The Sun.
London, England, 1802-11-15 00:00:00

CORN EXCHANGE, Nov. is..

Tint supply of Wheat to-day is but scanty ; in
the morning it appeared to incline upwards, but
afterwards gave way ; there is a good supply of
Barley, but from the great demand it sells higher ; as
does Malt ; Pease are lower, and Beans of both
sorts are rather dearer; we have many Oats at Mar-
ket, and those of middling quality are at some-
what less prices ; the sale of Flour is brisk.

Wheat 45s a 52s .a 58s od Tick Beans . 31s a'34s 6d
Fine ditto -59 s a 6os od Oats - 14$ a as a'235 od
Barley -25 S a 33$ od Poland ditto :245, a 25. s cd
Malt - .. 44$ a 48s 6d Rapc Seed „ 321 4.141 per la;:t
Rye - -33 s a ;6s od Fine Flour - 41t5 a 5°5 ed
White Pease 45s a 5.)3 od Scconddo. - VS a 455 cs'ci
Beans - 33$ a 35$ cd

On Tuesday last was married, the Rev. WIL-
LIAM PoCHIN, of Emmanuel College, Cambridge,
to Miss GREEN, Daughter of EDW ARE? GREEN,
Esq. of Lawfud I lall, Essex.

tiL:7 THE ATRk.

Ccvmt-Carayert.

tllc Comedy of
..Delsys aka ender:,lTh much
more compaCt than on its original appearance, and
followed on
Saturday last by iew gerimis Drama of Two
entitled A Tale of 11,0 ;Yr'

CIIARACTt RS.
Bonamo Mr. MURRAY,
Romaldi, - - - Mr, oNS r 614,
Francisco, - - - Mr. Fakery,
Stephan°, - - - Mr. Bit uN r
Malvolio; - - - Mr. Cox a,
Michelle, - - - Mr. BL ANC HAR D,
Selina, - Mrs. Grnus, '
Francella - - Mrs. MAT eocies.
. , •
• The.Seene,lies at a Yillage in Savoy. A person named
Francisco has been received into the house of Bonamo, who,
knowing nothing of his story, is not .disposed to harbrithehith
any longer. Francisco had been deprived of his tongtie, but
was able to deliver his thoughts in writing. Francella, Bo-
namo's old female servant; lied fonnd Francisco about eight
years before the opening of the Piece; ih an expiring state;
mangled by ruffians, and by. the assistance ot Michelle a
neighbouring Miller, the wretched man was preserved. Bo-
namo heating this account, and persuaded by hiS son and
the rest of hip family, resolves to continue his protedion to
Francisco. Count Romaldi, at this time, arrives, for the
purpose of concluding a marriage between his son and Se-
lina, the supposed niece of Bonamo, to which Bonamo as-
cents, though he knows that his son Stephano and Selina are
devoted to each other: Rornaldi starts on seeing Francisco,
who discovers equal emotion; and hurries away. Romaldi
is soon joined by his servant Malvolio; and as they know
that Francisco is to sleep in Bonamo's hottee, they resolve,
in the dead of night, to kill him. Selina overhears the wicked
design, and givCs information to Francisco. The assassins
approach, but Francisco, who is prepared with pistols, for
some time prevents them froth executing their purpose. At
length, under a persuasion that be has too much humanity
to fire, they rush upon him ; but the screams of Selina, who
has been Lifson the watch; bring all the flintily into the room,
and Francisco is preserved. Bonamo's suspicions are then
so strongly roused against Romaldi, that he resolves to break
off the Intended marriage, and to give Selina to his son Ste-
phano. Romaldi departs in anger, declaring that unless
Bonamo alters his mind' before ten o'clock the following
morning, he shall repent. Bonamo daspiseS this threat, a
rural fire takes place, and the lovers are on the point of being
married, when at the appointed time a lettereomes from Ro-
maldi, affirming that Selina is the daughter of Francisco, and
annexing a certificate of her birth, in procf Of the assertion.
Francisco is then considered by &Ammo as a wretch who had
profaned the bed of his, Bonamo's, deceased brother. Fran-
cisco and Schwa are then discarded. Stephano resolves to
follow them, but is confined by his father. A benevolent
Lawyer in the neighbourhood confirms the account that
Selina is the daughter of Francisco, but proves that she is
the °Miming of a Secret marriage, and that she is obtruded
on Bonarno, as his niece, by the artifice of Romaldi. It
appears that Romaldi is the brother of Francisco, sod that he
contrived to get the latter into the hands or the A 'mines, and
when he escaped, by the assistance of Malvolio, way-laid
hint, cut out his tongue, and lett him, as they supposed,
dead. "Cheery is now up against Romaldi and Maivolio,
and the officers of justice pursue them and take the latter.
Rornaldi hies to the very spot where lie and his accomplice
had committed their horrid butchery on Francisco. The ho-
nest Miller who protected Francisco, allinds a refuge to Ro-
maldi, out afterwards perceiving the scar on his right hand, one
of the signs by which his person was described, suspects him.
Romaldi, however, induces the honest Miller to voted him, •
rather than involve one who may be innocent, in danger. At
length, Francisco and Selina arrive at the same spot, and the
horror they discover at the sight cif Romaldie induces the
Miller to run for the Officers of justice. In the mean time,
Romaldi offers his pistol to Francisco, that he may revenge
himself for all the injuries he has suffered. Francisco, who
had remained in concealment rather than impeach his bro-
ther, throws away the pistol. Romaldi then attempts to
escape, but is taken by the Soldiers, not before he had killed
one of them. Bonamo, and the rest oft he Charaders assem-
ble on the spot; and as Rornaldi seems to repent of his vil-
lainies, the Piece concludes with the restoration of Stephano
and Sei ins to each other, and the avowal of an intended ap-
plication for Mercy in behalf of Rornaldi.

The Plot is not cleatly developed in the course
of this Drama, but we have given such a general
outline of it as we were able to collel.
It v.orrip-rellenth a strong interest on the whole,
though it is very improbable. After the hor-
rible mangling which Francisco has suffered, what-
ever may be the mildness of his nature, it is not to
be stappbsed that he would wander in disguise and
beggary, rather than reveal himself, which he might
easily have done, and yet have kept the
:secret,
without exposing his brother to danger.
It is also not to he conceived that IL/wild; would
still pursue his brother with unrelenting barbarity,
as he knew, the latter, though deprived of his
tongue, 'could unfold his history by writing. Nor'.
is so shocking. a deprivation the proper subjet of
dramatic composition.
However, the piece is worked up in such a man-
ner as to rivet the feelings of the Audience, and the
interest is sustained to the conclusion.

There was one gross absurdity:—the Soldiers who
are in pursuit of Roma/di, see a man of suspicious
appearance, and full of perturbation, in company
with the Miller, and yet they never once notice
him, though,, for aught they knew, he was the ob-
je& of whom. they were in search.

Romaldi should not be made guilty of killing one
of the Soldiers, as such an event tends to defeat the
hope of that mercy for which application is to be
made.

This piece was, in some parts, accompanied by
Music, but, except in the Dance, the experiment
did not succeed. Indeed the " light quirks of mu.
sic" which were introduced during Soliloquies,
or to accompany the silent expressions of Francisco,
rather disturbed the mind, and prevented a proper
sympathy. The Music indicated Science rather than
.Taste.—lt seems to be a combination of an An-
them and a Hornpipe.
The acing was uniformly excellent. H. Jonti-
sTorr displayed a force and determined wickedness
in Romuldi quite charaficristic ; but he appeared
much too juvenile for a man who was supposed to
have a Son old enough to be married.
PARLEY was very expressive and afrMing in his
Dion6-shew. His dress, however, might be im.
proved, and his appearance be rendered somewhat
more interesting.
_ _

Mrs. MATTOCKS deserves high praise for the
feeling, as well as humour, which she displayed in
Ft'ancella ; and Mrs. Gin as strongly appealed to
the feelings in &line'.
Little BYRNE danced himself into the favour of
the Audience, by his grace, ability, and expresion.
This Melo-Drame, as the piece is oddly called,
is brought forward with verrheautiful Scenery, and
was very well received by a crowded Audience.

Mrs.loßDAN'und Mrs. PowELL, much to their
honour, were peculiarly attentive to the new Hamlet
on Friday night, and endeavoured very anxiously
to assist him in managing the business of the stage.
Such condua is so different from what new perform-
ers generally experience behind the scenes, that it
deserves a commendatory notice.
TA I, MA) the French A&or, and Madame TAL-
stA, have quitted Brussels, after playing there
twelve nights..

REPORI.

CC•URT OF I,..Hi,`;'s BENCH, SA.TURD AY, Nov.

ELWES R!. MAWES.

Mrs war a case which was argued yeaterday ny.
Mr. Serjeant I;a:ll6H:it', for the atintift, and Mr.
BALGUv, for the Defendant., It was an art on fur
Waste. The. Defendant had rented a fitrin of lha
Plaintiff, for a term of years. The IlltAetalan,
erected, at his Own expence, a beast hoUse, a car;
penter's shop inclosed, and other buildings, on a
brick l'oundation in the ground. Before the expi-
ration of the term of his lease, the Defendant dug
up the foundation of such bnilding, and carried,
away the materials, leaving the itlace on which
they stood in the same condition as he found it. It
was also stated in the case, that these ereCtions made
by the Defendant, were eiedions tiessary for the
purpose of improving the profits of
.his
This action was turned into a special case, 2nd wasp
argued upon the fads, of which the above is t-lic
substance, and the cidestion was,.“ whether the De-,
-fendant had, of had not a right to take away, be..
fore theend ofhis term; ereatons made i" If he had;
no action would lie; and therefore be would be ao, •
titled to jddgmenr ; if he had not, judgment should
be given for the Plaintiff.
Mr. Set-leant VAttagiat Contended on behalf of
the Plaintiff, that the Defend-int had no right to
remove any thing that was afriaed to the Ftezaiold,
for that there ti'as no ease to warrant his so doing,
in any thing that belonged solely to " Agriculture."
That the• distineion was,. where certain eredions
were made by dyers, bakers, and other persons in
trade, for the purposes of trade-,..they had been
permitted• to remove them, provided they left the
premises in the satrie state as they found them
So again, some permissitn of the same kind had
been held right in cases that are of a mixed kind;
that is, partly of farming and partly of trading bua
siness, such as the erett:on of a cyder mill, &c,:
but that there was no instance, or any case in the
books, in which ant eredibn fastened to the ground,
for merely agricultural purposes; had been permit;
ted to be removed ; and that therefore this wa.
Waste in the Defendant in this case.

Mr. BALGur, on the part of the Defendant.
admitted, that if this case had been to be decided
two hundred years ago, judgment might be expel ed
to be pronounced fbr the Plaintiff, hut the rigid
tule-in favour of Landlords, he said, had been much
relaxed in modern days in favour of trade, and for
the encouragement of industry. He rhaintained
this proposition, " That evherever a building is
ereded by the tenant for the immediate purposes of
his trade, or the improving the profits of his farm,
he may remove it, provided he leaves the premises
in as good a condition as he found theffl."
Lord ELLENBOROUGH, this day, delivered the
judgment of the Court, and commenced with say_
ing,l the Court was unanimously of opinion the
Defendant had no right to take away the ereftions
made upon this farm. His Lordship stated three classes
of persons to whom questions of this kind applied.
First, as between Executor and Heir-at-law, in which
the rule, in favour of inheritance, had been uniformly
rigid. The second was between a Tenant for life, or
a term of years, 'and the Reversioner, or Remaindcr"
man, in which the rule had been a little relaxed
The third was the case between Landlord and
Tenam, which was the case in question, and irk
which the greatest relaxation from the rigid rule in
favout of the Landlord, had been allowed, in favour
of trade, and for the encouragement of industry.
Here his Lordship recited all the cases from the
loth of lien. VII., .when the distindion was first
taken in favour of trade, down to the latest period,
that of a Nisi Prius determination of my Lord
KrNYON, of De,an and Mierby ; and then made ob-
servarions upon the whole tenor of sueb.decisions,
which was, that the relaxation of the principle in
favour of the 'Landlord (that whatever was fixed
to the freehold belonged to the inheritance) had
never extended to erections made for the purposes
of Agriculture only. All the cases went only to
spew, that exceptions to the rule were to he found.
in instances in favour of trade, as that of Dyers,
Bakers, &c. or of mixed cases, made up of ttasit
and agriculture united ; such as a cyder mill, which
was partly for trader. and partly for the improve-.
ment of the profits of the farm; but that in. the
case of any building crederi for the purposes of
Agriculture alone, the rule, that whatever was fixed
to the freehold, belonged to the Landlord, was
without exception. This, his Lordship said, was-
a general legal principle, of which, he believed,
no considerable doubt was entertained on either
side of Westminster-Hall; and to overturn which,
would be a great innovation in the law of the land ;
for these reasons, the Court were of opinion, the
Defendant, in this case, had no right to remove
these eredions, and therefore the Court was bound
to pronounce judgment for the Plaintiff.

Mr. GAR Row moved the Judgment of the Court
upon George Gibbons.
The Defendant was brought into Court, when it
appeared by Affidavits, that the Defendant was the
Printer of a Hand-bill, accusing Mr. Shnttleworth,
Captain of the Ship Hercules, with the wilful mut.
der of a boy he had on board, of the name of Wm.
Archer, accusing Mr. Shuttleworth of great cruelty,
and taking notice of the case of Governor Wall,
which was stated to resemble this; and accusing
the higher classes of society with greater cruelty
towards the lower, than brutes chew to each other,
and insisting on the necessity of a severe example,
in order to make men of this description remember,
that they should treat those who were under them,
with humanity, (See. all for .the purpose, or, at
least, producing the of t% of enraging the Populace
against Mr. Shuttieworfh, and which might have
endangered his life, hod he been in the streets
where these Hand-bills were distributed, particu-
larly about Wapping, where they were bought
with great avidity by Sailors, and such like per.
sons.

It appeared that the Defendmit was a Printer,
living at thocorner of Great St. Andrew's-street,
St. Giles's, and was the Publisher of this Libel,
that several persons bought Copies of it of him, and
asked him who the Author was ; whom he refused
to name, and behaved with rudeness to those who
inquired, shewing them a Copy of the Commit-
ment of Mr. Sbuttleworth to Newgate, to take his

. ,
trial for this charge (for he was committed on the
oath of, Mary Archer, and others), and saying,
they had better not stir in the matter, for the more
they stirred, the worse it would be, Bc. &c.
- Mr. Shuttleworth being th 6 committed to New.
gate upon this charge, took his trial at the Old
Bailey at the Admiralty Session last Autumn, when
the accusation appeared to be unfounded,-and Mr.
*Shuttleworth was' acquitted by the direaion of my
Lord A LVANL EV, before whom he was tried.,
Mr.-EasKiNE on the part of the Defendant said,
that he had an•affidavit intended to be offered in
mitigation, but which contained matter which was.
not fit- to be stated in that Court, as well as some
which Was• very Proper, and, therefore, he would
ti,)t lay it before their Lordships—lt contained an
account of the great poverty of the Defendant, his
numerous'fitnily, who must suffer in eonseqUence of
.the judgment of the Court on the Defendant.—Mr.
ERS!CINE said, that no man 'could detest more than
he did, this species of attack upon any man ; it
was impossible to say any thing .in defence of a
man who was guilty' of it, further than roimplore
the Court tb consider the- effect which it must have
on others, and- .that they., would pass on this un-
happy Defendant as, slight a judgment as justice
would admit, in a case.. wherein the innocent must
suffe. with the guilty:
Mr. dAturow addressed the Court at considera-
ble length on the part of the Prosecution, and ani-
madverted with great warmth on the very impro-
per praaice of publishing partial accounts" before
Trial, "or the cases of men who are accused of capital
and other offences, by' which even .Jurymen might
be made to imbibe prejudices which they might not
be aware of at the time of Trial ; a consideration
most alarming in the administration of justice. This
was,a practice which the Court, was called upon, in
its discretio:), to endeavour to repress, of which
there .was no chance unless the punishment was very
severe.

Mr. GuR NE Y.followed -on.the same. side.

The-Defendant
,stated his- poverty, and said he
was beset by creditors, and that he .did what he
could to get money ; that he had. a faMily entirely
depending-upon him for support, that he got into
the trade of a Printer, with very little knowledge
of the business for which he was now before the
Court ; he was .no scholar ; he succeeded a person
of the name of Davenport in this sort of business ;
that when he became apprized properly of the na_
titre of it, he .destroyed the plates he had, and
printed no more such things,, and was resolved to
follow some other course of life, &c.
The Court ordered him to be committed, and
brought up to receive judgment this day se'nnight,

Mr. Gins moved for leave to file a Criminal
Information-against Mr. Charles Bellard (as we
heard the name) for certain letters sent by him to
Mr. Luttrell, a Justice of the Peace for the county
of Devon, some parts of which appeared_ to the
Court to arise out of an Elation squabble, but
some of them rather tending to accuse Mr. Luttrell
of miscondua as a Magistrate, a chara&er in ,which
the Court would prote6t him with its interference.
Rule to shew cause granted.

COURT' OF EXCHEQUER CHAMBER.

NOVEMBER 13.

THE Case of Easterby anti'llPFurlane, late Own-
ers of the brig Adventure, and who were conviEted
at the Admiralty Sessions of procuring the said ves-
sel to be destroyed, in order. to defraud the Under—,j

writers, was brought forward before the twtlve
judges, in consequence of certain points of Law
arising out of it having been reserved for their •de-

cision.

Lord ELL ENBOROUGH, who tried the Prisoners,
stared, :that there were two objections taken by
Counsel : first, that the offence committed by the
Prisoners was one which did not come within the
jurisdiction of the Court that tried them ; secondly,
that the Prisoner Easterby was not an Owner,
within the legal acceptation of .the term. •
Mr. EasKINE, in a speech of considerable length,
argued in support of those two, points. The Court
of Admiralty, before, which the Prisoners were
tried, was, hessaid, a Court that owed its existence
solely to an At of Parliament which specified the
particular offences over which' it had jurisdiction.
But the Court was not competent to try any ex-
c.pt offences so specified. The first statute on the
5 übjea was that of the i Bth of Henry VIII. before
which time offences committed on the high seas
could only be tried according to the Civil Law, or
the Law of Nations. By this Ad the Xing was
empowered to appoint i Special Commission to try
certain crimes committed at sea, which, had they

been committed on land, would be felonies by the
Common Law. The A& did not create any new

offence.; it merely regulated the' mode in which
-piracies, robberies, and murders, committed at sea

should be tried ; and had no statute been passed
since that time' concerning this. Court, tt could
have jurisdiction only over these offences com-
mitted at sea. The next Aa that went to remedy
the inconveniencies of local jurisdklion, was that

of the 3d of Edward VI. Before chat time, if a
man received a blow in one county, and died in
consequence thereof in another county, the mur-
derer could not be tried in either, and he might
escape with impunity. But this statute declared
that he might he tried in one of the counties;
and it also provided for the mode of trying offences
committed partly on land and partly on sea.. Cer-
tain offences of this kind, particularly specified in
the Mt, were to be tried by the Admiralty Court.
Another ACt was- passed in the reign' of• William
M. for the purpose of removing the defeCts of for-
mer Ass. By thiS it was enacted, that all persons
on the land who should be found to be aiding or
assisting pirates, who wilfully and knowingly should
set forth any pirate or pirates, or who should com-
mand or counsel others to aid and assist any pi-
rates; all such persons were to be deekned.accesso_
ries, and their offence was to be inquired into in
the snrie !winner as if they were principals, under
the statue of Edward VI. Thus it would be seen
by what slow degrees the Legislature of the COuntry

I remedied the deeds of the CommOp taw. The
statute of George 11. was next • introduced, to re-
medy other defects, for which the former statutes
had not provided. By this it was enacted, " That
if any Owner, Captain, Master, or Mariner, of
•any ship or vessel, shinild wilfully cast away, or de-
stroy, such ship or vessel ; or direft or procure the
same to be done, in order to prejudice the Under-
writers by whorn it was insured, they should be
deemed felons, and .suffer .death." But thiS
though it created the. offence, did not say in what
Court it•should berried. To obviate this defeCt,
another statute was passed in the Ith of George
11. by which it wa enacted, " That all such per-
sons as above described, who' shall cast away, or
destroy, any such ship or vessel as aforesaid, were •
to be tried by the body of the county in the Ad-
•miralty Court." Here, however, there was a ma-
terial omission; the wordi "procuring or advising"
were not stated in that part of the Act which named
the Court in which the offence was to be tried.
Perhaps the Legislature thought that the parties
concerned in destroying a ship must have been on'
the sea at the time; and never supposed that 'the
ad would be done by the advising and procuring of
persons on shore. This was the case with resped to
Easterby and M‘Farline. Their offence was corn-
, mitted on shore—it consisted in advising and pro-
curing the thing to be done—and there was no Ad
of Parliament which direCted in what Court that
specific once was to be tried. The statute creat.
ed the offence, but forgot to give the Court of Ad-
miralty a jurisdiction over•it.
After dwelling on the above points for ,a mist-
derable time, and quoting various cases and au.
thorities, which Mr. ERSKINE contended were suf-
ficiently strong in favour of both Prioners, he
came to the second objedion, whiCh related to
Easterby only; arid that was, that Easterby could
not, in point of law,. be considered as Owner of
the vessel:or cargo. And this ObjeClionhe ground-
ed on those,ACts of Parliament, commonly called
Lord Hawkesbury's ACts,- by which it was required
that the register of
_every ship should constitute
the only designation of its real owner. The register
of the vessel in question was in the name of M‘Fara
lane only ;_ and whatever property Easterby might
have had in it, the indidment, with respect to him,
was, on account of such register, deledive. He
knew that it was an invidious thing, and that for
which he might be required to make an apology—
to stand up in defence of men :who had Committed
an offence so heinous as that of which the Prisoners
had been convicted.` But he was- then Counsel for
the Law, and not_ for the Prisoners ; and it was
better that the guilty should escape, than that
the law should be overs trained. He still had the-
consolation to think, that if the law should be found
defedive, the Legislature might interfere, and re.
medy the evil by endting a new law. He con-
cluded with praying their Lordships to set aside
the verdiCt given against the Prisoners.
Mr. Serjeant BEST addressed their Lordships on
behalf of M'Farlane, and dwelt on several of the
points allnded'to by Mr. ERSKINE.
Mr. MAR R YATT afterwards delivered a very able
speech in answer to the arguments that had been
urged in behalf of the Prisoners, Contending that the
Admiralty had jurisdiction, and-that sufficient proof
had been adduced of Easterby's ownership.
_ The opinion of the Judges will be announce-dli
the opening of the next Admiralty Sessions.

In the case of Bakegvell, convicted at the Old
Bailey, for taking Bark Notes off a file, in the
Bank of England, and reissuing them, on which
he was referred for the' opinion of the twelve
Judges, on a case, stated, " whether at the time of
committing the offence laid in the indidment, he
was a person entrusted -by the Governor and Com-
pany of the Bank of England with the cyrtody of
the said notes, and .on -some other questions to he
stated ;"

Mr. Justice RooKE this day observed, that the
Report received from the Judge who tried the
cause, (the RECORDER) did not at all specify any
fati or fads elucidating the question of his being a
person so entrusted, and as such he could not but
consider it as defedive, and:not in a state on which
they could found their judgment.
• After a few words from Mr. GARRow, in the
absence of Mr. GILES, who is to argue the point,
the argument was.deferred.

An ingenious Author in a late Publication, has
made the following remark on the National, Debt :
Speaking of it,,in the year 1796, when it anyiunted
to 3600 00,0601., " it would require," said he,
(to pay it off) " 47,265 pounds weight in tol.
Bank Notes, having 512 Notes to. one pound.
This sum in cash, if put into carts, each, contain-
ing, tooolb. and having .two. hoeses to draw, al.
lowing +o_ feet to each cart, would load sOOO
carts, cover 37 miles'in length, with a remainder
of 116 carts on the 38th mile. Were it to be laid
down in guineas in a line, it would extend above
4300 miles in length. In i 794, the Naii&.7.l
Debt was 260,000,0001. sterling ; and if a man
were to count too shillings .pe,r minute for twelve
hours a day, it would take him 1797 years .283
clztys -nine .hours and two minutes. The whole
of this sum being 5,200,000 . shillings, and the
coinage standard being 6z shillings in the Troy
pound, its whole weight would be 83,709,963165.
which would require 41,936 carts, each to have ei
ton weight, to convey it to any place : or . sup-
posing a man could carry too pounds weight from
London to York, it would require 833,670 men,
to perform it ; and .if all these men were to walk
iii.a line at only one yard distance from each other,
they would cover. 456 miles and a half and 7o yards.
The breadth of a shilling being one inch, and if all
these shillings were laid in a strait ht line close to
another's edge, the line they would coyer would be
83,070 miles, which is 2,070 ruilep more than double
the circumference of the Globe.