The Sun.
London, England, 1802-06-28 00:00:00

CORN EXCHANGE,

June zS.

Tins Day our Market had few fresh arrivah or
Wheat, and having many Buyers, caused it to go
off a few Shillings dearer ; Malt and Barley
taro Prices; Pease and Beans brisk, and ratter
on the advance ; of Oats we have large supplies,
but there being a demand for fine Samples, they
fetch high prices, and inferior sorts lemain very
low ; Flour has a ready sale.

Wheat • sos a 6os a 7os od Beans -28 s a 33s act
Fine do. - 7ts a 73s cd Tick ditto - zbs a -Lys od
Malt -46 s a 48s a sos od I Oats - 145 a iB., zis
Fineditto -sls a 52s 6d Poland do. 22s a 23s od
Barley . 28s a 325 od Rape Seed 311 a 341 per last
Rye - - •305 a 345 od Fine Flour Sm a sss per s,ck.
White Pease 33s a 37s 6d, Second do. 45s a ccspe, do.

THE THEATRE.—The Surrender of Calais was
represented on Saturday ,last at the Hay-Market
Theatre. MURRAY, for the first time, playcd
john de rienne, with his usual energy anal feeling.
—Mrs. .St. LEGER, for the first time performed
Julia, with rather too elaborate an expression of
pathos for the interesting simplicity of the part.
The Farce was Fortune's Frolic, of which FANS'.
C ETT Is the whimsical hero.

One of the Performers at Covent-Garden Theatre
came forward at the conclusion of the second ad of
the Cabinet, on Saturday night, to apologize for the
absence of Master Byrne, who was suddenly taken
ill. The only part of his speech which we could
distindly hear was, " Gentlemen and Ladies, a
Gentleman who is just come in to the Theatre, has
had the good fortune to get two children since the
commencement of the Opera, who, if the Audience
will permit, are ready to be brought forth." Here
the clamour was so great, that the Orator was
obliged to retire. The two Children, Master
and Miss Rogers, at length made their appear-
ance, and acquitted themselves very well in a
double hornpipe. N. B. This performance was for
the benefit of the Lying-in-liospita/.
Mr. LACY'S Annual Benefit, on Friday last, at
Drury-lane Theatre, Was tolerably well wtended,
but met with many interruptions on ac:ount of the
absence of a Gehtleman, who was to have made his
first appearance, and of Mrs. MotrxrAlN, who
.was retarded by her performance the same night at
the Haymaker Theatre. Mrs. JORDAN volun-
teered her services. Mr. LACY gave Theatrical
Imitatigns with success. The first Piece was a
revived Dr:rna, of one aa, entitled DA; Prodigal;
the second was, The Child of Nature; and the last,
The Waterman.

The hay harvest in the neighbourhood of Henley,
Reading, Maidenhead, &c. is nearly over : it never
is remembered to have been more abundlot, or, be*_
ter saved ; and the appearance of corn, both fur
strength, szraw, and ear, is the most promi,ing.
The oldest peasants say they do not remember. see.
ing the wheat and corn to the present perfection.
Yesterday morning a Sailor met in Rlcidington
Fields, to fight a man of the name of Friday, of pu-
gilistic note, for twenty guineas a side. None
would back the Tar, as he was a novice in the sci-
ence, and Jack was obliged to venture the last of
his pay, or forfeit the rtrmey that was down. For
several rounds he was compelled to give way to su-
perior skill, till placing a fortunate How in the
stomach of his Opponent, Friday gave it!, and Tack
received his prize money 'on the spot, to the great
joy of the spedators.

The average Price of Sugar, computed from the
returns made. for the week ending the 23,1 day of
June 180 z, is Th;r2:y,seven zad Test Penci
Three Farthings Fer hundred weight,

L AW REPORT.

COURT OF CHANCERY, Tura 25.

Mr. MANSFIELD applied to the Court, to know
when it would be its pleasure that Counsel should be
heard on behalf of His Royal Highness the PRINCE
of WALES, to prove His Royal Highneirs right to
the arrears of the revenues of the Duchy of Corn-
wall, according to His Royal Highness's Petition
of Right, referred to the Court by HIS MAC ESTY
in Council.

The LORD CammELLor,said, that in a case so'
important, as well from the magnitude of the in-
terest concerned as from the high rank of the
parties, and in a course of proceeding so obso-
lete as a Writ of Right, it became the Court to'
proceed with the- greatest ,circumspeaion. He
should, therefore, not take any step till he had
first consulted with the twelve Judges, as to the
mode in which Counsel should be heard on behalf of
the Petition referred to the Court by His MAJESTY
and from the advanced period of the term, he feared
he should not now have an opportunity of consult-
ing with the other Judges till the Winter Terms.

COURT OF kING's BENCH, JuNz 25.

THE KING V. DEANE.

This was a Rule of Mr. Adam's (enlarged from
the last Term by the consent of the Prosecutors,
upon conditions) calling upon the Defendant, Joseph
Deane; to shew cause why an information, in na-
ture of a Quo Warianto, should not be filed against
him, to shew by what aufhority.he claimed to ex.
ercise the office of a capital Burgess of Harwich.
In the vacation, Defendant filed magy
in long affida-
vits opposition to the Rule. But this day, when
Mr. AnAm-moved to have the Rule made absolute,
the Defendant's Counsel,. Mr. -ERSKINE, declined
shelving cause.
The Court therefore made the Rule absolute
against Joseph Deane.

JUNE 26.
BAIL FOR DEBT.

TMLEY w. ELLISON.

Tins was a Rule calling on the Plaintiff to shew
cause Why the Defendant should not be discharged
out of custody on filing. common Bail.- The De-
fendant was arrested for 3oobl. upon.the Affidasit
of the Assignee of the Plaintiff, who had assigtfed
all his effeas over 'to his creditors • for the pay-
ment of his debts. The Affidavit upon which the
Defendant was held to bail was to the following
effect : " That the Defendant was justly
.and
truly indebted to the Plaintiff in the sum of 30001.
and upwards, for the value of certain bars of silver,
containing thirteen thousand ounces and upwards,
delivered to the Defendant, to be by him carried,
on behalf of the Plaintiff,. to Gottenberg, and there
delivered to Elias Beckman, alid undertilen to be
so delivered by him, but which the Defendant had
not so delivered.!'
This application was made upon the grOunds
that the Affidavit. on which the Defendant was held
to bail, was defeaive, and such -as a person ought
not to have beep arrested upon, because it did not
state.a debt to be due to the Plaintiff from the De.
fendant, pr any specific sum of money whatever
withheld from 'the .Plaintiff.by the Defendant, but
gated' only a breach of promise by the Defendant ;
and for which breaCh of promise no damages were
IP stated to have accrued to the Plaintiff, &c.

, Mr. GARIOW and Mr. Wa.uros she-wed Cause
against the Rule, and maintained, first, that this
was one of these Cases in which the Court would
not interfere in the present stage of the proceeding,
on, the general ground that the Court would not
try the merits of the Case upon Affidavits of the
Parties ; that the Court had laid down this as a
rule a great while ago, and adhered to-' it in a
series of practice, and confirmed it by many Cases ;
that this was a practice founded upon good sense,
• and that the contrary pradice would be full of
inconveniences, for it would be superseding the
• - office of a Jury, by a discretionary power of the
Court, and trying the merits of a Case upon
the Affidavits of Patties, who, if this Were to
become_ a common prat-lice, would have much
terriptation to commit perjury, &c.—for which
reasons the Court had always refused to entertain
such motions as these, but left the Parties to try
the merits of their Case before a Jury, in the Imean
time holding the Defendant to bail. There was
indeed a different pradice in the Court of,Common
Picas, in which these uestions were considered
upon Affidavits of the Plrties. This had occasion'-
. cd a great deal of consideration, and the Judges
took time to consider of it, and there was a con-
_ ference between the-Judges of the two Courts, the
effed of which was, that of confirming the Judge's
of the Court of King's Bench in their former opinion,
and Mr. Justice BUI,LER. afterwards observed in
that . Court, " That they could not control the
Court of Common Pleas : the Judges of that Court
were guided by their own wisdom in the rules
which they laid down lor the guidance of their
own praCtice,, but there was no reason, in the
opinion of the Judges of the Court of King's
Bench, to alter their pradice, and that therefore
they would not travel out of their own ruses."---.
The rule was this : that in a common course, a De-
fendant was held to bail!, upon an Affidavit stating
that he ,was justly and truly indebted to the Plain-
tif in a sum of money therein specified. Upon this
sort of,Affidavit, the Plaintiff was entitled, by Sta-
tute, to-hold a Defendant to bail in the ordinary
course of proceeding, without any application to the
discretion of a Judge. Another species of Arrest was,
where there was a breach of contra& op the part of
Defendant towards the Plaintiff, by means of which'
the Plaintiff had been damnified, and in such a Case
the course was. to lay all these circumstances before
njudge at Chambers, and that learned person would
exercise his discretion whether such Defendant
should be held to hail or nor, and would make his
order accordingly. The substance of the case here
was this—Some years ago, about thirteen thousand
ounces of silver were delivered by the Plaintiff to
the Defendant, for the purpose, and with

,_ _~

reetion of ifs deing deliVered, by him, to a 'peison 1
of the name of Elias Beckman, at Gottenhesg.—
This the Defendant undertook to do, but which lie
had not done. The Defendant arrived lately in
London, and the Plaintiff's Assignees (for he had
assigned his effects to his Assignees,' for the be-
nefit,of Creditors), determined on putting 'the law
in motion against him. They wished to hold
him to 'bail, but as this silver was not sold to
the Defendant, it was not a common case of a
de ' and they, could not arrest him by the ordi-
N
nary ocess ; they therefore laid all the circum-
stances of the case before Mr. Justice Gaosi, at
Chambers, and that Learned Jtidge, in his discre-
tion, was satisfied that Justice required, and theses
fore ordered, the Defendant to be held to bail ; and
the question now was, whether he was justly so
held 'to bail ? The Learned Gentlemen, on behalf
of the Plaintiff; maintained, that in case of a De-
fendant being held to bail for any breach_ of contra 1,
where specified damages had been sustained,
Troyer, Detinue, or other cause of action for da..
mages, the rule was this, that the objeetion to qv.
holding MT to bail, or application for his discharge,
should arise out of the Affidavit on which he was
held to hail, and if that Affidavit was defeaive, lie
would be entitled to his liberty' on filing Commis's
Bail, but not otherwise. , That the Court of King's-
Bench had expressly decided, • over and over again,
they would not hear any Affidavits on the merits of
the case, because that would be trying the cause,
and superceding the province of a Jury.—The
Learned Gentlemen submitted also, there would be
great evil from entering into the *tits of a case
upon the Defendant's being held to bail.—Suppose a.
Captain of a ship were arrested upon an ACtion of
outrageous Battery, by authority of a Judge before
whom the circumstances were stated, and which, ~ii
the face of the Plaintiff's Affidavit,
.might be of the'
most desperate kind ;—suppose the Defendant were
to come forward to the Court, and, upon his Affi=
davit, to state',that, true, indeed, he did beat the
Plaintiff; and put him in irons, but that there was
a Mutiny on board, of which the Plaintiff was the
Leader ; and, suppose a great number of the Crew
were to join the Defendant in this Affidavit ; and,
supposing the Court, judging on these faas, were
to order-the Defendant to be discharged, and the
Defendant were; then, to go on a foreign voyages
and never more return within the jurisdiction of the
Court—and then, suppose that the whole of the
Defendant's case, stated in. these Affidavits, , was a
system of Falsehood, supported by perjury, from
top to bottom : that the Plaintiff had cause of at-lion
for-which a Jury would have given him a thousand
pounds in damages; but that the whole of which
was lost by the Defendant being allowed to' be dis-
charged ?—These were only a few of, the evils that
might result from the praCtice of entertaining clues.-
tions of merits of a cause, upon the Affidavits ofthe
parties. The Court of King's Bench had, 'there-
fore, wisely-, abstained from that course, and had
said, on more occasions than one—" That if the
Plaintiff's Affidavit stated, positively, a debt, or
that of his Agent, Sce. the Court would not take
the Affidavit of - the Defendant to contradia that
fad, no? even, although the Defendant might swear
that the Plaintiff had declared the Defendant owed
him nothing.—That if the Plaintiff took a false:
oath, he might beindiCted for perjury:" . This was
laid down by Chief Justice LEE, in the case of
Emerson v. Hawkins, and it. was Confirmed 'in a
case afterwards, in Douglas 32. •
. Mr. ERSKINE, in support of this Rule, said, he
never meant to contend that the truth of the Affi-
davit . on which the Defendant was held to bail,
could be questioned by an-tither Affidavit being made
to deny the fad. He knew that if the Plaintiff
swore falsely, he might be indided for perjury,
and as he swore at his peril, the Court would not
question the oath, in. any manner, except in a pro-
secution ; 'but. he denied the proposition of Mr.
GARRow, that there could be nothing done further
than to look into the Affidavit of the Plaintiff, to
hold. the Defendant to bail ; and that unless there,
was some defeEt in it, the Defendant must continue-
to be held—That was not so--2for if. any Affidavit-
were ever so, positive that he owed another man a
sum of money, and he was arrested on that Affida-
vit ; if he could shewsthat he had been held to bail
before, for the same s‘m of money, could he not
come to that Court and 'say so, and would not that
Court order him to be discharged in such a case ?
Lord ELLENBOROUGH -said, that most unques-
tionably the Court would, in such a case, interpose,
becauSe that would be an abuse of the Process of the
Court.

Mr. Justice LAWRENCE said, that if it appeared,
by Affidavit, that the Defendant was , a married
woman, the Court would interfere also.
Mr. ERSKINE then proceeded to argue, that 'the
Affidavit on which the Defendant in this Case was
held to bail, was defelive, inasmuch as it neither
stated positively a debt due from the Defendant to
the Plaintiff; nor that the Plaintiff had atually sus-
tained any' damages from the breach of the De-
fendant's contract with him.—That this silver
might have been delivered to the Defendant for the
purpose, of being delivered by him to Beckman at
Gottenberg—Non tonstat, that it was the property
of Beckman, and if so, no damage could arise to
the Plaintiff from the nondelivery of it.—He took
this to be a Rule—" That no Affidavit could be
good for holding any one to bail, unless it was so
worded as that an assignment of perjury might be
made upon it.—Hert he contended, that if the per-
son who made this Affidavit, were indicted for per-
jury, he might say that this property was be-
tween the Plaintiff and Beckmanralthough it might
be all Beckman's property. The substance of this
Case was this—The, Plaintiff was an American
he -conveyed this silver from France to Gotten_
berg at a time when it,was death by the law of
France; to take any bullion or specie out of France,
and he gave it to the Defendant for thispurpose.-
-This was a contra void in Law, for which both
Plaintiff and Defendant would have been put to
death in France, had their anion been diScOvered—
and a contrad contrary to the lex loci was no
.contract at all; and therefore could not be enforced
in England. . ,
Lord ELLENBOROUGH Said, this a good detente

to this ACtion if made out--but merits which the '
Court could not try.
Mt. ERSKINE further urged, that 'the Defendant
bad !,cen sued for this very debt, before a Tribunal
in the' dominions of his Sovereign, the KING of
DENMARK : That the Case was stated to some
Magistrates there, whom the Defendant accused of
aEtiog with great injustice towards him ; that he
approaChed his 'Sovereign with a' full statement of
Ins case, which that Monarch graciously conde-
scended to investigate, and afterwards actually
ordered these Magistrates to- be dismissed from
their offices for their miscondud in this ease.--
That this suit is now depending in a Court of
Justice in Denmatk : for these reasons Mr. ER-
E submitted that this Defendant ought not to
be held to bail in this cause in this country.
Lord ELL E NIfOROLIGH sari, that this was an
application to the. dicretion of the Court, to diS-
charge the Defendant upon filing common bail, and
certainly it was an important question, 'but it was
impossible for that Court, consistently with its-
own Rules, to question any fads-that were extrinsic
' of the circumstances stated in the Affidavit made to
hold the party to bail. If it had appeared that the
Defendant had- been already held to bail _in this
country, for this demand, the Court would order
him to be discharged, because !to person can, by
Law, he held twice to bail, in this country, for
. one and the same debt but the question was here"-
:did it, with sufficient distindness, appear to the
iCourt, that the Defendant stood in the same situa-
tion, in point of la w, in the Court iti Norway, as
'he did in this Court ? and that the Plaintiff had the
same benefit by, ptirsuipg his Adion• there, as-he
May have by pursuing it here'? If it did not appear
that the Plaintiff would have the same advantage by
pursuing his Adion there, as he may have by pur-
suing his Action here, it would_ -be unjust to
him of the means of it according to the
rules &f law' here, made for the
-purpose of enabling
Plaintiffs to, pursue Defendants with effea f part of
kawhich was to hold the Defendant in the• first in-
stance to- bail. His Lordship said, the Court had
no means of knowing what were the Laws of Nor-
way in this particular. Then the question was re.
duced to a question of construaction upon the avord-
ing.of the Affidavit made to hold a person to bail in;
that Court. And then the point .became a plain
one, and :within the Rule which was laid down
in the Cases which had been alluded to by the
Learned Counsel for the Plaintiff. The Case of
,Smith and Fraser, in BlaCk.stone's Reports; was
an authority also in this resped ; where the De.
fendant was held to bail by order of,Mr. Justice
FosTER, and which came afterwards before the
Court; when it Was saidi"." that the fads of the
Plaintiff's Affidavit for holding the Defendant to
bail, could not be controverted by another Affidavit ;
and that if the Plaintiff swore that which was false,
he might be inalided for perjury ; for which reason
the Court had laid down a rule that they would not-
travel into the merits. of a cause upon. Affidavits in
this way."—So much for decision; but his Lord-
ship aalded, that if this rule had not been already
laid down in this case as a firm rule of the CO'ift,
for the purpose of excluding from its consideration,
circumstances that were extrinsic of the Affidavit to
hold to.,bail, or of imposition upon the Court by,
abuse of its process of Tort or Coverture of the,Dea
fendant, or. some' such matter; it would, in his
opinion, be matter of convenience to lay down that
rule now, apd abide by it in future ; for a contrary
course was full of evils—it invited the party to
commit perjury its order to come out of prison.—lt
would impose upon .the Court tasks which it could
never perform, that of sifting by Affidavits, through
,the merits of every case wherein- a Defendant was
held' to bail, in every case in which the discretion
of a Judge had ordered it to be so, upon complicat-
ed circumstances,. so that if the rule had not been
already laid down, - it would be matter of conveni-
ence, as well as for the furtherance of-justice, to
lay it down now.—Why then, the question here
was reduced this—was there, in this ease, in the
Affidavit upon which the Defendant. was held to bail
-by the order of a Learned Judge, such a degree of
certainty, as that the person who made that Affidavit
might, be convicted of perjury, if what he stated in
it was false ? No man should be held to bail unless
the-Affidavit contained that certainty and subjected
the deponent to that penalty if he swore falsely.—
Now this Affidavit was the Affidavit of the Assignee
of Imley' the Plaintiff—it stated,- " that the De-
fendant was .justly and ttuly indebted to the. Plain-,
tiff Imley in the sum of 30001. for silver deli-
vered to the Defendant, for the purpose of his
• carrying, and which he undertook to carry, to
Gottenherg, and to deliver it there to a certain
-person," whiCh the Affidavit averred he had not
H thine. Certainly the Affidavit might have been
better worded, but if .it conveyed certainty enough
to subject to the penalties of perjury the person
' who made it, that should be sufficient. His Lord-
ship thought such was the case here, and that the
party might be indiCted for perjury if the Affidavit
was false. Here was stated a contract between
the parties, in which one of them was stated to have
misconduded himself, and had thereby damnified
the other. The amount of that datnnification- was'
stated to be 30001. This, his Lordship said, was,
in his opinion, stating an injury with sufficient dis-
tindness to entitle the party suffering it, to hold the
party -causing it to bail. His Lordship said also,
that, in his opinion, .the Court could not look into
any of the extrinsic circumstances of the Case, they
must he reserved for trial before the proper Tri-
bunal ; for these reasons, he was clearly of opinion
that this Rule
,ought to be discharged.
•The other Judges were of the same opinion, and
therefore the Rule was discharged. •
Mr. ERSK INE said, it was stated to hirtuhat the
Plaintiff in this Adtion was dead.
The Court said, that if so, there could be no
-doubt the party who made the Affidavit on which the,
Defendant was held to"bail, might be indided for
perjury.

application made on behalf of Mr. Hunter, one
of the Chief Clerks in the Navy Office. It was
stated that the. Defendant had had access to
the books in the Office,' and that he had availedhirn.
self of the opportunity which he had, by such ac-..
cess, to -make out,a false Muster, in consequence of
which, a representation was made by Mr. Hunter.
to the. Board ; upon which the Defendant Wrote'
a letter to Mr., Hunter,- complaining of his con•
duel. in the representation he made, of which Mr.
Hunter took no notice ; in consequence of which.
the Defendant sent to him another letter, in which,:
among_Other things, he called him a Liar, a-Rascal,
and a,CoWard, and ,that. he would post him up as such,
among his friends.—Rule to. shew Cause granted.
A person was charged with a Criminal Informal.
tion for assaulting an Officer of the Revenue in the
due execution of his duty, and rescuing a quantity
of Spirits,- &c. To be tried at the next Assizes for
the countY.of 'Kent.

• DIED. •
In Dublin, Hamilton Gorges, Esq. Representative in Par.
liament for the County of Meath.

PRICE O,
sATU

Bank Stock
Navy sper Cent. shut
; per Cent. 1797, t050,-
I rish 5 per Cent.
4 per Cent. Con. 94 89i 90
per Cent. Red. 74;
3 per Cent. Con. shut
Ditto Scrip
Bank L. Inn. 4t I-16 3-16
Ditto Short Ann. 5
Ditto Scrip '

N' STOCKS,
RDA Y.
India Stock
ExCiteq. l3ifls Ts. 2S. prat).
Fundable ditto prem.
'3d Exchequer Bills prem.
New S. S. Stock
Oinnittin Qk
Imper.- 3 per Ccnt.
Ditto AIM. 12 3-16 Y
i3ank for opening
India for opening
Consols for opening 75111

To THOMAS TA (I,OR,'Esq. •
Dear Sir, . No. 9, New Bridge-. Street, London,
I FEEL it a Duty incumbent upon me, to inforri
l l
you of the very great and extraordinary Cure 1 have re
ceived from your invaluable Medicine, LE AK E 's PATEN, -
P I L LS.
• About two years ago, I was attacked with a VENEREAL
,DISORDER, whichl treated rattier slightly for some tittle,
but the Disease at length spreading all over toy body, I was
obliged to apply to the most eminent of the Faculty, 6°e
:
their assistance afforded only temporary relief : I wen;
through various Courses of Salivation, and from being rattle'
of a,corpulent habit, was reduced to a mere skeleton. Th° •
Ulcers that speead all over My Limbs rendered me a Coln"
Wete•Object, so that my Friends. despaired of my rec;overY.•
hen brought to this situation, I considered death as inevi;
table, hut a relation of mine commenting upon the many
Cases in which your Pills had succeeded, I ,was induced t°,
try a'Box of theist, which I thought rather relieved me, a 7.
by persevering for two or three months, and tbl lowing Y°""
direetions, I experienced the most unaccountable relaxation
from-pain, the sores gradually subsiding ; I am now, 0;0126
God, perfeCtly recovered, and walking out daily: I doubt
not, but one more box, which I think cautious to take, o."
establish my health in its original- state—
It is with the most heart-felt gratitude,. that I subscribe
myself; Sir, your-Much obliged'humble Servant,'
Deansgate, 'Manchester, July r, 'Sot. W. PEA RSti"
P. S. For the public benefit, I do not object to "the abov,.,
,being published, but leave you to act:as your own bette'
judgment shall-di date.
Prepared and Sold by the sole Proprietor, •
Tl.lO S TAYLOR, Member of the Royal College of Surgootts,
London, at his House, No. 9, New 13ridge-street ; •
'Where, after a 'constant 'residence of more than Thirty-51
Years,, in. a "praCtice particularly directed to the Cure Of
Venereal Complaints, and'those incidental to the Parrs ° •
Generation in both Sexes, with that inviolable secrecy
o
which Men
.of his Professiou should always observe,
flatters himself, the advice and assistance he gratuitot!re
ly admifiisters to Persons taking this Medjoine,
• esteemed by. a-discerning Public, as an advantage
to be obtained, and voiltolzinbiguity.
Also sold, by his Appointment, for the convenience °J!
those living at a distance; at the Perfumer's, No. 35-, St• .A
ban's-street, Pall Mall; the Toyshop, No. 103, Oxt`„)r,`:
street ; Mr. Disborough's, No. 7, Fish-street-hill;
Steel's, BoOkseller, No. 1, Union-row, Little Tower-hi";
Mr. 'Baxter's South-bridge, Edinburgh ; Mr. Callwell'bs,
Dublin; Mr!Billingets, Liverpool ; pit; Atkinson's,,Ma%
Chester ; and by one Person-in every considerable ,To‘v°.l,,
Great Britain and Ireland, in, Boxes of only 23, 9d.ea'"oi
sealed .up with full and plain directions, whereby persons_ j
either sex may cure themselves with ease, speed, secrecY,
safety.
N. B. Every BOx sold in.Great'Britain 'is sealed up
a stamp, on which, by favour of the Counni#soners, is
P.
ed, at the Stamp-office, " T. Taylor,. No, 9, Ne‘y Brim
street," to imitate which is Felony,. and a Bothers are coun-
terfeit.