The Sun.
London, England, 1828-03-20 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

VIOE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT—Mulch 19.
JUDGMENT.
F X.-PARTE BERNASCONI AND OTHERS, IN THE MATTER

01' cIL
His Hosouß gave judgment to-day upon this
petition. It stated that Wm. Chambers, the brother
of Abraham Henry Chambers, the bankrupt, had
proved a separate debt under the commission, to the
amount of about 4,000/., said to be due for the
principal and interest of a promissory note of 3,7941.
Two years after this proof under the commission,
Wm. Chambers brought an action of debt against
his brother for 25,0004, and on the 26th November
1827, final judgment was signed for him by default.
The Sheriff of Dorsetshire seized under the execu-
tion the property of the bankrupt, and also some
property belonging to the Assignees. The present
petition, which was presented by the assigneeF,
represented that as Wm. Chambers had proved
under the commission in the first instance, he must
be concluded to have made his election, and was
therefore bound to come under the commission
rateably with the other creditors. It prayed that he
might not be allowed to sell the property
which he had seized, but that he be ordered
by the Court to give directions to the Sheriff
to withdraw his execution. This prayer was made
under the 59th section of the late Bankrupt
Act. It had been previously decided that the cre-
ditor, as between him and the bankrupt, must be
considered to have made his election by proving
under the commission ; but the present was the first
instance in which that question arose as between
the creditor and the assignees of the bankrupt.
In answer to the petition it was stated, that the
action at law had been brought not only for the debt
proved under the commission, but also for the re-
covery of other demands.
His HONOUR WAS of opinion, that not only under
the Statute, but also under the general jurisdiction
exercised by the Court, he was empowered to
make the order prayed by the petition ; he did not
see what difference in principle there could-exist
between the rights of the bankrupt, as regarded a
ease of this nature, and the assignees of the bank-
rupt who represented him.
The order was made with costs.

LENT ASSIZES.

NORFOLK CIRCUIT.-THETFORD, RLtßdnl 18.

James Beckrti and William Cricp, both young
men, were indicted for stealing a sheep, the pro-
perty of James Tweedle. The prisoners were found
" Guilty."
Sentence of death was reco:ded against the pri-
soners, with an assurance that their lives would be
spared.

NORTHERN CIRCUIT.-LANCASTER, MARCH 17.

ACKERS V. HEATON.

Mr. DODD opened the pleadings. The declaration
stated thltt the defendant had debauched the wife of
the plaintiff, whereby the plaintiff had been deprived
of her society and assistance. Plea—" Not Guilty."
Mr. Sergeant Coss stated the case. The plain-
tiff was a gentleman of some property, residing at
Blackrod, in the county of Lancaster. He had been
married for several years to the person who had
been the victim of the defendant's art, and had, by
her, become the father of several children. The de-
fendant also resided at the same place. He was by
profession a surgeon, and as ho had attended the
plaintiff and his family in that capacity, he had of
course had that unrestrained intercourse which the
confidence reposed in a medical man always afforded.
—lt would be proved to them that the plaintiff had
abused the confidence thus reposed, and had availed
himself of the opportunities which his profession gave
him to inflict a lasting and irreparable injury upon the
plaintiff. They would find that it had been almost the
daily custom of tLe defendant to visit the house of
the plaintiff. If upon any of those occasions the
plaintiff happened to be present, the defendant would
pretend that he came to consult a weather-glass
placed in the plaintiff's house ; but when the plaintiff,
as was not unfrequently the case, was absent, then
the defendant's visits had been more prolonged, and
the real object of his visits more apparent. It had
happened in this, as in many other cases of a similar
description, that the unfortunate husband had been
the last to discover his own dishonour, and that
rumour had conveyed the repent to all his neighbours
before it reached him. As soon, however, as the
truth had been discovered to him, he had imme-
diately dismissed his wife from his house, and she
had gone to reside with her own parents, taking
with her an infant but a few months old, and leaving
three or four other children with the plaintiff. Thus
situated, the plaintiff had continued for some time at
Blackrod ; but he had soon found his residence
there painful in the extreme. He had found
himself an object of observation to his neighbours,
and had been exposed almost daily to the mor-
tification of meeting the man who had been the
cause of his disgrace and misfortune. He lied
therefore been compelled, soon after his se-
paration front his wife, to remove from Black-
rod, and take up his abode elsewhere. Still, how-
ever, he felt desolate and unhappy ; the recollection
of his loss perpetually recurred to hint ; and the little
children who surrounded him constantly cried out
for their absent mother. Worked upon by these
considerations, the plaintiff's resolution to live sepa-
rate had been ultimately overcome, and he had con-
sented amain to receive into his house the wife whose
infidelity had dishoneured him. The unfortunate
woman had accordingly returned home, But she
had never been able to hold up her head after the
disgrace which she' was conscious she had incurred.
Her health had rapidly sunk beneath the mental dis-
quietude which she endured, and her death, which
happened a few weeks ago, had completed the
melaneholy catastrophe of which the defendant had
been the occasion.
After evidence had been adduced in support of
the charge, the Jury found a verdict for the defendant.
Mr. BROUGHAM, as leading Counsel in the pro-
secution against Ashton, who Was tried on Saturday,
and sentenced to death, for shooting at one of Lord
Sefton's gamekeepers, now stated to the Court that
he was instructed, by the noble prosecutor, to re-
commend the prisoner to mercy. The grounds on
which he presumed to make the recommendation
were, that it was clear that the wound had not been

inflicted by the hand of the prisoner, and also, that
it was obvious that the gun of the prisoner had not
been fired in the affray.
Mr. Justice BAYLEY was not prepared to say
what would be the effect of this recommendation,
but he hoped that the feeling which the Noble Lord
had displayed in making it, would not be lost on
the prisoner's friends.

WESTERN CIRCUIT.—DORCHESTER, MARcit 18.

Win. Joy, aged 22, was put to the bar charged
with having feloniously assaulted, on the 14th of
August last, Mary Ann Trigill, aged 24, and
having then and there, &c. contrary to the statute.
The prisoner was also charged with a robbery, com-
mitted upon the same person.
The prosecutrix, a very delicate modest-looking
woman, detailed the principal particulars of the case,
hich was one of peculiar atrocity. The prosecutrix,
on being directed by the Judge to make those ex-
plicit statements which in these cases are necessary
to prove the entire guilt of the prisoner, became
greatly affected, and at last fainted away. She was
removed from Court for some time, after which she
returned and completed the evidence against the
prisoner. She deposed that she had never, before
or since the violation, had any intercourse, and that
she was now enceinte.

The Jury, after a short consultation, found the
prisoner " Guilty."
The Learned Judge, after a very solemn address,
proceeded to pass on the prisoner the awful sentence
of death, which is to he carried into execution in a
few days.
Mr. Serjeant WILDE then prayed the judgment
of the Court upon Sir Robert Steele, who had at
the last Assizes pleaded " Guilty" to an indictment
in which he was charged with having sent to Cap-
tain Garth a libellous and insulting letter, with in-
tent to provoke a breach of the peace. Mr. Serjeant
Wilde said, that at the last Assizes the defendant
having pleaded " Guilty" to the indictment,affidavits
in aggravation had been put in by the prosecutor,
and leave given to the defendant to put in an affi-
davit in mitigation. As, however, the affidavits put
in by the defendant had not been confined to a
denial of the statements in the affidavits in aggra-
vation, but had introduced a great deal of matter
wholly new, the Learned Serjeant requested leave
of the Court now to read new affidavits for the
prosecution, in reply to such parts of the affidavits
of Sir Robert Steele as had introduced matter en-
tirely new.
Mr. BARSTOW, on the part of Sir Robert Steele,
complained that this motion had entirely taken him
by surprise.
After some conversation, which occupied a con-
siderable time, and a consultation between Mr. Jus-
tice GASELEE and Mr. Justice LITTLEDALE, it was
decided by the Learned Judge that the new affidavits
of Mr. Sergeant Wilde should be read; but that
such parts as did not refer to the new matter in the
affidavits of Sir Robert Steele should be struck out.

All the affidavits, which ►were very numerous,
were then read seriatim by Mr. Bishop, the clerk of
the arraigns.
The first affidavit was that of Thomas Garth, a
Captain on half-pay of the 15th Hussars, dated Dor-
chester, August 24, 1827. It stated in substance,
that in the December preceding, the deponent was
residing with Lady Astley, at the St. James's Hotel
in Jerreyn-street,London ; that in the circumstances
in which he was then placed, he stood peculiarly in
need of the assistance of a friend; that the defendant,
Sir Robert Steele, had offered his services upon the
occasion, and that they had been accepted ; that the
defendant was at that time residing at the above-
named hotel as the friend and guest of the deponent;
that the defendant recommended the deponent to go
down to his father's (General Garth's) in Dorset-
shire, the defendant offering to remain as Lady
Astley's protector in the deponent's absence; that
the deponent having left town accordingly, the de-
fendant had treacherously abused the confidence re-
posed in him ; bad misrepresented Capt. Garth to
Lady Astley ; had spoken contemptuously of his
understanding, and had made the most insulting and
indelicate proposals to Lady Astley herself. That
the deponent was, upon his return from Dme;etshire,
informed by Lady Astley of the conduct pursued
by the defendant towards her in the deponent's ab-
sence. That the deponent thereupon applied to
Colonel Gurwood, late of the 10th Hussars, on the
conduct ►which deponent should pursue towards the
defendant, ►who had thus violated his confidence,
and insulted Lady Astley. That Colonel Gurwood
and other military friends had advised the deponent
to hold no communication with the defendant. That
on the 23d of February afterwards the deponent had
received from the defendaUt a letter, of ►which copies
had also been circulated among the gentlemen of
Dorsetshire, and one exhibited iu the club-room at
Weymouth ; that all the gross insinuations and im-
putations upon the deponent's conduct, contained in
the above-mentioned letter of the defendant, ►were
utterly false ; and that the conduct of the defendant,
since that period, had rendered it imperative on the
deponent to come to the Court for protection and
redress. The affidavit stated also that the deponent
had given the defendant 5/. to defray the expenee of
his journey back to Weymouth from London.
The second affidavit was dated the 4th of August,
1827, and made by Edward John Howard, of Sack-
ville-street, Piccadilly, the prosecutor's attorney.
The next affidavit was dated as the above, and
made by Dame Georgiana Carolina Astley, of
Montagu-square, Middlesex. It stated, that the
assertion made by Sir Robert Steele, of her Lady-
ship's having acted towards him ►with levity, and
been guilty of making indecent advances to him,
were utterly false, unfounded, and calumnious. She
then went on to state the circumstances of the re-
sidence at the hotel in .fermyn-street, and the de-
parture of Captain Garth for Dorsetshire; and hav-
ing repeated the statement of Sir Robert Steele
having on that occasion made insulting; proposals to
her Ladyship, added, that about the middle of the
night of the 25th of December the defendant had
attempted to force his ►way into her bed-chamber at
the hotel, and had only been prevented from enter-
ing by the circumstances of the door being locked,
and a maid-servant sleeping in the room.
The letter which formed the ground-work of the
charge against the defendant was then read.
There followed next an affidavit of Sir. Robert
Steele, dated Dorchester, 4th of August, 1827. It
stated, that about the time in question (December,
1826), the deponent had been consulted by Captain
Garth, with respect to a negociation then going
forward between the latter gentleman and Sir Jacob
Astley, " the object of such treaty being the accom-
plishment of the wishes of all parties in procuring
the marriage of the said Sir Jacob and Lady Astley
to be 'annulled by Act of Parliament." The affi-
davit went on to state, that " there were two points
connected with the said treaty upon which there
was a difference of opinion between the deponent
and Captain Garth, the first being as to the terms
which should be insisted upon with Sir Jacob Astley
and the second as to the course of defence which
should be taken in the action awainst the said Thos.
Garth, in case the treaty should be broken off; that
as to the first of these points, he advised Captain
Garth not to insist upon Sir Jacob doing more than
returning the fortune which Lady Astley had
brought, together with her jewels and other
personal property; while on the other hand Capt.
Garth declared that he ►would insist upon Sir Jacob's
allowing Lady Astley 4,0001. a-year, or he would
exhibit such a case against him as would reduce the
damages to a farthing.* That as to the second point,
he earnestly advised Capt. Garth " not to make the
eliminating of Sir Jacob Astley any part of his de-
fence, as the effect of his taking such a course would
be, that Sir Jacob would not be able to obtain a
divorce, and thereby Capt. Garth would be pre-
vented from making Lady Astley his ►wife ; that in
a moment when, during the absence of Capt. Garth,
he had lost his self-command, the circumstance oc-
curred respecting the conduct of the deponent to-
wards Lady Astley, and for the Occurrence of which

In the case of " Astley v. Garth," the Jury returned
a verdict for the plaintiff—l/mar., le,

the deponent afterwards expressed his regret to Col.
GurWood; but the deponent most solemnly protested
that the circumstance did not occur in consequence of
any previous deSign of deponent. That Capt. Garth
returned from Dorsetshire on Friday, the 29th of De-
cember, and that in that and the following day Capt.
Garth and Lady Astley had behaved towards the de-
fendant in their usual friendly manner, and as if
nothing had occurred to interrupt their friendship.
That on the 29th and 30th, the deponent and Lady
Astley and Capt. Garth went to the theatre toge-
ther. That on Sunday morning the deponent went
to Brighton, whence he returned on Tuesday, and that
on his return he received the following note at the
hotel

‘. Tuesday, Jan. 2, 18'27.

" My dear Steele,—My Lady has promised to dine and
spend part of the day with her old governess, and I am
going to dine with some Meltonians. I Lave given orders
for everything to be ready for you.
" Truly yours, " THOMAS GARTH."
he affidavit went on t© state, that upon this
same evening Lady Astley came into his apart-
ment after dinner, and met him in the usual friendly.
manner. That the next morning, before the depo-
nent was out of bed, he received a message from
Colonel Gurwood, who, on being introduced to the
deponent, stated, that Captain Garth had, on the
preceding Saturday night, seen the hand of Lady
Astley in that of the deponent ; and that, on her
Ladyship's being thereupon interrogated by Captain
Garth, she stated to him what has been-already
detailed in her Ladyship's affidavit. The affidavit
then denied, expressly, that Sir Robert Steele had
ever made the assertion about the levity of Lady
Astley's conduct, which Mr. Howard had positively
sworn that he had made ; and went ou to state, that
" the whole of the disgusting conduct attributed to
him by the said Mr. Howard on the said occasion
had been wilfully fabricated." He further stated
that he believed, and still does believe, that Captain
Garth had adopted the said line of defence because
he could not obtain such pecuniary terms of settle-
ment from Sir Jacob Astley as he desired, and that
he wished to take thereupon such a course as would
have the two-fold effect of securing himself from
damages, and also of putting it out of the
power of Lady Astley to call upon him to
marry her without a settlement. The affidavit
stated, in conclusion, that the letter which was the
ground of the indictment had been written under
feelings of great irritation, and having mentioned
the services of the deponent in the Peninsula and
elsewhere, stated that neither his pecuniary circum-
stances nor the state of his health could endure any
considerable degree of imprisonment or fine. After
an affidavit from a surgeon, deposing to the state of
Sir Robert Steele's health. Mr. Bishop read an
affidavit of Captain Garth, flatly contradicting seve-
ral of the statements contained in the preceding
affidavits of Sir Robert Steele. It was followed
by an affidavit of Lady Astley, contradicting such
parts of Sir Robert Steele's affi&ivit as respected
herself.

Mr. BAnsTow then addressed the Court for the
defence, in what Mr. Sergeant Wilde designated as
a very ingenious address. With regard to the
charge of having imputed levity to Lady Astley, Sir
Robert Steele had authorized him, Mr. Barstow, to
deny it on his honour as a soldier and a gentleman,
as he, Sir Robert, had himself done, more solemnly
upon his oath as a Christian. (Mr. Howard's oath
flatly contradicted Sir Robert Steele upon this
matter.)
After the conclusion of Mr. Barstow's address,
Mr. Sergeant WILDE addressed the Court in aggra-
vation, and was followed by Mr. C. F. WlLLtAsts ;
after which
His LORDSHIP sentenced Sir Robert Steele to be
imprisoned in the common gaol of the county for
one month, and to pay a fine of 1001. to the King,
and after the termination of the imprisonment, to
find security for his good behaviour for two years,
two sureties in 200/. each, and the prisoner himself
in 5001. ; and to be further imprisoned until the
fine had been paid, and the security procured.

OXFORD CIRCTTIT.-STAFFORD, MARCH 18.

STAFFORD TERRACE.

John Willa, Thomas Moreton, Humphry
awl John Mills, who had been indicted for conspir-
ing to procure several of the inhabitants of this town
to surrender their premises or attorn to James Stamp
Sutton Cook, by threatening them with actions of
ejectment and heavy costs, were this (lay again
brought up, and on the motion of Mr. Talfourd, on
behalf of the prosectitor, liberated OH entering into
their own recognizances in 50/. each, to appear to
take their trial when tailed upon.

MIDLAND CIRCUIT.-NOTTINGHAM, MARCH 17.

IriManz Barker, a labouring man, between 30
and 40 years of age, and both deaf and dumb, Was
indicted for cutting and stabbing, with a certain
sharp instrument, Samuel Parr, on the 15th inst.,
at the parish of West Bridgford, with intent to
murder him, to maim him, or to do him some griev-
ous bodily harm.
The Jury acquitted him on the ground of insanity,
and he was ordered to be taken care of to abide his
Majesty's pleasure.

TUESDAY; STARCH 18.
George White was indicted far wilfully, mali-
ciously, and unlawfully shooting at William Hick-
ling, with intent to disable him, or do him some
grievous bodily harm.
William Hickling, who resides
with The
hiscprosecutor, fatheray
this town, and four other men,
ree c a public-house on the 22d of last
accidentally
entli
September, and agreed to go out together to catch
hares in Sir R. Clifton's preserves. They accord-
ingly proceeded thither the same evening, set snares
in the hedges, and then went beating about to rout
the hares, for which purpose twe of the party made
a noise by clicking two stones together. One of
them, named Watson, was accompanied by a dog.
As they were passing along one of the hedges, they
found a man lying down, who halloo'd to them.
They inquired what he was doing there ? lie re-
plied, that he meant them no harm, and offered to
shake hands with one of them. They ordered hini
out of the field, and proceeded in quest of hares. In
a short time, the man whom they had seen near the
hedge, and whose name was Drakeford, returned,
accompanied by Sir Robert Clifton's head game-
keeper, the keeper's son, and another under-
keeper, the prisoner at the bar. The poachers
ran away a , short distance in different direc-
tions. The head-keeper pursued one of them,
named Watson,'a few yards, and took him into cus-
tody without any resistance. His son pursued and
apprehended another; Drakeford secured a third;
and the prisoner, drawing a pistol from his breast,
called out to the prosecutor, that if he did not stop
he would blow his brains out. At the same mo-
ment he presented the pistol at his back, and almost
instantly fired it off. The prosecutor exclaimed,
" 0 dear, 0 dear, you have shot me !" and fell
upon the ground. He was taken to the head
keeper's house, and put to bed, and afterwards
walked home. Sir Robert Clifton ordered Mr.
Wright, his medical man, to visit him, who had his
wounds dressed; and he was afterwards attended
by Dr. Davison. He was for some days confined to
his bed, and was afterwards sent to gaol for three
months, on being convicted of poaching.
The Jury, after deliberating for about ten minutes
returned a verdict (through their foreman) of Guilty,
with a recommendation to mercy : but another
with
the Jury added, " We find him guilty, but not wlt
intent to do any grievous injury.
must reconsider their verdict,
for
jC
he did
even-
tend to do a grievous injury to
the prosecutor,
not guilty
The LORD CHIEF BARON told them
dtihdant
otthieny
if he did fire at him, they must say
of 11 of Gzally.
deli-
beration, returned a verdict • d• •
The verdict was received with great dissatisfac-
tion to hear the trial,
tion by the multitude ass
the whole day.
The Jury, after a few minutes ofeadditional .
which occupied the Court during
escape he had had, and never
ing from the narrow
again use fire arms on such an occasion.
His LORDSHIP advised the prisoner to take warn-