The Sun.
London, England, 1823-11-17 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
COURT OF ICITS740'81""----BENCH, Nov. id.
THE ETNG v, SEOROE niatar.rY.
This was a conviction on the 23 Geo: M. alpinist the de.
fendant, fot knowingly harbouring and concealing rispeciiied
quantity of gin, being run spirits.
Mr. PLATT now contended that the conviction should be
quashed, inasmuch as the evidence set forth was palpably in-
sufficient to sustain the charge. The statement was, that the
officer, going to the house, saw the defendant's wife and a Dr.
Milling, who left the room when he entered it, and that on
Searching he found a vessel, call: d a half anker, 'in which were
two gallons and two quarts of foreign oxeye. ft did not ap-
pear that the defendant was near the premise, or that the
spirits had been conveyed thither with his privity so that there
was no proof that he knew they were deposited in his house,
eveh if they were smuggled,. not was there anti proof, that they
were illegally imported. It WIN true.that the liquor could not
legally be imported in the vessel called a half anker ; but the
mere fact of its being found in such a vessel was nut even evi.
denco to go to a jury.
The Stip ty or

Wpt Al

..,ticc! wispluTsustentrantotransWet' 011ie elate; had not 'te '
liQ on tither of these arguMents, but bad asserted that the
room where the spirits were found was detached froni his house,
which proved to be untrue i and argued that there was a 'suffi-
cient primd fheic case to justify the Magistrate in convicting.
Mr. PLATT, in reply, argued that as to Jury could have
found a verdict of guilty on such evidence, a Magistrate, who
was both Jury and Judge, ought not to have held it conclusive.
The COI/HT held that the evidence was not sufficient to sup-
port the conclusion that the defendant knew there was smug-
gled gin on his premises, though they thought the circumstance
of the half anker was presumptive proof that the gin was ilk-
gaily imported. They ordered the conviction to be quashed.
THE KING V. THOMAS JAMES.
Arr.-C. F. Mt. t. TAM moved for a rule to show cause why
the indictment found against the defendant for perjury should
not be quashed, for want of the addition of residence and de-
gree or trade required by the statute:of additions. The Learn-
ed Counsel contended, on the authority of Mr. Justice Buller,
that though an erroneous addition is ground only tbr plea in
abatement, the want of addition is sufficient cause for quash-
ing the indictment.
The COURT granted a rule to shoW cause.
The Judges rose at half-past one to sit in the Exchequer,.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Nov. 15.
BENNET V. THU H.TELL.
We noticed, that on" the motion of Mr. Serjeant Pitt.r., a
rule (made peremptory for this day) was granted to show Mtge
why Mr. Green, the bail in this action, should not have fur.
ther time for rendering the defenaant, or the time for justifying
enlarged.
Mr. Serjeant TABBY this morning appeared for the plaintiff;
not, he observed, to show cause against the rule, but to state
he was instructed to give consent that the bail should.have a
week's further time.
The CoonT observed, that" this would be insufficient, for at
the expiration of a week it would be necessary to make another
application. It was then ordered that the time should be en-
larged till the.- 4th day of next Term, when the bail must
come again before the Court for such further relief as circum.
stances may require. Ile was also ordered to pay the costs of
this application. I

111/CKNELL v. TiltywrEta,.
Mr. Serjeant PELL, stated, that he had- an Application to
make in this rase, similar to that on which the Court had just
decided. Mr. Green, the bail in the last action, was also bail,
in the present, for a debt of 311/. The Learned Serjeant now
applied on his behalf for a rule to show cause why further time
for rendering the defendant should not be allowed
granted.

ARCHES' COURT, Nov. 15.
LADY TtIRWER AGAINST ant GREGORY PAGArsivloileit,
BART.
Dr. LIJSRINGTOX rose to move the Court to admit the libel
in this case. On the third session of Trinity Term last, the
Proctor for Lady Turner returned a certificate Into Court, stat-
ing that it had been impossible personally to serve Sir G. P.
Turner with' any process. Since that time the matter had stood
over, without coming to an issue. Now the Court must see,
that if the admission of this libel was any tertherpostponed, the
Counsel for her Ladyship would ant be able to apply, during
this Term, for any allotment of alimony.
(It was stated by the proctors of the parties, that the reason
why the case was not yet before Counsel on the part of Sir (ire.
gary was. that he had lately changed his solicitor and proctor,
and there had not been• sufficient time to allow of the necessary
communications.)
Dr. Luau' elerseer begged to state, that -the libel stood on
admission the last day of the last term. lint there were other ,
reasons why the cause ought to be invaded with : Lady Tur-
ner was, in the meantime, left wholly destitute.
The Couitr said, if a'party did not choose, in a criminal
suit, to furnish his professional advieent wish instructions in I
due time, he Must take the consequence of his neglect. The I
Court wotild hear the libel read.
Dr. DoDSOir 'read the' libel, which' consisted of several are
ticles ; and was, as we reflected it, to the folloWing effect et--
Ist. That in the month of March, 1818, Sir Gregory Ove
borne Page Turner, Baronet, being a bachelor, &c., paid
his addressee, in the way of marriage, to Helen Eliza
Page Turner (then Helen Eliza Page, spinster) ; and they
were, on the '2Bth of -April, 1818, lawfully married et the
church of St. George this Martyr; Illoomsbery. 2d, This ar-
tide pleaded the usual exhibits in supply of proof.' 3d, That
durirt the summer of 1818, they resided (principally at their
house in Portman-square; and in that end the following mum-
mer had two children, one of whom only survives; and that
the said Sir Gregory and Lady Page Turner continued to en.
I habit together as man and wife until the month of June, 1121 ;
since which time they have lived separate and apart, • in ecinse.
(pence of the cruelty with which Sir Gregory has treated
his Lady. 4th, That in the month of November, 1819, the
behaviour of Sir Gregory to.w arils his Lady became quite
changed from what it had been ; for while he expended
large sums on costly purchases, and in the indulgence of his
own Inclinations, he totally dented her the necessary supplies for
the expence of housekeeping, &c. l• and used to abuse her, and
call her by the most opprobrious names. .sth, That one slay,
when the said Lady Turner was seven months advanced in her
pregnancy, the said (Sir Gregory Page Turner, without any
extinct flew into a passion, and strut k her over the neck and
face violently. 6th, That shortly after her confineMent in the
month of Jan. 1020, Sir Gregor): refused to pay even the ex-
peaces by such conflneMent, &e., incurred; theton one evening,
happening in the mime month of Jan. 1120, the mother of Lady
Turner, in the mildest manner, requested Sir tiregary P. Tur-
ner to advance her daughter some part of the monies necessary
to her subsistence, and the keeping of her household ; where-
upon he with much force struck the mother of his wife, said Lady
Turner. The remaining articlee set forth that in August,
1828, Sir Gregory went down to his country seat, leaving Lady
Turner without any pecuniary means whatever t that an cu.
cution was, in consequence, put into the house, and that in
the meanwhile Sir G. P. Turner continued to indtilge his
habit of making expensive purchases. That one evening in
January, 1821, Sir Gregory having in the morning laid out a
very large sum in one of these transactions, Lady Turner's
mother, in the most gentle way, took an opportunity of con-
trasting the costliness of the price he had so paid with the
little means which he refused to his lady ; whereupon she was
so rudely struck by him, and so much was Lady Turner ter..
rifled by this violence, that she miscarried with the child of
IwBh2r, Sirslle Owrasegr o theny
end hie lady continued to reside in Baker, pregnant; that down to the month of June,
street together ; but after that time he left her destitute
of all monies, even to defray the charges of her confine-
ment, so that she was obliged to borrow :sums at interest ;
that in December of the some year Sir Gregory returned
to town, but not to the house of his lady, to whom he
refused to communicate his place of residence ; and that he
has, down to the month of July, 1822, entirely neglected
her ladyship, never calling at her residence but fora few mi.
antes .only in the morning; and even when she was near her
confinement he returned down into the country that an exe..
cotton was put into the house in Baker-street for arrears of
rent due ; that though Sir. Gregory Turner was informed of
the circumstance, he ware(' the execution to continue till het,
ladyship's time of confinement was just at hand; she wart
extremely terrified with the preOnce in 11".1'6'"e" the °ffi-
eers ; that in January, in e, Lady Turner was delivered of o.
male child,
and a letter was dispatched, ennonneing the event
to him, and addressed to hint et his country *eal-
; that. Sir
Gregory, however, made no inquiries in consequence, arid"
did not even answer the letter, notwithstantiing the birth of