The National Register.
London, England, 1821-02-04 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF RING'S BENCH.
WEDNESDAY. JAW. 31.
The fringe. Edmonds. Urristiriglit, Wader, and others.
Tne Attorney-General this day chewed cause against
a Rule for a new trial obtained by the defendants, who
appeared in Court, with the exception of W. Greathead
Lewis and Maddox.
Mr. Justice Best then read the report of the trial, and
the subsequent proccedihgs of the defendants to chal-
lenge the array of the special Jury, on the ground that
the Master of the Crows Office had omitted to summon
Mr. Samuel Pcach, who ought to have been one of the
Jurors.
The Attorney-General contended upon the first point,
namely, the refusal of the Learned Judge to allow the
challenge, that there wrs no ground for that application.
Mr. Denman, in reply, contended that it was impos-
sible to preserve the right of Trial by Jury, if a Judge
had the pawer to deny the privilege of challenging the
array.
After Mr. Deuman's long and able argument,. the
Court held it too late to proceed further in the cause this
day, and they ordered it to come on again at Monday
next.

THURSDAY, FEI. I.
The Kiug v. Tyter.
The defendant appeared to receive the judgment of
the Court, having been convicted of publishing Paine's
Age of Reason.
Mr. Gurney was heard in support of the prosecution,
but the Court deferred its judgment to Wednesday next.
The King v. Sir E. Burdett.
This cause came on again by appointment. It ex-
cited considerable interest, and the Court was crowded
at au early hour. Sir F. Burdett, Lord Lowther, Sir
R. Wilson, Mr. Hobhouse, and several other persons or
distinction were in Court. . . .

The Attorney General prayed the judgment of the
Court.
Mr. Scarlett observed, that the judgemeat of the late
decision of the Court and the Public feeling were so
much at variance that he had to propose to the Attorney
General to give the defendant an opportunity of havina
the judgment reviewed by consenting to have the case
argued de nom.
l'he Attorney General refused his assent, and com-
plained that the suggestion had not beets made to him
in private.
Mr. Scarlett replied. with some asperity, that such a
line of conduct would have been a want of respect to
the Court, and proceeded to move an arrest of judgment,
on the ground that it did not appear that the words of
the libel applied to the facts winch had agitated the
public mind. The words lioroughmongers did not
mean the government of the realm, nor were tloody
141 eras words which could apply. to the government.—
After a long and able argument tit support of his appli-
cation, the Court stated that they could not attend any
longer to the motion this day, and further proceedings
were postponed to Saturday.
FRIDAY, FEB. I.
VAII,E V. VAN DYE..

This was an action of assunipsit for the breach of a
marriage promise, the declaration alleging, that in con-
sideration of the plaintiff's having promised to marry
the defendant, he promised to marry her in a short time.
Mr. Jessopp (with whom was Mr. Kook) opened the
case with great feeling.
The case proved in evidence was in substance this:—
The plaintiff was a young lady aged eighteen, of pre-
possessing appearance, the daughter of a lady who kept
a boarding and lodging house in Nelson-square, Black-
friars-road ; and the.oefentlant was 3 young gentleman
aged twenty-four, a ;wive of Demerara, in the West
Indies, and the son of a widow lady residing in that
Island. In the early part of the month of April last
year the defendant, who had been sent over to this
country to study the profession of medicine, and then
living upon an allowance made him by his mother, was
taken to the house of the plaintiff's mother, by one of
her boarders, on a visit. lie was immediately smitten
with the appeaance of the plaintiff, and a warm attach-
ment was the consequence. His attentions became so
marked, that the mother was desirous of a declaration of
his intentions, and she took occasion to write him a let-
tor with that slew. On the 26th of April he answered
the letter, declaring that his intentions were honourable,
and desired permission to tender his addresses to the
pliiiiitifl, and at the same time soliciting her good offices
with the daughter hi his favour. Accordingly he was
received as the as owed suitor of the young lady, and be-
cause
her constant visitor, anal to all appearance was an
ardent lover. The promise of marriage relied upon was
a declaration of the defendant's to a friend of his, who
took occasion to remark upon some familiarities which
passed between the delenuatit and the plaintiff, in the
presence of other persons, when he said, " Why, every
body iii the house knows that I am shortly mite married
to her." The defendant continued his tender auditions
to the plaintiff mail the begonaing cilium., when, idler
a discontinuance of his visits for two or three days, the
young lady, feeling an anxiety on that accoutit, wrote
him a letter upon the subject, to which lie sent an an-
swer on the 3d of June, which was rather cold in its
terms, and concluding with these words, " If it is fine,
I will call over in the evening," language which, the
Chief Justice remarked, was sufficiently indicative of a
change to his StlititilelllS, for, otherwise, a lover, at Isis
age, would not care much about the weather. However,
on the sth of June, all doubt upon the subject was
cleared up, for, on that day, he wrote a letter to the
mother, d tali nctly avowing his intention of discontinuing
his visits to the daughter in future, assigning as his rea-
son for breaking off tne match, that his own family and
friends never could be brought to consent to the mar-
riage. The whole period of the courtship was little
snore than a month, and, in a very short time after this
declaration, an action was brought agaMst the defendant
fur the bleach of promise of Mal Flaw.