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

OUILOHALL.

George Partiham was bronglit up on a warrant, he being
charged by the parish officers of Farrinatlnn Within with
having deserted his wife and•family,and leaving them charge.
able on the parish.
_ _ _

One of the Churchwardens of the parish stated, that the
defendant received an annuity of 11. per week, besides which
he earned a consiae eable stun as a drot er in Smithfield market
his wife and her children were in the parish workhouse and
us he. was able he ought to be made to remunerate the parish
for the expellee they hail been at for their support, as also
indemnify them against any future expellee.
The defendant, whose look and manner ponthrayed the
greatest ignorance and stupidity, said he would not with
the children to starve, although they were tinue of his; but
no 'tower svoutil fu, ee him to live again with his a ife.

!t. Stephen Cho:dins Hooter, theaittieg Alderman—" Yon
are riot :Asked to live with your wife, bet if yon do not pay
the parish for her support, yon will be committed as a va-
grant to the Horse of Correction."
The Defendant —" I have offered to pay something to keep
the children front starving; but mat, I never wear a badge
again if I pay a doil for her support."
The Churchwarden-•-" ri is not the wish of the parish to
be harsh with the defendant. He is but a poor simpleton;
he was left an estate, which he sold tor an inutility of 11. per
week for his life. He is also, at the death of his fattier, who
is is ignorant as himself, entitled to 5001. lie went to Lewes.
and the woman who is now in out worklion:e sttz...•o 4 child
10 him, at the same time having two children provided tor 14
the parish. The parish officers at Lewes, tee get rid of the
woman and children. perstiatliA the defendant to marry her,
and gave him 51. Ott conditimi that he shoulrillileiiksio.: The moment
the mart m iage ceteony was over at Lewes, the pat ish officers
cleric pie.sed her awl her children to our p ac being that
of her liiishoio:\ defcritt tut). I think the paii,ti officers
of Lewes might he indicted for a rt.r.”.iraey, in tnveiglio§
the defendant to marry the woman, to ('liable limn to gel
'idol her, and to throw the inconthrance on another parish."
Sir S. C. Hon ter—" No steels indictment would lie. Tho
office's of Lewes ought to lie commended for giving 51. to
make o womma wllOlll they knew to be ('mail, an honest woman.
They married her to the defendant;, and how wet e they to
knew hut that she would make a good wife And she may be
• very gond kind of woman for ss hat I know."

'l'h; biureliwarden—" Will you undertake, "'Arnhem, to
pay ow 15e. per vet elk?'
The defendant—" No, I will not, to sapport other men's
children ; but yon inay have mil of the 16 a week which
I receive, or you may receive the 11. weekly if you like, and
baud me over 10s."

The wvrthy Alderman observed lie thought this was a very
fair

The Ciinrchwartlen concurred in that opinion, and the de.
fendant %%us discharged.

THE. BANK OF ENGLAND V. JOHN JOHNRON, COAL MERCHANT,

This case, which had been tr toy to day promo., dto the
came on on Tuesday before Sir Cla nolo% Banter. The
defendant W:l4 a coal-m.4'lmm to the I ink. and „pow,
several ',itemise establishments in aril at/am :lie metropolis.
The Directors of the 'link having ascevaini d th it the Act
of Parliament tOr the 'collation of the dative'', of roods had
nut been complied with by Mr. Johnson, cod aware of the
possible bad consequesices of inattention Upon the part of' the
public to a statute so important, ordeiett that the defendant
should be s tttttttt oned before a inagiatrate, upon no less than
So iidarniations. 'rite fines allowed by the act in cases of
conviction would am Ito nearly 1,0001. The greatest
interest was naturally excited, and while the Case was going
forward, the utmost attention was paid Meyer". e tad that
fell from those immediately concerned. _

Mr. Freslifield, of the is:ittAr of Frest)&lll, and Co.,
attontted fur the Bunk; Mr. Aolitevis atteutlrd for the de-
frtuktnt.

The defendant's Connie!, admitted that his client had done
w ong, but said that the °Wetter had been unintentional...—
Under such a representat' it would, he suage,ted, be as
well eel 10 press the fines to their full extent, the public
werviee being 101iikl-l) lo be tls much adVellired It) the exercise
of the magistrates' !privilege, which cumin diminish pounds to
die smallest ruin of the realm in this ease.

Mr. Fresh&lit observed. that the object of the Bank W3S
to show the pitldie, that they gad a •yearily tat the act of
Parliament ag mitt the practice of impositions of is. very
serious nen 'C. He thought it due to them to state in the
office the probable consequences Of Wit implicit itliance, and
he trd•ted that the le%son would prove of general utility.
Mr. Andrews urged its the strongest mann., , that the in.
fliction of such a piiiirdiment upon the mime of inadvertence
would be ttlimereitill, and strengthened his argument by say.
ing, that the very reading of the matter on which they wet e
to i.roceed would occupy bra hours. Hit object lie said, was
to save the inagisii ate trouble.

Sir Claudius Hunter let/nested that hie time or attention
should not be considered as ill bestowed is the investigation
of what lie heard was 11 1110,11 flagrant rag,. lie %timid as-
dPrtake to attend to every statement that should he made
with ihe most scrupulous care.
itdr. Andrews suggested that a penalty might he taken en
one information, and an acquittal oiven upon sII the rest.
Mt. Freslitield said it was a mistake, il• want of liberality to
the deti•ndaut was presumed by his Counsel. The Batik
wouiti prove that the very reverse was the case.
Mr. Freslitield and die. Andrews then withdrew into a
private roma, m lien it was arranged dist the defendant
plead auilty upon the re huhi 60 inforittlltialsi and that he
should abide the decision of the magistrate as to the tines
under the lenient hand of the ',Rigel:mien.

Mr. Freslatie:d then stated that he attended the office en
the behalf of the Bank of England, by whosa. instructions he
had lodged the in los ataaflons. The tarsi accused tin• defendant
with swing sold and delivesed coal. without a vendor's
ticket, emintersigned by the teeter. I.llOfC informations carte
kid without any view but the benefit of the public. The
Bank had pi ()tragical without at all consiaterio2 the tees they
might have sustained by the COlialtct or the defendant, and
ming well able to afford the es pence* of a prosecution, were
411( rmincd to maintain it in consideration of the pit blue alone.
The case W;l6 a most important one. The penalty. in the
e%ent of conviction, would amount to na arty 1.0001. 'Mr.
Fteslifteld then Mated, that it nes most u. Ct scary the pull is
slutuld have full aneaqtre and quality it: Weil an ite:lf.o
.-aal, and that it was hot jn>licr to the coal trade to pro• c
Mat the peactive he had to complain of was the mere act of
ihe d ditinfaist himself; and not COIIIIIIOII to the triode. It was
not his intention to dilate on a subject so well undorstia". -
He should but mention a few that it would tie imps
per to OMR. It 1143 fonati atect•sa7 to vats au act nt lilt

OCT. 5

47th of the King, to protect the public against what was
called in the act, "the fronds of the coal trade." He would
not designate the present case by that name, but certainly
the public were liable from their carets:wines, to impositions
in the trade of the I.7russest kind. It was regulated by the
act, that coals contained in any ship should he publicly ex-
hibited, tinder it penalty of 1001. It was required that the
meter SWAIM, after he had measured the coals, give to the
waggoner a ticket, which ticket, if Mid countersigned,
%seed be a security to the consunter that the article purchased
Was that to which he was entitled. It was most important to
have the quality of tl:e ecal also properly attended to, it being
ituown that coal varied front five, six, to eight shillings per
ehaldron, as to quality. The coal mei chain woe'," do it must
serious injury to the consumer, by putting upon him coal of
a quality inferior to the sum at which he had purchased. Fur
the purpose of guarding against such an imposition, the act
had a!irerted that the ship should be furnished with a certi_
ficate of the quality, which certificate was, e,am the lanai"
of the coals, to be examined by the land Coal meteor, that he might
ascertain whether they were of the quality mentioned in the
ticket directed to be delivered by the vendor to the purchaser.
and the meter was required to countersign the ticket, if he
Was satisfied that the coals were as described iii it. Thus by
regular stageit, from the working of the coal-mine up to the
.sai,., the qeality was preserved. ME. Fre, litirld then stated
• the contrails of the meter's ticket to he sent with coals to the
coominio., observing, that it should be signed by One of the
priticipal laud coal.rnetete, and countersigned by the labour-
. leg cual.meter attending and delivering them ; and that the
peualty iitfixral it, She eventof not complying with the regu-
lation was LW. 'it was here that the fraride contemplated
by the legislature ategan. The vendor's ticket was presented
eta the delivery of the coals to the purchaser, ,butit was On(
countersigned. If the provisions of the art were complied
with, it WA t imPossiine that the politic could ne d, frateled,
sillier as to tl:e quantity or quality of the coals they purchased;
but it was his duty to state, the t in tl.e ease new-before the emu
a meter's ticket accompanied the coals, but it was not t•oun-
tersigued arc:orbit?, to the act of Parliament, ter it contained
the 'name of at person not in existence. He cued call a
meter, the only one of the name stated in the ticket, who
%Toed prove that lie had /lint countersigned tie ti,ket ; amid
there were other circumstances tenting to show the gross
Irregularity oldie proceeding. Hr coed also prove that appli
cation had Ivrea inade to the person who shoed have
tersigned, in order to induce him to do so, and that the per-
son bed refused, in consequence of not having seen the ship's
- certificate. In fact lie could, if it a as allowed in such a state
of the ease, pruve that literates were deficient both in quality
add Timmy.
Mr. suggested thene.cillessness of proceeding to
:the test, and uhserved, that er.:Freslitield had no right to
.410 so.
Sir Clemilins Hunter was of .opinitin that Mr.- Freslifield
was justified in steiug what lie had evidence to support.
Mr. Fieshfield Said, he did not iutend to go to circumstances
of aggravation; lie had no wish but to protect the public.
The defendant hail declared that his fault was negligence.
If that defendant was able to prove thatille coals• were oats
. quantity amid quality stet:milted in the ticket, and sold to the,
Hank, lie *tumid upon the part at the Bawl: withdraw every
large:nation, and .be mote liajapy in discharging that dusty
than the piiittful one he Morbid probably be old ged to ex.
-
..mute. He eourludrd with stating, that the alagi-trace was at
liberty to reduce the titie to Is. if he pleased. The Walk
Avoilid bus satistiml with his derision, ramfidetit that the Witte
service wool l be the tiod consideration with him.

Mr. Andrew. having intimitted that the tlartiflAnt would
plead guilty, M. nallitield aliott.tiucd trues
messes.. _ _

Mr. Andrews said lie-was glad of befing.spared the duty tit
.lielainis.g Inc Magistrates long upon this investigation. Mr,'
Freshfield had mentioned what, he had no doubt, was the
motive of the Bank in uppeatieg in this case, namely, for the
purpose of pfrovin4 the control which the statute hail over
merchants in this trade, and the necessity at calliug the pith
fie atwotion to a matter which Silliowerfully interested Mein.
Ile (Mr. Andrew s) stionld advise his client to. confess himself
guilty ; awl he thought it his duty to add that, in his opinion:.
the Rank had acted with great linerality in not pri'sainu
the fines to the extent allowed by the Act of Pal 71';
was, however, to be considered, that the offelice was not of
such a natiorcas to authorise the indiction oI silch a punish.
ment, it being the fact that the crime was one of mere olllia-
sion. True it was, that if the defendant was guilty of taking
advantage of the opportunities which might have ',resented
themselves, and supplied a hal mate, ial,lllA offence welsh' be
of the most serious kind. If the merchant had himself ats
tended the delivery of the coals, and acted us his own WIII4II-
- nothing could excuse the neglect that would subject
the public to so serious a disadvantage. Rut the defendant
was 1101 his own wharlinger. He wusa great dealer. and al-
Maya intrusted his tickets to his whartitiger or sonic other per-
son undo,- him.
Sir Claudius Hunter.—That surely can be no justification.
Mr. Andrews admitted that it was not a justification. He
confee.sed the penalty. But im circumstances of at
could be stated in such a ease. It was evident that his client

. . .
had an exc.-tient character, the Bank (so re-pectable a hotly)
haviug emplo3 ed hint, if there werenu other reason for saying'
that his character was unimpeachable. It was, Mr. Andrews
observed, in the power of the Magistrate to reduro the line
to the smallest possible coin, and considering all thexii cum-
atances. of the ease, and the lirmatise that neither the Ronk
nor the Pohlte shunt.' he subject to similar inconveniences,
trusted to the lenient lleei,,mn..ft;oe Chair.
Sir Claudius Binder said, that he bad a few words to say on
this imputtant ease., to show that the course the Bank had
taken wasiltatw.l. i Cll was roust calculated to strve the pi:4hr.
The Bank had detected a most palpal.le and nbotninable
error, to say the least of it t and, if they hail proceeded to
prove it, 50111 e thing mete I error *mild liare been tumid
• out. II has not enough tusac, •• i leave Msy 641/1111rini IU my
Ivharfimier, and I thei clore a.a not responsible ;•• there was
no excuse in submitting to the direction of soother who
:lilted wrong. Comitiermgial: the circumstances of the Case,
tar Claudius limiter thought proper to floe Mr. Johnson los.
_oil each information. The wilole amounted to 251.
Air. Andrew. expressed his client to be satisfied.
Mr. that a moiety hying theproperty of the
inforiner,,be ahuadd thati:., the magistrate to older one half of
hat moiety .0 thy Spualtields Pour, and the Miser half to the
S iciety far the Lit tie er :Small Del, tors.
A man, named Jett;•.ias, was brought up on snspia:an of
insint: been cavv.efuell in riab cog Mtn. Kendal „laudla.ly of
the Mitre, in Chancery late, of IL 1. all the iminey she wata,
worth In the world, the bard cawing& of upwards of thirty
years.

Mit. Ken 1.111, o lin it llotit' ,yeskrt of age, ttaitnl, in very
4, en t it at thy. ia W.. 14,y to Bonk

TII% NATIONAL REGisTEn.

notes, silver, and halfpence, in a box which she kept in her
bed room locked; that on Friday evening, at 7 o'cluek, she
added to her previons stock in the box the sum of 151.1
and, on going into her room.at it, found that the box had
been broken open, and that ail her money was gone. Several
articles of dress were also missing. Tlie..alarin was given.
oth eeis entered the house, and searched the rooms of the
lodgers, but without fimting any of the property. They
imwever found a small crow bar in a corner, malt which it
appeared the box had been broken open, and which was so
constructed as to convicce the officers that the business had
been done by experienced thieves.
Mrs. Kendall then recollected that between eight and nine
o'clock Jenkins and a stout 11•111 came In the bar, unit asked
for a glass of gin ; that some whispering took place bet vreen
them, part or which was heard by Ms's. Kendall, and Was cer
ta n'y a denlated In excite snapieimi. "Do you," said the
stool man to Jenkins, ".go into the tap.riiiim, and go up
stairs." Mrs. Kendall perceived that they lingered about ;be
house, hot had DO idea that coy trick had been meditated he.
wards l:er. They had,she saidoeparated, the prisoner going
into the tap room, and the stout man walking towards the
stairs. After some time they went away.
The officers having received an accurate description of
those who were suspected, accompanied Mrs. Kendall to
Cow-cross, where they laid their hand; upon Jenkins, Wiwi'
she immediately identified as one of the visitors of Friday
night. De.e.titoitttql it, and said he knew the stout Weil well,
on, refused In mentim his name, lest, as he said, he should
implicate hinire;l. Ho was ttutended.
The other pet ,on is kuo All to the otEcers esautost infa-
mous slept eilator.