The National Register.
London, England, 1818-05-10 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

149

COURT OP KING'S BENCH, g -ATURDAY, MAY Z.
RIOT TR DISTURB A DISSONTINCI CONGREGATION.
The Rev. W. Eastm, J. Gerrard, R. Handal!, G. Lever,
J. Trowbridge,W. Ford, J.White, and mod lieros ere brought
up to receive the jedgment ut the Court, having been foetid
goiltY at the Sitiishurs Assizes, heft re Mr. Justice Holroyd, ofa
riot with Intent to distorts a dissenting congregatitm, asseic.
bled fur the purposes of religions worship, in a house duly
ii reused, at tt•tcy, ou the 51,1 of December,
The Learned Judge read the notes which he took at the
trial, front which it appeared that a numerous muff hail re,.
se/art/led at the front of W. Hetes cottage, at Anstcy, in
which the Rev. Mr. Hopkins was preaching on the evening
its question, where they commenced dariciug, whistling.
singing. blowing row horns, shaking sheep belts, and makieg
other noises, und that the defentlents were present, aidinganot
assistin r therein; that these disturbances prevented the pussi-
Litity of perforining Divine service on that awl other occa-
sious.—Rutt's house being duly liccured, ti►e present prose-
cution was brought to prevent interruption in future.
Mr. Easun►'s affidavit was put in cud read; in whieli
stated. that ho had been upwards of Sd years, curate ut k:...
stet'. lie Kati lived in friendly communication with the former
dissentiug preachers, who had officiated oct•asionally tittle.
On the day in question. lie was going down to the house of
the defendant Gerrard, respecting some books fur a Sunday
school ,and knew nothing of the meeting its question; wlirtststfflr.
Gerrard's house,several of the parishroste rsessue and compla i
edofthe interruptiontheyhait received front the dimple r's nee r
Butt's home : this induced them to go to the spot, when a
person named Jay, a friend of Hopkins, cause up to him, and
asked who Ise was. Mr. Easton said 1w was tLeclergyntan of
the parish. Jay teplied," You the clergyman of tb•• parish
Ifyou are you do not preach the Gospel." This address and
other similar expressions did irritate him ; and he confessed
he did not use all the exertions l►e migkt have done to repress
the noise made by Iris parislsioner s, who wcte dancing out
what was denoinimited the daucu►g 'dace, lie ir Butt's cot-
tage , lit now notch regretted having [wear thus betrayed by
his feeling into an oujostitialtle impropriety of coutluct,whiela
he never ceased to lament. He had now been for thirty year.
Alinister of the Gospel,. bail [nought up a family of ten
children, never having hail au income of more than 881 per
tantrum, till within the last twelve months, except the ocea-
slonal aid he had recoived front the benevolent donations of
charitable persons to clergyman with coutined incomes,
from time to time. Withiu the last twelves months, however,
he had been presented to a living of 1201. Suave the trial, he
had made application to the prosecutors of this indictment,
who were, he understood, a society in LOllllOll, to know what
he could do to satisfy them. The answer returned was,
that nothing short 01 4 public apology in the newspapers
would be accepted. This was a degradation which lu• trusted
their Lordships would consider lee was justified in refusing to
undergo, anti he hod rather preferred throwing him/ellen the
mercy and the justice of their Lordships.
The affidavit of Gerrard was also read in which he stated,
that he had acted without any premeditation, and greatly
regretted whathe bad done ; that he had since trial alsoapplivl
to the prosecutors for mercy. the terms held out to Irina
were to pay all the eapeusca of the prosecution, to give 2tol.
to the Salisbury 'Wino:try, to make a public apolo:zy in the
newspapers, and to enter into sureties to appear tor joilginenr,
when called on. These were terms he was nut able to com-
ply with, and he applied for come modification of them;
and the answer he received was an order to attend to receive
judgment.
Affidavits were put in front all the defen•lants, expressing
their contartion, and affidavits to their character were also
read.

Ou the part of die prosecution, tire affidavits of the Rev,
Mr. Hopkins and of J. Hutt, weir: put iu, stating that an at-
tempt to pert:um Divine service was made on the Otti of
Much, :it Butt's cottage, hut continual interruption was
giseu (torn without, and no attempt has since been made to
perform Divine service in Anstey.
'1 iie Court then proceeds d to give its judgment ; and after
commenting 011 the various cireuntitalices of the case whirls
their Lordships observed Were not of an agelavated nature,
it 1101 aiolitArilla there was any thing preme.iit.tted on the part
either of Mr. Easton or of Alr. Gerrard, adjusted that Enciou
should pay a fine of 51,; Gerrard of Wi.; and that azets
should enter into a reeagnizAuce iu Lt) 1. to keep the peace
fur three years; and saw other SeVell tielelol4/1101 should
pay a fine of Is. each, sud enter .1110 reeoglli7:lllee In 3VI,
e.mil for the Sallie period. This &age, and illey Were Jia.

MONDAY.
HAMILTON V.

The plaintiff in this ease. had broitgla on net;en against
Mr. Bell, the proprietor of I ire Wee/ay Di.spolch, for a iitott
on her character, had appeared in his paper. Mr.
Gurney, on a former do, nbtailtell a role to anew cause why
the plaintiff should not give security for auy costs that miabt
.ierrne, on the groan.' that she was a married woniant lis is
:wart trim her husband, without whose coast:at the action
had been brought.

Mr. Justice Was it not net forth in the defend-
aid's affidavit, that the plaintiff is a married woman;"
Mr. Citrucy--" Yes, my Lord ; and it is also sworn by a
respectable individual, that he had seen her husband since
ibis action was ..!0.1U1111:11e

Lord Elienborough—•• Ir• a verdict should ho found for tlao
defendant, ho oi could he recover cot The 1,a,1y
in that case, wove for it Will of error, and zr.oid the vt men:
of coots." •

Their Lordships were unanituougly of opinion, that the
plaintiff should give security for auy roar., Otat ought be in..
currcd from the present day.—ltisle mule al,' o;ate.

WE!!M>O V.

JEWISH SIINAGOGUES..—LAZAHWO AN th OTHERS sYMONS.
This was an action fur the usr and Leriyatinn of rertitini
seats rented by the defendant and his sots, in iii. Jewisit
nagogue, Denmark-cone t, Sit-Ansi, and ids° Corr certain reli%
giuus uflerings tine to the 6) nagugue, the whuie demand be-
ing fur theaUIII of
Mr. Scw..let cutitinetett the case fur the plaintiff, and Mr.
Mat rout fur the ilefentLiut. . . _

Vtiee4Pl' eXeliCti AtIIIIC ititere,t, from the insight it afforded
into Annie rlf Ibe cnvtonci and cerets u lIIt oi the Synagogue.
and ail() en account et Ilse lintiutl..ince ...I the qnestion to We
Jewish part of the king's subjects.
It appeared in evidence, that the plaintstrs and several
others twine of whom aresince dead) hail become lessees of
tile Synagogue in question, in the year 1127, for a term ut 2tl
yea's. The defendant and his son had occupied two seats in
the Synagogue, the forrusr tar three years, at 21. 2s. an 1 the
latter for two years, at 188.6.1. per Auouas, cad] occupat,pa