The National Register.
London, England, 1821-11-25 00:00:00

ThIL hING P. ilUlt ropi.

The defendant, a constable at the Court house, Folk-
stone, appeared to receive judgment, alter having been
found guilty of an assault on a person named Dickinson,
an officer of the Customs, who was 'mistiest by an bite-
riated mob at the time lie was going to give evidence
before the magistrates. The defendant was stationed at
the door of the hall, with orders from the Mayor of the
town to let no person in. Mr. Dickenson, alto wore his
uniform, came will, his sword drawn, pelted with stones
mitt mud by the mob, said endeavoured to pass the &fen.
dant, who refused to let him into the Court-house. He
assaulted hits, and declared lie would lose his life before
lie should go in. •I'he Jury, at the trial, were directed to
take into consideration, a farther the defendant was acting
from orders received from his superior. The Jury were
of opinion he had gone beyond his duty, and found hini
guilty.
Mr. Justice Bayley, passing judgment, observed, that
the defendant must have known the officer was dying to
avoid the attack of the mob, and it was his duty, as a peace
officer, to protect him rattler than keep liiin out of a place
where lie expected such rescue and protection as the law
could afford. The sentence of the Court was, that the
defendant be imprisoned in the gaol of Canterbury tau
moinliA, and find sureties for his good behaviour, himself
in 1001. and two others iii 201. each.
Soon after one o'clock, Mr. Justice Holroyd sat at Nisi
Pi ins tried several causes.

The Court ibis day heard Special Csses argued.
TUESDAY, NOV. 20.
THE EARL OF JERSEY V DEAN.

This was ditected by Isis Honour the Vice-Chaneellor,
for the purpose of taking the judgment of the Court upon
the legal operation of a line levied by the Earl and Coun-
tess of Jersey. The question appeased to by, whether
the levying of this fine was a forfeiture of the estate set-
tled on Lady Jersey iss her marriage settlement.
Mr. Lynch on a former day was heatd in behalf of
Lord Jersey. He contended that the estate could not be
divested by the stets of the parties.
Mr. Cuote addressed the Court this day, contending
that the estate was forfeit, d.

The Lord Chief Justice, after heating the whole of the
argument, intimated, that the Judger would consider be-
fore they gave judgment. His Lot .Iship observed, the
rase had been extremely well argued on both aides, and
much to the benefit or the clients.

Doe on the Demise of COLE v. J. FITZGERALD, Esq.
This was an action of ejectment agaiust Mr. Fitzgerald,
the defendant, to recover certain 'treatises in question,
They consisted of two old dwelling-houses, known by the
name of Beane:lamp, fronting the turnpike-road, in Ram-
sey, two cottages to the west, a culith'S shop, atiii four
cottages litinieng Love lane, with other premises. In
ISM, two cottages were pulled down; and in August,
11512, Mr. Fitzgerald began to erect a new dwclhng-
house on the belie of the two cottages. On 'the 17th of
November, ISI2, he made his will, and among other
bequesis devised as follows:
" I live and devise my dwelling house and premises at
Ramsey unto Elizabeth Cole, of Kout ey, tut and during
her natural lite, and after her death I give and devise the
said dwelling house, garden, and premises to her son
George Fitzgerald Cole, now an infant, who was baptized
in the parish of St lilies in the Fields, in the county of
Middlesex, to hold the said premises to the use of himself
and his heirs for ever, but in case Gturge Fitzgerald
Cole shall depart this life under age, and without issue, 1
direct the said div, Ilitig boast., garden, and pi emises
shall became a pat t of the residue of my estate and el.
It eta." The te•tator also gave Mrs. Cole all his furniture
and effects. His estates situate at Wexford and Water-
ford, in liviatid, he gave to John Turner and J. Purcell,
hta hell

The It tor of the plaintiff, Elia. Cole, cohabited many
years with the tt stat or, who died without re volsiii•, his
1k tore his death he moved out of the 01,1 dwelling
house, railed Leatichanits, into the new house lie had
even building, and the gn. stion Was whether the devisee,
Mts. Cole, took the whole of the testator's property at
ttoinsey, under the words "110115 r, garden, and pre-
mises,' used in the will, or only part of the property,
consisting of the old dal:Mug house, without the new
house, cottages, and appuitehatiees. The question, iu
the form or a special ease, came before the Court.
Mr. DCIIIII.III, as counsel fur the lessor of the plaintiff,
contended that the testator, by the words house, garde'',
and peensises, imetided to give this lady, Mrs. Cuba and
5011, all his property at Mousey.
Mr. Adam, un the other side argued, that the lessor of
Ilse plaintiff was not intitled under the bequest to retain
either the new house or furnitme renamed into it.
The Court were dewily of opinion, that all the testator's
plops fly at ltosisst•3 passed to the devisee unfit r the teems.
of the will, and gase judgment for Mrs. Cole, who will
consequently be admitted to possession of the property.
The Lord Chief Justice at two o'clock, when the Court
was I ISlllg to sit with the rest of the Judges in the Excite.
quer, said, he understood several persons were attending
to receive the judgment of the Court ; it would thei elute
be bust to proceed with judgments to-morrow, Thursday,
and Finlay.
Mr. Peat son reminded the Cilllli, that they had allowed
him to move, this day ot to-moie ow, for a minutia' Mien-
mason mi,stitist m ssti agate, lot ;slisise of his authority.

Lord Chief Justice.— e will hear 10-morrow.
Mr. IN sull.-11111cis it COllle Oil to-und row, time will
be a ditheolty in the proceeding.
Lord ChierJustice.—We will hear you to-morrow.
The Jtitho then ruse and proceeded 10 the Exeltegtaer
Chamber, to hear argimients of Counsel upon a point of
law at bit% at the vial via Crown case.
Wil)hk6l/AY, ?Ob.
- .. . -

Ali. Reader tuoVcd 101 Icabe to Ille a et Melina inifutma..
;,gaisist Mr. Julni Walker, and Ilati utter uverseeux,
of St. Mary, Nottingham, fin nut cinifur iii iii g to the (fi-
let:lions ui a relect verity, assembled in imisnance of an
act fur better providing fur Inatiaitciacitt of the pout.—
This application arose tint ol a transaction beture ilie
Court last year. The palish of St. Mary, Nuiiiiigliauti,
contains lt(00 poor, mid the aninal expellee incurred
by the inhabit:4ldr nllll/111111 ill 10,0(.411. Tile palish be.
came disratistieti with Me way in which their funds
vivre managed, and gave notice to the toictseerd to MUM-
-1111.11 a Nelect verin. Ths.) stisised, mid this court was
apphrd to li.r a wati.l. 5, Mach wit.. oanird, anti the
0% t las-13a Waded lat.', ILIUM, Lout !wally welt conapcllttl

•

I

to comply. In June last a special vestry was summoned,
and at the said vestry several resolutions passed. Om:
directed the overseers to discharge Mr. S. Wilkinson, the
master of the will klionsv. Every one of these resolutions
the overseers treated with total disregard and contumacy.
There was, boa ever, oue subject wheel' they were ready
to attend to. By the act ol the SJth of the King, they
admitted that the parish had the tight to say what poor
should receive relief, and consequently they were ready
to •obey the directions of the seloet vestry on that point
but all other instructions they treated with disregard,_
Mr. Header contended, that the overseers were obliged
by the provisions of the act to obey all the resolutions of
the vestry, and therefore the information he applied fur
ought to be granted, in order to compel them to do the
palish business according to the wishes of the parish.
purrs.

Mr. Justice 11.iyley.—" This is not a case so clear that
you must inter corruption in the officers in not complying
with these tesolutions? The court never grants a criminal
infutination against parish officei a without a prinsa facia
case of corruption, and 1 think the construction tit a new
act or Parliament may Mad to some hesitation. Ido not
mg. that the refusal to comply is so clear a case of corrup-
tion that the court ought to grant a criminal information."
refused.

TUE KING U. JACKSON, THE EIDER, JACKSON, JUN. AND

_
JERVIS,
The Solicitor Gaiter& applied to the court for a new
trial in this case. The defendants were found guilty by a
jury at Goililltall, of a conspiiitey to sue out a commission
of bankruptcy against Jackson the younger.
The Lord Chief Justice read bib notes of the trial.—
The sun of Jackson the elder saw an advertisement, of-
lei ing the share of a lucra:ive business fur sale. In con-
sequence of that advertisenit lie lied an Intel view with
Mr. Edgar, of Bartlett's•buildiugs. and was introduced
to Mr. Fox, who agreed to mina him to one-ball share of
his business, as a surgeon, fur a consideration of .10501.
He was also to have the option of purchasing the whole at
the end of a limited period. Advances were made by
the father to the son, who became debtor to his father to
a cousideraille amount. On the day the son was to pay
the consideration to Fox, who was stied for the MIIOIIIII,
and Miring that state of things, the defendant stied out
commission of Bankrupt against I
The question at the trial was, whether any debt bus.
fide hart been contracted between the son and fattier so as
to justify the petitioning creditor's debt.
Ihe solicitor General now applied for a new trial, on
the ground that they had discovered, since the trial, a
deed of indenture, which proved that debts were really
due front the father to the son. He contended that the
parties had debts against the son, which justified the
piling out the commission for the purpose of preventing
the *Mrs property from being swept away by one el editor.
The discover) of the deed to which lie alluded was suffi-
cient ground to induce the Court to grant a new trial.
Die Lord Chief Justice asked if any gentleman bad a
note of the manner in which lie left it to the Jury ?
'foe Solicitor General bad no note.

The Chief Justice said, the impiession out his mind was
not so much to question the alleged debt due trom the son,
butt a hether it was to be considered such a debt as would
justify tins father to sue uut a commission.
Tile Solicitor General adverted to the affidavit, in which
lie butted that he advanced sums of 11111 l iey to its ►on from
time to time, in consequence of his having a small propert).,
which he derived lions his grandfather; the oilier children
of .11r..1aLlisun haul no property, uud cousequetal) the father
expected no return.
TLe Court graii!rd a rule to chew cause.