The National Register.
London, England, 1821-03-12 00:00:00

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 7.

JONES, O. LLWIS.
This action was brought by Mr. Jones against Mr.
Lewis the ehkr, by which he sought to recover a con-
siderable sum of money he had applied to the use of the
son of the defend nit. The money which amounted to
7881. was expended by Mr. Jones in the discharge of
certain annuities and clan us upon reversionary interest
which Mr. Lewis, jun. had in an estate. Mr. Jones
also had a reversionary interest in the same property,—
The sum claimed was not precisely a debt, but tile
defendant was said to be liable to pay the denrnd by
virtue of an engagement, which, it was alleged, he
entered into for the benefit of his sou.

Mr. Manning, solicitor for tile plaintiff, was called
as a witness. Ile stated that he was applied to by Lewis
the younger and Jones, fur the purpose of accomplish-
ing the business. The object was to py the creditors of
tlr. Lewis, jun. ten shillings in the pound by the sale
of his reversion. In order to make a good title, it was
necessary to clear away a number of claims. The de-
fendant came to town, and hating consented to the
statement in a paper produced by Mr. Vanor, his own
attorney, he said to Jones, " You pay the expenses out
of the purchase money of the reversion, and I will
repay you." The ainoun: of the debts was knowu at
that time, but not the amount of the expences. There
was an excess paid upon the expences equal to the suns
the plaintiff sought to recover.
Mr. Scarlet', for the defendant contended, that Mr.
Lewis had Deter made himself answerable for more
than 6321. which he had discharged by paying 7001.
Mr. Vapor been called, stated, that in 1818, he was
attorney for Mr. Lewis, the defendant. Ile was em-
ployed to settle the affairs of that gentleman's son. Mr.
Jones and Mr. Lewis, jun. required him to make out a
satisfactory paper of the charges attending the sale of
reversion. tie accordingly made out the paper. The
share of young Lewis was not enough to discharge the
annui.ies and make a clear title. I was consequently
proposed to Mr. Lewis, senior, to advance money for
the purpose. A 'sleeting took place at Monday's cof-
fee-house for the purpose. The parties were all present.
Mr. Lewis was told the sale could not be made good,
unless he advanced 6021. to pay off the annuities. He
at first expressed his dissatisfaction at being called on to
pay so large a stint, but finally agreed to pay it.
Mr. De 11111431, alter the above evidence, admitted that'
tie could not recover the whole stun of 7881. but eon-
it:mled that the plaintiff upon the face of the transaction
was at least entitled to 9001. more than the defendant
nail ',lid.
The Jury returned a verdict for the defendant.
FRIDAY, MARCH 9.
LIDEL.—HOURSON U. WALTER.

This action was brought 4theidalntiii, a newsman
and publisher in Wimp°le-sncet, against the proprietor
of the Itmrs, to recover a compensation in damages for
a libel calculated to injure him in his business. The
libel complained of was a paragraph, which appeared in
the Twits of the 22d of June last, stating that repeated
complaints had been made of the plaintiff's 'rreor Laity
in delivery of the Timis, and that they refused to let
him have papers. It a ho stated tha other news•venders
%could supply the putalic with the nuts mole regularly.
The defendants put in sev,:ral pleas of justification.—
The most material plea was, that they Mund themselves
obliged, in the support of the interest of their journal,
to insert the paragraph. The plaintiff, by late and ir-
regular delivery of their papers, had made an impression
upon those who receised it unfavourable to the pro.
prictors. They were, therefore, under the necessity of
explaining the cause of late delivery, and pointing out
how it might he avoiued.
The Solicitor-General. as counsel for she plaintiff,
addressed the Jury. lie described the cireumnatices of
the ease to be shortly all follow :—Mr. Hodgson was a
respectable news vendor at the west end of the town,
and from the distancr of his connexions from the imus
oflice,was some time in June last induced to renionsi rate
ith the publisher of the Times paper, upon what he
considered an unfair priority of distribution of that join.
nal—out of this remonstrance some unpleasant feclind
arose against Mr. H. dgson, the proprietor of the
paper thought proper to insert a most oflensive paragraph
in his joirrnal, not only n fleeting on the character of
the plaintiff, but ind.r, ctly adenine; his customers to

obtain their papers of some other person, as the pro.
victor of the Times stated he was determined not to
let the plaintiff have any from his office. He contended
that the motives under which the defendants acted,
gave the plaintiff a claim to considerable damages. The
plaintiff's case was proved, but it did not appear that
any damage was sustained by him in consequence of
the offensive paragraph.
Mr. Scarlett for the defendant, called several witnesses
in support of the pleas of justification.
Mr. Watkins, publisher of the Times, proved that the
plaintiff's servant came frequently lin the papers, when
he knew lie could not receive them. lie would then go
away and come again late, so that be could not deliver
theni in proper time. Ile generally conducted himself
in a disorderly manner.
The clerk to Mr. Booth, keeper of a circulating.
library in Duke-street, Manchester-square, proved that
the I,laintiff furnished the Times at a very late hour. It
was on the occasion of the publication of the Queen's
letter. Upon cross examination, it appeared that the
Timesoffice, on thatiday, did nut publish until a late
boor.

NI r. Booth confirmed the testimony, and added, that
after the Times refused to let Hodgson have papers, he
had received them sooner.

The Solicitor-General made a very brilliant reply.
The Chief Justice summed lip, and the jury, after a
little consideration, gave a verdict fur the plaintiff 501.
darna,4es, and 40s. costs.

COURT OF CIL THURSDAY, MARCH 8.
THE DIRECTORS OF TUE NATIONAL UNION FIRE SOCIETY

V. TIIO3. BIGNOI.D SIN.

Mr. Wetherell stated that the Court had formerly
granted an injunction to restrain the defendant front
receiving any money on account, or interfering in any
way with toe affairs, of the National Union Fire Society.
Ile now moved that the injunction should be dissolved,
on the ground that the Court had no jurisdiction in this
case. The defendant had filed an affidavit, in which he
stated that he was the principal founder of the National
Union Society, which had obtained a large share of
pnblic confidence. The defendant was appointed Secre-
tary of the Society, and was to manage the whole of its
affairs, as the other directors were wholly ignorant of
the principles of insurance. Tile society went on pros-
peruusly fur some time under the auspices of fir Bignold.
until some disputes arose between that gentleman and
the directors, in consequence of which the latter took
possession la the books and papers belonging to the
society, and carried them to the house of one of the
plaintiffs, Mr. Driver. The directors, who are the
plaintiffs, then applied to the court for the injunc-
tionwhich had been granted against the defendant.—
The alleged grounds on which they made their
application were, that the defendant had destroyed
certain receipts belonging to the society. The
learned counsel denied that their allegations of nii,con-
duct on the part of the defendant were true; but, allow.
log them to be true, the plaintiff's had no right to bring
them tinder the consideration of the Court. According
to the deed by which the society was established, the
directors were empowered to correct any misconduct on
the part of their officers. If the directors found that
the defendant had been guilty of any misconduct, they
might have framed some by-laws to remedy it : if they
thought that the defendant was in possession of any
balances due to the society, ihvy ought in nave appointed
an auditor to examine his accounts. After having acted
in this way the plaintiff's, had they funnel it necessary,
would then have been authorised to come into court to
claim relief. The plaintiffs, however, had assumed,
that where a particular mode of proceeding is prescribed
by the laws of the society they may repudiate it, and call
upon the court to interfere. If this principle were
adopted, every private dispute which might arise in
in societies of this nature would be removed from the
private forum by which it ought to be determined, and
referred fur decision to this court. The !corned gen-
tleman concluded by praying the Court to dissolve the
injunction.
Mr. Fonblanque, for the plaintiffs, opposed Mr.
Wetherell's application. lie contended that the M.
junction was granted 411 full and atillielelit grOillidS --
The Court, when it made the order in this case, was
satisfied that Mr. Hignold had been guilty of acts of apo-
hation by destioying Certain receipts belonging to the
society; that he had omitted to pay duties on insurance
at the Stamp-oflice, although he knew that the society
was liable to certain penalties for neglecting to do so,
and that, in fact, he had omitted to do every thing
which he had stipulated to do, and had done every thing
which he ought not to have done.--iudgment deterred

if vunoetiontA.—A repay lately made by the Russian
Councillor of stair Leunsliein states, that an old soldier,
living in a village in the circle of Belewsky, had ft equently
cured nun and brutes who had been bitten by mad dogs.
He reduced into powder the Water Maintain (Minna
Montagu) and having strewed it un a slice of bread and
bonier, gave it to the patients to rat. The Councillor
observes, 4• i RAVe little credit to it, until accident fur-
nished me with a pouf of its efficacy. One of my bro-
ther's hounds went mad and hit the Inuit:mien ; the
ordinary operation was peat:wined, to pi the propa-
gation of the virus, and the wauud healed; but in a few
weeks all the symptoms of hydrophobia appeared. The
huntsman was taken to the old soldier, who administered
two doses of his remedy, une in the evening, the other in
the morning, and then said this Mall might Le unbound.'
and taken home w illiatit dancer. The huntsman emit:-
t kneed great weakaess, but bad no tits either of dclit.Bllll
Or hydrophobia. In a few days he f I himself pee feetly
Clired, and he has now lived 18 years without having any
telapse."—The Water Plantain grows in marshy,; the
rout resembles an onion, with thick lilies. It remains
tinder water till the latter end of May, or the beginning
of Jour; it flowers all the r, and may be gathered
at any time; but the best is at the end of August. The
roots are well washed and cleansed, and (hied in the
shade; when dry, it is pulveilzud and etliiiiitistried as
above

SURREY SESSIONS.
MONDAY, MARCH 5.
RECEIVING STOLEN GOODS.
James Pindard was indicted for feloniously receiving
some wearing apparel, and a considerable quantity of
household property belonging to Mr. K. Ramsdell, a
tradesman residing at Norwood. Elizabeth Pindard,
the wife of the prisoner, had been convicted on Saturday
of having stolen the property iii question from the house
of the prosecutor, where she had lived for a considerable
time, sometimes as a weekly servant, and sometimes as a
chair-woman. Property had been continually missed
during her services there, and at length suspicion felt
upon her, and stolen property to an amount that sur-
prised the prosecutor, was found in her possession. The
offence hail been Comm tted tinder circumstances of a
very aggravated nature, and die court sentenced her to
be transported seven years. It was for receiving the
property so stolen knowingly, that the husband was
now tried.
Haminand, a constable, produced a variety of pro-
perry which he had found.
Mrs. Ramsdell, the wile of the prosecutor, identified a
considerable portion of the property Mood upon the pri-
soner, part of which she proved to have been stolen, and
part of it had been taken away by tome robbers who
broke into the house.
Mr. Turton, the counsel for the prisoner, contended,
that there was lt of the property for which the pri-
soner was now indieml for having leloniotisty received,
knowing it to have been stolen, which had not been
identified at the trial of the principal ; he had, therefore,
he contended, a right to prove that the evidence in that
case did not warrant the general verdict which had been
given of guilty.
The court a,ked the counsel what evidence he bad to
prove his statement 2
Mr.'forton said. that as he must have the best evidence
that the nature of the case would admit, he should pus.
pose to examine the worthy chairmau himself, and call
upon him to produce his notes of the trial.
The chairman said, that he had very little recollection
of the evidence distinct from his notes; but he had
never heard Wine of a Judge being called lipun to be
examined before himself.
The bench consulted upon the application, which it
appeared they did not think ought to be acceded ;
but some persons present having stated that the
learned counsel was misinformed upon the fact, and that
the property in question had been identified, he did not
press his application.
The prisoner and his wife were also convicted upon
a second indictment for robi:aig the house of Hr. Hol-
loway, a person in the same ileighbourhood.
The Chairman, in passing sentence, observed that he
had never seen an instance of persons escaping detection
during so long continued a course of crime. Ile then
proceeded to sentence the husband, James Pindard, for
receiving the goods siolen by his wife, to 14 years' trans-
portation, and Mr stealing the goods of Mr. Holloway
the two prisohtrs were sentenced to be transported for
seven years each, to commence at the expiration of their
former sentences.
A young lad, named Win. Paynter, was indicted (or
having feloniously embezzled sevenpeoce, the property
of Mr. A. Saner, of Peckham.
The Chairman said, that there could be no doubt but
that the prisoner had been guilty of continued depreda-
tions on the property of his employer; and, touter the
very aggravated cucumstance of the case, he sentenced
the prisoner to be transported for seven years.
CIRCULATION OF BAD HONEY.
The following prisoners were prosecuted at the in-
stance of the Mint:—
John Becket, a young man, was indicted for having
utuseed a counterfeit half crown, at the shop of Mrs.
Hudson, at Camberwell, on the 19th of February.
It appeared that the prosecutrix keeps a baker's shop
in Camberwell. The prisoner had often been a cus-
tomer fn twopenny loaves, biscuits, &t. which he had
paid for generally with hall-crow us. Out rubbing one
of them the copper made its appearance, and rill a sub-
sequent occasion his money was examined more scru-
pulously, when another bad half-crown was detected.
On his being taken into custody he behaved with the
greatest impertinence—said lie supposed she meant give
him a ride in Raiy.stoo, which lie snook' like iery
as a few months regular living, and the change of air,
would benefit his health. It appeared that the prisoner
had dealt ooh other bakers in the neighbourhood in the
same way. lie was found Godly on two charges.
The Chairman sentenced the prisoner to be imprison-
ed for six moil Its lii the conallloll glop, and to bud su-
lks for 161 pond lyenaviour.
Michael Brady was also convicted of utteriog one
hall-crown, and it ing a determined utterer, he WA>
sentenced to be imprisoned in the common gaol for Pt
months.
Diana Winter was charged with having had in her
possession a quantity of half crowns, with intent to cir-
culate the same.
A Police Officer stated, that he saw the prisoner upon
the stroll in Suffolk-street, and she being an old acquain-
tance he took her into custody and searched her, after a
most desperate resistance, when lie found six bad hall-
crowns in her pi.- kris, carefully wrapped up, that the
brilliancy of their appearance might not he injured by
their being tumbied about in the pocket. Some inure
bad money was found concealed at her lodgings.
Tne jury footed the prisoner guilty, and the court sen-
tenced her to be imprisoned fur twelve months, and find
sureties to be of good behaviour.
'f he neighbourhood oI Camberwell, Newington, and
Kennington has recently been inundated with bad
money. The prisoners formed part of a considerable
gang of enterers, who had seated themselves in that
neighbourhood.
A girl about 17 years of age was tried for striking an
old lady who had been rather censorious. The deb
dant gave as a reason for assaulting the old lady, that
she had heard that the prusecutrix iutentled to swear