The Sun.
London, England, 1809-07-15 00:00:00

they amused him with stories aboat temporary.diffi-
' cuities brought in the nay of these'appointtnents by
the motion of Mr. Wardle on the case of Mrs.
Clarke in the House of Commons ; that, they said,
was all nothing, and would, blow over again. But
'afterwards, when this prosecution was instituted,
this sum of mone); the 20001. was repaid to Mr.
Hesse.
This witness was corroborated-in every respeEt by
Mr. Hervey,' who accompanied him in the whole",of
the proceeding. He proved- that Pollmann said,' in
the hearing of Keylock, that the oath which Mr.
'Hesse was to take was a little Temporary oath ; that
he did not mind it—he had taken 40 oaths in a day ;
that Mr. Hesse might safely take the oath, that he
did not purchase his place, because' lie only -pur-
chased the interest that procured it; and that he did
not. pay tot it, because his friend paid for it for him.
It then appeared that Mr. Hes'se first went to these
Defendants with a view of pur•cbasing the office in
question;thinkinalt legal; but finding it otherwise,
pursued the subject with a view to, prosecution.
Such was the outline of the case.
• Mr. ESPINASSE was Counsel for the Defendant,
Pollmann; for whom he had nothing to urge, ex. 7
cept that the offence imputed to him was not an of-
fence at common law.
Lord ELLENEOTIOUGH. said, it was a point to be
urged in arrest of judgment hereafter; if these was
any thing in it ; but that was decided by the pro-
f vision of a statute, by which the a& was made a mis-
demeanour.
The COMMON-SERJEANT, who bad cross-exa-
mined Mr. Huse severely, addressed the Jury for
the defendant Keylock, and 'called respectable iner-
chanis to give him a good character.
Mr. DALLAS Made an able speech for Mr. Wat-
' son,' the banker ; when
Lord -ELLENBOROUGH said that the defendant was
emu led to nis acquittal on the face of these pleadings,
And he was acqnitted accordingly.
Mr. GASELEE maintained, on behalf of Mrs. Har-
vey, tine evidence did not fix her with guilt in these
I ransadions.
Ttte ATTORNEY-GENERAL made an able reply on,
behalf of the prosecution.
Lord ELLENBoitopcti delivered a charge to, the
Jury, by which they were direated, most clearly,
to the most prominent points for their consideration.
After which the Jury said, they had no particle of
doubt on this question and found the Defendants,
Francis Lewis Pollmann, John Keylock, and Sarah
Harvey—Guilty. -
The trial lasted the whole day, and. the Hall was
thronged for the whole time.

JULY 13.

STIRLING V. HUDSON.

This was., an action, in which Admiral Stirling
was the Plaintiff, upon a policy of insurance on the
ship Princessa, to recover the sum of 4471. los.—
Admiral Murray, and several other•witnesses, were
called to prove the ship seaworthy. It had been
taken at Monte Video, and was on its way to Eng-
land.with aluantity of bark, when it sprung a leak,
and was deserted at sea. An exception was taken,
On the part of the Defendant; upon a question,
Whether the prize-agent had, been properly ap-
pointed? •
Lord ELLE;4IBOROUGH was of opinion that the
transaetion was pertedly correct ; and the Jury
returned their verdiCt for •the Plaintiff, 4471. los.
leav,ing the point of law, open for further diicus-
slot]. •