The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1820-02-16 00:00:00

-mow your mow, sum roar p.m!, varsonausso sum rw gars
lona, bat not sinee. t
ite-ezespiefoi-41inIngirik Melly from h4ll
uncle, INA he had given Inv godlier the receipt for
making thowelichs.,e, • •
Henry Powell' eastislistal.4,4llgeol in the
trade' a iootee. Mt* plelfles ; of The isiiiiJo•
called " Haraey:a
,Mateo,'. it it its, t'ilikVieqpicif ;li
it its the property of :Wm. Lazenby ; atwayklsnegbili
it of het; know her to well it for 15 or 16 yogi;.
remembers both Mr.. 14..34 labels to he• in nee.
' Witness Yrold her ihoset'3ool: r year for the loft
eight or nine yews. The hoe spurious bottle+ were
then abeam to ailness, which he pronounced ant
geruient by the appearosice; these were muddy, the
genuine, transparent.
Mr. Greenfield, Attorney for the Plaintiff,
stated, that by her directive. be called on the De.'j
fendants its April, 1817. isroduced the 300 labels
to Mr. Benjam n Cock*, and asked by whose di.
rectinws he had printed them ; he said fie had engraved
the plate by the direction of Harvey owl flatlet*,
chymists. in Queen-street; theitiseide, three or roar
Yieery befqre, aid had stiock off labels as their
trade required. The 300 hr had struck off for
• Gentlemtm who hod br4 in their etriploymelot,
and who was to call for thefts. and that the boy by
mistake had taken them io Nit.. Lossenhy',. lie
offered to give op the plate. %Vitoria would not
•iake it ; Cracks said be laid done it without Mrs.
Lazenby's consent : it was die custom of the trade ;
ittirgo fiat* in it, Ind would d 6 it again.
cillEll .Imm:a here remarked, quit the
'befeadatit could make no legal defence against
sits irvidence,.and rooscoutooded kith, Counsel on
both sides to consent to a verdict being taken far
the Plaintiff, to show printers that they had no right
aLo do what the Defendants imagined they might.
This was .{;reed so. His Lordship then told the
Jury that there was no doubt a printer wa• not at
liberty by law to enable or soist ally person to com-
mit a wrong, by aching ins Article of his own.

IIUCCIII 11. wirsatons.

This was an action to recover 288/. the price of
•tfro acres and a huff of land. ihiCh the Plaintiff, •
Gentleman of !otiose, had been compelled to as-
sign, so the trustees for mokiog a certain read. The
Defendant was their sole treasurer, and the action
was brought pursuant to the directions of a special
Act of PurliaMeot.
Mr, 0,101)01f examined..—ls solicitor to the trmtets
--!Mr. limbyao. ! ge is sole treasurer—Mr. Grantham
. ~ .
was surveyor to them—does not know whether be
was lewdly authorised to intake purchases fur them,
but knows that the trustees have in some instances
confirmed his contracts.' - Witness then read an
entry from the militates of the trustees, describing
the contract, and cootaisting a resolution of the
trustee., approving of it.
Mr. Tieker's surveyor proved that the land was
taken possession of by the truiteriisitheyeur 1816.
fly the conseut of Mr. Guitoirr. the Defendant's
Comore,. the Jury gave a verdict kw the Plaintiff,
with 2001. damages.
. - .
*WATKINS v. IitITTBIESS.
This woe an scion to recover t(omages for on as-
sault. It took place so far back as June, 1816, and
.-the Plaintiff wit content to relitiqdish further pro-
-teedinge, its the Defendant was insolvent, but had
been compelled to come into pour;, in cousequeuce
of • ride obfaiiied by the Defendant. The Plaio-
Alf kept • yobbo-Wm it Hackney, and employ-
ed the Defendant todo souse work for hint, but Me
latter delayed completing it or long, What be was
Obliged to employ another person: • Stutters them
came to his horde. Died very obuiiee language. and
made -a bloW itirrstot. but utuntentionelty struck his
lige in the figig?„
Under them eiromerleamaso the Jury, under his
Lordship's dimolioooffPoOff s'verdict for the Plain-
tiff—Damages ls.
sttiTB V. Durres.
' This was an actiou to recover 461. 31. 6d. for
money had and received.
Mr. ScARLETT stated, that the Plaintiff having
been iti 'business as a shopkeeper, and having be-
come embarrassed in his circumstances at the be-
ginning •of last year, sod desirous of doing equal
justice to all hi. creditors, proposed a composition to
- them of stern shillings, ist the pound, which was
agreed to by them all except the Defendant in the
aedoi. ' Hearrested and sent him to prison, in con-
serkuence of which quay others of them did the
same. 'The Defended was • cheese-factor, and
. had sold groodstopthe Plaiatilt in his own name to
the amount of 580% which war comprised in five
;-ditreient sums. The arrangement respecting two
of these, he said, he shoutd 'leave to his principals,
on whose account he 'had sold the property, mid
that he was authorised to settle for only three sores,
viz. 3071. I Is. 841. on account of a Mr. Edwards,
87/. 3s. 9(1. and 64/. JO., fbr property of 'his own.
'After sometime, the property having been greatly
reduced'bflitigation, the Plaintiff could only offer
4r, in the politic! ; Defendant consented to agree to
this with respect to the -two latter sums, but pro-
tested sgaiost doing so for the •nionefr doe to Mr.
Edwards. But he propoied Ihat Smith's Wife
should meet him at the chambers- of his attorney,
and pay him his dividend; reckoning at 7s. in the
pound on the 307/., and 4ki. sin theta* Other rums,
together 'with 171. hit total id the legal proceedings.
and that tken he wolildotibieribe the corupositiou
paper as at do. in the pound
_op the- aggregate
4591. ss. 541. beiug 01/. 17e. This arraugentent
was accordingly curried into eifiet. The object of
the action was to trompet the Defendant to refund
the amount of 3a in the pound on the sum for
which lie had secretly received 75., which the Learn-
ed Counsel stated it hod been settled in many cases
lie was bound to do.
Fe ederiek W. Carter, Solicitor for Plaint fe; era-
mined. —The Plaintiff stopped payment in February
1819; there was a meeting of his creditors on the
13th, which wrs adjourned to die 16th. On the
13th a Mr. Ray gave in his name as attending for
Dutton. Smith was sweated by Dation in loot
Easter Terns for 4004 and upwards.
Cross-examined—Defendant is * cheese-factor,
Never heard Mr. Smith say, that part of Dutton'.
debt Was.due to people iu the country. •
Br-ezannisted—Tiro at, the creditor*, refused to
sign the compositiousgaigait till sewing" seen Mr.
Dutton'. digitate* - ' ''" • • •
Nr. Runty, '
Defe:
something had bet..' fiul{. 178.00. and
171. the costs of the beit. was • t .how
smash: -Outlaw said in hispeasenee, hod

77', 7

.
that la load ff. 494. au 0 chose.
NI•01;01•41. 'Outten tend` iss him he was tie.
fictive 7s its the pourril ON La
Witness weut out of the tom , ozyipiffainu* ;le
;payment, knowing it to be illgg 'nee dursil:tel
.iornimsition wire three put it, end reptlesusil the pow;
of Dutton appeared as a creditor compouudnig rue!
Sews witwen nosperwatned.—Dation said, e+i
wards would not eniur iu on• lower terms thati"o.)
in the pound. Mrs. Smith thanked Dutton for,.
'perittoding Edwards to accept that.
Mr. Cuirtv addrehed the Jury for the Defend-
ant; contending that the action was a eery shabby
one, since the sum claimed of Alr. Dattou had been
pant to Edwards.
Mr. Beckwith, a goo•malter, was then called, for
'the purpose of sheaving that the additional throe,
shillings had been paid to Edwards ; but his evia;
dence did not go that length. •
One or two other witnesses were called, but thee',
'proved nothing material.
The Jury, tooter his Lordship's direction, found
*0 verdict fur the Plaiutiff, for the sum laid in the
declaration, with ens. units.
INsoLrgsvr figRTIIRS' COURT,
Tuespartr, Feestua,nr 15.
• JUDGMENT.
COoDa V. annattaii( Jolt. *soya.
The circuinstences artists ease tie nopertall op
Thursday and Friday last. '
The CommisSionEit this day observed, that
there was no strict obligation on him, in giving
his judgment, to do any thing more than to give
his assent or dissent to the dlseharge of the 14001-
vent ; but looking on iris u:efiWe of gr;wl' pildsc
importance, as there must on either one side ei the
other be evidence as infamous us ever came before
any Court of Justice; he would allude to the
leading features of the case. As' to the objection to
the story of Mr. and Mrs. Coode, respecting the
identity of the Defendant, he did not think it de-
served much attention, for if the evidence of Coode
and Anderson was not true, the question as to idtti.
tity was of no consequence. Mr. Cootie' if his
story was true, must have thought the Defen-
dant one of the most arrant thieves on erirth—:yet
how he could proton! to him to become an inmate of
his house was most singular ; to bring him under
the roof with the same woman the Defendant' was
said to have defrauded, and he, Coode, was now
married to, seemed so contrary to the general feel-
ings of mankind, one would suppose .11 could nut
be possible. Yet Coode in his evidence admitted
It to be the fact. On the other hand, it was im-
possible for him to believe the story of the Defend-
ant. He could not believe that if lie gave money
to Coode for his protection, he would not have used
it when he was arrested, or that if a fraud had
been•practised on him by Coode, that he` did mit
inform any person of it but his Solicitor. Ills otitis
witness, Bardine, contradicted him, and said he knew
of it in Atignst. Then supposing flardine'did know
of it, such he not have known it was a considraCy on
the part of Coode ? he knew the lies of Enand,
and must have known it wale transportable offence.
The ivory told by the Defendant and Bardine its
to the proposal mid, by Coode in Whitecross-
street prison, to make the Defendant a book-ripe,
-a ~Bardino sidsply 'muffing that it was not
passible, could not he credited. For rusty
owe, whether Jew or Christian, educated or un-
educated, had • similar same of feeling wheat they
received an injury, and if the Defrodoset's story
was true, be must have considered Coo* as great a

scoundrel as ever walked, and could not hive re-
ceived such a proposal so quietly. Sardine also
cootradicted the Defendant as to his changing the
ducats for hint for a ten pound note. It was
a natural quevtion to ask. how did this infamous
transaction come to light ? did the Defendant
bring it forward ? would be have 'ltemises:id it if
Coode had net opposed him ? they had ever, reason
for supposing lie would not. Then, on the other
hand. if it was true, would Cootie have volunta-
rily come forward to upon it, for he• MOS. have
known by his opposition, it would come to the
knowledge of Goveramert, and that they would
institute proceedings against hint and Mr. Ander-
son, sad if it was true Coode could have ow de-
mand against the Defeadant. On the whole of
the evidence, he had come to the eonelusiou, that
the story of Mr. Coode was true, egad the evi-
dence of the Defendant an outrage on every
thing in the shape of troth. He would think him-
self justified in finally remanding the Defendsut ;
but as another person, who was at prison out of
the country, might have an iiiteirestie examining
him, he would allow him to be brought up *pin
on the a pplicatiou of any of the parties.
The Defendant was remapded.

MIDDLESEX SESSIONS.
CIIIIIENWILL. 111111UMIT'15.
FRAUD IN COALS
J. Bomptos was Indicted by the Coal and Corn
Committee, for having on the 4th of November
last delivered at the house of John Heideman, New.
road, eight bushels of coals, without a meter ticket.
Mary Hardeman proved, that the coals were de-
livered according to order, by the Prisoner, on the
4th'of Novetpber, and that at the tinte of delivery
the ticket wis handed to her, and
.14 purported
to be a meter ticket. The witoml suspecting
tbit there was some deficiency in lite ratty of
coals, mentioned the circumstance. lOtter,1Otter,
who wedtatisy, and shortly returned stit "%Atm,
whom htirepresented to have been the pet*a Whir
signed the' Meter ticket. She then sent her dough',
ter to the' Meter Office, for a person to re-uiemorr
the cools. This girl wee also produted, end ptuved
that she delivered the ticket et the office to a Mr;
Gardner, Who imMediately told her it •was a fatal.
cater) ticket.
Mr. Gardner, of the Meter.office, confirmed the
statement of obis witness. He stated, Lirse•it was
aaveleary, when tests ore delivered from sbr Past
at die coal eeereiseati to • have a Psahmeadeee
Otilltir 'yea the delivery. If the'coale *fie ik-soidl
it telif;,Ptiltomry to produm a relideni ticket, eS
witteensiintoerruckeo. ',,tk•- • *
:11110411111 having 'been fatly prommile,the ,Jtorvet
• sera et gado* of 8.1 ' •
*64' dig Me lel 41
.• l•

----"TlV—iiWilluttitet s Is h•i,
diettnent, was not to injure
IV en example, which he t
proper effect. For an offei
was tree, than there was I Sun
provided by Statute, but it
Common Law, end aii rue
The present indirtittent wa
ever willing the COurt was
views of the Prosecutor, in
tpepresetit instance, they c
considering that according tc
fendant,had no more to do ic
to retitle the pay mint orate '
Count:l:ices, the Court ewer
of IS/.
W illeam. *Mt was indict
23d if October last, the I
known, with eu intelatio Gel
dissection.
Robert Tisdale, a butcher,
of Si. Pancras,, prOsed, ilia
her lost, he saw two men, the
kit, •and the other it bag,
fle immediately suspected w
/1 in " pursued thew, he apps
..
I. brought hint to Si. P.in
sernining the bag and bask
they contained a dead bud,
Prisoner was theo conductej
garden.
Upon the cross•exarnittati
said, he directed the body 1
geotr's Hail, Lincoln's ha
&Jived the 'stab of Sixteen el
He denied haritig propose
the porter that the body silo
that he should have hi. Aare
denied • hiving expressed dist
of 16s. being given to him, I
have beeu made it pound—ri,
trary, he had on expectation i
The porter of the College
corroborated so much of tie
et related to hint, and adder
Meted by the Corporation of
shillings for each piece.
The 'evidence having been
said, that the Jury must hat
had been Proved against tl
he was in possession of
averments in the indictme
stolen the body, end tin
it. Neither of • three haw
ed, they were bound to
He trusted that the Jury a
they would decide on this i
that their judginent Should
feelings, barrettes strong or
might IsiV; M itr!sumpt
the Prishier Alb intentil
but yet itothitet of that kin(
The Jury immediately ri
Aeimittul, end the Prison!
monition, was discharged.
Levesdale and Swarm; twi
men, were indicted- by Ja
Jacob. for ad asmult, on t
November;
' Esther Jacob kept a boo
1 Commercial-toad, end cohel

es his wife. On the above.
late hour, she was alarmed 1
the street, apparently at hi
down stairs ont of bed, and
which a gang of persons,
Prisoners at the bar, resin
moat violently.
John White, who had b
ran down stairs stripped, •
extricate Miss incob from
who held her, he was himse
by the same persons.
Esther Jacob deposed fu
her crosioexaminottont she
White, but was not learn
she w•a married.
Mr. White also lolly dep
his crosa-examirratioa he a

son of ;slew of the name o
his Majesty's service he viler
He Will about to explain
Coors• stopped him, sayini
was quite unnecessary, as n
moo than for came to •aite

Witness t
known all his line under a
that he had taken out his

DUMP.

The Prisoners having bet
pies' tiny setoriwicdged th
brought in • verdict accordi
Ou the interposition of C
coespremise eno entered in
and an juvilgasent, was &live
. B. W. Pmts, a respe
gealleman, was potato the
ing written • ford end inj
character of his owe 'nadir
-resided in Chelsea. The all
in • letter' written by
iintliord of the Furtive where

resided, and described *ea
probrinse that he peribly ci
the. Defendant recootatend
and not by a public trial
tors, which it aright be
parties to COSOSOL - The De
mu the request 1 the Pr
*imps& by the Counsel th
4:nest might be: as •snoderi
peewit. • •
CMAIIIMAII slid, the
saslarsisaiers the Uefenda
Of Abe Promote., 'mined 11
Wass siereisaef justice, the
gamut tu bin ea.the indulge
alismiskdaseelbse:insaly nu
..twister him's* eduarlis
at say limb iousilse Oath.,
@sight bit paprolospow
Pager ettb•6ll4 gime eon
*4. assuLd•lie sesseitti
simpcalbees ear much

riti#
tO y,6