The National Register.
London, England, 1816-05-06 00:00:00

CONTEMPT OF COURT.

Mr. Girdlestone moved, that Mr. George Newnham, who
had been brought up by Habeas Corpus from the King's Beuch,
might he committed 2• the Fleet prison, for his contempt, in
refusing to lint in his answer to a bill tiled against him.
Mi. Newithaun, addressing himself to the Lord Chancellor.
said, it was utterly impossible for him to answer to the volu-
minous matters which tad been introduced into the bill. The
injury he had sustained in his health and fortune renliered him
incapable of the exertions which were required to put in his
answer. He trusted his Lordship would not commit hint to
Vie Fleet. He already had the• mislbrtune to be a prisoner in
the King's Bench- He grieved it should eVell have been insi-
nuated he was .capable of any contempt towards the Court in
which his Lordship presided. He had no desire to oppose the
I int and regular course of law. If his Lordship would direct
him how to act, he should deem this the happiest moment of
his life.
Mr. Girdlestone observed, that all that was wanted was
the defendant's answer. He had already had nine months to
prepaee.mL
Lord Chancellor.—l cannot, Mr. Newnham, relieve you,
tin. the law of the country is, that y must answer. I cannot
help you more than I could help myself in the same situation.
1 have no option—if an appearance or answer is not put
in, I am bound by my oath to commit the party in contempt.
Mr. Newnham hoped his Lordship would remand him to the
King's Bench, and not send hint to the Fleet prison.
Lord Chancellor.—l have no power to commit any one to
the King's Bench. You must be committed to the prison of
the Court.
The defendant was accordingly committed to the Fleet .
WALTLN JUNE&

The defendant, who had contracted a marriage with a ward
of the Court, which was invalid from the misspelling of the
names, and against whom an attachment hail been issued for
subsequently publishing boom at Manchester, is at length in
custody. She had emitrived to a mile the search that was madd
for her a considerable time, a police officer who had been
sent in pllrsuit of her, at last found her place of residence,
and eenvey ed her in custody :a M.!uchester.
Mr. Allen, the Lord Chancellor's tipstati is gone to Manclies—
ter, to bring her op to London.
The Lord Chancellor said, he was sorry to see the. cases for
judgment accumulating se fast. They had amassed 'to such
.a.flegree, that he was of opinion he would not be able to do the
sinters justice, if he was Au decide them in one day; he would
therefore divide them, and give judgment in half on Tuesday-7-
the remainder he would dispose of on Thursday.

COURT WRING'S BENCII.-SATuRvAY,Mitit 4.-

NESTTRIALS.

D'AMFDO'rTOM AND CO. V.CATVit AND CO.
This WW an action tried before Lord Ellenborough at Guild-
hall, during tke last sitting, when a .verdict was found fur the
plaintiffs upon certain bill ; of exchange for £;i6; S.
Mr. Toppiek; applied for a rule to skew cause why this verdict
should nut be eat doe. n ; the hum of C 146, the al11011!%Cof one of
the bills, on theground that the biaitt question was the preperty
of the a.ssignees.of Messrs. Harvey, banker., of Billericay and
Rockford ; the same 114Vi11g tome 111(0 the posscs•ion of theylain.
tiffs after J. W. Harvey, one•of the partners, hail committed . an
act of bankrupv.v.
The Attorney :itneral however contended, that the. Harveys,
never hexing given a valuable tousidercion for the bill in
question, had no interest to convey to their assignees, and
therefore that the bill was a bona fide security in the hands of
the plaintiffs a verdict was aceerdiagly taken for the plaintiff
with leave to move.
The Court declared its opinion,. that the present plaintiff's
Lad no occasion whatever to ming. 4 themselves with the -bank-
ruptcy of the Hatreys. The Harseys as appeared from the
evidence, had no interest whatevet to convey to theif assignees,
Laving never given any valuable eisisideration tin. the Bill The
:sae wee (4 afore r(fead.
•