The Sun.
London, England, 1812-08-07 00:00:00

THE ARMY,

GENERAL ORDER.
• Horse Guards, June-24, 1812.
The•Cornmandee-in-Chief has commanded it to be notified,
that when it irthe intentiN of a Court Martial to award. So-
Mary Confinement as a punishment, it. is necessary that the
words S' Solitary Confinement" should he expressed in tlik
v,ording of sentence. Annexed is the form of Commit-
ment, which is to be used when the Commanding Otticer of a
Corps finds if, neeessaxy to place any soldier, in pursuance of.
the. Sentence of a Court Martial, in the temporal custody of
the Civil Power.
By command of his Royal Highness
The Commander in thief,
, .
HARRY CALVERT, Adj.-Gen. .

. ,
-1 commaniling Meer of • -- do hereby
require and birder you -,to reze'Ae into your custody, and to
l(ep in confinement for the space of (here insert the period),
(here insert the name of the prisoner), of the
:Regiment, pursuant to the Sentence of a Court Martial held
at a Copy of .which sentence is hereunto
, .

' .
• annexed. . .
An authentic description of the Prisoner, extracted from
the Regimental Description RookP is also annexed.
To

The Gitoler or Keeper of

COURT MARTIAL.

(COPY.)
Head-Tim-tees, Halifax, June 10, 1812,

GENERIAL ORDERS.
At a General Court-Martial, held at Halifax,
Nova Scotia, on the 27th of May, 1812, and con-
tinued by adjournments to the Bth of June, Cap-
tain George Shore, commanding a detachment of
the 104th -.Regiment, `stationed at Charlotte Town,
Prirrce Edward Island, was arraigned. upon eight
separate charges, exhibited against him by order
of his Excellency Joseph Frederick Wallet Des
Ilarres, Colonel in the Army, and Lieutenant-
GOvernor, commanding -his Majesty's Forces in
the said Island.

The First Charge was=-For having removed a sentry from
the important post of George's Battery, and from the Maga-
zine, in direct dhtobedience of orders.
- The Second Charge—For disobedience of orders, in allow-
ing, men or hit deti,oment to work for inhabitants,. &c•
The Third Cha-.l7:—For having absolutely disobeyed a gar-
rison order.
The Fourth Charge—FOr having made false. reports to the
Lieutenant-Governor.
The 'Fifth having framed a statement of his
men's complaints made to him, rad for' having forwarded it
to his Commanding Officer, containing a wild fabrication of
mischievous faliehoods and vile perversions, relative to pro-
ceedings wickedly represented by the said" Captain Shore, and
preposterously pretended to have taken place in Prince Ed-
ward Island, te.:c.
The Sixth Charge=--That Cd'etain Shore did, in his state-
ment, make use of sundry expressions, tending to.Ofarne the
character of the Lieutenant-Onveruot, &c.
The Seventh Charge—That Captain Shore did exhibit a
contumelious disposition, to frustrate the objects of an in-
vestigation, directed to be made by the lieutenant-Gover-
zior, &c.
The Eighth Charge—That Captain Shore did evince his
propensity to'diSseininate and foster the seeds of a dangerous
spirit, of insubordination and ninthly; and that the said Cap-
tain S. did treat the Lictitenant-(iovernor's letters written to
him, with contumelious scurrility, &c.
'All which conduct on the part of the said Cap-
tain Shore tending to excite a spirit of mutiny
and insubordination among the troops in this gar-
rison, being unjustifiable td his character as an
Officer, greatly injurious and derogatory td the
honour, dignity, and welfare of his Majesty's ser-
vice, prejudicial to good order and milimry disci-
plinf, and contrary to the Articles of War.
The Court Martial, after the most attentive con-
:.i,l.rotion of the evidence applicable to the charges
exhibited against Captain George Shore, of the
104th regiment, together with the prisoner's de-
fence, and evidence adduced in support thereof, is
of opinion, that—He is not guilty of the first
charge.
On the second charge, the Court is of opiniii,
that the Prisoner did disobey the Garrison Order
of 9th July, 1809, but as that Garrison Order :s
founded on a General Order, which does not exist,
and as the prisoner did 'moreover receive instrue-;
tions from the Head-quarters of his Regiment,
which appeared to him fully to authorise his-al-
lowing men to work -; and further, as it has not
been shown ,that he wantonly encouraged, or
that the irregularities did take place as expressed
in this charge, the Court does, thefefore, acquit
•
it is .further of opinion, on the third,4, fourth,
fifth; sixth, seventh, and eighth charges, he is not
guilty.
The Court does, therefore, most fully and ho-
nourably acquit the said Captain George Shore;
of the 104th Regiment, of all and each of the
.charges exhibited against him.
The Lieutenant-General Commanding is pleas!
ed to approve of the • above sentence, and to
direct , the Deputy Adjutant-General to rnalce
known the same to the prisoner, Captain George
shore, of the 104th Regiment; who is then town.'
• eider himself as released from his arrest.
(Signed) A. PILKINGTON.
Dep. Adjt.-General.

LAW IMPORT.

COURT OX CHANCERY, Aug. G.

STEWART, IN THE MATTEr. OF BRYANT, A

BANKRUPT.

Sir ARTHUR PIG OTT stated, that this was a Pe-
tition to his Lordship that he would order.the pe-
titioner hi,3 costs, on an issue directed by that
Court to be tried in the Court of King's Bench,
under the following circumstances :—The peti,
tioner was the Assignee of the Bankrupt, and the
question at issue was, to.try whether the Bank-
rupt had been legally made one,
.as the petition-
ing Creditta had sworn-to a simple debt, at the
same time he had an execution out against the
Bankrupt.
The Court and Jury were of opinion, as an ex-
ecution had been taken out, the petitioning Cre-
ditor had not a right to swear to a simple con-
tract debt. _

The LORD CHANCELLOR thought the Assignee
entitled to his 'costs, therefore ordered the taxed
costs, ninety-five pounds, should be paid to the
Petitioner. ,

His Lordship sat until ten o'clock at night.

NORWICH ASSIZES.

On Monday se'nnight Sir tames Mansfield and
Mr. Justice Heath arrived at Norwich, before
whom the commission for holding the Assizes.
were opened at the. Shire-house and Guildhall.

MARIA GONVAD V. JOHN BUCKENHAM.

This was an action in consequence of the de-.
fenaant having, after a promise of marriage to
the plaintiff, made default therein, and married.
another woman. The evidence on the part-Of the
plaintiff established the courtship between the
parties, and it appeared that even that part .of the.
previous ceremony, the hairs, had been .published
at the parish church of Lakenhain, iitit the parties
not residing there, it was considered irregular, aid
the defendant alleged his intention 'of naarryilg.
her by license. 'the subsequent marriage of the
defendant at Besthorpe, with Sophia Liminer, be 7
ing proved, as also various other acts necessary
to 'establish the ground of action, the Jury gave
a verdict fOr the plaintiff, With COI. damages.

TJPCIIE,R V. BATS.

_ .
The plaintiif is a wealthy gentleman, residing
at Toinpson, in this county, and the defendant . a
farmer in the neighbourhood. The action was
brought to recover damages the loss of a grey-
hound of the plaintiff's named Plantagenet,whose
death the defendant had occasioned.. It was
proved, that on the 26th-of 'November 'last, the
defendant's dog was attacked` by several of the
plaintiff 's, and that . the defendant stoned them
in defence of his own ; but it likewise appeared
that ha.vingssucceeded in dispersing the plaintiff's
dogs, and after his dog had run away, the de-
fendant threw a large stone at the greyhound
in question, and broke his leg, so that he Was
rendered useless, and was killed on account of his
fufferings. The intrinsic value of the deceased
Plantagenet was proved to be 20 guineas.---Ver-
dict for plaintiff, damages 40s.

LOOSE V. COYEMAN.

This action was commenced to obtain damages
goßtained by the plaintiff, who is a farmer at Field-
(falling, through the loss of service, from the se-
duction of his daughter On the part of the plain-
tiff, nothing appeared to exaggerate this case, or
throw any culpability- upon the Defendant, who
is the son of a respectable farmer in the same town.
But from the evidence of the Ministcr.of the pa-
rish, it evidently placed him in the situation of
being desirotA to make her an ample compensa-
tion.by marriage, and the only obstacle which ap-
pears to have been in the way, was the rigid in-
flexibility of theplaintiff. It however being proved
that .16ss of service was incurred, with other ex-
penses' necessarily attending these cases, the Jury
founka verdict for-the plaintiff, damages 201.

At the 16t Assizes., for the county of Deyon, a
cause was tried, .in which Ann Braund and Tho-
mas- Braund, Executors of William Braund, de-
ceased), were plaintiffs, and Arthur Kelly, jun.
Richard Eastcott, and. John Holman Lang,' the
partners of the late Tamar Bank, at Launceeto-n,
were defendants. The action was brought by the
executors, for recovery of the sum of 1501. and in-
terest, secured by a promissory note, dated the
21st of March, 1810, entered into by -Mr.
Benedictus Marwood Kelly, attorney-at-law, of,
Holsworthy, as agent to the defendants, which
note was payable 21 days after sight, to William
Braund or order, .with interest at the rate of three
per cent. per annum, to the day of acceptance ; if
left one year, to pa'y three and a half per cent. The
plaintiff's counsel having proved their case, the
counsel for the defendants called, as witnesses, Mr.
Kelly, the agent, and Miss Juliana. Kelly, his\
daughter, and the account which they gave, was,
that about a month or six weeks after the promis-
sory note was entered into, William Braund, the
testator, applied to Mr'. Kelly, the agent, for re-
payment of the money, without bringing the note
with him, or without having previously tendered
it-
,for acceptance, and that Mr. Kelly paid
Braund, the testator, the 1501. all in one pound
Tamar notes,, on Braund's pronlise to burn or des7
troy the promissory note as soon as he got home-t
that the Tamar notes were counted four times,
but no receipt or memorandum was signed by
Braund for the money, and that,'his pocket-book
not being large enough to hold the Tamar notes,
Braund tied them in his pocket-handkerchief, and
his pocket, wherein the handkerchief was put, was
afterwardis pinned.with three pins, by lips Juliana
Kelly. After some deliberation, the Jury return-
ed a verdict for the defendants. _ _