The Sun.
London, England, 1813-07-19 00:00:00

OLD DA I LEY.

On Saturday ,Henry Dale was indicted for' aving
in his possession sundry forged and counteatited
Bank-notes, well knowing them to be forged and
counterfeited.

JamesDuthie, a grocer, deposed, that on the
24th of November the,prisoner came to,,his shop,
and bought sonic BOurbon entree and sugar, for
which he
,tetidered,a 24. note, and gayelltis ad-
dress, " J Williams, No. 7, New-road:". Witness
called at that number, but found no person of that
name there. lie. identified the note by its having'
his own hand-writing On it.
Mary Gloversaid, that she had known.the
sorter five or
,six years. She received two 1/, notes
from two officers, to go to the prisoner's house
in Gloucester-1)1Ocie, Vauxhall-walk. She got a
2/. note from Ann. The prisoner had °ltch told
her that he coloured the notes with a camel hair
pencil and Indian
Mr. Glover, Inspector, of Bank-notes, 'wort
that the note's were torgeiies,
In his defence he stated, that on th,i'24fl) Nov.
he was at the Bitsb Tavern, at Bristol. • p•
John Bailey, a butcher and dealer in cattle,
lived at Portsea in November last; and is now re-
siding at the Magdalen Cbtree-house,,Blac4friars7
,road. lie was at Bristol in NOveMberlast. :lie
could not. say the day he arrived at Bristol, but he
knit' on the 24iir of November. On the coach
there" wawa person' of. the name of Dale it was
the prisoni.f).and. he travelled, with him from Bris-
tol to Bath. -

. -
Airs. Glover proved, that she paid Dale money
on or ahoot- the-24th- of Novemher.--Verdlet,
Gtaity.
Badcock was indicted for uttering a
forged check for 700/.. with , intent, to :defraud
Birehall and Co, and B. Brady,
,alias Oxford Bob,
and S. Hill, were indicted for aiding ond.advising•
Badcock to connnit'shis• felony.
Prow the evidence of Richardson and Cooke
(two accomplices) it appeared, that they anti the
prisonerthet ,at the Horns. Tavern, where they
agreed to commit torgeries
.on Some Banking-
houses in the City. It' was al%o agreed .thtt. Hitl
should procure, genuine checks, fro in witwitichCooke
was toexecute 'the forgeries. Badcock was then
to procere*rters- to icarry,.the..forged ehieck.:' in
order to. get, them cashed, and Richardson was to
watch the' porters to sue that the cheeks. Were paid
wi/bout hesitation, to return before the porters,
and to inform Badcock that " all was right." On
the Atli of September, Hill received threa checks
from Poisons, a hay salesman, in Whitechapel
Market (who had ?Jo ktioniedge Of the pintrose for
% hid* Hill wanted them), and these,' checks,
drawn on the bottse of Robarts, Curtis and. Co.
were given to -Cooke. From One of these Cooke
forged, in the. name Birehall and Co:,i to the
'amount of 7601. Badcock and Richardson then
proceeded to the White hear,. Basinghall-street,
and Jrom. thence,: Badeock sent a
„porter to the
()owe of Roberts, Curtis, and, Co.' with them,
while Ridhardson folloWed, and While the check
was being- paid, received cash foe a country note,
infving seen-tbat,the_ check Was, paid without
hesitatiOn,., he returned 'before the porter, and' in-
formed Badc,oek that all was right, Badeuek
.-havingreeeiviatthe eaA, voceeded alter ltichard-
icon to the Alourgate Cetiee-house, where these
fire worthi6 divided among them 3800k,th6 feta&
of two.dayi labour and lndustry. on this single
banking-house., 't he notes`worn then sold at 20
uer -cent. discount, to a pgrion named Birkett,
`.)'best facts %sere fully corrobora:ed by other
viutesses. '
Aftei a very able summing up-, by Sir_y. GtEBS,
the Jo,* returned a. verdict, utier a few minutes
consp:tal ion, finding the prisoner Bildt:rick , Guilty
—Detith'; and the otber.twO.guilty i)f counselling,
aid ng, Badcock to twit fait the. fe-
lony and4orgery...- •
Witham l9ilina was cupitatly-con v icied fray be-
ing at large before the exiiiration of the tern' for
which he had been ordered to be transported,-

LAW INTEMACTEN6D.

COURT OF CHANCERX,, Juta- t 7.

STAYNARKET THEATRE.IIOREIS 13. CO2,SLAN•

, .
The Loan CHANIcELLoa,..at the sittingiof the
court, gar.'e his opinion ,upon thelnotion of Sir
Samuel'Hominy, renewed on the preceding day,
and Originally made .on the first day of the present
Seal. it waS an application for an order to allow
Mr. Morris, the plaintiff, to hire performers, and
contract for all necessary means and materials to
open the Theatre without the consent of Air. Col-
man, the Manager and co-proprietor of the
Theatreovlro refused to do anything whatever in
the business, by which mean,s the performances
were wholly suspended at this advanced state of
the season.

The Loan CHANCELLOR stated, that he had read
the affidavits carefully, and made up his' mind on
this important question but in tender eonsidura.-
tion of the interests of the parties and the cancel n,
desired that the plaintiff and defendant might once
more, on his recornmenduti6n, hold an interview
or conference together, for the accommodation, of
their disptues, and the result thereof to be nien-
tinned to him--adding,' that if thii suggestion
'should not be 'attended to, he should put the ma-
nagetilent of :the Theatre into iiitferent hands from
either of the parties.—Final judgment deferred.

COURT Off' RING'S BENCH, JuLy 17.
ciIAwNER WARBUATON.
This was ;an action by which the plaintiff, a
clergyman, sought. to miner from the defendant,
who keeps a house for the, reception of insane
persons, at, tioxton, a compensation in :damages,_
for having imwarraetably received and falsely de- •
tained hiln.as an insane person, in the libese so
kept by him, for the space of nearly seven years.
Mr. TogrING having stated the case un the part
of the.plairaiff,.a number. of witnesses were exa- '
mined, Consisting principally of keepers who had
been in the service of, the defendan: during the
period the plaintiff had been confilred in his house,
all of who concurred in srating, that they had
never seen any thing like insanity in the conduct of
the plaintiff, during the whole of the time be had -
been so confined in the defendant's .house. It ap,
peered that the plaintiff had been first sent to the
'house' of the defendant in the year 1805, and that
after remaining there for some months, having
the liberty of the garden and'the use of .the front
parlour occupied by those whO were in the most
convale'scent state, he.was sent borne to his own
Itotpe in the country, in the custody of a keeper,
who was to attend °pun him so long as might be
thought necessary. Here he was joyfully received
try his wife, by whom, in about ten days, the J
keeper was dismissed. In the following year,
howeyer, the plaintiff was agitin sent to the house.
of the'defendent, and Was for'several months kept
in
.the back parlour, allotted for those in a more
advanced MN:dangerous state of insanity. Fro*.
thence was .removed 'to the front parlonry
haying again. free access ~to 'the. garden, &e.
but., was never discharged, out of confine:
nient till he contrived . a few months ago to
make his escape, 'During the whole of .thit
period the.keeoera whet 'attended on. the plaiotiii-t
and the defendant', other patients'never saw any
thing but sane, ;elm conduct, on the part of the
One person Alone of this descriptim4
named Itiehards,l still in the defendant's services,
deposed that the plaintiff 'had tt high and a Jove
state.olmind ; that the high was the. irrational,
state; that the plaintiff would theft talk •at ran-
dom about the king and the Parliament, wishing
them All murdered, and would.- also talk of his
wife's infidelity. On their cross-examination,
the witnesses admitted that thedefendiint's'house
was regularly visited by Dr:. Wdlis once or twice a
week, and -also by the visiting Physicians, ap-
pointed under the Act of Parliament, anti that all ,
,of those crentleineri bad the seine. opportenities of
• seeing the plaintiff as they bad ,of seeing the other
per4o6s confined there ; „at the same time,
the plaintiff was in no respect precluded froin'ae-
cess tci them.. 1•
The ATTORNEY GEratAL having Addressed the.,
J ivy on the part, of the defendant, Who h.;:d
ed a justification;
Dr..Chawner, .the plaintiff's brother, an Mr:
Croft, a surgeon of eniinencei, u'ere'called-,. who
proved that they had seen instances Ofiti6nity in
the plaintittrom the year Idol, cml thAt froth
what they had seen, and .froni:the representations
of the family; they were lad need ..to ,sigtik he cer-.
.tificutes, ,011 the faith of which Lthe defendant re-
..ceived the' plaintiff into his house; the original
certificate having been 'granted .by Mr.. Croft, -and
the subsequent one at the..time- when .Mr..Chawn
ner was Sent back after his temporary' liberation,
haVing,beeri tigne&bV his brotheei•Dr. Chawner.
"'Mr. Toermo,here stated to his Lordship; that
be felt himself placed in a very delicate situation;
and after what he:had now he wished to
knoW.his LOrdship's opinion, whether there was
any hope in proceedingfurther. ••
Lord ELLENBoliatfost thought not. The defen-.
dant had justified, by Static,; thatbe bad taken
. the plaintifridf-on the representation of HS friends;
.
a that:justification lie hail u
Made ui.
'ought to have heen 'another assignment on the te-
, cOrfl, charging the defendant with confining the
plaintiff longerthan was necessary.
The plaintiff was accordingly nonsuited. • •
, • - This cause laited fecnit nine in the fawning till
t hall:Past tour in the afternoon, .

COURT OP COYIM'ON PLEAS, Jv

citutimer.

. was an action against the defendant, who
lvaS-SoniCtimp since Deputy Prothonotary of the.
Alariihalsea Court,.to recover- a compensation i 4
'damages for a malicious prosecution.
It appeared that the defendaut was suspended
from his office for opposing certain fees claiwo'd by
the Attornies and Judges of the Palace Court,
'and the pl:iintiff, Mr. Cruchley's Clerk, was or
dered to officiate, as Deputy Prothonotary in his
stead. ,In coricquence of such appointment, the
defendant prefei•reti seven indictiuent4 apiinst bun
at the Old for embezzling various sums;
am9untiug,to 225. The plaintiff was accordingly
bronght.to the bar of the Old Bailey, oil a charge
of te.lony, hut ivas diseharged, there being no
pretence for the prosecution. .After the piosecu
tion the plaiutiff brought this action. It Wa3

proved that tbe money said' to be embet I;id,
been entered fairly in the-defendant's bum, Ana
that the plaintiff's conduct, in the stri, poiat
of riot, had been I.9nest and honourable.
The Learned Judge was of opinion that the du
fendant.had never bad probable cause for the pro"
secutioni and the Jury, under all the eireilin-
stances, found %.verdict for the plaintiff.--at'
triages 2000 i-