The Sun.
London, England, 1804-07-27 00:00:00

'THE KING V. MILES.

The. Defendant was indiaed -for having, in his
custody ordnance stores, not
.being one.third worn.
William Spencer said, the prisopet loeged Ott
Chatham, and in consegnence of a warrant, he went
to search the Prisoner's lodgings. Under his bed
they found several copper bolts, quite new, with the
'wad arrow upon them ; in a shed in the. yard,
which he rented, they also found a great many
of r with, the Government mark upon

them.
The being produced in Court, and identi.
fied as G )vernmeto stores ;

Mr. GURNEv, for the Prisoner, admitted, that
he could riGt urge any thing in his defence. He
should reorve what he had to say in mitigation,
until the Defendant was brought up to receive the
judgment of the Court of Ki-g'h Bench ; then he
shotOd Five seventy-two arguments in favour, of
mercy, t,,r just so many years was the Prisoner
Guilty. •

CANUOURNP THE COMPANY or FR![
This was a case of great importance to the parties
Concerned. The Defendants are a Corporation, hay.
ing the properly of the oyster.banks, near Whitsta.
ble, vested in them, and all Members of the Cur.
potation are Joint Proprietors of the Fishery. In
order to become a Member, it is necessary that the
oltiiinant should serve an apprenticeship to a Mem.
ben, for seven years, and upon such service, at the
Ptitirmion he is entitled himself to be admitted a
Minnbet, and also entitled to all the privileges of
the Corporation. In this case, Canbourne, the
had been apprenticed to one Andrews, a
Member, in the year 1793 ; but, before he had
served a year, a hard frost destroyed nearly all
the oysters on the lanes. The consequence was,
that Andrtws had no employment fur him, and, it
was agreed between the Plaintiff and his Master,
that he should go 'on. hoard. the R.,ase Tender, in His
,ty's Service. When on board,,he was order.
ed to Cadiz, and was afterwards discharged at Lis.
boo. On Ills. return to England he was impressed,
and kept on board .the Te,aler at the Note, from
whet,ce he. wrote to his Master at Whitstable...
Andrews, as soon as he received his Letter, applied
to the C remanding Officer of the Ship, to have his
Apprentice delivered ul' to him, but was refused ;
and returning a kw days after to make a second le.
mand, he found that the Plaintiff' had been in the
mean time sent away on board His Majesty's Ship
the Tamer.
Andrews, who was evim;ned, stated, that the
Plaintiff went on board the T,nder by his consent.;
and that, when he returned he paid I,im 751.
' his I'4 a Prize.money, and which be was entitled
to, In, the earnings of his Apprentice.
'flan imply of Dredgets refused CO adlinit the
Plaint,ff to hit, freed tn, on the ground, that he boil
oat dui) ;.eryed, his • Master under, the Indenture of.
Apprenticeship.
, •
Altr. •RUNNINCTON, very early in' the
rquseog pit cd that he was clearly of opinion that this
was a g-0,1 service, inasmuch as the, service on
board th'e, King's ships was ,with the. consent of the
master, and. he having received the produce of that
service. • •

Mr. Setjeant SPPARD, • for the Defendants, in
*sisted that, the very. existence of: the Company de.
pend!.d on:the issue of this question, and contended
that
.stizit sort of, service was afrard in law upoothe
Coosiitotion of rl e Company din observed,_ that in
this businel.. there Wil4,lllnatereilldiffctence from the
common cases of trades., Zr was not here the„ mere
tight of setting up 4 trade, but, ,by admission into
the Company, mart became part 'Proprietor of the
joint. stuck. of the Corporation; .and if men cnnid.he
adinitt,d opoil such sort :of services AS •wer; con.
tended for, a man might share in the beneath with.
out having contributed one farthing towards the
ptosperity of the Society,
..
The twat of keeping up the stock of oysterinpon
dee lanes was by fetching from distant parts thk
rpal, which was throviin ovarboard,upon them ; and
an appcotice, who duly served his master, was for
revert years employed in i!..reasing this the joint
wealth of the Company, and by it ultimately be.
came to share in, it. Hat if mere binding
.Would do, withuitt service, it Would be in the power
`of ti very few members totally to ruin the Company.
I. le, pressed these fillet very earnestly to the jury,
and entreated them, it they had any doubt, that
they woi,!!:" find such. a Verdsf as would enable them
to have the oqision of an olietior Court of Apteal.
1.1;e juy; under the advice of the Learned Sr,r-
jrant who tried the cause, cutout a Vcrtlia in favour
of the Pnintiff.

enottgh when the journey was performed. But he
insisted that they should there down with the money, ,
which they declining, they were both pulled off the
coach. They then appealed to the book—keeper at
I,e Inn ; hut, instead, of gettii4 redress, he advised
to call the watch, which was done, anti thiy were
immediately comfortably lodged in a stone room,
without even the luxury of a little clean maw,
Here they remained until they were the next day
discharged by. the Mayor of Rochester. The Learn.
ed Serjeant observed, that this mode of proceeding
wal pettedly ,o to him he was sure it was not
warranted by the Common Law of the land, and he
knew of no Statute authorizing it.
A Mr. !jail was called, who proved the case as
stated ; but in cross-examination, by Mr.GAu,Row,
he admitted that their_ money was run our, 1-lis
friend the Plaintiff had been a mercer, hut at pre_
sent had no shop. He was a gardener, but had not
yet got a garden, and until- they could both he
suited, they had retired to live upon Mr. Hedger's
estate in St. George's-fields.
Mr. GARstow made an able speech to the Jury,
who found a Verdict avast the Coachman—Da.
wages and Not Guilty 1 the Guard.
Mr. Hail, the Witneas in this case, had also
brought his adion, in which Mr. Davis was to be
the Witness ; the same Verdict was taken by agree-
ment in that cause.