The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1822-06-10 00:00:00

A LARGE SNARE.

A large shark was observed last week off CakW Castle
Hants, by Mr. Bailey, master of the Canteen there, who wait
in his bust at the same time. He instantly rowed us
shore, and having procured • 'musket, with some ►all
cartridge., sista put off to the spot. The mossier darted
with great velocity towards the boat, when Mr. Bailey
discharged the piec, withia a yard of the fish. Ho recess-
isig the fire it west off, but almost instantly returned, and
wish his tremendous jsus wide open attacked the boat, and
received • second shot near the shoulders, which caused it a
second tune to disappear, but it game op aeai• iu shoat seven
or eight minutes, to all •ppeusncr, in a distressed state. The
effect sf the first shut was visible un its belly, tt haviug gone
quite t►rough, sod she blood discolouring she water. Os a
third shut being fired it went dusts sad was seen ars wove.
It it conjectured, that the GA was from 14 to 16 fret la
length.—(Brighton Herald)

MINORITY
AGAIIIST WI IRISH CONSTABLES BILL.
NAIOAT, JUNE 7.

Abeleromby,Na.J. Gashell, B. Pi-hoir, Hon. F.
Barrett, S. X. Hamiltiot, Lead A. Rice, T. S.
Wed, H. Hume, J. kearilo, I).
Bruasbant, N. Horst, R. Ridley, Sir M. W.
Bourse, O. Hatt bitmoa, N.H.. Re mbuld, C.
Illimicra, T, F. Jervoiar, G. P. Rob. etas*. A.
Calera•, J. Kraarily, T. F. gearless, .1.
Campbed, 11.. Latauchr, R. Smith, W.
Carter, Jobs Lenwu, Sir W. It•noth, R.
Colborne, N. R. Lemaard, T. B. tiebrught, tEr 1.
Cascameam, L. Lashiairion, 3. Tr. in .yer, J.
Crompime, Baal. Laolry, V. White 1..

. - .
Creevey, T. Mash*, J. lt we J. R.
Denison, W.I. Milbank, IC W. bb:, E.
D nnnnnn ou, Va. Monett. J. B. Weider's, C. C.
Evans, W. Marrysii, J. 'lii,clJ. Alderociii
Fereusoo, Sir R. C. Newis•ri, Sir Jobs Winisuore, W.
Forbes, C. O'Callaghan, J. Wodehou.e, F.
Grsttsn, J. Polisier,C. F. TOL! VIM
_ _ _

Cleuerrisy, Lord Power, R. Abhor's, Vs..
Gram, RighlHoe C. Posrlesi, Ho.. W. Ebrisess, Vis.

LAW ItIIIiLLIGF;NCE.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, SATURDAY, Jumz S.

PUGILISM.
HUNT V. 11C!..L.
This was an actsuo brought by the Plaititiff. tl•e
conductor of a sparring exhibition at the Fiver%
court, Leicester-square. against the Defendalit, the
proprietor of the Weekly bispairk newspaper, for
a libel. ft was tried at the sitting. alter last
and a verdict was found (or the Defendant.
Mr. Serjeatit BOIANQU►T now moved lon a rule
to she* cause why this verdict should out be int
aside, sod a new trial granted, upon the ground of
misdirection on the part of the Judge. The
Learned Judge. he submitted, hail, in summing
up the facts of the case to the Jury, intimated it
as his opinions that the exhitriiiiyi of which the
Plaintiff was the conductor, was illegal—and,
consequence, the Jury had found their verdict fur
the Defendant. Ile bud now to contend, that the
opinion thus given by his Lordship was nut correct
in point of law. The Learned Seljertat then !o.
carded to argue that the exhildtion so question was
altogether harmless in itself; that uo now:hitt' could
arise from its repetition; and. that it was no nose
objectionable than exhilo ions of fritcrog, or archeij.
or any of those other gymnastics exeicises. the 111.
tent of whirls was to milord rinusenient, while they
were calcul.ited to teach the tot of self-olefelic..
and the practice of which bad never been ques-
tioned.

The CHIEF JUSTICE said; that he certainly hart
stated Ins opinion on this subject in plain terms to
the Jury, end Unit opinion trammed unchanged.
Nevertheless, he was desirous that the Jury shostl.l
hive given such a verdict a. slight have led to
more enlarged consideration of the question. Mrs
Serjeaut Pell, who conducted the case for the Di -
resident, however, had very properly urged, that the
Jury were the judges both of the law mud the facts,
ILA they had, oil a full view of all the circern.
stances, found the verdict which bad been de-
scribed.

The Cone, then gave their opinion seriatim..
that there was no pretence for disturbing this ver-
dict. The exhibitions of which the Plaintiff visa
the conductor, were in do respect similar to those
to which they had been compared, inasmuch as the
latter had never been the cause of prixe-lights, 9r
breaches of the peace, whereas the former were
known to be precursors of such obnoxious events.
Matches were made, bets laid, and very frequently
Imes lost, as consequences of such scenes ; and any
tweeting which thus tended to a breach of the peace,
was clearly a misdemesnor.—ltule refused.

BREACH OF PROMISE OF MARRIAGE.
lIATTHILWII V. RILTMOI.DI.

Mr. CußwooD Opened the pleadings in this ease.
The Plaintiff complaiued of r breach of promise of
marriage on the part of the Defendant, and the da-
mages were laid at 1,500/.

Mr. Serjeant PELL, in stating the circumstances
under which this action had been brought, said he
did. not mean to go at length into thAprinciples
which geuerally governed cams of this description.
Every case must stead upon the facts which more
immediately beloaged to 'well; and only in propor-
tion to the injury sustained could deranges be reco.
erred. Undoubtedly, there were cases in which a
man would be justified in breaking his word, how-
ever solemnly it bad been pledged. If a wan had
been led into a contract by circumstances of gross
delusion, and that he had subsequently diacovered
the deceit which it had been intruded to practice
upon him, a sufficient apology could thus be urged
fur its breach : but where no such circumstances ex-
isted, and where a man, arrived at the full years of
discretion, had thought proper to lead • woman
into the hope of • matrimonial counexion, which
hope he had afterwards betrayed, without the
shadow of a cause, then his conduct was indefensi-
ble. He did not mean to put this case before the
Jury as one of deep aggravation, and all he asked
for his client was • fair and reaveinible compen-
sation fur the injury she had sustained. NVere lie
to ask more, lie felt that he should justly subject
himself to censure. Tice facts were shortly these :
The Plaintiff was • widow woman, he believed of
the age of forty year., or perhaps rather more, be-
tween forty and fifty. The Defendant was a smut
older than the Plaintiff, he might say ten year., ine
that the Jury would see both pantie. were adeausetl
in years ; they had known each other for several
years. The husband of the Plaintiff died iu
the month of March 1815, and the Defendant wait
executor under his will, so that he was fully spa
prised of the property of which the Plaintiff be-
came possessed. From 1815 down to 1840, it sp.
peered that lie had shewo towards the Plaintiff
every attention, and diaclserged the trust repus.d
in him with great propriety. In 1840 it would
seem that he lied altered his views towards the
Plaintiff, and declared his intention of form..
ing with her • matrinnouial engagetneur. In
this character lie comiused his visits, and Ott-
moiely, in the anticipation of marry tug her, he in-
duced bee to change tier place of rewoence, and to
purchase suitable ruminate fur their future accum.
modation. His conduct, however, did not rest here,
for, on the Bth of August he at- malty executed et
settlement, in which provision was established as be.
tween husband and wife. Undoubtedly he could

.4
t