The Sun.
London, England, 1807-11-04 00:00:00

BOWES V. ItAYS AN/3 OTIIENS.

Sir SAMUEL ROMIL:LY, follo4Veti by Mr. HART on.
the sane side, moved the Court this 4y, on, behalf
ot the. lion, Thomas Bowes, now or late a priAnier
in the King's Bc...nch,-Prison, tor a continuanc,': of an
.10j-unction by him obtained, againsttheDeleti,iants'

proceedings a Ott. law in this case. Th 4 cireu,o,n.uues
stated welt!, that the Plaintitf being,in,grcat dituress
and embacrassment about the year tiO4, entered,:
into a, trusf'deed hit raining rlivera, sunny ot, money.
at the high and exorbitant interest of paying, or
causing to be paid, . four, tinitu the sum, borrowed,
Upon un.i,occutrenee of any one of the seyerof con_.
tingencies iu the deed Cont4ii)ed..: TneSe,three con-
tingencies were the death, without issue, of t Right
Hon. Lord Strathmore, the Plaintiff's brother ; On
the'Phtintiti's coining into posseSsien of La)itl Siriuii
morn"sestates, which the. Plaintitfis heir in tail wale
in ,Teiwri4cter ; in tho event of the dead) of the
Plaintiff's brother, the Honourable George ,Bowes,
without issue,
.wiro was then in a dying state,: for
he died. in December, 1806, ten days only subse-
Cll.leflt to the trtu;sactions which grounds the present
proceedings, on Mr. Bowes'a return front the Isle of
whither. he had retreated in 180.1.
owing, to his pecuniary embarrassment, where fie,
rnet ith the I.4ladant,, or rather with a.M.r., Hill,
who; ade4 as agent .or procurer- of the Money in
question for :the use of the Plitintilf: The sum agrPed
to beadranced to the Plaintiff was otily .504
he had not however itituallyreceiyed,andlie was to pity
the sum of VOW)]. upon any of the foregoing
tingencies„ 'one, of whieh took place in tetOoys. af,,
ter the present Dt.bleudant had come into. this COtp,-;
trae,i, for he was not rat first a
,party to tbe trust
deed. The I..e:irtied colaitscl stated, .tharthe Plaits
tat was at that time heir in tail to Lord Straththore's -
estate of 30,o(it)l, per annum ; to another estate of
••t 1,01.)01. per Ahtitiht , and to a third iii Scotland of ,1
i'.%oooi. per y..ar, of wiichlast the intail could not
tae barrt4, and of cOuroe: that the risque of the
' lender was. not in reasonable or sus( -proportion
,to
the enortrions.gain of four tinter the sum agreed to
be.advanced„
Mr. Iticitups, on the other side, argued that he
Court' had nothing, to do whit the prelient,calcallatlon.
of risiine or advantage. sot that if.the
Georgellwes" death had :nnt,rccwrc,l-a(th.:o tithe
nothing would have been heard of this- tri.tosi@i4.,o,,
and tbe ,Detendant would:never get a ahilling fluorin
of theeventSfshould occur, .-

The Loan CiTANCELLOR, olvierved, that by th's
.mocle4ifyeasoninolie sum might havebeen t 00,000;.
'or 240,0001. !a be paid lor &Pol. wl3icli would bul
manstreu. The rule was, his ii)rdship said, v, here
the contr was falr and l'eASonaWe, great profit was
allowable on remote contiopencies but this case
was unstifierable.—The Injunction %vas ordered to be
continued.' •

" R,.

.',r._.

,

Oil)

TUI;SDAY.-SIKTIT MT.
George Fathom was capitally indicted for stealing
in the dwelling-house of, hi; Lite; deceased Master,.
Mr. John DaWkins;a -tallow7chandier, in Mount,
„ .
weer,' Grosretibr-sqUare, seven boles, containing
several- dozens at store- and mould 'Oodles, %Ike'
above 401. the property of rnaiter's. executors. -
Thothas Shipman. was al So udic3ed ,fo-r reeciOng
the abovementioned l'noperty, knowing, it to be
stolen.

It appeared'in evidence, that-the Prisoner; George
'FeMt ii, Was, the apprentice of Mr. Dawkins, 'and
in consequence of his good, conduct and ,atten-
lion to his master's business, the utmost coup=
deuce and trust las placed in him. In short, so
gootran opinion 10.79 his master of him, that in his
&dining !wealth he entrusted :him almost entirely
with the management of his busii:ess ; and as an
inducement and encontagoment to hishitliftd con-
dad, he annexed a 'coAieil to bk will, icaving him
a handsome legacy. TR • Prisoner - Shipment had
been in the habit of visiting his "sister, who was'a
servant .in the family of Dawkins;• in the
course of those V isio, an intimacy had grown between
hiut and Hon in consequence of some tis•-
picitili4 formed on the part nt a young man, named
\yin. Bloke, thFy porter employed in Mr. ll's ware:-
houses, of the Prisopi:rs, he intimated his stitpiCions
to his master, who was I heti iying,on his death-bed,
The consequence of. which- was, that information,
was given at Marlborough-street Otlice, and a
wa -
'rant being issued tnr,the search of the Prisoner Ship-
man's lodgings, the abovc=mentioned property was
found, a part concealed in his sleeping room, and
the in a coal vault. Both Prisoners were
. conseq nen tly, apprehended, and committed for trial.
Tice Prisoper Felt ham, on, being accused of the
robbery, confessed his crime, and aeknowleded
,his contrition. lie accused 'Shipman as the origin
of his bad condutt in persuading him to do, What
he did ; and was not tbr such bad council, he
should not be brought to the situation in which ht
then; stood.. This e6nfe:ssion, however, not being
,made in the presence of the Prisoner. Shipman, could
not be
,recetved as evidence.

Mr. ALLEY on-the. part of the Prisoners, con-.
tended that Shipman was a principal in this crime',
because he had constant access to the warehouse
from whence this,propetty was*olen, and the pro-
" petty being also, found in his posFession, argued in
affirmation of his being the principal ; and there
being.no:evidence that he had ,reoeived it knowing
it'w be stolen, it ti,'.;.; ta:tr to (=elude that he could
not be ipriieted, lo' that offence, And as to the Pri-
sotier Felthatir, there was none of the goods found
itl(l.hti made rho confession
.he did under the ifunre, of meeting with mercy.
it was 6Vidt,tot her. h 7,1 unler very bad advice;'
and (fining pr..‘HolvA to 'ids untOrtunate'affair
he bore a fuo,f Trieproachable character, so .mucir
so, as had in evidence, that be had been
esteemed as a confidential servant), and trusted with
time management of his, masters business.
The Itti.cottnka sdnuoed' up the, evid‘tuce with
great precision, and observed that this indicinient
Was laid capitally ; but though, the property speci-
fied bad been kindinapossession of the Prisoners,
it did not appear that the property was taken at,
one time, which must .constitute the
,grounds,of
the' capital part of, the charge.
,The goodS, might,
. have been taken, at different times, to the value of
395, at 'etch time, but they could not tack all those
.rtibb,ries together, stS as to-form a capital otince,
att the lie,v ..couires that there should. be stolen pro,
p'erty to the full amount of 4n5,..t0 form the, founda-
tion:of a capitfit offence; therefore,. tint not being
f'ormed, the capital part of lite charge was dupe
away. The,remainder of time Learned Judge's ob-.
servations on this trausadicar coincided exaaty• with
the opinion of Mr. '4o.r -. lie observed With
ropeet to the Prisener Veltharn, that there was a
doubt et his hay.ing ancually stolen the propaty and
that in all ',uses of douht,; added to a good char,t6ter,
it should operate in flivour of the Prisoner,
The Jury returned a verdict of. :Not Guilty on
boot Prisoners.
Mary Lauder t was conviaed of. stealing :two
tea-spoiais, two thit:e Shirts, and other.
art:tides,' the property of John Winfield.
No capital cooviCtion took place, this day, tit!' at"
tention of the Court heing,occupied iu ruing petty
oif uses of no inteiest whatever to the public.