and the defendant gave his agent enders to advance its fir as
8001. of west consequence is it whether the agent bkl against A.
and B, or against A only ? Either the one or the other would have
imen ',efficient to have caused him to advance to the point speci-
fied. Circumstances have been !stated which render it a reemnehlt
conjecture that Hammond did commence his biddiaes beaux the
land fuelled the price of 6001. ; but n reasonable conjecture is not
a logical conclusion. 'therefore that is not enough. It must be
referred to the Master to inquire what were the biddints of Carmen
Hammorte

Mr. HEAL?, admitted that Mr. Mrmithouse could not Karel's@
pares. and that if the defendant had been imposed moor, In po,a.
sequence of Captain Hammond'a bidding', the tontract wee %Ind.
He just wished to put it to the Chart. previous to its being lefsue
the Master, whether. u Dr. Adamtbiteite was in a differed men
from that in which the sale took place, he wtts likely to be aware of
the fact of Hammond'e biddtony, supposing she latter be t.kt
before the estate had reached 6001.

The Vteg-Clrawerilnif.lassutne the egret rep)rtef—te by
principal what passed at the axle. Supposing Hnounond bad bid
fore the time mentiorod. I assume Medley repromit.d thm
cumin/nee to Dr. Adaeultwaite. I think it extremely orobsid.:
that Captain Hammond was a bidder before the estate riss:.cd fika.
because the kat of the rest bidders stopped at a little above :idd:
However, that is the *object for the Master's ioquiry. Alltht nth
no intention of fraud was entertained. yet., if a fraudulent siren
was thereby produced on the buyer, that is no apology. Lekt i: be •
referred to the Master, to inquire whether Hammond 'dad, a y
bidding before the Price reached 610 t, with liberty to Nate eay,oir-
constant-es specially.
After delivering Ina decision. the VICE-Cdaaclettdel eel& if
the refusal to Abide by the terms of the aeree.rent dud heed put. ea
the ground of the intemperance of all the parties, be would never
have affirmed the contract.
Mr Scongo—%re supposed as moth. your Renew% blot me.
tient of delicacy to the defendant. who kt4-r» a lava rehopl in tile •
neighbourhood of this place, entrained ut ream adopting the plea.
We did not wish the circumstances to en abroad to the emrhl
However. they will. owing to the cooduet adopted on the other
ride by Mr. Heald. and that without any advantage to hiocliest.
Mr.}Kann--lt was not my wish to state lily thing to the pre-
judice of this Learned Doctor. notwithstanding belies pimi,,ii(d
us with this suit, which will homy mind punish bimetal in the end.
Indeed perhaps both parties will be witfesers eventually.

cOUkT.OF KPIEVB BUNCII, TutsDAY, Nov. 15:

arms, 11r1XL ♦WD oTetrAte INHICA.D i&vi) OT11141111•
Th: phittititre is this actin Ate ram: halm, the deFendana ca.

.

I
10
I

~f~

Ii

-s• Ileohesll, eery on bathes* in Liverpool. The plaintiffs
-411441aptri. Mem& Davidson and Co. to purchase for them a
nom* eatten,. mid thy, were to receive for their trouble not a
_,_
_sollooldlleits bateree as bare an interest in the cottons so par-
mosoll. -7:bnysew Inhaye a third of the profits. These cottons
Obey pinhead on the =aunt of the plaintiffs, and afterwards
...._Pitithel thertil She on their own account, and received
"111111•141h.:11111 Ss INS brought to recover the value or these
aelaka, sea ilitt Intallan he the consideration of the Court wee,
.mitts.
~Adam and Co. lied such a property in the
l=rtlmathay crude awe, a good title to the pawnee ; that is,
illtilltwalea, awe No baminbidered as partners with the plaintiffs in
SildhapVcieri of the engem, or wieeely as their brokers.
It mend the CIS, for the plaintiffs, contending that
lanlthgbarldean and Co. werenterely brokers.
1k ?Arise. kr the defendants, contended that they were part.
'hen .at leu in this 111111111CtiOli, and consequently that they con.
swage*, title to the wiliness,
f after Mr. Kaye had risen to reply to Kr. Parke he fell
down- in g sweet insensibilite. He was tatined.ately taken out
et Own. When the svoineutary confusion which was created in
41.1mliSnall dad subsided • little, Nr. PAKILE rose to say that
11‘.. e was moseying, bnt that he was sot,in a condition to
tomb. ergiinient.l
The Lthela Close Jrtrettr niggerted that the ease had better
Mod ofec till Is-morrow, when he might be able to resume his
writ.
Mc ?mist immediately seceded to this suggestion.
The ()strwma occupied the rest of the day in hearing an elabo-
r.,.s7 ergertners en another special case, the details of which were
vg:iiely devoid of interest.--N.jodgnient wu given.
.• ... •
40DiatT OP COMMON PLEAS, TUCIDAT, Nov. 15.
a —.—

goods
sd the
Silk,

/!de
refer

Ay the
Ming

ny
.larch
gralrg4

~at.
..ad granted
condition that
I which

.4 rarArdinn,
private es he did."
in a few minutes the (mart resumed, and Dr. SeODART de.
livered the judgment. Ile said that the applieation of Sir Walter
Briscoe would produce both expense and delay ; drat it did net
apparent. the Court that he had any substantial grounds for desir.
a stiligelay, but nevertheless the Court wan unwilling to debar
h/ i fillitt.taking. the course he desired, but he must utiderstand that
h hiss st the peril of heavy Casts.
Jew Nen now applied to the Court to learn whether it wen
In ion of the opprobrious language used in open Court,
tirlewle"
ist the Judges were engaged in consultation.
Or. STODART—Knowiog nothing of the language flUtlllett to,.
we have only to declare our decided seine of its impropriety.
Dr. PH I I.LIIIOIIE—M y Lords. the language used brety Client
was certainly very improper, but 1 trust you will consider his irri-
tiled feelings, having been involved fur twelve years in an annoy.
mg suit.
Dr. STODAILT—WO know nothing of the language used, but
are opproiniost. terms applied to an officer of the Court in the face
efilset Opt, we censnler an insult to the Court, and are desirous
itifilefillit rtreetrongeet terms to testify our disapprobation.
rettiroeNirdoD—My Lord, 1 war present when the language
d of was used i it is necessary you should be put in pos..
aellfirlieel it. Sir W. Briscoe applied the tam " sconedrel" to
firoldtakee. 1 holtleneb language gross insult to the
C 4lll, tun convinced tint if an was committed in
tha I oaf of the Judges of his 'slaw Courts, they
*.
amid ieseeritly commit the pflioder.
ik.-Smoneet et—l tis iropoasibie far the Court to time language
toasprem in disapprobation vet such conduct, Ina the Court at.
pats that Sir Walter Briscoe will instantly retract his words.
Bit, W. llpiteoe—t f 1 sod those words before the Court, I vs'
,ottOoK. I retatt them as uttered in the presence of the Court, but
ward eat in private.
t tet.iiitiesoritspo—'elie Court was sitting, and the language cams
is its prisettee. •. -
Me. T•eres een (a Procteri—bir W. Brim* talked of anea-
-111-4—se sneaking and no mama subterfuge was never used by a
30.4todrel as that which has dropped from him.
Dr. tertensete—Sir Walter Briscoe was applying for a fa.
.swr to the Cain, which in some degree aggravates his conduct
°mats it.
De. Lee—ls the Pemba satisfied ?
Dr. jeu NE a.....M y horde, I shall 1....... *atilt-en-A with whatever the
t emit thinks d•iieg ; butt thihk I have a right to an unqualified
?enaction of the language applied to me. i
fin W. Briscoe-1 shall retract it, m having used it in open
t)alert.
Th. lionwfvoTox—My Lords; I am concerned in this suit
fie 817. W. Briscoe. I was in Court, and heard the expressions
termiltioeil oft they went mon disenneeCul, so tray thsgracelal
tbet if they be not retracted I Atli give op the papers and
-thief • 1-iteld. Every practitioner in the Court is bound to pro.
toe its-dignity, and prevent it from being made, what it sp.
pansi likely tube made, a bear-garden. It is necessary that
the proceeding' of a Court of JuetiCe should be conducted with
then y and decorum, in order to give its decisions effect.
De SeOlDatte—lt 113 W clearly appears that the language
used by - bir W. Briscoe was an insult on the Court, iii the
%lime of an Walt upon an individual officer of it, and that officer
otia o: irdown and esteemed respectability. It is no matter in
metst shape the insult wee offered, it must be folly and ohm.
lately retracted. Justice cannot be administered in any Court
sr,tthrtat d 'rutty ; fur justice will not have its proper effect if the
'litany at' Court be tint supported. air W. Briscoe must retract
Ms language word by word, or else the Court will hold lam ;n
ceestempt. it mot absolutely. setratted the Court will bold Min in
ecotel_.ol.
' Sir W. Ifirlaces leaving consulted with his Counsel, after ninth
Ikeits•ittp, soil with r.mouvrit reluctance, ri.iid—" I am sorry for
%Wm the !enrolee 1 have done before the Coast". •
Alr. 1/Re thouett the CAM' t was bound to 'mike the Proctor
(lee. Towneendi retract what he had said to Sit W. Briscoe.. If
Justin..., was &mete Provnts in defending them hem insult, an'
arise measure el justice ehould ha afforded to plaintiffs arid de.
faillants.
-0/. 110,00aque--tke lengunge mart by Mr. ToscarSd ISIS on
lac art °fillet:easy and in meshing. a From imult upeo It ; and
• she rt eanpos quake
torch conduct not. much sevetity.
- --. ere.-7WIXJII to -

COURT ()F THE Tfl AND CHATTHR or WEST-

11-15:1;TY11: TUESDAY, Nov.

Define Dr. Sw ant r-
Infrantoist v. lIPZARIIRIt.
In this cue Dr. H,AGOE a moved the Court for *divorce upon
the alleged ground of cruelty on the part attic husband.
The parties appeared is forma panyerir. The tuit.was pro-
moted by Mary Ann Spearman, against her husband, Hector
Spearman, and the libel stated various instances of unprovoked and
brutal violence. In one instance, the unfortunate woman, who
was described ea an industrious character, gaining her subsistence
by attendance bn lodgers, thought it neceperay to charge her hue.
band with an assault at Queen.square Other. and the 3bigistrue
sentenced him to confinement in Tothill.tirlds Bradewell, trout
which he was discharged upon the supplication of his wife. Her
clemency, however, prodticed an unfavourable alteration in his con-
duct, as the libel stated that he had subaequentiv, to repeated
instances, inflicted violent blows on her, and otherwise treated her
with the moat wanton cruelty.
I'he COURT inquired what' evidence there was to prove that a
lawful marriage had taken place between the parties
Dr. Haoor.n proceeded to read a copy of the Church entry, by
which it appeared, that Hector Spearman. he being a minor (over
the age of 17, but under the age of 21), was minted, n the church
of at. Martin in the Fields, in June 1811, to 3lary Ann Hart,
now Spearman.
The Cot. IT did not conceive that tine entry sufficiently identified
the 'parties ; there must he evidence or a lawful marriage too.
Dr. BAGGER said, that in addition to the entry in the church
books, there was evidence of tne marriage In the subsequent co-
habitation and acknowledgment of the parties.
The COURT said, that it lawful mairiage vat the necessary
foundation of all matrimonial suits. If a minor married without
the content of certain parties, whose concept watinecessary, the
marriage could not be lawful. In this t.sise there %eat no evidence
of the consent of the parties to the hushand's marriage.
, Dr. HAnOrit respectfully submitted that she late amendment,' to
the Marriage Act had legalised this marriage, even if it had not
been original)? legal.
The Cott RT thought the contract must be lawful when entered
into. It was desirous, too, to have better evidence of the identity
of the parties? Could not the evidence of the subscribing wit-
nesses be produced ?
Dr. IlAttnE it stid, that in this ease the witnesses wen strangers
to the partial; one was the Clerk of the Church, and although he
remembered that a marriage had taken place, he could not identify
the parties.
Dr. PIXICAPn, who appeared on behalf of the husband, said he
thought the objection suggested by the Court was fatal, he should
rely In it.
Dr. Ilanotn thought, that as this was a ease of the matt out.
intone and brutal cruelty, the Court should not exercise an ex-
traordinary degree of astuteness in lindingout objections to impede
the suit. The defendant had appeared in Court as the husband of
Mary Ann Spearman. If he had not appeared in that character
there a ould have been no defendant. .

The COVIRT did not conceive it exercised an unwholesome de-
gree of ututeness, by deciding that the suit mould not proceed
until some satisfactory evidence was produced, to peeve that a
marriage had been actually solemnized between the sallies. Th.•e
subsequent acknowledgment of ORE party was not sufficient.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, TUESDAY, Nov. 15.
• ritva.toirMattY CAit.

-
Samuel forgets was opposed
.by itlr. D. POLT.OOK, on the
pan of C. Illcatioa and Co., propriettus of the London Tavern.
Insolvent examined—SVas In custody in Whiterross,treet prison
in the November of last year ; he could not till how he then got
out, but thought It *as through the tostrementality of the Gover-
nor ; it might Its that he WWI put out one day without knowing er
a.,king how it happened ; lie was csnalnly not discharged wrier the
Insolvent Act; he had paid nearly or.e half what he then owed ; hie
present debts amounted ea 3761., which was about half the amount
of his tinnier odes.'

Mr. D. POLLOCK—Are you an LL.D. ?—No; on that head ii
watt deceived by person who promised to procure me a diploma
from the College of St. Andrew s, at Aberdeen ; I (hen tuned
the tide, but droped it afterwards, when I found I had no right to
it ; I dropped it about a fortnight before I went to prison, which
was On the 11th Of March last.
Are you a Member of the Antiquarian ,Raciery ?—I wrote a tope.
graphical work, which I rent to the President of that Society, and
was informed that I was elected a member of it.
What ! was there a deception in that case also ? Was the de-
ceiver the same person ?-1 es. (A laugh.)
Who was he P—A Dr. Austen, of Widtonston ; he was an LL.D.
of the College of St. Andrew's.
Whew did yrfu send the book to the_ president ?—When the ee.
cord edition came out I sent 'copy to him.
. What was the work ?—A biographical one—a topograpTilr—
a biographical one.
Now, tell us which was 7—Why, it was both. ((lreat laughter).
—lt contained a biographical sketch of the late King, and also
some topographical accounts of Kew Palace and Whet places.
Row came this Austen to know you sent the book to I'rord Aber-
deen ?-1 never sent a book to any such person.
I believe you ; but don't you know that his Lordship is Presi-
dent of :he Antiquarian Society ?—1 tion'ticonw ; I directed my
book to the President generally; I told Austen of the cireum.
stance, and on his assurance took the title, which I dropped in
two days.
PoLLoca—lt enabled you however td go to the London
Talmo, and order a dinner for the Rev. Slmuel Burgess, LLD.
F.A:S.; when wns it you had the first dinner P—On the Oth of
February last ; the tavern.keeper urged me to hive the most costly
wines.
_

Then it was he who urge& you to have Tenerife ?—Yea.
And Mountain ?—Yes.
And Lisbon ?—Ves.
And Bucellas ?-I'ea.

And Champagne!—Yes.
[Great mirth was here excited by the "'earned Conned holding
up the several wine-tickets issued by the inrielvenal
Theme-00nd dinner was held on the tith or 9th of March. It was
for eight pergolas. The amount of the bill for the that dinner Was
111. odd. The second hill he has not yet received, though he ap-
plied for it. When he demanded It Mr. Bleadan said—" Don't
mind it till after the large dinner." The large dinner was to have
been for 200 persons. In a week after the ',vend dinner he found
himself in gaol ; before which time he diecovered lie was rot an
Llalt or an F.A.S. The large dinner, which did net, however,
take ytace, was to have been attended by the friends of the Protes-
tant cause, and held on the 22d of March last, the Rev. Samuel
Burgess, LL.D. F.A.S. in the chair. Ile also distributed it card,
stating, that et five o'clock in the evening the friends of the Pro-
testa,nt education were to take tea. AR yras to have been under the
direction of the insolvent, who then styled himself, in addition to
his former learned titles, " Minister of 'St. John's Chapel, New
Town." There war, at the time no such chapel, but he intended so
to name a chapel, which was situated in that place, and had beat
dosed up for nearly a year; and the dinner was to have been in
commemoration of.openiug the chapel under its new panne.
Mr. A. Alexander was next examined by Mr. Poxaocta.—Wita
Denis one or the proprietors of the London Tavern. On the let of
February last the insolvent applied to him about is Society called
" The St. John's Charity, for the education nod clothing of poor
Protestant children." lie represented himself as the Minister of
St. John's Chapel. lie was anxious to know front witness what
the usual expense of dinners was, and was told that they could be
furnished-at any price from 3.4. to rd.& bead, but that the common
charge tOr charity dinners Wall 8%. Insolvent said lie must talk to
the stewards, Alderman Key and Dr. Collie; on the subject,
before be could make any final- amuigement. lie subsequently
called, and ordered a dinner for the stewards only, The dinner was
to have been furnished for Os. ahead. When ordering it he gave his
'tithes; as the Rev. Samuel Burgess, Minister of St. John's Cha-
pel. On the day of dinner no one came. The insolvent appeared
extremely anxious on the occasion. Ile expressed great barrow,
sod said the guests must have mistaken the day. he insolvent
was dressed in his canonicals. Ile wore a gown and hand. He an-
peered in the costume of a cle.atyman of the Church of England.
There same es the diallerboracite. Tile imminent. howeva . sena,
out in the evening, and brought some dissenting clergynaex Rom
the City of London Tavern, a here there was also a dinner on that
day. They drAnk 14 boitl;ei of wine, four If uhicli were Chant-
TAgne. lie directed the bill to be sent to Collett-place, Mite-end.
he insolvent called again. and said that as the stewards had not
tome before, be felt himself bound to give therh another dinner He
then ordered one tor the 10th of March. Tcn parsnip; came to it.
The amount of the b.ll was I'l. as. 6d. The heti:vent end his
Rev. guests were so tipsy on that occasion Riot they were not able
to Write order( for wine, and were supplied en verbal oats. The
inselecot requested that whale's would procute a awal performer
to .i,g for the company. Can't soy exactly what songs this same
pc:termer entertained them with. This, however, he knows, that
they.proke tea. worth of glass. Witness aubseinently delivered
the ball for this eotertainmeut to the insolvent's itiother,Ainti then
frimat out the whole secret of the fraud practised in him.
oaa.caerninoil by Mr. HEATH for the insolvent.—Never made
any recaarks as to tosolvent's age. Iskeer said that he was ex.
tremdy amine. Is nut in die habit of melting iheuirks nt those
from whom he receives orders.

Air. HEAT g—Then if a person present you with his ewe I sup.
pose it is quite enough ?—"No, Sir, his susoner we jiidge by ; his
manner is Jact we trust. If, for instance, a person CJITIC as a
clergyrunn, we give him credit as such. if. however, he presented
himseif attired in a wig and gown we would not hurt him —u a
clergyman I mean. IA laugh.) The insolvent tame to us on
Ingetlf of a charity. and mentioned some rexpectable harm. such as
Dr. (:ellter. &c. He (witness) was willing to accept the amount of
insolvent's debt to him in four yearly instalments. He vault& Italie
accepted it if he had been secured. Was nevi= Otero) M. as n
composition for the entire debt. The are? 414 pet eXenel 64. and
was tunes by insolve:i's mother. :WIMP* said. he did cot retie
oppose the insolvent from a wish to have him remanded ; he Wax
actuated solely lsv .public principles.
Me. HEAT u.—Yost bad better limit, your credit. phtt'br that you
wowld save the public more than by your itre.cut
Witness wrist to ICltitecross.street prison, tepee it:twist-hi, in
onnserp.eree of a letter which he teceived from him. Orered. to'
take to. in satisfaction of.his demand. ,
•
• Atlr. HEATH—Wad not that nuke etwergli
witness__prety,Str. would half your fel satisfy you latigh.)
Indeed. Sir, you must have F pretty eginign of up. .
beat .re-enanitned 4y r, POLt.c.gg.—S+eut not tegularly
II ea a disleitlng clergym, but los Niquently ureoctrell.as
was however promised by a fn rod that he wltiltrest
t4llllPci•
I. in c I —Wen, and 11u10die tou tett also

: ' ' • 1 '....i... LANE V. SILL.
. • 49° ' .....TOle Nisi had been obtained on a former day by
- • net to set asiile the service of the writ, on the
' 7 ' Wri she defendant having been arrested by the
f, : i
i- .
1: "" m .1,
t.
wt.,
as. -41 I:,
r..,.`saL-n..c.,;,,i.tile,:dTyw,
lee.
byla
g purchasel
toiSilk,ll‘s., n
tiyrt
taken
wkji
:isovoliab
ewniesibyhy,
agent,
r eongalotrnowat
,t.
hnarty
1,
.cossiduipdor rtaonoforei.nr.nott
Jones,l
.fiaeenty ld ehnw aoeci.
besides. wn
defendant,
condition
whichbay n
it hsde
• ....... 'Stephen silk.
pmt
ere
' • VAUGHAN now appeared to show CUM against
. .
• that the defendant was not entitled to the
. - .e.
-be played. The account against him was for goods
add • , ladle all the transactions between him and the
• 'he had bass nay known as htcphen Thomas Silk,
sat • tall 2hosioa.lkaphoo Silk ; in the letters sent by
• bawl* 1110.0dotilt his mono was an signed, and it was so
}tatillausid so rho acted which Iwo left with plaintiff. Mier being
'fan As • debt enure the begineingcf last year, be was of
r • ansited, and be bad now turned round on his bonefadc
asailetkig the arrest to be illegal, although he well,:inew
phiatiff had no knowledge 9f any other name than the one
opatle use of. The Learned Sergeant alto contended diet
au theelareadant had given bail, that ball did away with the ob.
jectiso..
Ar. Sseguant Rosawoutv, in reply, contended that it bad
bias emu and over again decided, that giving bail while in duresse,
slid not invalidate any obection that ought be made against a writ.
1 The oil - nation for the Court to consider was, whether the de-
* --......- '- arrested.
Crane unwillingness to get rid of a bona Me
- -
..
_.7........v....... • end would therefore take time to refer
tie - "1r...--- . - e question as it reseeded each party.
J
—.or—
COURT OF EXCHEQUER, TUESDAY, Nov. 15.
.
SI. AID W. OWt% a. SIR 1031XIIT VAI:GDAX.
SIT. Foxit.awtturs, with who. was Mr. RICII•ILDS, applied
Id the Court for an order to compel Sir Robert Vaughan to pay the
gam of twenty-eight thousand and odd pounds into Court, being
tie' Parehale money, and its interest since it became due, of an
estate belonging to the plaintiffs, who are infants. The estate was
uslltibrao crier of the Court, the defendant had bought it, and by
thadontract with bound to compkte the purchase on the 25th March
I
14". Ilia agent. Mr. Jones. had surveyed the land. and granted
new eases to etveral of the tenants, and had by so doing taken
.PIOVcd, which had not yet been ,
‘ t t ...."1 -Itad received no instructions from Sir Robert Vaughan
le • leans. rho land had been surveyed by Mr. Jones,
• that Sir Robin Vaughan would, as soon as the
• elan 7""" • • take possession. He had not yet taken possession,
• ' hos he: till the title wee proved.
' 7: ' •
weeit of..aoktioa, that
.tbe facto which had been
al•th pontesston. Thera wit VIII the Re-
p•ioted by the Court to receive the rents. His power
wul he could enthuse the payment of the rent from the
timing. kb would ha no mower to Mat to be told by the farmer
t- that.lla hut talus& • sew lease from Sir Robert Vaughan. These
wee ..nothrOht that the law would oompel a purchaser of as estate
Holt by seder of the Court, to pay the money into Court if posses.
Abu .proved ; but here there was no possession kroved. If
tha ' of the receiver was violently trespassed upon, it
•erresilda ape, be a reason to burden the person so acting with
all Jeke oossequenres of possession ; but nothing of the kind
/Lista, base, and they could not call upon Sir Hobert Vaughan to
i pay_tha money.
~. . Alouou discharged without costs.
i 1 ,
.t-• .-.......011
- T OF DELEGATES, Toman.sr, Nov. 15.
. . . •
- 4. • BRISCOE V. BRISCOE. '
A mandlitsliareino been granted in this salt, against the defend.
sax, Sir Waltet,Rrierne, the contempt of Conn. in bating refused
to pay enema, Well...mass! I Dr. Philliniore) applied to have a ped.
tier. beard, in which Sir 'Wither stated the suit to have been rex.
stunts, and the Cou enormous. This application was opposed by
Whilst the Code~ were engagd in deliberation t eon the
i .' cation made by Dr. Pnillintore, Sir W. Briscoe, addressing ite.
Jenner (the Proctor fer the opposite party) said, " it was a sneak.
/ i. 4 proceeding, and.lenner is a scoundrel for getting the munition

sw.aewca •11.1 lUUCU mvvrp.r. LINSCCIA, 01
Dr. LEL—Wallet 41004 agree with you. . • • ieralwN,
Slr W. Briscoe—lf jnstire be rot done to me for the insult °Malawi a
ollisat by o Proctor of the roan, I retract my retraetiou—it is twll Patch. He
1 efoll weld- - fiabn's /;4
Th.s angry disouoden was here torwshiajed by the announce. sir. Poi
Mow &lir; the Cour bad adjourned. het heed.
•
' •
"•—••• •aa••