The Sun.
London, England, 1813-07-17 00:00:00

WILDE V. HOBSON

This was a motion of a novel- kind, calling for
an order upon the plai;.tiff, who sues in hrnia
patipeiis, to give security for costs, and to stay
)roceedings In this cause; till he in's, the co,:ts of
a former action of ejeetuent, in which he faikil
for want Of 'the defendant's answer to this bill (4.
discovery and 'relief; the Motion. further went .to
impose on the plaintiff the hard condition of pay-
ing the costs of his unsticcessful suit in the Prcro.
gat ive Court ag:'.inst the will of the.testator in this
cause, to whom the plaintiff is heir at law or ..!e.t
kia, while the property is devised tn.the
dant by the will, to have'.becn
under fraudulent circitn.J.wees, p'ending the
werdtuess or incompeten;:y of -the tvstivtor.
'the motion ‘l.l Oppoied 011
.Varit.llls
grounds, namely,. that the ,plAintiff was a pAliper;
that no costs were required' of him in the Fo.;cie.
siastical Court; and that this suit wits not vevt-,
tious ; the plaintiff's Counsel contending, that this
motion oti:tht to be refused iv h costs, as uttet;'y
unprecedented. ►

The LoRD CHANCELLoR warmly animadverted
On the nature of this motion, and the zeal that ap-
peared respecting it on both sides at the Bar, re-
specting' Which. zeal, he promised, it should have
rio influence on his judgment, as he was (Icier-
mined to refuse the motion, bk. without cost ,i on
either Lordship ohser.eed, that the
modon was of very great importaLce, in it general
view, since, on such a doctrine, a next of ,in may
fin. .ever lose his right, and the defendant's
situation, One mijy possess and withhold th!.! right
of another man. No ease was eited,'nor cool!, he,
to justify the present motion,. 'viis kid doNvn
by Lord Chief Justice-De Gray, and Mr. Justice
G;,ould, said. his Lordship, arid disinised the
•motion:

'Before his Honour the vics-cfrANcELLoit.
Kr*WEIISLY V. CI,ARKE.

This interesting case came before the Court
upon all Exception to the Master's Report, which
was very ably argued at the Bar on both sides.
The tittestion arose on the last will of the coe.
brated Mr. Gibbon, the hiitoriau, who'diedahout
twenty yeah ago. at •Lausanne in
,Swit'4erlitod,
consti4uting Lady Elliott his heiress, a's the
nearest relation of his then living, c.rpariqii/t,:rh'il,
and devised to her, except certain legacies to other
persons,Atot only his own freeholds, but likewise
those he held in trust under a friend's will fOr th'e
"benefit of others, if foUnd'l6 be heirs, with rever-
sion' to him and his right heirs.
The purchaser of one of the trust estates filed his.
bill agiainst the verdorS, praying all the neeestrir
parti‘2s to be decreed to Join in making out and
executing a good title to bhn from the vendors.
Lady Ormond is trustee or executrix of ftlr.
Gibbon, and on at reference before the .I.!;ister,
hesitated to execute the coiire'v:a.ce, on the growo
that there was' a gentleti•oillall chiming. to he
heiress at lave or ne.t Of kin of Mr. Giithott, hnt
without having, fit that tong, uteri va4
step to prove her claim, or hring- any evt.i
lore the Master on the refute
is
111;eleitsukjti-t:l:ell('irtett•((ciel:
woeott towards her' I.:zilyship, the ill
t'eattiletlt Of the wife of their co:ninon itileesti,e
evidence of the kindred, and the liiiiibtors itepori
HO grandfather. Tbis was. held to be suit'cielit
s\'( confirmed.

COURT O' KING'S 11ENCII, ..lutv 16.
WESMIINSTER.

MORRIS V. SIR P. BURDETT.
Mr.RICHARDSOW ",tiltyti that this WaS aft Rrti(iti
brought by the phtilititr, for work awl Lbota

done; anil goOds sold and delivered, on account of
the defendant.
c ~,eivEy-GENEuAI... said, it was' rather
in the city
of Wi•NtUlin:.tcr, -he should have to ask, who were
the IVii,u,bers 14 the city at Westtitinster fot
th: t was literally the questioll whic.ii his Lord-
ship und the jury had to try. ' lit any other place
in the country, uny person would have no hesita-
tion in saying; that Lord Cochrane and Sir' F.
Burdett were the Representatives- fir Westwin-
ster; unless, indeed, they chose to reverse. the
frames, .and say', Sir P. litirdetrand Lard Coch-
rane.

Ihe demand this cash for 225/. being

-a moiety. of 450/. the whole suni charged .to the
Candidates for expense-of hustings and other
necessary things, at the election for Members of
P-ir{lament for Westminster., although not near
the amount of the expense which .the plaintiff
' had iecurred. Ily en Act formerly passed, the
candidates at county elections were made liable to
pay to the Sheriff the necessoy expences of the
election ; this Act had been lately extended to West-
minster. Who hut the candidates Might to pay the
expellees ? BeSides the expellee of the hustings,
it was, necessary,to employ 26 poll clerks ; and
would it be just and proper that the' expellee
'should fall on the litigh Rdiiiff, and he could not
'levy the Innottot on the electors ? it would pro-
bably be said, that the defendant in this case was
not a candidate ; he hint great respect for the Can-
didates, alchongh he had not the good fortune to
to bare: Often agreed with them, and not at ail
latterly ; indeed, on several great occasions
they were chummed one to the other, and had no
other person to ugree with them ; but, however,
they mast pay. •Ilere, then, WgiS R purity that
belonged to no other place ; all was love, all was
purity ; such was the purity that the member
must not be.a candidate. There was, however, a
good axiom in law, that he who does a thing by
another, is to. be considered as having done it
himself. If there was a good active Committee,
'and a strong-headed Chairman, there could not be
touch difficulty in saying who were the candidates.
'There was an old custom. that every Member, on
taking his math at the table of the Howe, should
pay two ; and he was then congratulated
by the Speaker oa taking his seat. To such an ex-
tent. WUS purity curried, that in ,order that the
Meniber might be able to say he was returned
free of experiee, Sir Francis _Burdett was waited
upon in grand procession' and had two shil-
lings deliveredrtabim to lay upon the table'. He
wished that such purity was carried all over the
country ; for byithe should have saved four shil-
lings, the fees he bud paid during this Session 'of
Parliament, on having twice taken his seat. The
best friends would sometimes differ, and a very '
statmelt patriot had threatened an opposition, and
every body expected a strong poll. After the can-
dictates are nominated, and a poll demanded, the
Bailiff only adjourns for two hours, to pre-
pare the books. If a contest should be expected,
it was necessary for the High Bailiff to prepare
the hustings and poll-books before-hand ; and
.unless the hustings were erected at a considerable
expense, anti of great solidity, ~persons would be
very .onwilling to tart their lives upon it, in the
contest every persen knew it had to sustain, dur-
ing the fifteendays. The High Bailiff deserved
greatcredit, not oqly from the candidates, but
from the country, fur having put an end to that
scene of riot, which was known to have always
arisen at the election for the city of Westminster.
Before the Candidates had returned their thanks,
!:.,'fore the election was ended, the mob rushed
forward, kind, at the hazard of their lives, draged
the bustings.,,which they claimed as their per-
dikite ; this the.plaintilf had prevented, by ealhug
irr the assistance of a great number of peace, of-
ficers, The Cientlernao who acted for the plaintiff
thonght ho•had nothing to do but to ask, the Can-
didates for thesoloant : he, however, was obliged
to bring two actions. Lord Cochraue suffered
oilgumut by default ; andayou a writ of inquiry,lie examined.must minutely all the charges. He
sapposed that the Honourable Martinet, itt conse-
queare of o,rae agreemeut with his constituents,
found himself under the,,rlecessity of not yielding
until lie• had retired to the last ditch. The jury
'had only to decide, whether the defendant' wa.s
odidate. ble had, MI a former ueclugou, the
ibis:tests of „the present detimdant entrusted to
•ale merely,pronounced the very words of his in-
structions, but he made, no way in persuading his
Lordship and the Jury.
Mr. Morris was admitted to be the High Bai-
liff of Wesiuinster.

Mr.Ontp:ion, Clerk to Devon and Took,
produced office copies of tlic precept and return
u` ttieigeotion of Members of Parliament for
Westminster.

I'tlr. Whetham, Clerk of the Journals and PI-
Teri, produced the .test-roll, and swore that the
Haute of Sir F. Thirdett was written under the
,name of Westminster.
Air. Took, Deputy to plaintiff during the last
ilectiuni swore that the proclamation was in
in the usual manner : the precept %VHS thittd
evt ember 1812 ; the day of election oral : 11,0
Hth of October, at tlic 'hunt place. Alt...hirm dis;
jun. called on him, and made ensptiry as to the
cloy tin which the day of election should IA c
place. Ile was the sou of 'Mr. Brooks, of the
Strand, Chairman of the Westininster Election
Connuittee—(Lord ELLEtoottooon—" I know
nothing- of the Committee,")--the usual hustings
were built, and poll-clerks .were retained, poll-
books and the i.ecessary.stationery were procured
contest was expected by him in particular. It was
necessary to make preparations beforehand, as, by
the general Act, the !lig') Bailiff, could not adjourn
for a longer period than the next day. It was the
custom in Westminster for the High Bailiff after
uolnination, and poll •demanded, to adjourn for two
ttr,urs, in order to swear in the poll-clerks, and ur-
rangq them. in their [,lures. ,T.l 1
e carpenter comp
that the seven or 'eitiht -idays. usually allowed
net Ntflicient, and that, he - 'g
I.e;d to
());,,,ecre
oriel
andsii. byonTe !it'll tl:v ;hie' election
Cochrane. were, oleo Tcni.
0-1: tt and Lord
withdrew on, the morning of tli,!eie,),,rtt"e "4"-tierrieri
olYercd theiwelyes u
advers,nient,,r `lvhou had
Sheri if took evei'y precau n tio to fri.„4, the lit, .lig4
,and surceecied, (Lord ELLENBOIMFGH- Thset:ltligt;::
Lion only. suppo3e; as to whether delenidaut
he liethle to any thing, trot as to the amount ?)

I The 4-6w:a colpl.oyed ;,.11..lanviih: Ca' verve ,
and Mr. Inwood t9...31,11,:ey.
Lord EILLTINDOIkOUO;I.----lqr. BrOlyl!aill,
derstaml th v
at oa do, Hut dis'ptite the aalociSs.,
that the only vet:tion 6 whether delemdaut
at all
Mr.' Blow Gil ANI.—It is tilt ovly queey
.sm.
Tool:, on cross-examinittioa, swore, ti.ot he did
not see Sir V. Burdett dorir:.-4 the, whole time..
Mr.
~ArioittilLY-GENLIIAL said, that was his
case.

_Mr. Bizonotuact submitted, , that the plaintiff
must he nohsuited. It had.notheen proved that
the deletaant Was a candi‘!ate:
Lord r. UMW did !mt see that they had
"t' •ty - 1 • - - •- 1 t provr4 su...uneut.y v‘as necessary he
should: at feast be assent lug, that he should be the
ohjeet of voting for at the election.
The Arror.NEY-6ritAt. said, that would go
to at great.exCent ;. if a person were sick, and not
able to attend,. he would not be liable. for the
expellees.
Lord ELLENannoup,H.—if his agent does it, it
isthe saute as it he did 'tiniscli .
The ATTliftNEy-GEN-4RAI, cited the case of the
saute parties in 1 camPbell; 218, as deeic;ing the
-
Lord ELL UN /40110 ii Git did not distinctly reCol-
lect that ease, but he thought he had left the
question of agency to the Jury : but in this case
there• was no connection proved between the de-
fendant and the son of the Chairman of the Cont-•
mittee. •

The. ATTORNEV-GYNERAT, COOtendetl, that by
taking his seat, the defendant had talopted the acts
of the persons who had acted in his favour, and
niade hi:ll:self liable to the expenses.
Lord ELIA NnoitouGusaidi he would reserve
the point, ‘rticther by taking his seat; which seat
be was obliged to frtite, 116 was then to be con-
sidered as a candidate, and liable to the e•xpenses ?
Suppose a person abroad, t:leeted without his
knowledge, was be to be inaealiable for the ex-
penses ? By candidate he understOf:l a person who
solicits votes, but in this case 'it 411:1 not appear
that Sir F.'Burdett took any part.
The ATTORNWV-GENERAL said, he believed:
there was an instance. of alslonher never takint
his seat.

Lord ELLENBOROUGII.—In case of a cill lie
would he obliged !.(-) mteod.

The ATTOI=Y-GENERAL Said, that in order to
avoid a call, he had delayed his scat for
two or arce days: - • _ _

Lord ELLvt.sottouon could not take
notice of the emtnnis of Parliament, but by the
word Candidate he understood a person ,who
offer-
ed himself as an Object to be voted for.
Mr. Took was again called,lic swore that he
waited on Committee.
Lord Et-LENRonou.on.--"Vou must connect de-
fendant with the Comtnittee.

Took.-.--Tbe members vi,ere pearly the•same as
the members of the former Committee.

LOVIELLENBOROUGIio----That will riot di) ; God
forbid there should bc a continuation of the pro-
ceedings
,from election to election, •
Mr. Took was proceeding to state, that Inc bad
given tickets to the Chairman of the Committee to
admit Sir 1?. Burdett's friends.

Lord Eti.Exaoßoucii.---It canfiot be received.
What is the Chairman to the Court, oniess you
connect him with the defendant l: .

The ATTORNEY GENERAL said tie would call 'Mr;
Brooks.
_At r. Brooks was called.

Mr. litiouGuAM objected., tbact he wouid.,:bave
gone to the jury wheu the Attorney Oenerul closed
lis ease, had lie thoirgltt the litturney-tieueral
Ivould have called more witnesses. •

Lord ELLENnonou(in thought he could not al-
low the plc;i►till to call farther evidence, and,di-
reeted tl►e plaintiff to be nons4ited , With leave
for the defendant to move to set aide the non-
suit, and enter a verdict for the 225/. his Lord-
ship'theti said, that there might be sonie
stances attending his taking his seat, Which niit;ht
hiu► to the expences 3 but the ground
on which lie had nonsuitcd the plaintiff Was, that
the naked fact of taking his seat dia not make the
defendant liable.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, JuGY, 16.
:SITTINGS sEroaz JI7STICE ASP A SPECIAL

J V 11Y.

DUNBAR V. lUTCEICOCK.
This action was brought byibe plaintiff', a
Lieutenant in the London Ali against Major
liitcheock of the same , regiment, to recover
damages for false itupriSonment. It appeared
from the evidence; that on the 24th of October
last, the (Akers of the reginient dined *together at
the Ship Tavern, Greenwich. ,The defendant
took the chair, and they .had nuvit conviviality.
They had been drinking together aix or seven
hours before any thingpartiettlarhappened. At
near eleven o'clock,. a dispute occurred between
Danbar and another oilitera the name of
Shaftoe, in which the defeMboW threatened Mr.
Dunbar with an tr,:rest said;'Mr. Dunbar, I
desire y-oft will hold your toofoire„ or pit the
room, A'Tr, D— .said, l olv6t,::Aktienoil trotted
Croft tin suug.a song; ;t'iter whieh
rose to addresis President, wht; tarid,
bar, if you say any thing More, it is my otder,
that you consider yourself. tinder im arrest,
and go 16 quarter*. Mr.. Dunliar then' abused
the Major,
.called him'a scoundrel and a coward,
and said, it he Wonld meet him the :next
day. Re would give biM two' shots' for OUC.
—lie was going out at the dmir, and the:de-
fendant cxelnimed,—Stop, Sir, yon shall not gO.
without a file of men. The gentlemen present
then got up; turned Mr. Dunbar out, and n.- co
veved him to nu adjoining room, where lie was
placed till the file Of men sbOuld arrive, but before
the-latter came, be leaped out of the
,window, and
went to town: The file:of soldiers' went throngh
Greeniriell in search. 7of him, but contittlittl.n.in_ot,,nt:ef
next morning he
course,
find
agsasi'leellilifmlds-gelointeipttooitlie coin.tuand-
ing officer, and was put, under close arrest. lie
continued a prisaner front the 25th of October till
the 23d of January, during which he was tried by
a Court Martial, and by sentence suipended,from
ra,ok. and pay for:twelve months. For the inipri-
sonment which the plaintiff- considered ilie%all, he
brought his action, anti it vas contended that be
was eatitleti to lame darnafres. All the 'witnesses

ahaitted that the conduct of the plaintil era,ey.-
treacty indecOitons at- the dinner. col. Sir C S.
:3anler said particidait- thaChe- Co-risrde`redM!...
Do.nhar's Oifcrice, a military point of view,. so
had, that he could not consent to enlarge his ar-
re,t when applied to for thatt,purpose.
Mr. Serjeant LENS, for the defendant, la-
mented that the plaintiff 'had brotht. the action,
because it,would doubtless add to the unfavour-
able impre.ssiOn made by his present eouduct. The
Learned Set: east then produced the Military
:Zr-
ticks-o;' War, atid contended that the defendant
was hound by the
.20th article to do as he had
done. It he had not put the plaintiff! under ar-
rekfor intleeent, mutintrus langungc,
he would- have been unworthy -tine character of
an
.oaicer and a Gentleman.

The Learned Junge e left the Jury to decide whe-
ther the plaintiff, by his behaviour,' bad given the
defendant a right to e).atitie him. If they thought
he had, then they would find a verdict for Major
Hitchcock. His Lordship expressed sonic regret
that Subb an action had been brought into a Court
of Justice, as it could only tend to expose to the
world matters of insubordination, which the Le-
gislature had Wisely confided to the judgment of
a Court-martial.

The Jury, without the least hesitation, found a
verdict for the defendant.

Mr. Dunbar' asked the .indge, after the trial,
whether he might indict the parties for a con-
spiracy to injure him by their conduct ?
Sir J. MANSFIELD Mid, in answer, that if plain-
tiff took his advice, he would have no more to do
with law.

COXSISTORY COURT, DOCTORS' CONLMONS, JULY 16.

WARING V. WARING.

This was a cause of divorce, or separation, pro-
moted by Mary Ann Waring, the wife, against
James Waring, Esq.
rher husband, by reason of
cruelty and adultery. It appeared front the libel,
and other proceedings exhibited, that the mar-
riage took.place between the partic, on-the *sth
of October, 1800, at the parish church of St.
Bartholomew near the Exchange, with tbe con*-
sent of the tather, the ;wife being at-the time
'under the'age of twenty-one. That the parties
cohabited together in Coram.,street, till the 23d of
January,'l6ll, during which period there was the
bb-th of five children, fotir ot which are still liv-
ing; when Airs. • Warint, -quitted her husband's
•
house, 'and went to live with her father. That
soon after the marriage Mr. Waring begau to
treat his wife %vial great et itchy, sw.earmgat her at
dinner time, etind would often take the things off
the table, and throw them under the grate, and
also restrained her, front seeing her father without
his knowlege. That on the night of the 6th April
18:j8, without any provoction, Mr. W. put hint-
self Into great pass:on, swore.that she should go
out of the Lottse; beat her head ai4ditist the marble
of the chimney-Piece,. Avi,erc:by, the teeth of the
comb in her hair were forced into her head, which
caused it to bleed very touch, and that the wounds
continued
.sore for a ennsiderable time afterwards.
That on. their. going down to Sandgatei.,he took
his female servant, Am: PoWelr, .::to the eat-1.111'2-e
with'him (with whom adultery is alle.lsed to haVe
been committed);, and ranged his-wife
and that while at 'Sandgete he treated his wife
with great cruelty. 'that on their- return frc.m
Sandgate to Cora M-street, Mr. W. contioned
treating his wife, and that on her miseerriaire in
1810, be compelled her to get . up, having c.om-
patty tai dinner, consequence of which she be-
came extremely "Phat in January I he
put. himself into a passion with his wife, dragged
her by the arm, threw her over the back ot a
chair, and after Wards pushtd her into a back par-
lour, and locked her therein. That on the fol-
lowing morning she made her .eseaper to her fa-
ther's house, where she has continued to reide •
ever.sinee. •

The defence set tip was a general denial of the
acts of cruelty on the part of Mr. Waring, and
further stated them to have been occasioned by
hei. resistance to his attempts to restrain her vio-
lence, when any thing occurred to rouse her na-
turally irritable disposition.
Sir WM,' SCOTT MI § Of opinion, that this de-
fence Was, satisfactorily made Out; and that the
provilcation in all the contests was given by firs.
Waring) mid the undue violence used principally
by ber, the husband acting, for the MOS:. part, on
the defensive. He therefore disthissed the prayer
for a divorce. •

na cosra, rar,sgts caux.irtavor: nyri:.
This ,i•us H., suit fin a nullity-of marriage, by reason Of
minority promoteA by patio:rine Da. Costint, winstet, tbe-
ot Geo. Hyde, the younger of (Ad Butlingtou-share,
ligaimt him, tin the ground of ins minority, he being at the
time not in than 19 years of age.
The birth of the minor in February 1;81, and the marriage
in June MO, were proved by the itai errtitieates, and the
father and motherol the Minor proved the non-consent of the
'former.—No defence hying offered, •
Sit. WM. SCOTT vrnnounaced the marriage anti and void. '