The Sun.
London, England, 1821-08-17 00:00:00

[NEW TIMES.I

Mr. Waithman -may very fiirly and properly
be asked, whether he .did not know that the
King's orders were, that the Funeral should not
pass through the city ? Whether he, as Sheriff,
ought not to do his utmost to enforce obedience
to the King's lawful commands—whether (upon
his oath) he does not know that there was a plan
formed to defeat the iiing',3.ommands—what he
heard, and from whom by name, relative to any
such intention before he -Set' out ? 'Whether
he did not see ' and observe a riotous and
illegal . opposition to the paSsage of the Fu-
neral through Kensington-gate; whether he
did not see several horsemen, and whom

by name, inciting and encouraging the riot-
ers ? Whether he took any, and what steps
to quell the riot, or to secure any of the rioters ?
Whether he did pot see brick-bats, stones,-mud.,
and sticks thrown at the King's troops) and wile-

ther, if he himself had been so treated, he would
have sate like Patience on a Monument ? We
have not time to add one half of the questions
that might and ought to be put to Mr. Waithman,
since he thinks lit to thrust himself in the proceed-.
ing before the Coroner. We would; however, bed
to suggest one thing to the Coroner himself, which
is, that great as Mr. Waithman may be at Guild-
hall, he is nobody on an examination before a
Coroner's Inquest ; and that if he presumes,• by
impertinent questions -or irrelevant remarks, to
impede the course of justice, he should be silenced
or committed. The Laws of England know no
distinction of. per Sons : and even Mr. Sheriff
Waithman cannot be allowed, on a matter of life
and death, to violate those rules which are essen-
tial to the liberty and security 'of Britons.
..* We may fairly add to these questions of " The New
Times," and ask Mr. Waithman how he happened to be upon
the very spot where the fury of the mob existed in its greatest
force, and the attacks on the military compelled them, at length,
to fire in self-defence ?

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

SECONDARrS COURT, AuG. 15.

PICKFORD V. ELLIOT.

This wat a writ of.iinquiry to assess the damags in an action
of asvault and false•fmprisoument, in which the defendant had
sufLred judgment to go by default. A Special Jury had been
summoned, but four Special Jurymen only were in attendance.
The plaintiff's Cvnsel haying consented to a tales, the Jury
was sworn,

Mr. C. Pill ei U's proceeded tee state the case to the Jury. The
action was brought by William Pickford, the plaintiff, against
I lenry Augustus Elliot, the defendant, the recover damages for
a trespass, an assault, and a fitiee imprisonment, and to recover
the value of property, belonging to the plaintiff, of which the
defendant had violently and wreingfully possessed himself. It
might be necessary to inform the Jury, that the plaintiff was the
son of one of the most respectable merchants of the City of
London, who had been a Governer of upwards of 20 Charities,
and who at the time of his death was the oldest Governor then
living of Chriit's Hospital. Pis property, and, he trusted, his
respectability, had devolved • upon his children, 'and Mr. W.
Pickford was now a merchant of the City of London, and the
owner of several ships, one of which was the Resource. The
defendant, Mr. Elliot, was the Captain of a sloop of war, the
Icarus, in his Majesty's Navy. In the year.lB2o the plaintiff
went in person on board his ship to the Brazils, in consequence
of the value of the cargo, which consisted chiefly of dollars to
the amountof 400,0001. There was on board the vessel a carpen-
ter of the name of Patteson, a very skilful workman, whom the
plaintiff' had occasionally indulged, when they touched at any
port, by allowing him to work ashore on his own account, and
althougte, he might have stopped his wages during such period
of indulgence, he had never done so. There were some per:.
sons in whom indulgence failed to create gratitude, and unfor-
tunately Patteson waS one of them. When the ship arrived at
the port of Rio Janeiro, 'he asked leave to go on shore, but as
Captain. Pickford had no pratique, es it was technically termed,
with the shore, and as Patteson had abused the indulgence which
hail beeri graeted him on a former occasion, he refused to let
him go. Pa.ttesori became discontented ; and he contrived to
communicate this discontent to the rest of the crew se that it
rose almost to absolute mutiny. As the Icarus aioop of war
was lying near the vessel, Capt. Pickford thought it rit in this
emergency to apply to any ship of war which bore his Majesty's
flag, and he accordingly ordered out his boat, and went on
board the Icarus. He did not see the-defendant on this occa-
sion, but he saw a perfect Gentleman, the Honourable Mr.
Maude, the First Lieutenant, who was at this time in Ireland,
and who could not therefore, he regretted to say, be called as a
witness in the cause, because, by a strange anomaly in the pro-
cess of the English law; a subpoena did not run to Ire-
land. , He represented the situation in which he was placed
by the mutiny of the carpenter, and ..Nlr. Maude, with that
propriety which generally characterises the officers of the Navy,
instantly ordered a Midshipman, and. a number of Marines,
to go on )board the Resource, arid bring the mutineer Patteson
to the Icarus. Captain Pickford was at this time in a bad state
of health, and in addition to the misfortune of a debilitated
constitution, he had.a chililying on its death-bed at a•house in
Rio Janeiro. He went on shore for the purpose of seeing-his
child before its death, and while staying at the house hereceived
a message from Captain Elliot, at the purport of which he was
not a little astonished, for he was told that unless he repaired,
within half an hour from the receipt of the message, on board
the Icarus, and paid Patteson whatever sum he demanded,
Capt. Elliot would send ah armed launch on board the merchant
ship, the Resource, and take out dollars to the amount of Patte-
son's demand. The distance of the house from the shore, and
the state of the plaintiff's health, rendered it impossible to come,
ply with the 'summons of the defendant within the time pre-
scribed, and the plaintiff therefore wrote -a letter to Capt. Elliot,
in which he deprecated the threatened outrage, and stated his
readiness to make every effort iii his power to see Capt. Elliot
as soon as possible. He accordingly did repair bn board the
Icarus, and it was there that he had the misfortune of a first in-
terview with the defendant. As soon as he came on board, Capt.
Elliott abruptly accosted him, by observing, that them had been
a great deal of trouble in settling the accounts between him and -
his carpenter, and added, " I desire you will settle them in-
stantly." The plaintiff said, he was quite ready to settle them,
and drew a cheque for the sum due to Patteson. Capt. Elliot
objected to the cheque, and said " Come, Sir, that iseiet your
name; by G— you are falsifying your signature." The plain-
tiff irt vain protested that he was a respectable merchant, inca-
pable of committing such an act ; the Captain swore that he was
a shabby fellow, and ordered a fresh cheque to be drawn for
the whole sum demanded by Patteson. Upon the plaintiff's
refusing to pay this suns, as it amounted to 91. more than was
due to Patteson, Captain Elliot said, " If you do not pay it in-
stantly, I will tie you up to the gangway and give you six dozen
lashes, if it cost me 5,0001." Captain Pickering replied that he
was on board-ins (Captain Elliot's) vessel, arid that he knew
he was in his Ower ; belt lie Would not dare to commit such an
outrage upon him, When there were British laws to appeal to
for redress. He requested the officers of the ship to give
him their names, as witnesses of this transaction. Cap-
tain Elliot forbade the officers to giee their names at their
peril. " And now for your insolence," said he, turning to the
plaintiff, " I declare you a prisoner; send off his boat ; I will
not take your dollars, but by 0— I will take your three top-
sails." This order was no sooner given than executed ; in vain
the plaintiff represented the danger which would arise from dis-
mantling his ship in the event of a storm. Captain Elliot or-
dered out an armed launch to go on board the ship of a British
merchant, and actually brought away the three topsails to the
Icarus. The plaintiff was in the mean time detained a prisoner
on board the sloop of war ; he 'appealed to the humanity of
Captain Elliot to inform his wife of his situation ; his request
was denied ; he bogged to be allowed the use of pen, ink, and
paper ; this, too, was refused. It was lamentable to reflect on
the degree of tyranny which was exercised on board a ship of
was ; the autocrat of the Russias was not more despotic than
the captain of an English frigate. But though Captain Elliot
would neither inform the plaintiff's wife ofhis situation, nor al-
low a father to see his dying child, he could go on shorehimsdf
for his own amusement, and as he probably learnt on this occa-
sion that the man on whom he had committed so gross an out-
rage, was one of the most respectable and honourable merchants
that ever traded from the British shores, he thought proper,
after the expiration of six hours, to give orders for his libera.
time Captain Pickford applied, as soon as. he got on shore, to
the authorities of the country, and a criminal warrant for piracy
was issued against the Captain of the Icarus, which was only
not executed because the defendant fled under the flag of Eng-
land from the port. The defendant had at first the hardihood
to deny that he had committed the offence with which he was
charged ; but, after some consultation with his legal advisers, he
found it would be useless to follow up insolence and oppression
by audacity in a Court of Justice, and he therefore confessed
upon the record that he had imprisoned and plundered the
plaintiff. The damages were laid in the declaration at 20001.
and the Jury would see whether any circumstances of mitiga-
tion could he adduced to diminish those damages. Having now
stated the case, he would ask the Jury, whether, if he succeeded
in establishing it by evidence, it was not one of considerable ag-
gravation ? Let them call to mind the total absence of all pro-
vocation—the insolent language by which the outrage was ac-
companied—the prohibition of all communication with the shore,
the scene, the defendant's vessel—the witnesses, the defendant's
crew—the threats of the defendant,from which he abstained, and
those which he actually carried into execution by the plunder
of ht property and the imprisonment of his person, an impri-
sonment aggravated by the state of plaintiff's health, by the
illness dins family, and by the rank which he most deserved-
ly held in society. He would not degrade any one of them
by supposing for a moment that he would deem it sufficient to
give his client reparation for the mere, personal suffering, how-
ever poignant, or the mere loss of property, however considerable,
which be had sustained. Ile was persuaded there was not one
of them who did not feel that he had a much higher duty to
discharge, who did .not feel that he was that day called upon
to tell the commercial community of this great Metropolis at
what sum he would estimate such an outrage committed by
a British officer upon a British merchant ; to tell the Navy
of Great Britain whether their flag waved for the protection
or the oppression of the people—to tell this armed and pre-
sumptuous innovator that we were not yet reduced to submit
to either naval or military jurisdiction—to convince him that
there was a power in England paramount to the sword, a
power which patriotism created, which wisdom had nursed, and
ages rendered venerable—the power of the law, which, while it
maintained the rights of the proud and the wealthy, extended
its fostering shield over the cottage of the peasant, and protected
him against oppression, though mailed in armour. There was
one way by winch the Jury might equitably estimate what da-
mages were due to his client. Let them say what damages, un-
der similar circumstances, they would claim for themselves,and
he asked no more. Let them consider for what sum in monies
numbered they would be content to undergo such treatment as
his client had received ; let them consider at what price they
would endure not only insult, but plunder—not only plunder,but
imprisonment—not only imprisonment, but menaces the most
odious and revolting. Let them consider, in short, for what sum
they would consent to be told that they should be flogged at the
gangway of amen of war, and beexposed to the jeers and deri-
sion of a common crew of hireling dependants. If any man
were base enough to tender a sum as the price of submission to
such indignities, would they not dash in the ruffian's face the
proffered wages of dishonour ? Let them reflect, too, on the
place in which the outrage was offered. It was not in one of our
own ports, where his client's character might have borne him
high and buoyantabove such indignities. No, it was on a foreign
station, in the face of strangers, that a British officer, the natural
protector of our commercial, interests, had presumed to degrade
a British merchant into a slave. It was on a foreign station that

he had insulted, plundered, and, imprisoned his client—on a fo-
reign station he-had Violated the law;-and trampled on the flag'
of England—from a foreign station he fled beneath a red cross
banner to escape a criminal warrant for an act. of piracy. In the
name of the British navy, he protested against such an outrage;
in the 'name of that flag which had never waved but in sup-
port of freedom and independence, he protested against such
vile and unprincipled oppression ; he protested to God he
almost merged the insult to his clients and to the laws in the
outrage which had been offered to the commercial community
of London, and the still greater outrage which had been offered
to that sacred ensign, which for so many age's had borne our
name in triumph through the world. He intreated the Jury to
consider the case, stripped of all colouring, divt sted of all ag-
gravation. What excuse could the defendant plead, what pos-
sible palliation could he allege ? Would he say that his client
appealed to him ? True ; but it was for aid, and not for oppres-
sion. Would he say chat his client was in debt ? It was at any
rate a disputed debt ; hut even admitting the debt, who, he
would ask, made the defendant the arbitrator? What isghthad he
to plunder the plaintiff to the alleged amount? Who gave him
pie right; a right which belongs not to the Monarch himself, to
imprison without proof or process ? Who gave him authority to
insult a respectable British merchant on his own quarter-deck,
surrounded by his own myrmidons, where there was no chance
of escape, no possibility of resistance ? Did he imagine that his
uniform gave him the right of resorting to such lawless violence ?
He tiustelethe verdict of this day would undeceive him, and
convince him that we were not compelled to submit to military
or naval oppression. Did he suppose that the distance from Eng-
land took away the blessings which belonged to the birth of an
Englishman ! He trusted the amount of the damages which
they would this day assess, would teach him a different lesson,
and convince him, that wherever the Briton journeys, he bears
about with him the blessing of his birthright. It protects him at
home, it walks abroad with him, like his moral shadow, it courses
the sea, it traverses the deserts, it is indissoluble, inseparable,
neither weakened by distance, nor changed by circumstances ;
whatever realms intervene, whatever seas roll between the Bri-
ton and his home, he is still safe under the shelter of the laws, and
protected by the guardian shield of the Constitution. They had
this day a proud duty to discharge, 'and he was satisfied they
would discharge it faithfully and conscientiously. ,If such an
outrage had been committed by a foreigner, the Government
would have taken it up ; it would have become a national con-
cern, and the foreign power would 'have been called upon to
make reparation for the insult. tilfw much more odious was
the offence, when committed by an officer wearing the uniform
of the British navy, upon the deck. of a British man of war ! He
committed his client's case fearlessly into their hands; he sur-
rendered it to their sacred consciences ; and he asked no more
damages than they would themselves expect to receive, if they
had been so plundered in their property, imprisoned in their
persons, and threatened to be tied up to the gangway, and
flogged,,. even though it should cost the defendant 5,0001. amid
the jeers and scot:11:1gs of an hireling crew. He was persuaded
they would return such a verdict-as would mark to the commer-
cial community of this country, their swornopinion of such
treatment inflicted by a British officer upon a British merchant.
Wm. Fuller examined. I was master of the Icarus in De-
cember, 1820. I remember seeiag Capt. Pickford, when he
came fine on board the Icarus on a Sunday morning. I heard
some conversation between him and Capt. Elliot about the bad-
ness of the provisions ; Capt. Pickford acknowledged they were
bad, - but said he could not get better. The second time he
came on board the Icarus, was on the 29th of December. I
remember hearing a dispute between Capt. Pickford and Capt.
Elliot about paying Patteson his wages ;the dispute was about a
difference of 91. Mr. Pickford said, he was willing to pay him
his due, but he was convinced he was not entitled to the 91. be-
cause he had worked out of the ship. Capt. Elliot said, " You
shall pa him—l will make you pay him, or else I will keep you
on board the ship." Mr. Pickford walked up and down the
deck with his arms folded. Capt. Elliot desired Capt. Pickford
not to be insolent, or he would flog him on the quarter deck, if
it cost him 50001. Capt. Pickford said, " I know, Capt. Elliot,
lam in vour power, but flog the at your peril." Elliot said lie
would, if he did not pay the difference. He afterwards or-
dered Pickford's boat o% and kept him on board. Captain
Pickford press:gest-against his detention. A boat was after-
wards.sent from the Icarus with an officer. 1 remember Pat-
teson being on board the Resource, and I understood that lie
was sent on board the Icarus as a mutineer. Capt. Elliot or-
dered his men to unbend and bring the topsails of the Resource
on board the Icarus. I should not consider a ship safe without
her topsails in any vicissirtidoi of weather. The sails were
brought on board the Icarus, and Capt. Elliot afterwards went
on shore. He made no offer to take Capt. Pickford. I remem-
ber Capt. Pickford appealing to him on account of the illness of
his family. As soon as the toriails were brought, Capt. Elliot
ordered Lieut. Maude to send Capt. Pickford on board his own
ship. Capt. Pickford then Laid to Capt. Elliot, " you know
better than to keep me on board." Capt. Elliot said, " I do,
do I ? then I will keep you on hoard till to-morrow morning,
or at all events till further orders ; Mr. Maude, keep him on
board !" Capt. Pickford said to Capt. Elliot, " I will thank
you to let my wife know I am di/mined on board as a prisoner ;
I ask you this, as a Gentleman, nln as a Captain in the Navy."
I heard no answer to this request. Capt. Pickford then asked
for pen, ink, and paper, which were denied him. The sails
were brought on board hat afternoon, and were never returned.
I heard Capt. Pickford ask for the officers' names. and Captain
Elliot said it was not necessary. Capt. Pickford-said, " Gen-
tlemen, I hope you will take notice, I protest against this pro.
ceeding." The plaintiff spoke shortly to Capt. Elliot, but I
should have spoken more warmly myself, if I had been treated
in the same way. •
Cross-examined—The Erst time Capt. Pickford came on
board the Icarui to charge Patteson with a mutiny. Capt. El-
liot appointed Sunday morning to investigate the complaint.—
After an investigation of the complaint and an examination of
witnesses, Capt. Elliot told Capt. Pickford he was satisfied
there was no foundation for a charge of mutiny; Patteson ap-
plied to be taken on board the King's ship as a volunteer, and
was received. I recollect a long dispute about 4:9. Capt.
Pickford said, that as lie had given Patteson leave to work out
of the ship, he had no right to demand it. Capt. Pickford
spoke in a warm way, but not insolently. The sails were sold
for about £9 sterling, and the policy was given by Capt. Elliot
to Patteson. I think they were worth £20.. Captain Pickford
was ordered. to keep on deck, but Lieut. Maude afterwards
asked him to dine with him.

Re-examined.—Capt. Elliot was not on board when Lieut.
Maude granted this indulgence, and I was first consulted as to
the propnety of it. Capt. Pickford did not answer warmly
until a considerable time after he was threatened to be tied up
to the gang-way.
Another witness was called and sworn, but the Plaintiff's
Counsel conceiving that he had already fully' proved his case,
declined examining him.
Mr. ALLEY then addresSed the Jury in mitigation of da.
mages. He contended, that the case, when stripped of all the
verbiage with which the pla:ntiif 's Counsel had surrounded it,
was one which called only for very moderate damages. However
fluent the langu-age, and however dexterous the address of his
Learned Friend might be, the course he had taken was directly
contrary to that so luminously pointed out by Longinus. The
assage to which he alluded—he abstained from troubling the
jury with the words of the original—impht have taught his
Learned Friend very different principles of pleading. There
were many circumstances: which his , Learned Friend had
stated in aggravation of the assault, which he had failed to
establish by evidence. As' to the charge of the defendant's
absconding in . consequence of having committed an act of
piracy, it was basely false.l it was usual in cases of mutiny
on board Merahaat ;V:es).4.alaa. if 1444 s Skip- was lying pear,
co call upon the Captain of the King's Ship to interfere.—
In this case Captain Elliot' was referral to as the arbitra-
tor between the plaintiff and his crew, and he was satisfied that
there was no ground for the plaintiff's complaint. As to the
taking of the top sails, it was certainly an illegal act ; - but Capt.
Elliot acted. under an erroneous- hnpression of the authority
with which he was invested by the Act of '2 (h.o. '2. cap. 36.
That Act enabled seamen on board Merchant Vessels, to enter
as volunteers on. board King's Ships, and it empowered the
Captains. of King's ships to-direet the payment of such seamen's
wages : but it gave no power to', enforce the
.payment by a sum-
mary distress, although a contrary impression prevailed among
Officers in the Navy, and the practice had been to levy a
distress on board Merchant Vote's, where payment was re,
fused. The error which the defendant had committed, was
rather an error in -judgment, than an error-of the heart. He'
was not in a condition to •pay lare damages, for though Con-
nected with a family of high rank,_ lie was a younger brother,
and his only patrimony was! what he could earn by his
sword., Under all the ciretn)stances, he was satisfied the
Jury Would consider this a case which called for very temperate.
damages.
The SECONDARY, after briefly recapitulating the evidence,
directed the Jury to give such damages as they might think due
to the woanded feelings of the plaintiff; and in adcricion to these,
the value, whatever it might be, of the three topsails. In as-
sessing the damages they were bound, in point of law, to lay
out of their consideration the -threats of the defendant, ,which
formed no part of the assault and false imprisonthent charged
on the record. •

The Jury retired for a short time time, and returned with a
verdict of—Damages for the plaintiff; ONE THOUSAND
POUNDS.

EX ECUTIO N.LJames Cazothorne, convicted at
the Lincoln Assizes of the murder of his wife,
was executed on Thursday, on the drop at
Lincoln. Previous to his being brought out for
execution, he made a full confession of his guilt
to the Clergyman who attended him.

TIIE ASSIZES.

KENT ASSIZES-MAIDSTONE, AUG. 15.

CIVIL SIDE.
Before the Honourable Mr. Baron Wool).
THE KING V. 1110-1AR1) MARSH.

This was an indictment against the defendant,
for assaulting and beating with a whip Robert
A prey Webb, gent. once Town Clerk of the Bo-
rough of Folkestone, on the sth September last.—
Mr. MARRY ATT and Mr. CHITTY conducted the
prosecution, and Mr. AuoLpuus and Mr. PLATT
the defence.—The case proved on the part of the
prosecution was in substance this :

The prosecutor was a gentleman aged about
50, and had been Town Clerk of Folkestone for
many years ; and the defendant was a gentleman
farmer, occupying land about five miles from that
town. On the sth of September last Mr. Webb
having occasion to call upon a Mr. Gammon upon
business, stopt on horseback at a turnpike-gate,
and inquired the way to that person's house, and
was directed down a narrow lane, skirted by
part of the defendant's land. When he got into
the lane he found it very inconvenient, and per-
ceiving a gap in the hedge leading into a stubble-
field, he rode in, not knowing whose property it
was. He had scarcely got in when the defendant
came up and seized hold of the horse's bridle,
asking him what business he had there, and swore
he would be d---d if he would not do for him.
The horse being high spirited, rose upon his hind
legs, and the prosecutor was in imminent risk of
being thrown off. He was then labouring under
a fit of the goat, and had he fallen he might pro-
bably have risen no more. He informed the de-
fendant of the way in which he was afflicted, and
begged him to let go the reins. The defendant,
however? kept fast hold ; upon which the prose-
cutor struck him over the knuckles with his whip,
which made him loose his hold. The defendant
then tried to seize hold of his knee to pull him
off the horse, but missing his grasp, caught hold
of the prosecutor's whip, and pulled it out of his
hand, and began belabouring the prosecutor most
unmercifully; His thigh was severely injured
by the whip. He also struck the horse seve-
ral times on the flanks. The prosecutor rode
out of the field as fast as he could, the defend-
ant following him, and swearing at in
his retreat.- He returned to the turnpike-gate
and asked the collector for a stick to defend
himself. He. Was supplied with a stick imme-
diately, and then returned to face the defendant,
and try to force his way down the lane. The
defendant, however, made a bold stand, and be-
gan Cutting the horse over the head with the
prosecutor's own whip. The horse became irri-
tated, rose on his hind legs, and pranced in the
most alarming manner. In this state of peril the
prosecutor, being unable to reach the defendant
with thestick, made a full charge on the defendant,
who, in order to avoid the consequences, scrambled
over the toll-keeper's garden fence. After which
the prosecutor pursued his way down the lane
unmolested. The field into which the prosecutor
had entered turned out to be the property of the
defendant. It was a stubble oat field, and all
the oats had been cut and the grain got in. Ad-
joining to the field were some turnips and beans
growing. The prosecutor had been accompanied
by two dogs, one a greyhound and the other a
spaniel. Some jealousy, that the prosecutor had
begun sporting too early in the season, it seemed,
had excited the defendant's wrath. The prose-
cutor had told one of the defendant's servants,
on the day preceding, to tell his master that he
had killed a hare close to his house, but not on
his land. The tollgate keeper and his daughter
corroborated the prosecutor'i evidence to a con-
siderable extent.

On the part of the defendant witnesses were
called to contradict the prosecutor's case, and to
prove that he had committed the first assault by
striking the prosecutor on the knuckles.—lt
seemed to be admitted on both sides, that the
defendant had first seized hold of the prosecutor's
rein before the blow was struck, and the question
was, whether that constituted the first assault.

The Learned Judge was proceeding to sum up
the case, when
The Jury interposed, and said they were satis-
fied—they were disposed to find the defendant
Not Guilty.

The Learned Judge inquired if they were all
agreed

One of the Jurymen said, 44 We think that the
defendant, in seizing hold of the prosecutor's
bridle on his own land, was no assault."
Mr: Baron WOOD—" Then you are wrong, for
it is an assault." His Lordship told them that
the defendant was not justified in seizing hold of
the horse's bridle in the manner described, unless
he had previously warned the ciefendant against
committing a trespass, supposing him to be a tres-
passer, and then he would only have been justi-
fied in.laying gentle hands upon the hers° or the
rider. Here there was no such warning—the
prosecutor did riot know that he was on the de-
fendant's land, and even if he had known, the
law would not justify the violence used by the
defundant. They were bound, therefore, in
point of law, to find the defendant guilty, if they
believed the evidence of the Orosecutor. If they
did not believe him, that was another matter.
The' Jury, after deliberating a few minutes,
found the defendant "Not Guilty."

CROWN SIDE.
Before the Honourable Mr.lJustiee BunnouGu.
DESPERATE BURGLARY.

Emanuel Willis and John Cable were indicted
for a burglary in the dwelling-house of the Rev.
Dr. Piggott, at Mereworth, in 'the night of the
14th of May, and stealing therein a quantity of
valuable coins and medals, and other property,
estimated at 250 i. ; and John Friend was indicted
for receiving some of the same property, knowing
it to have been stolen.—Mr. Adolphus and Mr.
Marsham conducted the prosecution, and Mr.
Andrews the defence.

The case against the Prisoners was made out
principally by the testimony of an accomplice,
named Nathaniel Ford, who deposed, that on the
Ist of May last, he came into Kent from London,
with the Prisoners, Willis and Cable, the first 'of
whom he had known for twelve months, and the
second for three. Witness was a butcher by trade.
On the 6th ofMay, in the evening, they all came

to Mereworth, and went all round Doctor Pig-
gott's premises. They had a crow-bar and spike-
bit, and a chisel with them ; they went into the
farm-yard and lay down there ; they returned to
London .next May. They all agreed to go to
Dr. Piggott's on the 13th of May ; they met in
the Mile-End-road, and went to the Isle of D'ogs,
and were joined by another man, named Bell,
where they crossed the river to Blackheath, and
struck into the Maidstone road at Eltham, and
thence they went to Mereworth, stop-ping.at dif-
ferent public-houses in the way. They lurked
about in a wood close to the Prosecutor's house
until it was, quite dark. Witness loaded 2 pistols,
1 of which he gave to Willis. They had a crow-
bar and 3 centre-bits, and-phosphorus in a bottle.
When they got to Dr. Piggott's .there were two
lights in the house. Soon after the lights were
put out they commenced, operations. They
took two panes of glass out of the area window,
and a piece out of the shutter with a centre-bit.
Witness put his arm in and touched the alarm
bell,. which made a little noise.• He took it otf,
opened the shutter and got in. The others gave
him a light, and he
.went round and opened the
area door. W a illis nd Cable stopped outside to
watch. They all had crape with them. The
other man, named Bell, went in with witness.
They took four coats out of the hall, 'and then
went into the kitchen, Avhere they took one silVer
spoon. In the next room they took some tea
spoons, and some victuals which they ate. 13
another room they took some .bottles out of a
hamper. They then went into the library, opened
several drawers, and took a quantity of gold and
silver coins. Willis pocketed thorn. In the
same room they took two watches and several
rings. They took 30 shirts and a great man,'
handkerchiefs in' another room. , They also toOk
three umbrellas and two pair of, pistols • the
latter of which were throWn by. Cable into a pond
in the garden. They then went back into the
kitchen and made bundles of what they had go.t.
Cable then came in, and they all ate and dratik-
and went away. The' other three put on a great
coat each, it beluga wet morning. They had talc.en
candles -with them. Their companion_ Bell had
had a stick, which he left in the house. 111.1.eY
came back. towards Wrotham. They went iot°
a wood there and left the great coats and some
shirts there. They put on sik shirts a piece, and
each had several handkerchiefs. Willis tied ur
the gold and silver articles, and carried them oti•
Witness had one. watch and a ring. They the"
went to Northfleet, and. waited for the passagf
boat,_ which they went in, and landed at I..ifne",
house. They went to a Jew there about t«•-e147
o'clock, and sold' all they. had brought wit;
them for 601., which 'they divided ainonZs
them. They kept one shirt each and two hal'uc
kerchiefs. Next day witness saw the prise',
.Friend, and on. several subsequent days, The'
proposed to him to go to the wood, at Wrotbaril+
to fetch away what they_ had left there; tbieTe
did not tell-him hew they got 'Ore thir:gagreedB,-04„ej
knew their course of life. - Ile agreed
•
he accompanied the rest to Wrotham, 0" the
Friday week after the robbery.' They went.
Gravesend by water, and froin thence to ‘V.f°l
tham, where they found the things, and div'L'e,
them. All the prisoners were appreheaed at
Meopham, on their return from Wrotham• kea t°
On his cross-examination the witness said, he Was ssHz
turn King's evidence, and told it would be better fat him'•
had followed tine life of a thief for a long time. .fle 1/„.3.5
gaged in one robbery at Belsham, at Suffblk ; one et Oaks
Kent ; one at Rayleigh, in Essex ; and several in Esso•4
had robbed two or three churches ; the last was :here
church ;he had originally proposed this robbery-- ifiro2 "
A great number of witnesses were then examined, to C°„hicb
the accomplice in a vast number of minute particulars,
he detailed in the course of his evince. of
The Prosecutor's butler and his cuachman proved th,„,e ,grin-
the house next morning after the robbery, which fall •
ed the story told by Ford. •
Dr. Piggott said, that the whole of tote property be h. It
would have amounted to 2501. at the least. 0415
The prisoner Willis declined saying anyYct re-
'in his defence. Cable only denied the
specting the handkerchiefs. Friend 1118" art
defence. No witnesses were called on the par
of the prisoners. •
The Learned Judge then proceeded to Of
the evidence to the Jury, cautioning them it
tend with great circumspection to the ea'.a steel
might have upon the case of Friend, eon" „yes.
with that of the other two prisoners, whose
would be forfeited to the law, if the crime c
Toyed.
!
ed upon them by the indictment was pthe
His Lordship then recapitulated the who'c ~.
evidence with the greatest particularity an pre
vision, and concluded by leaving the caseet'trrro,
to the Jury, as one peculiarly within their r
vince. 6009
The Jury, after five minutes' deliberi
found all the prisoners " up
Sentence of death was immediately passe" es of
the prisoners Willis and Cable, and no 11°P
anytnilde.c punishment was held out to
`
The prisoner Ford was sentenced to 14 .Yretattl:
transportation.—The trial lasted from nine'
morning until half-past three in the afternootl.

A v r
DROWNlNG.—Yesterday morning the bou)
a very genteel-looking middle-aged man
the
found floating in the Regent's Canal, neat but
Harrow-road.—llis pockets were searched, rf
nothing was found that would lead to a disco “.the
of who he was.—The body was conveyed t° -for-
Race Horse. public-house, where it now lie'
a Coroner's Jury.

BIRTHS. • ,corigl
Yesteiday, at Carshalton-lodge, the Lady of P. 0
Esq., of a daughter.
On the 13th inst., at Rolleston Hall, in the County of its'4.
ford, the Lady of Sir Oswald Mosley, Bart., of a son'
..//
DIED. of
On the 10th inst., at his seat Ashley Park, Surrlyr 0'
Ma Hall, in the County of Cumberland, aged 49/ Aiieos
Fletcher, 13att. lie has left issue two sons and two 49,0801r/9
and is succeeded in his titles and estates by his son,
aged 13 years.
On Wednesday morning, at the house of his brotW•ll.ilie
Abingdon-street, Westminster, Joseph Jordan, Esq.
Island of Barbadoes.
On the 12th inst. Justinian Casamajor, Esq. eldest `off
the late Justinian Casamajor, Esq. of Potterelle, Herts.
Yesterday, in the 81st year of his age, Francis Ilsrg'sjol.
Esq. one of his Majesty's Counsel, and Recorder of Liverlitcy.
On the 10th inst. at his brother's house, Rodden, the
John Lewin Sheppard, aged 28.

-- • ct
LONDON : Printed by J. B. CARSTAIRS, of. No. 21.1,f.rel
Ormund-street, Queen-square and published by 14 :4u,;
SCRIPPS, of co. 7, South Molten-street, at THE -„0,
OFFICE, No, 112, Strand; where Any rirrisE3lo, :-
ORDERS, LETTERS, &c. (post-paid) must be addrt.:W47•..

I

I

•11