The Sun.
London, England, 1825-12-05 00:00:00

ROYAL NAVY.

PORTSMOUTH,— DEC. 3.—On Wednesday evening the
Spartiate, 78, Rear-Admiral Graham Eden Hamond, C. 8.,
airlved from Rio Janeiro, last front Lisbon, whence she sailed
on the 19th ult. in company with the Superb, 78, Sir Thomas
Staines,-Bart.. K. C. 8., which ship arrived with her. The
Superb was relieved in service in the 'Tagus by the Albion,
74, Captain Ommanney : she is to be paid off at this port, and
re-commissioned. The Spartiate is returned home with the
officers and crew of the Wellesley, from being found unlit for
.active service ; she made two feet water an hour during the 76
days preceding her arrival : two pumps were kept constantly
going. Her officers and crew are to be turned over to the
Melville, 74, which ship will be commissioned for service.—
She was towed into harbour this afternoon (the wind being
fOul) by the Lightning steam vessel.
. On Wednesday the wind shifted to the south-east, when the
outward-bound - merchant ships detained at the ?rlotherbank
and Cowes roadsteds (about 60 sail) proceeded on their respec-
tive voyages.—Also sailed the Rainbow, :18, Honourable Cap-
tain Rous, for the East India station, taking out Major-Gene-
ral Bourke, Lieutenant-Governor of the Cape of Good Hope,
and family • and the Dispatch, 18,- Captain Parsons, for the
coast of Africa, with two Commissioners of Inquiry, and
Lieutenant-Colonel Douglas and Captain Victor, of the Royal
Engineers, to snake an inspection into the state of the forts on
that coast.

The Harlequin, 18, Captain James Scott, came in this morn-
ing from Plynioutli. Remain at Spithead—Superb; Harle-
quin, Pranga. In the harbour—Victory, Warspite, Spartiate,
Ganges, Romney, Volage, Herald, Mastiff; Sparrowhawk,
Calliope, Arrow, Sprightly, .51agnificent, Royal Oak. The
Warspite, Volage; and Harlequin, are for the East India sta-
tion; the Herald and Mastiff; for the Mediterranean ; Magni-
ficent, for Jamaica; Royal Oak, for Bermuda.
On Tuesday the Dutch frigate Pallas, Captain Von Ryk,
arrived from Norfolk, in the United States, after 22 days' pas-
sage, having landed there his Serene Highness the Dulee Ber-
nardof Saxe-Weimar, who is making a tour in that country.
She'saileal in the evening for the Texel.
The Cato and Vihelia transports are ordered to embark the
2d battalion of the 95th regiment for the Mediterranean.—
The Zephyr is to take the depot of the sth regiment from
the Isle of Wight to North Shields, for duty in Tynemouth
Castle. The Duchess of York embarked, this morning, Ma-
jor-General Mainwaring, at Cowes, for passage'to Barbadocs.
The Sesostris has sailed for New South \Vales, with 150-
male convicts from the hulks at this place.
PLYMOUTH, DEC. I.—Came in the Reynard,
and Nightingale, from Channel services. Sailed the Harle-
quin,
for Spithead. Twenty mechanics are to proceed hence
in the Royal Oak, for Bermuda. The Madras, Fayier, from
this port, arrived at Madras, July 19. A public subscription
has been opened in this town for the sufferers at Mirainichi;
about 1001. have been given. By a decision of the twelve
Judges, the Essex, convict ship, which •was proceeding to
Miltbrd, navigated by Mr. Raven, Master, R. N. tinder the
charge of the Dwarf cutter, Lieut. N. Gould, is to share in
the proceeds of the valuable Dutch smuggling. lugger Two
&titers, which the Dwarf then captured. Remain—Britannia,
Genoa, Windsor Castie, Druid, Shamrock, Talbot, Pandora,
Nimrod, Victor, Nightingale, Camelaon.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
•
COURT OF CHANCERY.—(THIS DAY.)
COVENT-GARDEN THEATRE.
CONST AND OTHERS V. HARRIS AND OTHERS.
The LORD CHANCELLOR was occupied this day until near
one o'clock in hearing a motion made by Mr. HEALD, praying
that the receiver might be ordered to pats.his accounts.
The LORD CHANCELLOR strongly recommended to the
parties to settle amongst, themselves, and intimated that if
they did not do so, be would make an order on Saturday.

ROLLS COURT.—(Thrs DAY.)
JUDGMENT.-EVANS V. JONES.

His HONOUR gave judgment this day in this case by order-
ing the Defendant to pay over unto the account of the Attorney
General all sums of money in his hands, and appointed a re-
ceiver of the rents and profits of the estate.

[PROCEEDINGS OF SATURDAY.]
COURT OF CHANCERY, DEC. 3.

DE BEAUVOIR V. RHODES.

Mr. BE•LD wished to hear froiniii.lloine whether or no
he intended to accept the issue for a trial .at common law which
had been °fired him by the Court: The object of the trial pro-
posed is to get the decision of a court of law upon the point of
fraud or no fraud in obtaining a building lease for lands in the
parish of Hackney, on the presumption of which _ the heir-at-
law was p weeding to an ejectment of lessee until stayed by the
injunction of this Court.

Mr. Ho alih said that he could not give any answer until the
decision of this Court was made known to him as to whether or
no the inj inction so granted should abide.
The Lon D CHANCELLOR Ilad made up his mind upon that
point, bu he would not now declare it, because he did not like
to have a dry decision : he always liked to accompany it gr'jth
the reasons which had induced him to come to it. He would
take it th: first thing on Monday morning.

CONST n. HARRIS.—COVENT-GARDEN TWICATRE.

The day IA as taken up with hearing a part of the argument
in this case. It will be remembered that the plaintiff claims
the benefit of a life-e State in one-eighth of the whole property
demised by a Mrs. Martindale. By a deed of 1812, the pro-
prietors appropriated certain rents and profits appurtenant to
the theatre fo: paying off the incumbrances, through a com-
mon receiver, Mr. Brandon. In 1822, Mr. Harris, who own-
ed seven-twel-ihs,of the whole, underlet the theatre to Messrs.
Kemble, Willet, and Forbes. These gentlemen Now held,
with their own shares in the property, seven-eighths of the
whole. They proceeded in their new management, and among
other arrangements, they discharged Mr. Brandon, the receiver
appointed under the deed of 1812, and appointed a Mr. H. Ro-
bertson to the office. The plaintiff brought a bill in Chancery
to compel ,he parties to an observance of the conditions of the
deed of 18 2. The Court was of opinion that the debts ought
to be pt id out of the property received by the treasurer ac-
cording to as assignment, and doubted the validity of Oat act
of discharging the receiver, Mr. Brandon, whose appointment
was of common .consent of all the proprietors. The question
of receiver.hip, however, was referred to the Master, who, in
consideration of the new firm having 7-Bths of the property
in actual possession, ratified the appointment of Mr. Robert-
son. Th.: next consideration then was, under what directions
the receiver was to act. Notice of a day was given to all the
proprietors to assemble in the Master's office, and agree upon
the directiors s to be given. Neither Mr. Const, the plaintiff,
nor Mr. Harris the lessor, appeared. By the ordinary course,
therefore, head g had due notice, they were held to assent. The
Master allowe • all the expences disbursed by Mr. Robertson,
and the night]. • and current expences for keeping open- the
theatre. This arangernent, gave dissatisfaction to the plaintiff,
who consieere I it as opposed to the fulfilment of the conditions
of the deed of 1312, and to the opinion of the Court expressed
thereupon. Notice was given of a motion to discharge the re-
ceiver, and the Master, finding that his order was objected to,
suspended it in effect until the parties had consulted the ;opi-
nion of the Court upon it.
Mr. H EAL:II now moved for certain directions to he given to
the receiver, of an import similar to thoie under which he had
hitherto be .•ri acting.
Mr. Twiss supported the application.
Mr. SUGDEN appeared for Mr. Const to oppose it. He was
the party who had given notice of the motion to discharge the
receiver.

Mr. HART appeared for Mr. Harris, the lessor, who had, as
he contended, transfered, by the lease of 1822, all the debts
and incumbrances along with the property. He approved of
the appoi ument of Mr. Robertson, but thought that the obli-
gations aid conditions of the deed of 1822 ought to be strictly
fulfilled.

This was the extent. to which the case was argued to-day ; it
is to be resumed on Monday.
The LAW CFIAI46ELLOR occasionally touched upon points
not only connected with the motion, but also upon what are
technically called the merits. His Lordship appeared to be of
opinion that the directions and the order of the Master under
which the present receiver is acting, must be considered as suf-
ficient for ilia security, until reversed or countermanded by an
equal authority. 'The Master had taken the only course which
was opel to hint of ascertaining whet expences should be al-
lowed a: being actually necessary to keep the theatre open. He
had consulted !vitli the managers and proprietors, -who were the
only proper ju 'ges of such matters. Those who did not go into
, the office to al t that corisnation, being duly invested, must be
held to acquies:c. These facts being granted, what could the
Court possibly do in the way of directions ? The appointment
of the receiver was now admitted to be sufficiently valid—the
Master had chosen him under the nomination of those who
owned or hel t seven:-eighths of the whole property. The di-
, rections had bvn given him under those forms, and with that
degree of caution which had before been touched upon.. Now
this Court could not, with any more cleverness than the Master,
undertake to judge of itself what were the proper nightly ex-
pences to be allowed. Bow was he to know whether such a dancer
ought or ou.4ht not to have so much a night. - He could not
calculate the value of singing a song so many times, for lie was
not a judge of the matter at all. This was the difficulty in
which such an appeal would place the Court ; and he must deal
with it at on -e by saying, that the Court was not bound to do more
towards the managing of a theatre, than it would be bound to
do towards the management of any other kind of property
brought into question before the Court. As to the effect of the
deed of 1812; or of that and the lease of 1822, taken together,
it was clear that the iroperty must continue bound to the pay—
ing 'off the incumbrances according to the deed of 1812: but
as Mr. Harr.s was a party to that deed, and signed it as a part
proprietor, and as he had afterwards parted with his direct and
immediate interest in the possession and direction of the pro.
perty, a qu stion arose as to how tar he was - now to be consi-
dered resp insible to the plaintiff for the fulfilment of those
conditions in the deed of 1812.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, DEc.-3.
cMINIVELL v. ItICUARDSON.

This was an action by Thomas ........, who had been
shopman to the defendant, a grocer, for slanderous words, and
also for c',aruing him with robbery, maliciously and without
probable cause. The defendant pleaded the general issue to the
whole declarat'on ; and to the counts for slander, that the words
spoken were t ue.

It appeared on the evidence for the plaintiff, whose case was
conducted by Mr. SCARLETT and Mr. Wrowesimi, that
being about is quit his master, after a service of ten months, on
the 6th of Msy last, he was called up stairs by the defendant,
and accused of stealing some
.silver from the till, He ex-
pressed considerable indignation a* the charge, and produced
his money, when the defendant claimed sixpence as having
been marked by him on the preceding; evening. Mr. Richard-
son persisting in the charge, refined 'to pay him his wages, and
he left the house without them. On the 7th of May, he direct-
ed his attorney to demand them by letter • to which an answer
was received on the 13th, from Mr. John Richardson, the
brother and solicitor of the defendant, stating, that if the ap-
plicant knew the circumstances, he would itsit take the case in
hand, aril that his client, who seemed bent on .his own destruc-.
should find tbritMr. Richardson could punish him with
vigour. On the 9th of May, the plaintiff' was apprehended, at
the instance of the defendant, and taken before the Magistrates
at Marlborough-street, .where Mr. Richartlgon made a charge
against him of stealing' I la. from the till; which was dismissed.
Mr. Richardson afterwards preferred two indictments succes-
sively for larceny, which were ignored by the„Grand Jury of
Middlesex, and also spoke the words imputing the same of-
fence to his lodger. In order to anticipate`an attempt by the
defendant to cast suspicion on the plaintiff, by reason of his
possessing a sum of money. considerable for a.man in his sta-
tion, the parties with whom he had lived previously were called,
who stated.that he was a young man of very economical habits,
and had recently been paid 251. for a legacy and interest left in
his brother's hands.
Mr. DENMAN (with whom was Mr. THEswEa), for the
defendant, proposed to show that the charge was true, or at all
events that there were reasonable grounds for the suspicion.
For this purpose Mr. John Richardson, the attorney, was
called, who was present when the accusation was originally
made. He said the plaintiff' appeared confused, but immedi-
ately produced about a pound in silver, among which the de-
fendant pointed out a sixpence as marked by himself the day
preceding. The plaintiff denied the charge, and said he had
taken the sixpence in change for porter. The plaintiff's box
was then searched, and in it were found four sovereigns and a
half, and a promissory note for 10.1. Ile was desired to account
for the possession of this money, and did so, except for about
I/. ss.

11!r. SCAKLETT, in reply, urged that the evidence did not
in the least support the charge of felony, which had failed even

when supported by the prosecutor's oath, and that, as it was
clear that the whole proceeding arose from the determination of
the plaintiff to demand his wages, the Jury ought to award
him considerable damages.
The Loan Cum, JUSTICE directed the Jury that the
charge of felony was not substantiated, and. therefore, that at
all events the plaintiff was entitled to a verdict on the counts
for slander. On the other counts for a malicious prosecution,
the question was, not whether the charge was true, but whether
it was preferred without reasonable cause, which they would
consider on the facts proved.
The Jury, after retiring for a short.‘tent-i returned a verdict
for the plaintiff, damages 1001.
A berdiet, by consent, was taken in the next cause, between
the same parties, in which,the plaintiff* sought to recover his
wages for their amount, 201. 168.13 d.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, DEC. 3.
cruel. CON.—FEDLEY V. BURCH: '
This was an action for Criminal Conversation with the plain,
tiff's wife. The defendant pleaded the general issue.
Mr. Serjeant VauertheN stated the case. --The defendant,-
John Burch, was a jeweller in affluent -circumstances, ,in
Holborn. The lady was, one of great personal beauty.—
The facts which he had to lay before them were these i
The 'defendant lived in liolborn, on the opposite side to
the - plaintiff: The plaintiff; William Pedley, was the son
of a respectable mineral manufacturer, and was married to
his wife in 1819, at Hendon, when they were under age.—
His wife was the daughter of a stateary,who gave her 390/.
down as her marriage portion, with the promise of more as
they got on. The match was one of ardent attachment. They
set .up in business in Holborn, in the shell fish line, and soda
water. The defendant perceiving that the wife of the plaintiff
was very- beautiful, was desirous of ingratiating himself in her
good graces, but he thought it first expedient to cultivate the
good will of her husband. For this purpose he frequently took
,meals in his house; and as the situation was close, he said
*that they wanted the benefit of the fresh air, and accordingly
he took Mrs. Pedley out in his gig to enjoy it before the busi-
ness of the evening began. The plaintiff's business rendered
it necessary for him to •go to the market early—he had to go
to Rillinsgate by three o'clock in the morning for fish, and
went to bed generally about ten o'clock. The defendant
knew this, and waited with him till ten o'clock, -when he would
get up as the unsuspecting husband had the candle in his hand
ready to go up stairs, and say, shaking him by the hand--
" Good night, my friend ; God bless you! 1 will see you in
the morning." With this he would go over to his own house
anti watch till the plaintiff had gone to bed, which he could
tell by seeing him put out the candle, for the defendant's
house overlooked the plaintiff's window. The defendant
would then go over to the plaintiff';: wife, sit with her eating
lobsters in the parlour, where he ingratiated himself in her fa-
vours. Matters went on in this way for some time, till the in-
jured husband coming.home rather early on one occasion, he
found that his wife was out, and on her corning home, she was
so confused by being thus taken by surprise, that he sent her
home to her parents till he had made further inquiries into her
conduct. Things had gone wrong in the shop, and his busi-
ness had been neglected by her in consequence of pursuing her
criminal pleasures with the defendant. The criminal act was
-often to be inferred from the circumstances of the case ; but
here they had the defendant's own confession of his guilt.—
He could not keep the matter to himself; he boasted of his
amours.
Evidence was called to substantiate the above charges, and
submitted to the usual cross-examination, after which
Mr. Sergeant SPANKIE replied—The seduction of yester-
day was a deep tradedy—that of to-day was only a buffoon
farce ; no tears were shed to soften their feelings for the in-
juries of the husband, or the loss of his faithless fair one. His
Learned Friend was so conscious of this fact, that although he
touched their hearts with the pathetic beauties of poetry yester-
day, yet he had not favoured them with one single quotation to
adorn the barrenness of this unfortunate case.—(Laughter.)—
But if he had illuminated die darkness of his case, it would
not have been with quotations from Shakspeare, but culling
his sweet flowers from the calendars of Newgate, and. the pas.
torals of St. Giles's.—(Roars of laughter.)—He knew that he
had a dry and barren case-between a silversmith and an oyster
shell.—(Laughter.)—So conscious was he of this taisfortune„
that_ he. would -- not use the word oyster, hut took a circum-
locution in describing his hero, and therefore dubbed him
a dealer in shell fish. Of his rase, he was afraid of open-
ing the .oyster to them—(laughter)—although it turned out
to be a native oyster.—(Continued laughter.)—He had
spoken of Chandos-street, but in this great town many
ladies might go to Chandoe-street ; but he did not himself
know, but he had heard it. from others—(laughter)—that
there was such a place as Chandos-street, but there was no
proof that the defendant went with a " key" there. What
right had the plaintiff to complain about the travels of others,
for he kept an oyster shop himself for all the loose fish in town.,
The boasts of the defendant were no evidence. It was held by
a Learned Judge that a man's boasting of having had criminal
conversation with another man's wife could not he received in
- evidence against bum. But the- conduct of the plaintiff to his
wife was not quite the thing—he had not taken that due care
of her chastity and conduct which it was incumbent on him,
in a place where she was held up to so much temptation.
It was not quite the thing for the wife going to bed when
.the hasbaed rises. (Laughter.) It was a bad state of so-
ciety.
(More laughter.) It was not the thing for married
.people to act like the heavenly bodies in their rising and set-
ting. (Great laughter.) The plaintiffshonld have acted more
discreetly ; he ought-- to have taken his moon to bed with him,
.and not have suffered her-to sit tip alone—" looking so modest
all the while."—(Great laughter.)—The plaintiff bad left his
fences open and, unprotected for stray cattle to enter in, and
enjoy the tempting things the gods provide them.—(Laughter.)
—Yes, the plaintiff's shop was kept open to a late hour of the
night, or rather the morning, with his beautiful and facinating
wife, smiling and blushing behind the flattering blaze of
gas,.. which showed her charms in a better light. —(Laugh-
ter.)—There was she, the centre of attraction, inviting in
the wanderers -of •the night, to partake of native oysters,
spruce beer, ginger. beer, soda water, vinegar anti pepper,
with her in the back parlour, while her husband, good easy
man, was sleeping in the cock-loft.—(Bursts of laughter.)—
The..lady was said to be beautiful, and he had never known
a crini. con. case where the lady was not represented as beau-
tiful. Men would go to ruin after a beautiful - woman, in the
same manner that they went to Tyburn to be kanged, because
Captain 11Iacheath was accounted so handsome, that all who
were desirous of being considered handsome had only to make
their exit at Tyburn.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE—They did not go to be hanged
outright—they only offered. .
Mr. Sergeant SPANEIE—Oh, yes 2- they got hanged, for
there was the glory !—(Laughter.)—But this careful husband
was sleeping in comfort, while his wife was enjoying herself in
a more lively manner —" Stolen waters are sweet, and bread
eaten in secret—"
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE heie interrupted him, saying
that though he did not object to pleasant quotations, yet those
from a sacred source were not allowable. .
Mr. Sergeant ,SPASIXIE said, that he made the quotation
for its conclusion,. which was most apposite, " that her feet
are in the depths of hell." He then contended that tile hus-
band sustained no loss by the want of his wife's society, for
she was perfhrtning one function while the husband performed-
another. It was evident that the husband had not felt the loss
much, or acutely—that he was riot alive to those tender sensi-
bilities of our nature that vibrate at the least semblance of un-
kindness or dishonour. Would a man who loved his wife, as
this man had been represented, have gone into an alehouse
with the violator of his bed and the destroyer of his happiness ?
Would he have sung' songs in the company of the man who
had seduced his wife, and rendered bins the object either of
pity or scorn ? Would he not rather have shrunk from the cone
tamination of his presence, as if he had been stung by a serpent,
and have left the room in the anguish of his soul to hide his
shame-and his sorrows from the eyes of men But this plaintiff
outlived his own 'sheltie, and _that his spirit was not bowed
down by sorrows; was proved by his singing merry songs in
the ear of his seducer. That conduct required no .comment;
hind if the Jury were to give damages in such a case, it would
be doing injustice to virtue by rewarding vice. It would be a
premium to bad men to court such actions. If they were to
give any here, it would be making Westminster Hall nothing
better than a broker's shop for discarded -wives, instead of
whistling them off with a rope about their neck to Smithfield,
as done in former times, which was.really the best punishment
and riddance of bad wives. In the present case they had no
children, and the husband had not, by his conduct, entitled
himself to damages.
The LORD,QH IE I, JUSTICE summed up at great length,
and the Jury consulted for a short tune, and found a verdict for
the plaintiff—Damages 350/..
The LORD CHIEF JusTrcE—That is a very right ver-
dict; I much apprdve of it.

UNION-Ram..—Ma.ll.HtiiiTTsviiiici on by a hackney-
coachman; named Clark, attended for the purpose of having the
ground measured from the Elephant and Castle to his residence in
Stamford-street, near Blackfriars-Bridge. Mr. Hunt, after
apologising for troubling the Magistrate, stated, that it was
put forth in a publication, that the distance from the Ulephant
and Castle to Blackfriars-Bridge was one mile, and the fare of
course one shilling; he, Mr. Hinic wished to know how far
that was correct. Having deposited the necessary expences he
retired. Mr. Hunt, Clark the coachman, and Johns the officer,
with the perambulator belonging to the office, assembled at
four o'clock, and measured the ground, which proved to be 47
yards more than the mile. Mr. Huth., satisfied with the deci-
sion, liberally remunerated all parties e igaged upon the busi-
ness.