The National Register.
London, England, 1822-12-01 00:00:00

rIP a• •
nys

LAW IATELLI:,LNCE.

COURT 011 KING'S RENCH.
moisnar, N.O. 2.5.
THE SING V. THE tiritetinstry OF eastnnincr.
The Solicitor General moved on a former day for a Mandamus,
commanding the Vice Chant%llor of the UdPenny of Cambridge
to elect Thos..leffion, Esq. :1;A. to the office of Lecturer of
.Miueralogy in the said Un.ve.sity.
Sergeant Lens she wed cater OM day against the conditional rule.
on the ground that the co.nt had no power to grant the Mau-
damns. The court directed the application to stand over until
Wednesday.
THE LINO V. RADFORD.
The defendant, a 51:ult.'s Aker, appeared so receive such
punishment as the court in us judgment slusald award, for exact-
line from a person named Wisel, whom he had in us:oily in a
lock-up house. the sum of 211. 156. (id more than he was legaily
entitled to demand.
The subject matter havin" been et fe.rred to the master of the
Court, dist a tasks read his ts,sort, by which it appeared that the
defendant had received the overchatAe alreat'y stated.
Mr. Cooper, who moved tor the attachment against the defen-
dant, tinder hich he was brought before the court, stated, that
this was not the only instance in which the defendant had int.
posed in his client.
The court sentenced the defendant to pay a fine of 251. to the
Sing, to refund the sum illegally received, to pay the co.,:s, and
6tiird committed to the prison of the court until the whole is paid.
QUEEN MAIL—THE LING V. WILLIAM CLARKE.
The defendant in this case, when brought up thrjudgment last
week, had time given for the purpose of making an arrangement
with his printer, to induce lam to give tip the unsold copies of
Qacen The defendant now put in an affidavit, and
produccel twenty-five copies of die wok, as all whica remained
in the printer's hands.
Mr. Gurney said he felt it to be his duty to press for the jiitlgs
meat of the coon against the defendant, a it appeared from his
schedule, filed in the Insolvent Debtors' Court. that at that time
there were copiLs in the printer's hands; either, therefore,
there bad been a very extensive sale since, or, what was mote
probable, wine of the copies were kept back. The court would
also observe, that by the defendant's withholding the primer's
ramie. it was impossible to have his ahidavit as to the copies
unsold.
_ . _

The Judges conferred together for some time, when
Mr. Jos. ice Bayley proceeded to pass the 'sentence of the court.
Ilia lordship observed, that, from tie recommendation of the
July and the defendant's sul,sequent conduct, the tour had been
inclined to spew a very extraordinary degree of lenity towards
but he had chosen (front motives which the court had no
right to censure) to conceal the printer's name, the case must be
considered as one where the printer's name war withheld. The
court, tilting the recommendation of the Jury into its consider-
ation, and the defendant's conduce at t' e trial and since, did
order and Adjudge, that he should be confined in the house of
correction, in CoWho:II-fields, fin font calendar months, and find
securities 11w his good behaviour tor fire years, himself in 401.
and two sureties in VOL each.
'fliedefendant asked what was to he done with the twenty-five
colatx of the work which now held in his hands ?
Mr. Justice Bayley—The court rualses no order with regard to
thesis ; but if you are prudent you will destroy them.
The defendant said he had no objection to give them up the
Society for the Suppression of Vice, and accordingly Lenthsl
them over to the solicitor tot the prosecution.
Mr. Justice Bayley—That, as a voluntary act of your own, is
extremely lroper—very proper conduct indeed.
The defendant then bowed to the court and withdrew in
ens.otly.

THE KING v AsirmitsoN.

The defendant, who acted as surveyor of highways at Mile-
End and W hitcchapel, appeated, on the motion of Mr. Gurney,
to receive jnilginent, having been round sulky of a fraud, to
keeping back vat inus emus received 6y inane of hisollice.
The defendant, who is a limn of respectable appearence, put
in his afildastf, stating that he had been prosecuted in conic-
stiplehce of the entertained towards hint by an individual
and that he had not been allowed the opportunity to explain the
appartnt deficiency in his accounts.
Mr. Gurney said, he was surprised with respect to the dcfcn-
dant's affidavit, and he prayed the court to allow one day to
answer it.

lac court complied with the request, and ordered the defen-
dant w be brought up to-morrow.

TUESDAY, NOV. 26.
IoNES, GENTLEMAN, o. It ItADLEY, GENTLEMAM.

This was an actit,n for work NISI lohour—business done by
one attorney for another. The [dahlia is a clerk in court.
A letter or the defendant's was put in, requesting tardier time
for payment.
A clerk of the Olinda 's proved the business dont., and the
TV:15110 ibleiless or the rits.rgts.

There being no defence—verdict for the plaintiff lOGI. and
costs.

Other undefended causes were disposed of, but of no public
interest.

At twenty minutes to eleven the Lord Chief Justice, Justices
Beat and Holroyd, took their seats in Banco, laming short
motions, anti) eleven, when Mr. Justice Bayley came into court.
The attention of the court was occupied in hearing an area-
'neat upon the terms of an award respecting paying of costa, of
no interest, until past twelve.
The case of certain attorneys being moved to be struck ofrthe
rolls was called nein to-day.
Mr. ites,ler, for the detendanta, observed lbw parties were
now attending the Court of Continuo !Ness, which Court had
determined to proceed iu its judguieut without waiting for the
dcci,ion of this.

Tito motimi %%as accordingly permitted to stand over.
VIE KING r. ANDY.RSoN.

The defendant, who was op for judgment yeaterday, and re•
mantled to give coons. I for the prosecution on opportunity of
answering affillvits, again stood upon the Hour of the coml.-
Ihe defendant in his allidarit had stated that his prosecution
WAS to be traced to hostile feeling OA the part of a Mr. Pepper-
c•o n. on• of the churchwardens, and unfair proreedinga against
Lint at a parish meeting. He denied that he had embezaltd
the parish money, and attri'auted the apparent deficiency in his
arrounte to errors w!!ich he had not been allowed to explain.
Mr. Gurney on this occasion, put in the affid.tvit of Mr. Pep•
percorn, who deposed that the defendant had contrived during
vine sears to hold the office of sort eyor of the higlays,l3S, a.ol
during that time had defrauded the parish to the amount of
•ithteeu birdred pounds.
tither ailidavits stated that the prosecution had been com-
menced in consequence of r..solutions passed at a meeting of
toe Inhabitants of the Hamlet of Aide

TI a 'Midas it of Mr. Harmer the attorney, abio Fisted, that
the defeietant bating been iiiitictori at Elicks's Hail, had re-
wired the proceedings; by reilitioeri into this court, and Oa
be uhiniately suffer. d a t erklict or guilty to he recorded agaihat
him.

...
The Common Sergeant adilreased the nowt in mitigation of
paniMment, and Mr. Gurney in aggravation.
The Lord ChielJustice.—Let the deftlidunt he eentanded in
theoatudy attic Mari ball, and be broti6lit 112 ag4tu to motiow.
1 lie dileudaut wan taken out of moat

•. ••••
• • . .`

TILE NA'

INAT. It

WEDNESDAY, NOv. 27.
THE MIND o. WM. /4EIIEIIBOM,
The defendant was brought op in custody of the Marshal,
pursuant lu the order of ,esterd iV, to receive sentence.
Mr. Justice linyley, pronouncing the judgment of the court,
said—

The defendant, as surveyor of the highways, in the Hamlet
of Mile End, Whitechapel parish, was prosecuted under two
indictments, Cz..--for unlawfully and 11-audit!. idly making and
producing hide accounts in writiti;, and fraudulently concealing
and neglecting to enter in those accounts seleral SUM 4
money received from 12 thtlerent persons. The sums certainly
ware very smell, not exceedin4 on the whole 41. and a fruition
on the hist indictment, and 31. and s fraction on the second.—
And that lie did afterwards'ialse a false nath in swearing to the
truth of tit. tir.t account, and would have sworn to the second
account, but that the nia,giatrate before whom the oath was tea-
dire.: refused to administer it.

4"

The court held that this was a very considerable aggravation
of the defendant's
The court adjudged, filial upon the first indictment the defen-
dant should pay a line to the King of SOUL and be initrisoned
four calendar months, and until such fine should he paid. And
on the second indictment, after the pa) ineot of 31101 hue, and at
the expiration of such imps isonmeut of font mentlis, that be
should be further imprisoned fur two calendar monlbs.

tiK•
v.

rape* to the power which the King util Consul had to de.
cid, the question might be tried by en issue. It was admitted
that the King, as visitor, had power to iuvesti,tte coniplaints
proceeding from the inivetsity ; but the royal decision must
proceed front leis Judges.
The Lord Chief Justice observed, that this being the last day
of term, the court could nut then devote any longer time tee the
argument, but would he prepared next term to meet the question,
and give judgment thereon. The decision was consequently
postponed.
The court sat to a late hour, hearing and deciding questions
relating to points of pearlier.
MR. HENRY DUNT.
As the Judges were rising to quit the court, at a quarter pact
seven o' duck, Mr. Henry Hunt ruse on the floor, and begat, to
address them.
Mr. Justine Bayley.—What is it you move, Mr. Hunt I
Mr. hunt.--1 aisle to move itaiiest one of the officers--no,
not one of the °litters, but a gentleman of your Lordship's
Court, Mr. Cheeks Frederick W illiams. I wish to ask your
Lordships that lie may be triennially prosenuteal for insulting
me, and trying to provoke nee to light a duel, which would hate
forfeited my recognizance s.
The Loud Chief Justices--That is a motion for a criminal in.
formation, and mast be made by Counsel.
Mr. Iltoet.—l hope your Lordship will not drive me to Coun-
sel in this case. I hive heard of" alt a thief tee catch a thief ;"
but I sin afraid it will not do to set a barrister to catch a har•
crater.
Mr. Justice Bayley.—The same attempt has been feerneerly
made, and the Court decided against it. The eistinetiou is this
—every man has a right to he heard in his own WHIM! ; lent in
a criminal information the Crown is the prosecutor, and there-
fore only counsel can move for it.
Mr. Hunt— But in this ',infielder case—
The Lord Chief Justice.—There can be no Wore of jus-
lice. We do not conclude you ; you may prefer a bill of in-
dictment before the grand jury.
Mr. Justice (lest.—Or bring yonr action.
Mr. Huitt.-1 have another case to bring before your Lord-
ships ; but at this late hour, alien you leave been fatigued with
so long a sitting, I can scarcely loess it.
Mr. Justice Best.—We will hear you move any thing in a
civil cause.
Mr. 1111m1.—I scarcely knew whether your Lordship will
think this a civil cause. 11 is a complaint against one of your
ofliorrs, Mr. Lulling:on. the Master of the Crown ethee, for
eatortiou. Your Loettship may remember, that when I was a
prisoner in llctiester gaol, I applied by ney counsel, Mr. Chitty,
leer the redress of cei lain grievances which I was suffering.
The High Sheriff of the County redressed these grievances,
and cousequently I requested leave to withdraw my application
on payment of coats. The costs were tatted ley the ma ter, who
male an error of If. in cabling them up, against me. I was de-
taint. lin ',cheater gaol for these costs—at least I was obliged
to pay them before I left it, as a detainer was lodged against
me.
'f he Lord Chief Justice.—lf you complain of a mere error,
you can only apply that the Master may review his Lesation.
Mr. Ilunt.—N o, try Lord ; for these errors have happened
singularly olten--o ce in the case of the High Bailiff ot West-
minater ; once in a case before Mr. Justice Best, when a pound
too much was charged nee. Three niece there leave been errors,
and all against poor me. (A laugh.)
The Lord Chief Justice.—We are sorry for it : but what
can we do ?
Mr. Iltint.—l have long affidavits on the subject; bat I will
not trouhle your Lordships with them now.
The Lerch Chief Justice.—Then you will not move now
Mr. Ilunt.-- Not in this case ; but on the other question I
wished to address your Lordship.
The Lord Chief Justice.—That has bee n decided already.
Mr. Mont.—Rut only in my case, may Lord.
The Lone Chief Justice.—Yes ; often before.
lluut.—l could chow your Lordship many cues to the
contrary.
'the Lord Chief Justice.—Not now, on the last day of term
—another time we will hear you.
Mr. Ilunt.--I wish to ask your Lordship a question about
an indictment which I preferred for a libel moitest a newspaper
editor named Dr. Stoddart : the bill was found, but I do nut
knew how the case stands.
The Lord Chief Justice.—lt has been long out of the paper
—do you wish to re-enter it 1
111 r. Ilunt.—As I said, 1 redly do not know what has be-
come of it. The ca e stood for Waal, and was called on, but
when I informed your Lordship that I wished to open the case
to the jury. you refused to permit them W be sworn.
The Lord Chief Justice.---Yes ; ou the same ground that you
cannot 1111(1,e for a criminal information in person. Fvery
eri-
minul procee cling is at the suit of the King, and the prosecutor
cannot interfere.
Mr. !lieut.—l can show your Lordship cases—
The Lord Chief Justice.—At peseta that is the rule of the
Court. If you can by ancient cases show that rule to be wrong,
come prepared nett term and we will Lear you. At present we
can say no more.
Mr. Ilunt.-1 am happy to see your Lordship so well after
so lung en absence.
The Judges then left tier Court. .1% it was the last day of
term, they remained until till the motions were disposed or,
abide, with the application of Mr. Hunt, proloogeu their sit
ting until ball-past seven o'clock.
FRIDAY, NOV- 29.
Sittings after Term, before the Lord Chief Justice.
WASTE e. LADY CARR.
The plaintiff, furrier to his Majesty, brought this action
against Lady Carr, for hating ley the negligence of her coach-
men, driven leer carriage against the chaise, in con-
sequence of which the plaintiff and his wife were Orman out
and touch injured. The question was whether the accident
Lye-
pei.ed by reason of any improper conduct we the part el Lady
Cttrr's see% ants.
It appeared, by the evidence, that the defendant's carriage
had re.urned to town from Ealing on the 27th of Mn) last.—
The defendant's daughter* and Mr. Pereaval,ber seen, were in-
side. They were driving aleeeeg Piccadilly with the iidentien to
go to the carpet warehouse in Leicesterlields. The coachman
drove on the left of Piccadilly. 'll lien they reached the Re-
gent's CIICUA, a hackney-coach was drawing across the street
to fall into the coach stand. The coach came on the light side
of Lady Cart's carriage, and at the same moment the plaintiff
attempted to drive his chaise across the horses heads The
coachman pulled up his lonises, and the pole pestling over the
wheel of the chaise, overturned it. The plaintiff e.nd his wife
were thrown out, and the chaise broken tee pieces. Mr. W.
got op with a severe bruise on his eye. Ilia wife leceited a
contusion on the head. She was taken up by (me ulltlee persona
alto UAW the accident, and was conveyed licence. Mr. IA ay le
asked whose carriage it was, and said, do not go away. I in-
sist on kuowiag whose carriage it is. The coachman gave Mut
au answer. He applied to the (outman, but could not obtain