The Sun.
London, England, 1832-11-05 00:00:00

APPEALS.

The Court was occupird the whole of ihe day in
hearing appeals, among which were the follotving
“npnrtant cars :-
W. 11. CARMICHAEL SMYTH AGAINST THE CONVIC-
TION OF THE MAGISTRATES AT QUEEN SQUARE

Vi.e a p•tlant, who has made himself noturiou
by his frequent appearance iii public Courts, had
been con.i.aed before the Nlagisiratas of Qqteet,-
squai e, for deserting his wife, on the application of
he ffie rs of the parish of Chelsea, to which she
had b come chargeable, in couseq rerice of her hus-
band (the appellant) neglecting to support her.
Mr. Smyth conducted his case in person, and
was occasionally assisted with note,- by his brother, a
c ,plain in the East India Company's service.
S,nyth having been .übj,eted to much ill-
treatment by her husuand, left him; she made fre-
quent applications io him lor pecuniary a-si•tance,
I,tv he refused to render her any. She was redrxed
o great distress in consequence of this, and was
compelled to apply to the parish.
Margaret Mandrill stated, that Mrs. Smyth was
introduced to her by Mr. and Mrs. Williams, and
torlod with -her some time. Wimess applied to
Mr. Smyth for the rent of Mrs. Smyth's room, and
oher expenses, which the appellant refused to pay.
W mess sued the appellant for the amount in the
Coutu Court, but the Commissioners decided
against her. Mrs. Smyth was at that time in utter
d-siitinion, being without the common nee—saries
1 life. Witness, at the instance of Mrs. Smyth,
represented this to the appellant, who replied that
it wa,, her own fault, for she had left a comfortable
home of her own accord.
Mis. Smyth wus re-examined--Left her hu,-
band's hou-e on the 14th of March, 1824, because
he locked her up in her bed-room, and would not
allow her to have the least thing without an applica-
tion to the cook or the housekeeper, not even a
needle and thread, or a bail of cotton. Judy Neal
was the name of the cook; she slept on the first
fhor, and Mr. Smyth on a sofe.bed in the parlour.
The appellant proceeded to address the Court at
considerable length, stating that this was a COllV'e-
ion obtained against him under the 3d section of
,the 83d of George IV., by which it was enacted,
that husbands who refused to support their wives,
and suffered them to become chargeable to a parish
should be liable to be com.nitted to the House of
Correction and to hard labour for any term not ex-
, eeeding one month. He contended that the com-
mon upon this subject nullified the conviction,
10l
beeaialisaew
a husband whose wife voluntarily lived
apart from him was not held responsible for any
debts she contracted. Tile appellant was proceeding
to cite cases in point, when
The CHAIRMAN told him he was only wasting the
rime of the Court. He might just as well sing so
many songs.--( Laughter.)
The appellant than proceeded to say that his wife

quitted him without any justifiable cause; that she
had treated him with great cruelty ; that she had
committed various acts of fraud against him ; that
she had associated with improper characters, both
male and female ; that she bad associated with
common prostitutes ; that she had refused to return
to appellant's house; and lastly, that she would not
suit to cohabitation with him; but on the con-
trary, declared she would not. He then called
Mr. Treharn Treharn, clerk to the Registrar of
the Court of Delegates, who read the judgment of
the Court in an appeal made by Mrs. Smyth against
a conviction given in the Court of Arches against
Mrs. Smyth. The judgment of the Court of De-
legates confirmed the decision of the Court below ;
it was given on the sth of June last.
Henry Wheal was the next witness examined by
the appellant. In October, 1831, he took Mrs.
Smyth into custody on a Judge's warrant, and re-
collected that Mrs. Smyth on that occasion struck

the appellant in the face.
The COURT having repeatedly called on the ap-
pellant to prove adultery, and finding no evidence of
the kind before it, proceeded to decide in the case,
observing, that the Act under which the c-eviction
was given was imperative ; the appellant had ap-
pealed against it, but had failed to make good his
appeal, because he had not produced, or attempted
to produce, the only kind of evidence which would
have assisted him ; the Court must, therefore, con-
firm the conviction, which must take is course, and
the appellant must he committed to the 11 use of
Co. rest oo for one month, and to hard labour.
The appellant, who was evidently much afft-cted,
entreated the Court, in the most humhle and anxious
manlier, not to commit him to the House of Cor-
rection. " I will pay the money to the parish,"
said he, " I will do anything ; I have an appeal
coming on at Guildhall un the 9 h of November, in
consequence of my having lost a situation of 6001. a-
year through th;s women. Don't send me to prison 1"
The CHAIRMAN said the Court had no power to
alter the tetras of the conviction ; none could libe-
rate him but the King hitnse f.
The appellant waq then removed in custody of
the Governor of Coldbaih-fields prison.

PAROCHIAL RATES OF ST. MARTIN'S•Iti-THE-FIELDS'

MR. FENN APPELLANT, THE MAGISTRATES OF BOW

STREET, RESPONDENTS.

Mr. ALLEY, who was for the respondents, stated
the case. lints parish %vas governed by a local Act,
the 10th of Geotge 111., %%Elicit empowered "the
churchwardens, overseers, vestrymen, constables,
and all other ancient inhabitants" in vestry as-
sembled, to make rates for the relief of the poor.
The question before the Court arose in con-
sequence of the words " all wher ancient in-
habitants," to which the different parties in-
terested attached different meanings. A meet-
ing was held, at which it was proposed to
make a 2s. rate; an amendment was also brought
forward for a Is. rate, and the majority appeared to
he in favour of the latter; but the parochial officers
restricted the right of voting on the question to
such persons oily as they conceived came within
the meaning of the Act, and the majority was then
in favour of the 2s. rate. The latter was confirmed
by the Magistrates of Bow-street, and it was
against this rate the appeal was now made, on the
ground that it was not a rate made by the majority
of the inhabitants, assembled according to the Act
in that case made and provided. He admitted that
the rate was not made by a majority of the inhab'-
tants, bu tha. was not the question; the question
was, whether it was made by a majority of the per-
sons Coming within the meaning of the words "an-
cient inhabitants."

Mr. ADOLPHUS said the term " ancients" was
explained as referring in the Middle Temple to
" such as had passed their reading and do not
read."--(Laughter.)
Mr. PRENDERGAST, for the appellant, objected
that the rate was not legally made, there being not
a suffic ent number of the inhabitants present to form
a majority in its favour. The poor-rate was a new
tax, levied for a new and distinct purpose, and the
power given by the Act was a power to tax the
subject ; it ought, therefore, to receive the most
liberal construction, so that those who were taxed
should have a voice in the matter. The decisions of
the Courts in respect to the new churches had all
been given in that spirit. Much reliance had been
placed upon the words " other ancient inhabitants,"
although these words ►-ere preceded by the term
" vestrymen." What was a vestryman in common
law but a rated inhabitant ? And therefore the
rate ought to be made by those who pay it.
The CHAIRMAN said the words " other ancient
inhabitant," could never bear that construction.
Mr. ALLEY said there had been a select vestry in
the parish from time immemorial.
Mr. PRENDERGAST could prove that the inhabi-
tants generally bad met, and chosen officers, and
made rates frequently, and even as far back as 100
years; how, then, could there be a select vestry
from time immemorial ? He thought the power of
making a rate should be vested in ail the rated in-
habitants, and the Act ought to be held quite ana-
logical to all other parochial Acts.
Mr. BODKIN followed on the same side. He hoped
that In order to put an end to litigation the question
would be referred to the Court of King's Bench.
Mr. ALLEY objected to go to the Court of King's
Bench, and besought Mr. Bodkin not to listen to
the idle nonsense of the parishioners.
Mr. BODKIN' did not think it was idle nonsense
far men who are heavily rated to 'ry to have a vo cc
in the app, op i aim' of their money,lf the law would
give it them.
Mr ALLEY declined to reply. .

Mr. PRENDERGAST kv Tshed. to bring evidence to
.haw that the mh..bitatits geneiady had voted m
such matters:.

Mr. ALLEY—Yes, I know they have wantonly
>,tui aud.ciusty itittuded themselves.
The COURT, after a short deliberation, confirmed
the Nrtg,stroes' (trier for the rate. Four of the
Magistrates voted in favour of this decision, and
one agam-t it.

Mr: PRENDERGAST appbed for consent of tl%e
Court to try the question in beneo Regis, but this
wa., objected.
The Court was filled with gentlemen living in
St. Martin's parish during t! .e hearing of the appeal.

POLICE IN FELLIGENCE.

MARLBOROUGH-STREET.

In our p per of last Monday there appeared an
account (copied from the Observer) of an applica-
don to Mr. Conant, by a groom, named John
Shillinglaw, for the pu, pose of bringing to the
notice of Mr. James Wright, of his friends, the
situation in which he was placed, ow,ng to his
iogfniohraatngceen mtleman. oonvsemateunrts
lyora placegen o d
emf
arieisnbalemnertei
Manning, who, we understood, described himself
as a solici,or, in Ma) fair, and the legal ad-
viser of Sir James Wright, came before Mr. Co-
nant to reply to the statement made by Shilling-
law. He produced a paper, which he said had been
signed by Shill,nglaw, in the presence of Mr. Isaacs,
the gentleman who accompanied him when he made
his application last week, which paper contained a
complete denial of what he bad stated to the Ma-
gistrate, and an admission that he was well ac-
quainted with the address and the friends of his
master at the time he came before the Bench to so-
licit advice. Mr. Manning, having concluded the
reading of this paper, added, that Sir James Wright
was a gentleman of considerable landed property in
the north of England, and had merely made a trip
to Italy for the benefit of his health. The state-
ment of the groom was calculated to injure the cha-
racter of that gentleman, especially as it had obtained
publicity through the medium of the prese. The
present case showed the clang, r of entertaining the
ex-parte statements of individuals ; and, in fact, if
encouraged, it would compel gentlemen of title and
property, such as Sir J. Wright was, when they
were inclined to make a continental excursion, to
send for their groomsand consult them on the subject.
CONANT replied, that
.he did not consider the

application of the groom was improper, or that it
was intended to raise a y unfavourable surmise

against any party.
Mr. Manning then withdrew.
MARY LEB ONE.

Late on Saturday evening the driver of the cabri-
olet No. 897, Henry Bartholomew, was brought be-
fore Mr. HOSKINS on the serious charge of occa-
sioning the death of Lady Caroline Barham, by
furiously driving his father's cab over her on Wednes-
day last.
It was stated in evidence that her Ladyship was
crossing at the corner of Cavendish-street into Mar-
garet-street, when the prisoner drove furiously round
the corner. The consequence was, that her Lady-
ship was knocked down by coming in contact with
the shafts, and that one of the wheels went over
her, dislocating her wrist, breaking two of her ribs,
and causing a concussion of the brain.
The Earl of Thanet, who is the deceased's bro-
ther, was determined to obtain ail the redress which
the laws of his country could afford him.
Lady Barham, it appeared, had lingered till half-
past five o'clock on Saturday afternoon, when her
sufferings terminated.
The prisoner's father and mother, who were both
attending their son's examination, now applied to
have him bail-d

Mr. HOSKINs—BaiI, S r ? No.
Bartholomew, the younger, was committed for
re-examination, or rather to await the result of the
Coroner's inquest on the remains of Lady Barham.