The Sun.
London, England, 1804-07-07 00:00:00

lE. appeared in evidence, that Jonathan Robson t
wasduly apppinted a Searcher of Leather. That On
the 31st of January last, be and Philip Payne and
Robert Denton, in the afternoon, saw a parcel of
illiceo hides, at Mr. tiephourne's stall in Leadenhall.
market ; 11,bson looked them all over, and found
they were not fit for the market, because they were
not dry ; on which he seized them, and attempted to
put upon them the mark of the hammer, to signify
that they were not fit for sale ; On which Mt. Hep.
bourne and the other Defendants came up, arid also
Mr. Lafwie., Mr, nepbourne insisted upon it that
the searchers had seen th,:se skins in the morning,
and had pAssed them. Robson said they had nor,
for if they had it would have been impossible to
pass then,. Mr. Hephourne then said, as the
searchers had passed these goods in the morning,
they should not examine thetoagain. The Defen-
dant then began ,to pull them away, and called their
carter, Davis, to bring the cart to carry them away,
which he did, and a great scuffle ensued, in which
Lafone, although he did'oot aft, bore. the.. part
of encouraging the other Defendants in their resist-
ance, saying to Mr. Hepbourne, " Knock.them
down (meaning the ,Searchers) take them away
(meaning the hides) from them, for I have done the
same thing in the country. D—n them; knock
them down ; 1 have done it in the country, and I
will do the same thing again—Knock them down.,
and' I. will hear you harmless." This °was for the
purpose of instigating the other Defendants to pro.
cacti to violence, which ended in rescuing the goods;
and the Witnesses added, they believed the other
Defendants. (4ntl particularly Mr. Hapbourne, who
although an hasty, was,a good sort of map), ,would
not have afted as theydid, had knot. been for the-
instigation of the Defendant Mr. Lafone. •
This was the substance of the evidence of the
three Searchers.
On the behalf of the Defendant, Mr. &twists
proposed to call the other Defendants ,as .Wianese4
to prove that Mr: Lat ne did not, ,use,thge words
to encourage theta, and this :he submittedtupon the
ground that-they were not called to exculpate
selves, but, on the contrary, if they said that Mr.
out use these words, they were giving
eviclenCr of linst themselves, They had. already
, Judgment by default, and they could not, by
their evidence, affea the Judgment of the Court
,upon them hereafter. He •adittitted the case was
,new, but he submitted there was no objetticin to it
tlf",n principle.
Lord ELLENBUROUCH observed, that if this spe.
cies of evidence was received, it would run through
the whole of the Criminal' Law, and create a pre.
cedent that might be extremely dangerous ; for, in
that . case, every .Defendant who pleaded guilty,
would become a competent witness for his compa.
Ilion who pleaded not guilty. He thought the State-
ment of the offence was one entire and whole charge,
and if any one of the persons charged with it was
exanined as a witness, on account of his having
pleaded guilty, he must be examined to diminish
the guilt a his companion who had pleaded not
guilty, that was to diminish part of the general
guilt, in which case such witness was diminished
by his own evidence, pro Canto, his own guilt ; for
which reason his Lutdship held that these Defendants
could not be competent witnesses.
Several Witnesses were then examined, tanners,

coreiers, and leather-faaors, who were present at
this scuffle, who swore they did not hear Mr. La_
lime say—" knock them down," arc. only that " if
he had been in the situation of Mr. Heptiourne, he
would have done the same," &c. They contradicted
the officers flatly, in some points that were collateral,,'
to the issue, but on the material question at issue,
" Whether the Defendant, Wont, had instigated
the other Defendants to commit the violence ?" their
evidence was merely negative, that they did not
hear it, &c.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH summed up the evidence,
and observed to the Jury, the question was, Whe_
thee they believed the witnesses for the Prosecution
or not i If they did, the Defendant must be found
guilty, and evidence, such as had he'en given fur
the Prosecution, was affirmative, that certain things
aid aftually happen, and that certain words were
spoken, whereas the evidence for the Defendant
was negative, that ,certain persons present did not
see and heat them. Affirmative evidence was in its
nature of greater weight and cogency than that of
the negative kind ; however, the credit due to the
witnessca was matter purely for the Jury to dispose
i of.

'rile Jury found the Defendant, Samuel Lafone—
Guilty. .

Dr. IhrtgoN, Dean of Waterford, is promoted to
the Irish Mitre which was vacant.

A SAILOR.—A soldier who was walking under.l
the Cliff of Whitby, amusing himself with gather.
ing shells and fossils, was unluckily surrounded by
the flowing title, in such a manner as to render his
situation extremely dangerous. As the„lik
tanc(d, he endeavoured to save himself by climbing
on a small ledge, which projected a little way from
the Cliff, but was not out of the reach of the waves ;
and as the wind was high, they clashed against him
with, incooceiveable fury. . The perilous situation
of—the poor,fellow as soon perceived, but all ar.
tempts to his relief seemed impradicable. , The sea
was so rough, that no boat could venture to his as.
sistance, and the height of the Cliff, with unequal
proje4ions, appeared to preclude all succour from
above. His destruction was .thought inevitable, as
in a few inimites the water would be on a level with
the place where he held his precarious footing. At
dab eriticarmoment, a sailor arrived with a rope,
to which having 'Slung himself, with the-assistance.
of the speClatots, he eaused himself to .be lowered
down the Cliff, and coming to the place where the
soldier stood, he fastened the rope round hisiludy,
and both were drawn up, amidst the acclamations of
the spedators. Englishmen are seldom disposed to
let actions of this. nature pass unnotieed,, A collec-
tion was iminediately matte for the generous, tar:,
but with chapacristic nobleness of mind, i► 7 .it%;;)-
lo tely refused to accept a single aillc,s he
might be permitted to share the money will, tine Nor
soldier whose life he Fad saved.