The Sun.
London, England, 1809-04-07 00:00:00

AN'aithtitan'i Amendlltent, vohenTt here appeared

For it, 61—Against it, 3e.—Majorilv
The 6th and 7th Resolutions were then passed,
and the Court adjourned. •

' CRUELTY To A'...rmia,s,-.The very wonderful.
niare helotigingt&r.vir. Wilson; the liverytnati,Whietk
perfortried ihlity miles in 'one hour and forty mi.
mites, yesterday finished a task unprecedented in the
.sporting c;ilCndar. The owner of the mare hacked
her on the Q.kith ult. for a avager of'
f...)00 guineas, to
go sth miles in three hours and a 'halr, sui:h being 1.4
the rate of nearly fifteen miles an hour. The anittial
went off in high condition yesterday on the Wood-
' ford 'road, and did Above fifteen miles within an hour
at n steady trot, and continued to do the same in thu
next two hours. The difficulty in the pertormanc4
was the left five miles in the, half hour, which was
done in four minutes less than the given time.' 13et,
,ting was seven to four, and tW014,1 one, agaiont the
mare. • .

The above article is copied from a Morning Paper,
but we are strongly inclined to doubt the accuracy
of the statement, for we cannot suppose that any
man possessed of common humanity would make
such a wager as that mentioned in the above para-
graph.

Tuesday last, a Coroner's Inquest was held at
Seaton Iron-works,. Whitehaven, ,on the bOdy of
Wm Little, a mechanic in the employ of the Sea-
tom Company, who was killed the preceding, even.!
Ing, 'whilst in the as of turning a bevit.wheel pat-
tern, in a lathe worked by watere-eVerdiCt,
Detzth, It may not be improper to
a caution to all employed in, a similar way, that thil
indentions and valuable member of society kit
•his lite by imprudently suffering the end of his
neck-cloth 10.00030 in contaa with the revolqiee
spindle of the lathe, by which it was caught, anti
instantaneous suffocation was the melancholy conic- ,
quence„,
A POINT' OP HONOUL—A few days since two
Freeell' Officers, prisoners of war Onoparole at. Bi- '
shops Waltham,. having had a dispute, they agreed
to decide' the affair in an honourable way. A meet'.
ing was appointed in a field near the town; but a
difficulty occurred in prdcuring weapons. It appears
that the. combatanti were only in possession of one •
sword, and a case-knife. Freed), ingenuity made a
pike of the knife, by;confining it to the end.of nr
stick;, but the sword being considered the best wea-
pon, they resolved to• cast lots • who should have it.
After the sword and.keife had been fairly placed in •
their hands, the deel'commenced, and the swords'
men gave his antagonist three woundi, one on the
face, another ,on the ern), and a third.across the
body. The pikeman gave several dangerous thrusts,
and both fell on the ground; they remained bleed-
ing and diaabled, emit they were discovered bye se-
veral passengers, who conveyed them. to apublic-
house in the Vicinity. The Officer who received the
cots from ihessabre was not. expected to recover,—
His antagonist is fortunately out of danger. t
Enie.--•-.00- Tuesday. night, at ten o'clock, thtl
family being about to retire, an alarm of lire pre-
vailed at the houiteolthe Rev,. Mr. Matilde, at the
village of Heekley, Oxon,
.syllich consumed the same,
with stabliug,•fec, Arad four 'Other, hoeses adjoining.
The flames herst forth from the biewhouse, where
a tire had been left, and with such impetuosity,that,
although the fire was discovered in its infancy, it could
not be crushed. • Two horses were burnt and itt
is supposed that damages to the amount of 66001.
were sustained, and the preMises altogether were
uninsured, 4r. Moulde was at an, hotel in fermytle
reet,' at the tittie, wf On fire.

' , SMITHFIELD MARKET, Aziit

This day's Market had but a short smpply of dif-
ferent:kinds of Cattle..44.,Potit is dearer titan our Irk
roortis. Veal Ms clfeaper.; neer; 'Muttorit and •Lamb
sold a; ;114 prices; and .the trade for• the most patt
was not over bitsk ; the sates. in thek Haymarket
were not lively •; Straw has fatten' in' 'price since,
Monday; nMarker. clover has got up in price; Hay
fits obtained last Pricese—The Ifollowing prices and
numbers are an accorate statement
To shift the per stone of 81b.
Beef 4s. gd. to 6s. Linda ss.; ad. to 6s. 6d..—Veal
6s. ad. to 7s. 64,1,--Vott is, 'ad: bs.. tu•64.7-I,4lrib 6d. to
9s. at. •
,Benst‘s. .loo.—Sheep and Lambs, 5,500.-'-ealtes, 400.
Pigs,
igs, 220.
l ay SI.. tes. add: to 61. 6s: od.:-Straw .11..165, ad. to
21. ss. 04.--Clover (il. 105. 10 71. :75.

Coror-Rxerralloc, APRIL 7.—There are tolerao
Suppties of Wlfeat to-day.; Finn in deniand, and
maintains last prices; Second and Orditutry, rather
cheaper. Barley, in considerable quantities; Second
and inferior are again lower. White and Grey
Peag, and the two sorts of Beans., at little variatinn.
There are twiddling supplies of Oats:; those: at good
quality support last prices; other sorts, dull Sale.
and Sales of Flour on the terms GE our last
qUotation.

Charing-Cross against all England for selling Ca.
pith' Prizes—those who back Charing-cross wilt,
win. It has been FOrtune's Ernpot hint for nearly a
Century; and the oldest Booth in the Fair is Q4R-
Tileiti s where the Public are respeetfully in-
vited to *are in the " good the Gosh provido' for
W.edneethly next.

cited a degree of preludica against them in the minds
of the Jury ; and his Learned Friend, Mr. Jervis,'
bad the convenience of it, by not calling-certain wit-
nesses, who were previously exaMined, and thereby
preventing a reply. The result had been favourable.
to hmi (Mr. Jervis), if that result 'could be called
so, that .had tended to produce this new. trial ; for
it was partly in consequence of the non-examina-'
tion of witnesses at the former trial, who bad pre.
.Viously.made affidavits before the Lord ChancellOr,
that ht _ordered a new trial to-take place, where
'these witnesses might all be examined viva v9ce.
The Learned
.Counsel then proceeded to state the
attempts formerly made to establish ,the claims of
the Liverpool, ;family, which he assumed, as being
the argument and, &rounds to be supported by;the
present Defendants, It had subsequently turned out
that a witness, named Lightfoot, who had formerly:
niade an affidavit .IseforrotbeCtiaricellor, tending .to
substantiate. the -assertion, that William Barber, of.
the Strand, bad originally come from Liverpo:.', but
who bad not been examined at the former trial, had.
died since the present. issue was ordered. That per-.
son had been carried to Worcester, for.thepprpose
of examination; but it occurred to hinvibet, the
person of the name of Barber he recolleded asn fel.
low-apprentice with him at ,Liverpool,., was named
John, and not Williams. and on that account be
waonot called,- A more fraudulent case than the
Liverpool one had hardly ei+er 'been set up, in any
Court of:Justice; and owing to a discovery subse-
quently Made, it was not now to be persisted. in ; but
the Learned Counsel rook that. opportunityof freeing
the Agents and .Counsel of the present Defendants
from any partieipatioe oreonnivance in that fraud.
It appeared that an,Attorney. in Liverpool, who bas
hitherto borne a respeCiable charader, aging for
Sarah Leftwich, te.establish the right oftheLiver-
pool family, -had taken upon himself melamine the
register of the birth, of this alleged William Barber,
of Redbank, near Warringtou, and had sworn to its
veracity before the Chataceller, although he did not
think proper to appear to swear to it at the Worees,
ter trial, but bad sent one,of his clerks for that pur-
pose. The clerk produced, a copy 'of the register
in ree,stion, purporting to -be relative to the biith
of William Barber; the :tied ,of Samuel Barber,
which lie (Mr. D.) could prove was most impu-
dent and palpable perjury ; because he had. the
original register now to produce, and it would ap-
'pear to. be a register of the birth of a William
Barker, and not of William Barber. He could
aloe spew 'that the mistake had been pointed out
to. that Attorney, at the time of inspection, by a
comparison of the letter k, in that name, with
others that occurred in words, where a k, ,must
necessarily exist, and yet that individual,, not only
persisted in the truth of his own affidavit, but
sent his Clerk to the former trial,' to confirm the
perjury.
The Learned Conniel then proceeded -to state the
various instances of alleged intercourse tbat• had
taken place between his clients and Margaret Ma-
thews, who had married the William Barber, of
n Mguntford Bridge, ear Shrewsbury, in Sbropsbire;
from which tuarriage,'Charles Barber/Ilia intestate,
was descended ; and. added, that be could prove, va-
rious nets of recognition, by which the Plaintiffs' re..
lationship, as second cousins ,to the said Charles:,
woeld becompleiely established. .
. In support of his statement and arguments, Mr.
DAUNaRY caked the:tollowing witnesses :
Mr,. John .4114, Agent for the Plaintiffs, who pro,-
dueed various ancient registers of births, marriages,
and deaths, of the:alleged comtnou aucestof s el the
family, —in the Strand ;.-aAture Lloyd,- living as
Mouuttord-bridge, aged (in s. Elizabeth Randles,• of
'the sitme place, aged 79 Susannah Roberts, of the
same place,' aged 72 ; Elizabeth Adams,. of West-
minster, who had been servant to John Moody, for
25 bears, at Pool-quay, in Montgomeryshire.; Nary
Myles, now of Leition.street, Whiteebapea
Eliza-
beth Groom, agstd Gs; and the Rev. Itiehard,JOnesa
of Great Boddart, Cheshire, who produced the regi-
'Ater of the birth of William Barker, dated I Oh jam'
471F1, from which the fraud already stated evidently
appeared to have been practised. •
To go into any !lather particulars of the .evidence
woead be uniuteresting, and would necessarily ex-
ceed our limits. After an adjouroment for an hour,
the Court met again at four o'clock, and proceeded
to bear the case of the Defendants.
Mr. Jaavis then addressed the Jury on behalf of
the Defendants, in a speech which lasted for two
hoots and a hall, in which he begged them not to
be to,:any degree prejudiced against the eause of his
vlientsi from the circumstance, of a frau& having
been praaised on the part of other chimeras, with
whom the present Plauitiffs were quite neconneaed.
The simple proposition before them was, who this
William Barber was, who marri.ed. Margaret Ma-
thews Y.Tbat his clients stood in the situation of first
cousins to Charles Barber, the deceased, on 'the
mothers side, was a ma, which his Learned firleod
had admitted,, and thel:efore it was unnecessary fol.
him to Olargeupon it.' All that he should endeavour
to shew was, that this William Barbei., the father of
Charles, had sprung from another family
,than that
.which,his Learned Itsieud had alleged in behalf of the
Plaiutiffs. There was an uffirmative to be established:
by the Plaintiffs in the former cause, by which his
clients could not be affeaed, although the aeriliaAtroa
in favour of that Plaintiff ; for he ha& proved that
these for whom he now appeared were the nearer
conneeied. Mr. Dauncey was interested in opposing
that ease of Mr. Serjeant Williams,. the Counsel foe
'Sarah Leftwich : and he .(Mr. Jervis) opposed it in
the same manner as he now did the present wee--
Jlis Learned Friend, Mr.- Williams, had evidently'
been imposed upon in supporting the case Of Sarah
Leftwich ; for a witness of the name of Lightfoot
had beenbrought to the.Asiixes At Worcester, who
had • made ate affidavit before. theChaueedor, but
Was not examined. It had been commUnicated to
her Attorney, that although that witness had stated-
the name oi the person who bad served an appren-
siceshipaloug with him at. Liverpool was • •William
Barber, yet that it had afterwards occurred him 4
that .it was John, and not William+ and the Atior-
'ney.attually withdrew the testimony of that witness,
trom the consideration Mahe Jury, and sebstitiatert
'aiaother man, of tlt6 'name of Murphy, "to prove the
Haose %kith the full knowledge that. Light-
e,rt was mistaketh TinJt lA/dot:64 had now de-
parted this life, perhaps lie had b ore mistaken;
teat if i:as Attorney knew it, he tivas

Lord Chancellor, for the purpose of ascertaining
one or two fads; which could be more easily .and
aecorately'ascertained, viva voce, by a, trial et,core-
.
mon law, than by any written evidence being hid
beeee it Court of Equity. . The ohjed of the suit
was of very considerable importence the property
in question 'amounting to tio less. a , sum man
- between one and tWU :bundled thousand pounds,
•and therefore it Was net. to be much wondered
at, that every satisfadioneshould be required by
•that Learned Jugde, befere whom
.the ,question,'
* as to its real and proper owners, came to beele-
tennined. This property belonged to a person 'of
the name of Charles Barber, and was entirely of
a personal nature, and he haVing died intestate,
the question now was, how it was to be distri-
buted among those who 'had put in thee' claims
as relations toethe deceased, it being by law to be
divided monied those who stout' in :le equal de-
gree Of relauonship, whether of the Maternal or
paternal line. The pre.ieet question to be tried
therefore was, whether* the fiaintiff, Johp Barber,
Thomas Barber, Edward. Moody,: Thomas
.Moody,
• Ann Jacitson, Elizebetle Hughes, the ..wife of
Fear) Hughes, Bireh, end John' 'l,4notly,
and Thoroae ritirch (both deceased), some or one of
them was or, were the sole next of dein, on the part
of the fethee, to Charles Barber,. at the time of his.
death ? and:also whether some or one Of them was
or were some:or:one of the next of kin, on th 6 part
'of the' father, to the said Charles Barber ?
said Charle Barber had nequired a large property'
in India and there, eeas no doubt (for it Was tint
&spitted by either party) sleet he was the son
of Willime 1.3.0 her and Meipece Barber, •persoes-
e.xerciSitig the teide of sadle'rs in the Strew% in
Louden, the. !teener having continued to exercise
.that trade after the decease' of the :father. Fits
eOntended, that both' of the parents of thiA
Charles llarber, cune. .front Shropshire, but this
was denied by, those who were the ,Defeedants in'
this suit. MT. Charles Bnber, returned to Etig;,
hind, after the death eflii father,emd Mother, rind
lived but a very short' titre to enjoy...the property he
bad made, for 'he died at °steno's Hotel,ehr the
Astelphi, on the teat of tengia4,..• 1799, within ten
days after his return. Immediately after his:eh:Aar,
.
many persons, es r.tellt neturally be euppesaki. :ep-
peered to claim his large .property. 2Artenregst.
these persons were the presenWeteedauts, wheat
his"Leerped Friend Mr. Jervis,* was, Low to repree
sent as claimants on the part .of the mother;: an 4
he Mr. Datineeey) lidd: no ' hesitation in admitting
that their. reseealee. clainas, Aweigh tae mother,
hat been alreiely .331i:if:eerily :established. That
was a tact whiclehe it cr meant to deny ; all-he
meant to coat tee' e'ee i.eas, that' his clients stood in
equal degree et relationship,: as representatives of
Williatif the father ol the deceased, with those. who
claimed *es representatives ,:f.Margaret, the .Mother,
" and .censettectely that the property ought to be
. • equally divided amongst „them. One-half of the
property 'the Defendants were already:in possession
• of; or at 'least had selliciently established their right
to receive; but they having learned thet the whole
• Was better than a heV, were disposed to cootest the
right of the Plaintiff*, by contending that iii (Mr.
• Dauneee's) client:] were not the iepresentatives of
'the' father of the person who died itoestate, and
• shirt Wilhamethe 'father, was eitheterepresented by.
Other persons, or had now no repreeentatives what.
ever. The Defendants, he believed, were to wet
'ne that V-,e Ceher of William Barber, of the
Strand, w's riative of Bedbenke near,Warritig-
ton, in Leecashire, and, therefore, that be . could
not be represented' by those who elaimed‘kindred
with the William Barber who came. from Stir:v.
ehive; HaVing: given this outline of the se, it
might not he. amiss for him to state, that thite roes-
: tien had • bath antecedently, investigated by. a. trial
titithe drat. Worcestq hoe the Plaintifts.
establildied, their claim as representatives lltrough
theynother: Judeed there had been no difficulty
011411041 g it, HS it. wens unnecessary to
.•• go: ter_ tlte. Jury thtl cla44 tbow..who repree
tented through the Mother. But there'waii also
other trial upon thtit oceasion,u4here4t was centended
that the W.. Barber iu qnestion was.a Liverpool matt,
/it'd the ‘ert!i6t of 'the Jury :Went to, establish that as a
tee.. To make this emitter jet Mute intelligible,
be. sotto,: that she Lord Chancellor : had
origoelly directed three issues to be tried at
Woreei4t'le the first was to establish the claims of
the pees. it IT:11114n, the representatiVei of Wil-
Eine, the lather, as eviginally from Shrop)thire r the
seeeee to otablieli. the claims of tee present De-
fend:vete teereeentittives of the mother i*and the
third to &tern,* whether the said•Williatri Berber
was oro Liverpool, so as thereby to eita-
blidr the clitiereofe MO. Sarah Left Wich, who' stated
hersett to he the ere!t next et kin ore the part of. the
father. Such was they order in which these trials
,stns) heve tnketi piece ; but that order was, net
beeelv obserk ea; ter that which morel lest as the
fits{ tried, awl consecllmitly the second verdict must
neeesserq havivtiemi reeeleied by tleii promiouoced
tee:n the thitef it. the Livereool man.,
were it“..1,1)r-,.tleti,filivQ, of Wilhthi, then the. 'Sheep:.
frrm (;.q,i:t lot 1.1,4,.). Th,vo,,t,f• threw The
andiet-

I.uNk&q

fjo. I

ble in • sebffituting 'another esitnesi, with the
same false impression that Lightfoot laboured under;
thaf circumstance did not fail to make an impression
upon.the Learned Judge's mind, and, together with
the circumstance of the causes not being tried in the '
order in which they were intended., the Lord Chan-.
cellor thought fit to direa this new trial, the case of
Sarah Leftwich being now left entirely out of the-
question. The Lord Chancellor said, upon that oc•
casion, that if all the evidence had been stated to the
Joryt and if there hed,beens no question upon that
point, he felt strongly disposed to saY, that there
Must be an end of the qtiestion in the Court of Equi-
ty ; but he,thought he Could not go. to that length,
meaning, as he did, to say, that there, should be a'
new trial for .the reasons he should assign. His
Lordship e bstained froth observation& on the argu-
ments upon this stitsje6l, for he desired it not to be
,Stated any where, whether •he was or was`not sa-
tisfied with the verdid already pronounced, for he
wished thequestion to go to a new trial, without
any prejudice Whatever, either against the one patty
or die other from any thing-failing from Intri. A
new trial was necessary, .because he thought that all
the evidence. had not been before the Jnry that
ought to 'have been before them,.'end lie could not,
'in the absence of any of it, be quite sure that he
colleaed the inferencecorreetly, as to the fa'tis that
constituted the other . cases. He (Mr. Jervis) was
sure that the Jury wouldtherefore take care todeeide
upon the evidence. now brought before them, and not
upon any circumstances that had already occurred.—
His Lordship, in stating his sentinients upon the ap-
plication for a new trial, went.on and said, that the
hypothesiS of Mrs. LeftWich was, that this William
Barber, who died in the Strand, in PM'S, was of
the Wm. Barber who cattle from Mountford-bride;
and the hypothesis of the others was, that this Wm.
, Barber was not the apprentice at Liverpool, burn of
the Cheshire family, but was of the Motintford fa-
mily. A witness called. Lightfoot, with that im-
pression upon his mind, and which arose from the
recolle&ion of his early }Teri, stated that' his first
impression was, that the ,person who was apprentice
along with him, was named William, and accents
itigle, with such an affidavit, the issues were (Urea-
ed, and he was subpoenaed 'to attend the trial; but
although he was carried to Worcester, he was not
called as a Witness, He having afterwards correaed
himself before the trial, isy recolleaing that the
name of the, person alluded to was, John,
,and not
William; his Lordship did not think himself under'
the necessity of entering into the question, Whether
this correaion were material or not, as he was at.
.ready entrusted with the decision, not, only frOtti,
circumstances arising from the evidence, but from
the condud of the . parties. That that perton
was'there, and not produced as a witness. upon the
trial, 'was a fait placed beyond all doubt, and be
therefore thought iewauld be better that the Matter,
should again be investigated, without any opinion'
being given by him as to the elaims of either pf the
parties. The. Learned Counsel having said thus
Much; in order to shew the real state of the ques-;,
tion befhre the Jury, and to do away any erroneou&
impres,iter that might be formed oPen their minds
by the cirennestances attending the former trial, and
the coneetition which his case had with that of the
LiverpoOl ease' as stated by the Plaintiff's Counsel,
testi psoeseeee to *cant out the ineenbisteneles he
the evidence, and to shew that no relatives of Wm.
Barber, who married
_Margaret Matthews, 'were in
'existence. should prove that Ws. Barber,
ing.uuder that conviction,' had gone to Mountfore.,
bridge, fotthe purpose of searehieg for her ewe re-
- hitions, to.Whotn she might bequeath her, property,
aunt that she said that Win. Barber had nu relatives
iii existence, having had neitheebrothee nor sister.
Mr. SHAVIS, in support of the Defendant's case,
called Ann Lawten, who, livedwith Mr. and Mrs.
Barber, in the Strand, as. servant, for q4.years, who'
delsosed that site never saw nor heard of any relations
• 'of Mr..llarber during .all that thee. -John Roberts,
who [tad alsolived with these persoes asjourneymati,
from Oe.tober, 78 1 till.. the decease of Wth. Bar-
ber, '
aiad had ever since carried on the business of a
saddler,. in the Strand,, jointly, with Mrs. Barber,
and afterwards on his own account, never heard ei-
ther of them speak of any relatives of the huaband,
but had seen si relation of Mrs. Elarber, named Min-
ton ; and he knew of her gain& to Moteitfordsbridge,
• to'inquire for her own relations.
_ _ _

Mark Creer, who had come from the East 'lndies,
as servant to Charles Barber, the deceased, had heard
him say his.father had come originally from Liver..
pool. This witness, intending to go' to Liverpool;
his native place, upon his arrival' in this country, had•
been desired by his master to make inquiries there
far, his (Mr. Charles Barber's} father's relations, but
such inquiries were never made, as Creer did notto
,to Liverpool till after his Master's death.
„.
• Mr. James Thomas deposed as to his knowledge
of Mrs. Barber's,reiations ; her coming to Shrews —,l
bury to inquire for them • and stated, that he never
. had heard Of any of heritesbandis relations in, that
part Of-the. country. Of a similar: nature were tile
testinionies. of .MO4. Margaret Thomas, Mrs: Sarah
Lewis, Mrs. Barrow, Mrs. Slangier, Mrs: Ed-
wardes, Diana Thomas, and Mr. T..Mathevvs,
Mr. Searle,. clerk to Mr. Jackson, of- Hatton-
garden, aysnt for one of the Defendants, deposed,
.That he lad,gone last Thursday se'nniglit to Chester,
to examine the register as to.the- birth of the alleged
WM. Barber, of Liverpool, a copy, of which had
been formerly produced and sworn ,to, by the At-
torney of. Sarah Leftwich. On seeing that register, •
•he iminediately .discovered that the name Was
:Barker, and not Barber, and had no doubt as to.the
fact, from a comparison of d& letter k, with those
in other Words. Hewmade a'fae4imile. of that part
of the register, on behalf of the.. Defendants hi 'the
present adios), for whomMr....rtiekson aaed. He
knew nothing of the substitution of the k.-tor the:k,
in the copy formerly, produced, fillf he made that
examination of it.. - .
Mr.. DAtiNtEY made an able and eloquent reply,
anathe Learned Judge' summed up the evidence. at
• great loogth. . • . ,
The Jury retired, and after .a -short ittferv3l, re-
filmed a verditt for the-Plaintiff, ; by to,hkih, '0)014,1
there nut he. yet another new trial, 1,41ey beorofi.
its repretatives.of the father, entitled ji)intly with
the Defendants, the "tepre3entatwps of- the tn.ititc,
to share the' extensive property-ol.the de),:ea,,e(l,

N. 4, Matt:o;t:o;urt, Pubbs.ocki by WILI3.AM,A.It.it,Ci.C.it • (TS, Sow it M,
StrAuti ; «herb 461velliftVolits, Oideci fur ti:e Pape"?' .tetters for the —c;. (zest-pa.-
4 I
•

„
AN AMOUR tN GRVB-STILEET.•—••A charge wars
Made at Marlborough-streef Office yesterday; by a.
Miss Brand against a Mrs. Middleton, of Grub,
street, for an assault, of which Miss Brand displayed
strong proofs in the face. It appeared in evidence,
that the parties lodged in one house in Grub-street;
and the Prosecutrix being to all appearance, and iu
the eyes of Mr. Middleton, a very desirable young
(s eoman, he ran away with her. The wife, morti-
tied at the loss of her husband's, affecaions, traced
Miss Brand to Lisle-street, where she had taken
lodgings; and she commence,' a vigorous attack' on
her on Wednesday night, when she exerted her ta-
lons to such a degree, that the Prosecutrix exhibited
frightful marks of jealousy and anger. The defen-
dant was heid to bail; but she protested her accuser
should not have a face to captivate her husband
longer-than her sureties to keep the peacedasted.

The Honourable Commissioners of the Lottery
attend this morning.at the Cashier's Office, Bank ot
England, to seal up and deposit the 1,000 Tickets, -
to he given next Wednesday morning, and the 600
Tickets given on the Second Day of Drawing
Every Ticket or Sharepurchased before the Wheel
goes round next Wednesday Morning, will have .tt
Thousand Chances, as the First.4trawn Ticket above
161. will be entitled to 1,000-whole Tickets. This
superior advantage never was before offered; and
HOR NSBY and Co. entreat their Friends and the Pub-
lic to take.advantage of this opportunity, and aPPIY
at their old established Offices,26,.Cornhill, and Sr.
Margarett's Hill, Borough; and no where else on
their aoccstlnt. '
•