The National Register.
London, England, 1821-06-24 00:00:00

TO THE EDITOR.

SlR,—The account given of the Unitarian Fond Dinner,
in your last paper, seems to me so little remarkable for ac-
curacy Or candour, that I cannot hot acquit yew of having
been pre• cid, though it assumes the shape of an Editor's
paragraph :—my reply shall be as short as possible, though
it necessarily invr,ives a little history. The Society in
gm ciao being instituted for a purpose no less grave and
serious in its nature, than (as we think) important as to its
object, the gentlemen who arranged the toasts to be given
after dinner (of whom I was not one) deiiberately endea-
voured to avoid every thing which might alter, perhaps
debase it, by an admixture with the party topics of the
passing day, and therefore confined their artifice of political
and public persons to his Majesty, singly and alone; raid
even to him without the interpolated addition of" Cod bless
him," which, however, unexceptionalite, or even, on other
occasions, laudable and proper, it had been the better, for
the fosegoing reason, to omit.—Concurring in their opinion,
when an attempt was made by some gentlemen to invade
the rule, I declined to comply with the annoy call,
stating (which " the account" omits to mention) the prin.
ciple on which the stewards hail acted, and my own opinion
of the propriety of iihidise, by it—and I am satisfied that 1
acted rightly ; that the wish, so far from being unanimous,
was not expressed by one fourth of the cotnpany, and that
the minute's reflection, for which my interposition:diorite('
the opportunity, convinced the meeting of the expedience
of the line a bleb had been drown; ill which all immediately
acquiesced, by that silence which was best proof of cut,.
sent. As to my own consistency, I have only to say, that
having objected to interruptiN the prescribed coma! by the
introduction of a subject wholly foreign to the design and
object of the institution, when on the point of leaving the
Chair I took a liberty, generally alloyed I believe, of
giving, as from myself, flee health of a gentleman, my inti-
mate friend, well known as :he most ptominent chuuipion
and leader of that very cause which we were assembled to
promote—whose talents and imiustry have beta for many
years devoted to its nib/imminent—hut a Ito, notwithstanding
the number and wallay of his publication., never once, I
believe, appeared before the public as a political polemic—
if this be inconsistency t am content to bear the blame.—
Trusting to your liberality to insert this,
I rani, Sir, Your obedient Servant,
London, June, 20, 1521. W. SMITH.

I'. S. 1 must desire to add my entire concurrence in your
richly merited eulogium oil the eloquent speech which Mr.
Fux delivered On the occasion.

•„" In conformity with our constant custom, we
insert the above Letter, but we cannot avoid
making a few observations on the subject. The
Editor of this Paper was present at the Dinner for
the purpose of taking notes (which he did at great
length, though subsequent circumstances prevented
his publishing the account he had intended giving)
and avers the verity of his statement that the call
was " nearly unanimous''—of which in his situa.
tion he had a much better power of judging than
the Chairman, and in which opinion he is confirmed
by several gentlemen who can have no motive for
misrepresentation ; he also knows that the silence
which was so unfottunately interpreted as approba-
tion of, or conviction of the propriety of the omission
arose solely from a determination on the part of the
dissatisfied company net to sacrifice the quiet of the
evening on that account We agree with the
worthy Chairman as to the gravity of the occasion,
anti as to the desirableness of excluding front
such meetings every political feeling, but we still
maintain that that cfclusion could not be obtained
by drinking " The King, God bless him," which
gas the precise form of the first toast, and after-
wards refusing to give a toast when so generally
called for—the omission of which at the present
moment gave the meeting a decidedly POLITICAL
CHARACTER and that of the worst sort• We could
have had no objection to the health of Mr. T.
Belsham, (whose every act has been so highly
creditable to him) being drunk, but nothing can
convince as that the fact was by any means con-
sistent with the first declaration of the chairman,
that he would " invariably adhere to the list
given him by the stewards."—En.

It has been represented that the Duke of Clarence
has only 18,0001. a year, besides 2,5001. a year
which was granted to him early in life, and which,
because he has received it so long, ought not now
to be noticed at all. The following is a very mode-
rate estimate of the public provision for his Royal
I-Ugliness, independent of his marriage:-18,0001.
a year by Act of Parliament ; 2,5001. a year by an
old grant; the admiralship of the fleet, 2,0001. a
year, a free house in St. James's, and a mansion at
Bushy-park (enjoyed for many years) with gardens,
farm, and the rangcrs!sip, with its privileges (say, at
the least, worth 2,5001. a year) and besides these,
1,5001. a year settled from public money on certain
young ladies called the Misses Fitsclarence. These
items make 26,5001. If we add to this the 6,0061.
additional proposed on account of the marriage, (to
say nothing of 18,0001. for arrears), we make up a
charge of 32,5001. a year ! !
A few days ago a considerable wager was made
by a gentleman of Prescot, that he would provide a
chaise and pair that should go thirteen miles and a
half within the hour; carrying, besides the driver,
two persons, weighing 480 pounds. This wager
was deeded last week, and won by one minute.

The population returns in every part of the king-
dom sbew a material increase since 1811. In the
single parish of St. John the Evangelist, Westmin-
ster, the increase has been upwards of 6,2oo—the
the total number of persons being in 1811, 10,615;
in 1821, 16,835.

LAW REPORT.

• COURT OF KING'S BENCH, Jostle 16.
DAY AND MARTIN V. BROWN.
This was au action brought by Messrs. Day and
Martin, blacking-inikers, of Holborn, against the defen-
daut, Henry Brown, for an imitation of their label.
The trick was discovered by a typographical error its the
counterfeit publication : the dainages were kid at 10001.
Mr. Scarlett felt do hesitation in opening the case, as
one of the darkest which had ever been presented to a
jury. Quiequid agunt hinittes, were words which had
blazed upon the proscenium of a theatre, and perhaps
the saute motto might be equally germane to die parties
of a court of justice—a stage upon which the scene was
varied even from the palace to the pot-house, and where
almost every character, front the prince to the pedlar, in
turn presented himself to public attention. Of counsel
certainly it might be said with truth, that one man in his
time played many parts; labouring in their vocation,
they lent their aid alike to all ; and the man who was
the opponent of royalty to-day, might stand tip for the
right of a chininevisweeper to-morrow. To intluduce
the present plaintiffs formally to Inc jury, would scarcely
(Mr. Scarlett thought) be requisite ; for who, with the
slightest pretension to polish, could be unacquainted
with the names of Day and Martin? Could it be ne-
cessary of those gentlemen to say, that, by stooping to
the leer, they hid raised themselves to the head of soci-
ety! Needed it to be observed in the year 1821, that
their fame laid spread through every clime where shoes
were made of leather? Did not their puffs and poems
(passing even those of Packwood/ aitutiate every news-
paper of the day? and would not they. themselves go
down to posterity the blackest, yet the brightest, charac-
ters of the age? The jury were men, and they knew
mankind. The jury wore boots, and they would know
the in. rits of Martin's blacking; of that inestimable
fluid—dark as the jetty plumage of that bird whose name
the maker bore. But fame raised enemies; success
raised rivals; and, even as with others, so hard it fared
with the mese plaintills. Pretenders had put up for
public fivour people had been poisoned for a while
with their pernicious preparations; but frail as their own
bottles had been their standing in the trade; like those
bottles they had broken ; and the long hands of sweep-
ing assignees had left not a hamper behind. Yet there
was out—and now the learned counsel came to the
gravamen of his case—there was one man who played a
deeper game. An envious oilman dwelt near Golden-
square, who saw and grudged the plaintilis' rising for-
tunes. 'l'he caitiff's name was Brown, and lie could
make a liquid which he called black, but which, like
1 • , was brown. Each tiask, like Pandora's box, con-
tained a thousand ills; it burned up good men 'r
shoes,
did harm to harness, and, lustreless, defied the sweating
valet's toil. To sell this villanous composition, however,
was Brown's chiefest care; and how did the jury think
the wicked end had been attained I Knowing that his
own name would bring no buyers, the man of guile re-
solved to take another's: he printed a quantity of labels,
is imitation of the labels of the plaintilla; pasted them
at leisure upon his spurious books, and uttered his own
base compound to the would as the genuine blacking of
the illustrious Day and !Martin. Even thus did error
steal into authority; and thus was High iiolborn cheated
of its homage! The means by which the fraud in ques-
tion had been carried into effect, would be sufficiently
detailed in. the course of the evidence; but, upon the
effect and character of the deceit, a few words might be
permitted. The plaintiffs did not ask vindictive da-
mages, but the defendant, they submitted, was a double
trespasser ; at once, a depreciator of their inestimable
ware, and a destroyer of the shoes and boots of the com-
munity: and there was another topic to which Mr. Scar-
lett would advert—his comments would be brief, but it
would not be thrown away upon the jury: he did feel it
his duty to add a seiiteiice as to the influence of such
conduct upon the general interests of trade. It would
he painful to say that the high and honourable feeling
which had distinguished Bratsk commerce was on the
&chin: ; but the plaintiffs were the only persons who
withi:: ilie last few years had suffered by ntean and pi-
ratical practices. There was a Mrs. Lazenby, who had
discovered a pickle so piquant as to tickle the palates of
all the aldermen in London—she hail been unable to
keep possession of her own name. A Mr. Cox, too, the
inventor of a most delicious educe [that, we understand,
with which a man might eat his own father]—Mr. Cux
had been obliged to defend himself at law: and the
learned counsel really apprehended, unless the jury
would make an example of the present defendant, that
'smite rogue would go down into the country, redden his
lace, put on a powdered wig, and call himself Mr. Scar-
ett ; or, playing the same trick upon the learned Soli-
eitot-Generait receive all those fees and emoluments of
office to which that heartied gentleman stood entitled.
Mr. E. Custance hail been many years in the habit of
ti.ing Day and Martin's blacking. lie. bought a bottle of
blacking (purporting to he Day and Nlartin's matitifae.
titre) from the defendant Brown. Finding it vile stuff,
lie carried it to the house of the plaintitli in High Hol-
born, who altjtired it.
James Barton proved the purchase of a similar bottle.
The grin' counterfeits were then put in.
Thomas Richardson was printer to the plaintiffs. Their
labels were painted from a stereotype plate. He timid
swear the labels on the spurious bottles were not rim. d
from the plate of the plaintiffs. There were se%ei,.l to-
pographical errors: among others, the word "
in the true bill, stood inestanable' in the counter-
' feit.
Bieliat d Brown, first cousin to the defendant, admitted
that he bad got abont 2,400 labels strisek off trout a plate
which was supplied to him by the defendant.
Mr. Denman addressed the jury in mitigation, but
called no witnesses.
The Lord Chief Justice thought it a case not tit for vin-
dicative, btu certainly for reasonable damages.
The jury found a verdict for the plattititfs.---lla.
magas 131.
60 W.: understand that no fewer than sevent..an per-
sans, were during the last 'tecua strved by Messrs. Day

THE NATIONAL REGISTER

and Martin with notice of action for similar encroach-
ments, but relinquished on the parties paying costs and
engaging not to offend again.
MONDAY, JUNE IS.
THE KING V. MOYSTON JONES.

The aboWdelenriant, if will he recollected, was tried
and convicted last sessions, for falsely swearing before
the Surrogate of the Ecclesiastical Court, Doctors' Com-
mons, that he knew of no impediment to his marriage
with Elizabeth. the daughter of Peter Harvey Lovell,
Esq. of Cole Park, Wilts.
The prisoner's counsel, Messrs. Alley and Andrews,
on that occasion took an objection to the form of die
indictment, which, was reserved by the Common Ser-
geant,
and judgment was respited until this sessions:
the defendant being allowed to go at large upon giving
security to the amount of 4001. for his future appearance
to receive judgment. He now sppeared, and Messrs.
Alley and Andrews moved that he he discharged, on the
around that the indictment was invalid, inasmuch as it
did not negative all the avernients upon the record, as
in cases of perjury. This the learned gentlemen con-
tended was as indispensably necessary in au indictment
of this kind as it was in one for perjury; and the con-
viction must therefore fall to the ground.
The Common Sergeant said. .the point had received
the deepest consideration ; and it was with much reluct-
ance that he informed the defendant that the Court con-
sidered the of to be fatal, and that he ;mist he
discharged. Had the decision hien otherwise the Court
would 'have felt hound to visit the offence with great,
severity.—The defendant was then discharged.
Richard Heath was indicted for stealing a book, value
13s. the property of Thomas Edwards.
The prosecutor is a bookseller. and keeps a stall,
covered with tooks, outside his shop-door.
A respectable tradesman gave the primer a good
character ; and said, he believed that detp distress alone
could have induced him to c,uninit the theft.

The Jury found him—Guilty; but recommended him
to mercy.
The Recorder said, this was not a case in which the
Court would deal severely with the prisoner; as allow•
ance would be made ihr the temptation held out by the
prosecutor, in placing his property in that careless man-
ner in the street. If tradesmen would be so careless,
they must expect to be robbed.
The tradesman who gave the prisoner a character
offered to take him again into his service, if the Court
would deal leniently with him.
The Recorder said, he should suffer a short imprison-
ment.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, JUNE W.

STEVENS AND ANOTHER, ASSIGNEES Of MITCHELL,

O. JOHNSON.

This was an action to recover 471. lOs. the amount of
a bill of exchange drawn by the defendant in the month
of July, 1818, on a person of the name of Moore, and
passed to Mitchell, in whose hands it remained unpaid
at the time of his bankruptcy, which took place in No-
vember last,

Sergeant Pell stated the plaintiff's case, and accounted
for the delay in brining, the action by sling that the
defendant had desirelMitchell,after the bill Ihtd become
due and was nut paid, to retain in his hands and endea-
vour to get payment from Moore, the acceptor, who is a
builder, and was, at the time the bill became due, actu-
ally employed in building houses for Mitchell.
the bill was put in and proved to be drawn by the
defendant's daughter, who was in the habit of drawing
bills of exchange for her father.
The jury, without a moment's hesitation, found a
verdict for the plaintiff.

satn•r, MAT 4'.
This being the fast nay of 'frinits, Term, the Judges,
with the exception of Mr. Justice Best, took their seats
in tile usual manner.

"I'h! Report of the Milbank Penitentiary was post-
poned, and read by the officer of the court.

.LIBEL.-THE KING V. SHACKLI. AND OTHERS.

Mr. Searlett moved to file a criminal information
against the defendants, thrce in number, for a libel on
the Countess of Jersey, published in The Jobs Bull
weekly paper. The application was made on behalf of
the Earl of Jersey. Mr. S. produced the paper contain-
ing the libel, which he read. The object of the writer
was to hold the Countess of Jersey up to ridicule and
contempt, describing her to be the insulted anifidank of
her Majesty the Queen. The learned Counsel then
quoted at considerable length the following article, which
appeared in the John Bull of the 6th of May, 1820: the
heading, in large letters, -for the purpose of securing
notice :