The Sun.
London, England, 1823-05-28 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF CHANCERY, MAY 22,
COROT V. NEDIRLIE AND OTHERS.
Mr. HART mentioned this case, in which a motion had been
made before the Vice-Chancellor, for an injunction to restain
the defendants, the Managers of Covent-garden Theatre, upon
a bill alleging various acts of waste. At the same time, a de-
murrer had been filed 'to the bill for want of parties. Some
doubts having arisen whether the demurrer should be heard pre-
vious to the motion or after it, the case came before his Lord-
ship by way of appeal, and now waited for his decision.
The LORD CHANCELLOR thought he could trust himself to
decide upon both the questions at once, and he therefore direct-
ed that both cases should come on together on Thursday next.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, MAY 27.
7'llE RING V. WILLIAM SMITH.
'!'leis was an indictment for wilful and corrupt perjury as-
signed upon certain articles of the peace exhibited by the de-
fendant against a young man, named William Poile, the pro-
secutor, for fear of his life. The articles stated, amongst other
circumstances, that a young woman, named Eliza Poile, who bad
married the prosecutor, was his (the defendant's) own natural
daughter, and that she had represented to him, which he verily
believed to be true, that she had been obliged to leave her
husband in consequence of his ill usage and violence ;
whereas, in truth, and in fact, as the indictment alleged,
the said Eliza Poile was not the defendant's natural daughter,
and whereas in truth and in fact, she had not left the pro-
secutor in consequence of his ill usage and violence towards
her. The defendantpleaded not guilty. The articles in ques-
tion had been exhibited by the defendant against the prose-
cutor, in consequence of the latter snapping a istol at him.
The prosecution was conducted by the SOLIp
CITOR-GENE-
RAL, Mr. PLATT, and Mr. C. PHILLIPS ; and the defence
by Mr. SCARLETT and Mr. ADOLPHUS.
The case excited some interest, and occupied a considerable
portion of time. The defendant, now upwards of 73 years of
age, was a man of considerable substance, residing in Boord-
man-place, Edgware-road. Some years since he had been in-
timate with a married woman, and it was supposed that the
fruit of the intercourse was a female child, whom he took under
his protection, brought her up, suffered her to go by his name,
and treated her in every respect as his own daughter. Being
arrived at the age of 18, and being himself about to marry, he
was anxious to provide for the girl. in some other way, and he
accordingly apprenticed her to the business of a milliner. She
was placed under the care of a Mr. and Mrs. Gurney, and
whilst under their roof she formed a clandestine acquaintance
with an officer in the army, by whom she was seduced, and'
was afterwards delivered of a boy ; she kept her situation
a perfect secret until the birth of the child disclosed her Mis-
fortune. The defendant then took her again under his
own roof, determining that she should remain with him until
the end of his life. Whilst in this situation, the prosecutor,
Mr. W. Poile, found means of getting introduced to her; he
made a formal declaration of love, and offered her his hand in
marriage. She acquainted him fully with her situation, and
the unfortunate lapse into which she had fallen. This intelli.
gence, however, did not abate the ardour of his passion ; he
continued his addresses, and they were ultimately married. The
prosecutor went into partnership with Mr. Stonestreet, in the
business of a pawnbroker. The defendant advanced him money
from time to time, to the amount of 5001. He made further
demands upon the defendant, on the plea that money was wanted
for his business. Ile offered to deposit with the defendant plate
and jewels by way of security, and also, the joint warrant of
attorney of himself and partner. In all, the defendant ad.
vanced him 1,01)01. It was stated, that the defendant treated
the prosecutor with great kindness and indulgence. The pro-
secutor addressed him constantly by the name of father, and
always treated and spoke of him as the father of his wife. In
process of time, however, the prosecutor began to treat his
wife with great cruelty and unkindness, and it became neces.
sary to institute proceedings in Doctors' Commons for a di.
vorce. They were ultimately separated. The occasion which
led to the exhibition of the articles of the peace above-men-
tioned, was the prosecutor's going one day to the defendant's
house, presenting a pistol, snapping it at him, and behaving
cfoaiumnedgeetdoey vidlence. In consequence of his demeanour on that occasion, the defendant filed the articlee, in which he made the
statements upon which the present indictment for perjury was
Mr. Poile, the prosecutor, deposed, that soon after his wife
live with him,' she became extravagant, and he WAS unable to support her. She left him on two or three occasions,
and lee always found her afterwards in lodgings provided by
the defendant, her father. Thedefendant had induced his wife
to leave him, and live with him (the defendant). He after.
wards discovered that his wife lived with the defendant as
his mistress. Shocked at such disgraceful conduct, he
withdrew the jewels and plate, which he had deposited
with the defendant, by way of security for the money
he had advanced, thinking, after such conduct, the pro-
perty would not be safe. It was in consequence of this hor.
rible conduct that he had gone to the defendaneshouse, with the
pistol, on the occasion in question. He had always understood
that a Captain Godfrey was the father of his (witness's) wife.
He positively denied that he had ever used his wife ill. She
had thrown a flat iron at him, and he had on that occasion
seized her by the anus to prevent her doing him any mischief.
'!'his was the only occasion on which he had used violence.
On the part of the defendant, the improbability of .the tale
told of the defendant was urged, and a great number of the
prosecutor's letters were put in, addressed to the defendant, in
which throughout, lie described his wife as being die defend-
ant's daughter,—spoke of him as the kindest and most indul-
gent of fathers, and acknowledged the obligations he was under,
for pecuniary assistance.
l'ivo witnesses were called, who proved distinctly that the
prosecutor had frequently beaten his wife, and abused her in
terms the most offensive.
The Sotact TOR-GENERAL declined proceeding further.
The LORD Cuter JUSTICE told the Jury, that there was
certainly no proof direct that Mrs. Poile was the dedefendant'`natural daughter, but lie had always treated her as his duld—
jsillimetilfiyadgeassisteattleamsesnutcwh
hiinchtltileleaAdn,daannctild;iit
mw.aadsesidnffitchieenartt
to
i.
des of the peace. The other assignment of perjury seemed to
have been clearly answered by the proof that the prosecutor had
n fact ill-used his wife.

The Jury immediately round the defendant Not Guilty.