The National Register.
London, England, 1811-05-26 00:00:00

.cause between Sir Francis Burdett and the Serjeant at Arms,
•Cff the House of COmmbns, 'stood over Until the argument in
the cause of Sir FranciS Burdett and the Speaker shouldbe
Tbsed of—that being now done there existed no other grounds
for postponing the trial of this cause. As to the case of Sir
'Francis" ilUifit4tt, against Earl Moira' that stood over in the ab-
• settee of a material witness (Colonel Coleman) who being now
In this hintdom, there was no longer any reason for postponing
, the krial of this cause.
• Lard ELLENBOROUGII, after a short consultation with his
brother Judges, appointed Vt'eduesday the itch day of June
• next for the trial of both causes.
JUDGMENTS.
THE KING V. DRAKAI{D.
The defendant in this case was brought up for final judgment,
for a libel upon military discipline, published in the Stamford
News, the particulars of which we have reported in a former
paper. He was sentenced.to fray a fine of '..)001. to be imprisoned
in the Castle of Lincoln, for the space of eighteen calendar
months, and at the expiration of that sentence, to find security
• for-future good beh_viour ,hirnself -in 4001. and two sureties in
.2001. each.
• • THE ICING V. COLLYER.
This defendant was also bicught up for judgment, for
publishing a libel on the Commissioners of Assessed Taxes for
the district of Salford, in Lancashire, also •mentioned in a
former paper. He was sentenced to twelve mouths imprison-
inent in Lancasterjail.

THE KING V. WEBB.
This defendant WU also stiitenced to eighteen months im-
prisonment in the county jail of Berks, being convicted of a
irand upon the reventie, by oinking the name and stamp of the
Extise Offler of the district to a quantity of paper.

ti

• TIIE KING ;V. PERKS.
The defendant, an Excise- Officer, was also brought up for
judgtnent, being convicted of a conspiracy to defraud the reve-
nue of the duties payable on paper, by permitting his seal to be
affixed to varicus bundles of paper. lie was sentenced to cigh.
'teen months imprisonment in flint Castle.
THE KING BISHOP AND TRIP.
---
The defendants, two soap-boileri and chandlers at Maidstone,
were sentenced, the one, Trip, to be imprisoned in the jail of
Maidstone for eighteen calendar months ; the other, Bishop, to
twelve months imprisonment in the same jail.
;ViWain Gibtfrons, tried and convicted before Mr. Justice
Chambrt, at the last Assizes for Exeter, of assaulting John
in a dispute about a right of way,was sentenced to pay a fine

of 51. -
Thomas Feat hard, a tavern-keeper, was also sentenced to pay
a fine of 40s. for an assault upon Wm. Cl!p...,tr,n, an officer at
mace, and his father-in-law, originating in a dispute about pecu-
niary affairs.

THE KING 'V. BARTON, ESQ.
Ts •
isief!ndant was brought up for judgment, having been
Oanvicted 3f assaulting one Richard Dancer. It appeared upon
et *part, that the defendant, with some brother students of
Oray's Inn, had been dining in the Hall of that Inn on the grand
lay in last term, and in proceeding up HOborn, they accidentally
tostled against the prosenitor, who making une of some very
abusive terms, was assaulted and pushed off the flags by the
defendant. The parties were all I,rought to the .wateh-house,
when bail was given for the defendant's appearance before the
Magistrates next morning ; but instead of being indicted at the
Sessions, he was some time after indicted in the Crown Office.
It further appeared that the defendant had frequently ()titled to
coomise the mat t er since, and to make pecuniary remunera-
tion. mpr Under thes, *rcumstances, the Court permitted the par-
ties to go before the Master to arrange the matter.

THE KING V. CHURCHARD ANT) r.TITERS.
This was a rule granted on a former day against the defend-
ants to show cause why a criminal information should not be
tiled against them for making a riot, interrupting and assaulting
,a congregation of Protestant Disseuterc,while performing divide
`worship in their Meeting-home,. in Wickham Market.
The A:lumen-General showd cause on thy part of the defen-
dant, Churchard, who denied that be had to the Meeting-
house for the purpose of disturbing the con!trt-gation or taking
arty part ii. the riot ; but it not appt wring to the satisfaction of
the Court that he sufficiently denied some of the specific
charges, especially his having worn a ribbon or laurel leaf with
the words " Church and State" inscribed upon it—and the other
defendants not having showed any cause, and from other cir-
cumstances, the Court after hearing Mr. Garrow onortly, made
the rule for a criminal information abs4ute.