The Sun.
London, England, 1815-11-24 00:00:00

EXPLOSION IN -WELL-STREET.

An inquisition was, held yesterday, at the Grave
Maurice, Whiteelrapel;beforea.lW.-liriwiN; Esq.
on view of the' body ,of Jean Jtilien Maignau.—
From the evidence it appeared, that Messrs Con-
stadt, who are Frenchmen, bad endeavottresl to
refine their sugar by seanr.
.upon an improved
plan i the boiler and appendages bad 'been tried
upon a former occasion, and did not succeed ; but
that on the day of the explosion, the boiler and
machinery arrre again tried in an improved state ;
that the heat was raised to nearly 46° to the square
inch ; that
._the Way valve had one weight npon
it about a quarter of an hour before the explosion,
which Blyth, %%ho 'superintended the fire, thought
was not sufficient, and placed another weight up-
on it which closed the safety valVe, Le Roy,- one of
the witnesses, remonstrated with 131yth upon the
danger, but he said he best knew-his own b-uSi-
MSS. Myth and three others, who were round
the fire, were killed. The boiler and machinery
were made under the suPerintendance of Hague
and TOpham. About five minutes before the ex.,
plosion; Hague, -with Mr. Spear and Collins, had
'quitted the fire, and all estsaped nolintt, Le Roy
was saved front haying just before the explosion
gone into a distant putt of the building, -which
was 'separated by an iron door. There. were 21
persons in all in the buildings at the time of the
explosion. Mr. Constadt having -offered himself''
as a witness, denied that he had given any orders
in the morning that the fire should not be in-
creased. lie thon4ht myth, who had the super-
intendance of the fire, was a person competent to
his business, and that_ the makers of -the boiler
and machinery were not implicated in the dreadful
occurrence.----Mr. Ustwui said, that lie had not
sat on the former cases, •which were within the
jurisdiction :of the Coroner for the 'Pe=te=r; but
that he thought this melancholy catastrophe had
-arisen froM imprudence and error in judgment,
and not from any criminal intent. That? hoW-
ever, it was the province of the Jury to decide on.
Verdict—Aecideiital Death.-
The ruins of the premises destroyed. in Well-
street, have 'been explored to the lower part of
the building, where the boiler and pans were
situate. The former was broken - into several
pieces, and one of the largest pans,, about eight
feet in diameter, was yesterday found- complete,
tut reversed with the mouth downward, anti"the
edges buried in the earth fFoin the effect of the
explosion. There is now little expectation of
finding the 'bodies of any of the three persons
missing. A piece of a human scull, a small leg
bone, and from 50 to 100 other particles, were
yesterday dug from the ruins. These were found
in, that part of the building where one -of- the men
(a German), was stationed; and Where win the
largest fire. The body, therefore, may be said to
have been consumed to ashes. ,

On Monday last William Ansell, of the Traave,
was executed Ol► bOtird the St. George, for the
murder of the Corporal of marines. lie appeared
on the fatal 'platform about a quarter past ten
o'clock, and was immediately 'mulcted jut() eter-
nity.

LAW INTEttIGENcE.

COMP OF CI-lANCERY; Nov. 43.

EI-i'ARTE TURNER, IN THE MATTER OF SIR GRE-

GORY'T'4GE TURNER.
Mr. ItstiT again mentioned this case to his
Lordship to-day. He was extremely happy to
be enabled to state, that the fears of his family
and friends, with respect to the health of the
worthy. Baronet, were .now completely relieved,
they. having received a letter from him, accontiti
ing satisfactorily-for his absence, and explaining
the causes of it in a manner Which did away all:
idea of its being occasioned by a relapse. This,
he was happy to state, appeared froth a letter
which he had seen lash night froth .Sir Gregol.y to
his confidential agent in town.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said he was happy to
hear it. When he saw Sir Gregfiry Page Turner
in his,rodm,• previous to his ordering the super-,
sedeas to issue, he found him in such a state- of
health as completely to satisfy his Lordship that!
he was thoroughly recovered, -unless, indeed; the
apprehensions of his- friends might create a re-
lapse.
Mr. HART stated the facts, of the case to be as
'he had narrated them. The necessity, therefore,
of applying to his Lordship to -suspend the seal-
ing- of-- the Writ of supersedeas was no longer
necessary.. .
The LORD CumicßuLoa, accordingly ordered,
that the same do issue immediately.
LORD .TOWN-- TOWNSHENO, &C. V. LORD CH ARLE
ToWNSHEND, &C. &C.

Sir ARTHUR PIGGOTT stated this to be an a-p-*
plication on the part of Lord John Townshend
and of Mr. Blake, trustees under the will of the
late Mhrquis Townshend, to have leave to go in
and propose before the Maser who should be
tenants on the estates of the late 'Marquis of
Townshend. This, he should esteem a motinir of
course,•were it not met by a .counter mocion..
Mr. HART stated that there was no intention of
urging that motion.
Sir A. PIGGOTT then contended that there
could be no objection to his motion.
Mr. HART submitted that there was "Fit least
this objection, that it was thereby meant to.pre-
chide Lord Charles- Townshend, who was t& be
the next teiiiint,in possession of the estate, from
going in to the Master, and offering himself as a
tenant of certain of the lands. 'chi., he was
clearly entitled to do by the will of his late father,
by which, White one of the trusts was the payment
to him of an annuity of 40001. a year, in the mean
time, was at the.distancc of about 2.1, years, minus
four, to he entitled to the possession of the estate
itself. There could therefore, he submitted, be:
no danger to the trust estate, front receiving the,
•offers of Lord Charles Townshend.
The LORD CHANCELLOR was of opinion that his
ordering the offers of Lord Charles Townsbend
to be received, might 'be of disadvantage to the
trust estate, inasmuch as other offerers might
thereby be prevented from coming forward. llis
'Lordship saw nothing to prevent, Lord Charles
Townshend from coining forward with offers to
• the trustees. If these offers should be disregaid-
ed, first try them, -and latterly in the Master's
Office, lie was then at liberty to conic into that
Court,-and there he should receive redress. Let
the order therefore be drawn up hi the form pray-
ed by Sir Arthur Piggott.

EARL OF 11AUVICK V. EARL OF UPPER OSSORY.
Sir S. I{o ALLY and Mr. WAKEFIELD stated this
to be an application on the Nil of the Earl.of
War Wick, to be permitted to become the tenant of
his own mines, upon payment 'of the customary
rent, being part in kind. The application was
founded on a deed dated in 1806, whereby the
plaintiti vested his estates in trust for certain uses,
and restricted himself to an annuity of 1,0001. a
year. There was a clause in this deed preventing
the trustees from granting leases for moxe. than
21 years. Sir S. ltomilly and Mr. Wakefipld
therefore prayed, that an order made by his Lord- '
ship in the month of July last, by-which permis-
sion was given to let leases foe an indefinite time,
be dissolved, and the trustees restricted to the.
strict Aerms of their deed. .
Sir ARTHUR PIGGOTT a nit-Mr. LEACH mainta in
ed that the decree did not go beyond the linfits_of
thedeed, but that it was in exact conformity to it,
depending as it did on the consent of the Earl of
Warwick whether .the leases should or shoidit-4a6t;
exceed the term of 21 years. -
The Lotto CnaNcELLom thought if the order
went beyond that line, that it was wrong. If it
was ambiguous, that it ought to he rectified. But
for the purpose of ascertaining these facts, he
must look into the terms of the order, and into
the clause in the deed.

COURT OE-KING'S BEAU, !kicky-. 23
BAILEY 'V. WARDEN Oa Error.)
This' case came before the ‘ Court last-Hilary
Term, upon a Bill of Exceptions to the direction
at Nisi bite of the 11-itejAtiel Justice (Mansfield)
of the Court of Common Pleas. It was an action
brought hgainst the plaiota in error; for assaidt- •
ing and wrongfully imprisoning the defendant in
error, in a damp- and unwholesome cell, Ste. by
which lie became sick,' &c. There were other
counts fiie a. cominon assault. The cause- of ac-
tion arose out of. the defendant's refusal to obey
.an order issued by the' late Samuel Whitbread,
'Esq. Colonel Of the lst:Regiment of Bedford-
shire Local. Militia, for the serjeants of his regi-
ment to attend school to learn to read ;and write,
the defendant 'being a serjekint in the,,regiment;
and the principal positions discussed wef,c; :wilt-
ther am actiotrOf trespass lies-for an inferior milt
tarn officeragainst his superior officer -(both being
under martial law) who.imprisons him for dis-
obedience to an'otder Made under colour,•but not
within the Scope of military authority, although
the imprisonment be followed by. a trial bya
Court Arartial.? Whether the Colonel of a regi-
ment has any authority to order his
.serjea.nts to
pay money towards lighting- and warming a regi-
mental -school and schoolmaster's salary ? Whe-
ther he has any authority to compel his setlietkint o
attend school to learn to read arid write ?..-AgifF,lC'hie-,,
titer theJudge‘at NisiPrius, was right', itiMirect;ag
the 3-4 y to say, tvbetiter ,the 'charge OFtnotiny.
[
was welt or ill-founded—and whether Chat was
trot 'a question exclusivelylor the jurisdiction of

Ole tribunal the a:pill-wilt in error
turned upon two grounds :—lst, That the evi`.
dence laid before the Jury was sufficient to or
title the plaintiff to the benefit of the
Act, inasmuch as the defrndaut had been guilt,'
of a Military offence, cognisable only by-a Court"
martial, and consequently that the° plaintiff vcag-
not liable to an action-at law :—and,"2tllY, Vag
the action was not commenced within siviuontbsi

as required by the Act.
The Court took time to consider the case, ail!
the ttthorities cited in argument, and now, at".
mature deliberation upon the positions ab°ve.
mentioned, gave judgment in favour of the Olio"'
tiff in error.—Judgment for the plaintiff.
THE KING. V. REV. J. T. LAWES.
The defendant, who is Master of. the-Gratrortai,,
School at. Marlborough, was found guilty:4olA'
last Assizes for Wiltshire, of an assault ..up
orit
Courtney Brice, one of his scholars, the son
Clergyman in the neighbourhood. The 'fatte''
were detailed At length' in the notes of.Mr.Sustic
Dampier, from which it appeared, that,thehoyi.
the prosecutor, had brought up his- theme in am
improper state, 'for Whicir Mr. Lawes.had at flt`lt
determined to flog him, but -afterwards. relented,
and only struck him on the top of his head witb-
his. knuckles. Brice bad the head-ache in Oe
ha'
afternoon, but continued for six weeks reguit
to come to school; after which he was. afflictet.
.with a constipation of the bowels, and tu0"614
'aid being called in, a surgeon and physician gavg/
it as their opinion; that the blow on the headi'
filleted by Mr. tanies was the origin of the coca„
plaint. • His head was shaved, and leeches ap;
plied ; but two other surgeons who exatnilc,„
`Brice, on the part of Mr. LaWes, were ohopiro-
that his health had not been affected by.e blows!.
and could observe no external injury-or tort'
The boy some -time afterwards was troubled v(trh►
.
fits, occasioned, as was contended for the rirsie;
cation, by the same severity of Mr. Lawes•
Jury found the defendant guilty, adding, that
had no intention to injure, but that the b.l;
given was an improper mode of punishment.
was now brought up to receive the sentence 01
the Court. „
A great number of affidavits were ilut 0-,;"4
hehalf, from medical men, fathers who now /(lita
sons under the tuition of Mr. Lacy es, and Ift)hei
vianng men who had been his pupils,-now
University, giving him a most excellent charact
for learning, ability, and humanity. '.
Atter hearing Mr. CasßetiD on one sidle, -0..
Mr. Serjeant Pet.t. on the other, the Court egli
teucel the defendant to the payment of 0.611 e
6s. Bd.

I

WARWICK ITOSPITAL.
Mr. TOPPING had obtained a rule to Olen' °use'
why a mandamus should not issue to direct smite
Bishop, the Dean, and the Archdeacon of VP;
cester, to proceed in an appeal bronght•ber:efa
them, as visitors of Warwick Hospital, bY
persons, -named IVynne, Richards-, and A1n,..1111,
who claiined,•to he admitted into tbareso";i;
merit. The subject was brought forwod, ni„,e-tic;••
to ascertain by the authority of the Court, --of
titer the. Bishop, the Dean, and Archdeee°ll,4og
Worcester, had, as visitors, the right of. 1e3,-000,
an appeal ; or whether Mr. Sydney, the u
in es'the
slant of the founder, the Earl of Leicester,
r.
lyt
2sth Elizabeth, had the sole and undisPuredesifaa
of presenting persons to the hospitalin elu-eta-•
as objects of the charity. The hospital wlis
Wished for " poor, needy, and impotent Pel
, °sarl
and especially those wounded in the vc,irs
the power given to the visitors was, " crrrea
abuses committed by the master or 12 urey- es:
and to see the ordinances of the hospital thc
ecuted, according to the true • meaningc 0400
same." The Court, after hearing :qr. the
BLOSSET.OII behalf of Mr. Sydney, ega'n,s-aiag'
mandamus, determined, according to the ".""
of the various documents relative to the foenio
titan of Warwick Hospital, or Maison Dien':tne3
the visitors-did-possess the power of appeal chid'
by them.
CHACE v. JoYca.
siJergti°7l,,
This was a case reserved for the con
Witt
of the Lona, upon a point of practice, ••-;
they the service of a latitat, directed to the lotA
riff of Surrey, was good, by being served at aria
son's Cafee-house, in the City of Lornl°"'ltellt
the Court, upon a review ofthe authorities, f
it to be irregular, and made the rule absolute
setting it aside, but without costs.
REX V. SAMUEL SMES. men/
The defendant pleaded guilty tai an int"cato
.for assaulting Mebitabel; the wife of Th°s''-,-tcinr
ley, on the 6th of November last, at 3 111-0
of dissenting persons, assembled in their c) er •
el
-
-at Braintree, in Essex, for the purpose °f. cd
brating divine worship. The assault consistencies
flinging a cat upon the prosecutrix's Il,a;d',0100
the gallery, during. the service. Foy tl),i'sboontt
offence the Magistrates at Chelmsford be,:ree for
ohviserintiirco(llle(fieuichlawnitietiol
cfiarliiteldseucptoirtiltY tt):115- •
The Court, upon the motion ° f.etle
General, now sentenced him to re F a fi" °
;f9t01:; Attorner
shilling, and be then discharged.

. ,
~ BIRTHS. r son.
At the Mount, near Madras, 'Nfrs Major Blair, of alijadt
On tile /di inst: 'in Marisehal-stre.ct. Aerdeen, tl .
of Alexander .FAirbes; Esq. of a son. - - / Cbl‘r.
On the 121 h inst. in Dundas-street, Edinburgh, I‘.rs' • f
nel Robertson, of Mineral; of a daughter.Ladyo
The same dav, at Glen,,Lirr'rHouse, Scotland, the
Co!rine): Mi,ldo.nald of Glengarry, of adaughter. .of II
On the 11th inst. the Lady of the Rey. Dr. Startel,
son. •
wini3Ox:lie Istli inst. at Casterton-Hall, the wife.of theAll'4°:e
oni r-Cas W a ilsom, a daughter.
On Thursday nq, in :Banover-
tuornisquare, the I'4"J
-
•JINCS Brett, Esq. of
.a son. '
On the ISth inst. at BaMlcarrßes, Scotland, Charles Malt,l.lTst
'Christie,. Esq. of .Untie, to Miss Mary. Butler Lindsay' e'"
(la-tighter of the Hun. Robert Lindsay, of Balcarres. ~, /e/
. - -On the clsd inst. Charles Jones, Esq. of, Harrt4 Wea_..a,
Mary, youogtst daughter of Mr. John. Dickens, of J4P'.- '
Wharf. ochester; 'Dc
Lately, at St. Nicholas Church, R
to Mro.
Cator l° 91.15,
Courey L'Affair, Phlsician to the Forces, ,s
Syines, of Bath. '
________...-----------

cOu
oCitiii
te—rau .1)1‘
in
at
eatti z
ahltoeTsce: no
lithe Af It' d 1%1,1°1.11
thl a
IR 0%! (tl,f,
01

LONDON: Printed by J. B. CARSTANS, No. j
of
0 7 Crave"
• buildings; anti published by W. SCl{.ll)P6,oliit 4
:at the N. 110, Strand where AdVele..:
Oicats, Orders, Letters (post-paid) t&e. must be ada: VIC -