The Sun.
London, England, 1826-04-01 00:00:00

ASSIZI; IN

HOME CIRCUIT.—MAIDSTONE, MAncn 30.
TAYLOR AND WIFE u. MORRISON.

This was an action to recover the amount of a reward of 20
guineas, offered by the defendant for the conviction of a man
named every, charged with pig-stealing.
Mr. ANDREWS and Mr. CLAnirsow conducted the plaintiff's
ease;, Mr. GURNEY and Mr. STARR the defendant's.
The case for the plaintiff's was this.—The plaintiff's wife
had a lodger named Overy, who told her that he had some
pigs to sell, and believing that they had come honestly into
his possession, she made the purchase. In a day or two
afterwards, she saw a handbill published by the defendant,
notifying thatTigs such as she had bought had been stolen,
and offering a reward of twenty guineas to any person who
gave such evidence as would bring the offenders to justice.—
Suspecting from,this that the pigs sold to her by Overy were
stolen, she communicated with the defendant on the subject,
the
and pigs being identified, Overy was apprehended, and by
her evidence was convicted. When she applied to the defendant
for the payment of the reward advertised,he declined complying
with the terms of the notice, on the ground that she was a guilty
receiver of tile pigs, knowing diem to have been stolen. She
now brought her action, joining her husband 'for conformity,
and the defence was
the thief, anti consequently could maintain
no action for the reward.

Two police officers were called, who swore that the plaintiff's
wife was 4 notorious receiver Of stolen goods, and also kept a
house of questionable fame at Sheerness ; that when they went
to search her premises for the stolen pigs she was greatly
agitated, and expressed a hope that she should not he prose-
cuted ; and that, so far from their claiming any merit in having
given the information against Avery, she disclaimed anydesire
in participating in the reward offered.
The Jury, under the Learned Judge's direction, found a
verdict for the plaintiffil—Damages, 211.

THE KING V. JOHN GERMANY AND OTHERS.
This was an indictment against the tlefendapts, for running
down a boat, and assaulting two men of the Smuggling Pre-
ventive Service,named Turner and Woodward, at Gillingham,
on the 4th of ugust last.
The prosecution was conducted at the instance of the Board
of Admiralty, by Mr. Sergeant Ortstow, Mr. MARRYATT,
Mr. GURNEY, and :11r. Knox.

- • •
It appeared in evidence that, on the .day in question, Tur-
ner, a gunner belonging to the Shannon, stationed in Gil-
'lngham Creek, had been sent from .shore by Lieutenant
Bray, with a message to the Commanding-officer of the Shan-
non. On his return, in a small boat belonging to a man named
Woodward, the boat was run down and sunk by a flatting
smack, of which the defendants, three in number, were the
crew. With considerable difficulty the lives of Turner and
Woodward were saved. A Waterman put off from the shore
anti picked them up. Turner caught hold of a rope attached
to the fishing smack, and was dragged through the water about
the distance of two 'hundred feet. The defendants; -seeing-the
danger of the men, had 'put out their boat to pick theth iip, anti
alleged that the affair was an accident, and that' the.), had no
alternative but to 'run on shore.. - At the spot where the acci-
dent. happened there were 17 feet of water, and their smack
only drew about six feet. Turner and Woodward said they
could not say that the defendants (whom they had net known
before) had acted from a malicious motive, but they declared
that they never saw such lubberly conduct in their lives.
Mr. ANDnEws. urged, for the defendants, that the whole.
transaction was the result of mere carelessness, 'if not of pitre
accident, and, on their part; disclaimed anyintention of run-
ning down the boat which had been sunk. '
The Jury, under- • the LORD CDTEF BARDN's directions,
Acquitted two of the defendants altogether, but found JOhn
Germany, who acted as helmsman, Guilty of a commoniusault.