Star.
London, England, 1830-03-29 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF CHANCERY, Mmictt 27.
PUBLIC CRARITIEBATTORNZT-OZNERAL V. EARL OF
ITIADBROKE •AND OTHERS. _ _

A motion was this morning brought before the court, which in.
volved some considerations touching the better administration of the
various charities of the kingdom. Though the discussion occupied
the whole day, in reading of affidavits, and the statements of counsel,
the real merits of the case, which are certainly important, lie in a
very narrow compass. It appeared that as long since as 1736, a
Mrs. Mary Warner gave the living and manor at Boyton, in Suffolk,
with several large farms, of nearly 1,000 acres, to trustees, for the
erection of alms-houses at Stradbroke, in that county, and for the
maintenance of the inmates. This charity became the subject of
investigation by the commissioners for inquiring concerning cha-1
rides, who made a report thereon to the House of Commons in Ja-
nuary, 1820; in that report they suggested various improvements
for the future government of the charity, and in strong terms
expressed their regret that the surviving trustees should have
mmitted a balance of between 4,0001. and 5,0001. to have remained
In the hands of the receiver, without making any interest whatever.
To correct this, and to extend the usefulness of the charity, an in.
formation was filed in December last by the Attorney-General, at
the instance of two relators, Messrs Gibson and Howland, who em-
ployed as their solicitor Mr. D. W. Harvey, the Member for Col-
cheater. On the Bth of March last Mr. Harvey was summoned to
appear before the Attorney-General, to show cause why the infor.
mation thus filed should not be dismissed upon the grounds that a
petition, embracing the same object, was already before the Court,
at the instance of the trustees, and that the relators were in indigent
circumstances, and instead of" retaining Mr. Harvey to institute an
inquiry into the Charity in question, their names had been used
without their consent. Upon these representations the Attorney.
General ordered that proceedings on the information should be sus..
pended until the result of an application to the Lord Chancellor
should be known, to be made upon such grounds as the Defend.
ants should be advised.

Mr. HORNS and Mr. HORTON appeared in support of the
motion—that the information exhibited against the Defendants
should be taken off the file of the Court, and that the relators, or
their solicitors, should be directed to pay the costs of the appli-
cation.

Mr. HARVEY addressed the Court at considerable length, and in
conclusion he trusted that his Lordship would dismiss the motion
with costa.

A long discussion took place between Counsel ; after which the
LORD CHANCELLOR said that the information must be referred
back to the Attorney. General, whose province it was to decide
whether it ought to proceed. With regard to the present question,
it appeared to him that, as the motion could not be sustained, it
should be dismissed with costs.

BOARD OF EXCISE, Ilf.tacH 27.
ADULTERATION OF BEER.

Several information; came on itthe;ringitgainst publicans for
having in their possession a deleterious liquor used to adulterate
beer, whereby they incurred penalties of two hundred pounds each.
The first information was against John Davis, of the York
Minster, Bunhill-row.
The Excise officers proved having found the liquor in the de.
fendant's cellar.
Mr. Martineau, of the firm of Whitbread and Co. proved that a
sample of beer taken by the officers from the defendant's stock, was
not in the same state in which it had been sent to him.
Mr. Farraday, director of the laborotary of the Royal Institution,
proved his having analyzed a sample of the liquor found by the offi.
errs in the defendant's cellar, and that it contained copperas.
The defendant was convicted in the mitigated penalty of 201.
Several other publicans were fined in mitigated penalties for the
like offence.

LENT ASSIZES.

NORTHERN CIRCUIT.-YORK, MARCH 24.
MAIMING COWS AT WHITIT. . . .

Reeves Witiors,;;liii, wee inaieteafoil;Xving, during the
evening of the 12th of September, maliciously wounded three cows,
the property of Messrs. Weighill, of Whitby.
Mr. ALEXANDER and Mr. 'MARSHALL appeared for the prose-
cation ; and Mr. ARCHBOLD for the defence.
Mr. ALExuttozn detailed the facts of the cue to the Jury. The
prosecutors in this case are butchers atWhitby. In 1816, the prisoner
married the sister of the prosecutors; and in 1826, in consequence of
domestic dissensions, a deed of separation was prepared and executed
by the prisoner, by which he gave up all claim to any property which
his wife had or might become possessed of ; the prosecutors were
made trustees, and they 'indemnified the prisoner from any respon-
sibility as regarded any debts she might contract ; he giving them
a promissory note for 1201. whkh sum they received. They after.
wards purchased with part of that money three cows ; took a farm
for the prisoner's wife ; and she accounted to them for the receipts
and payments respecting the farm. During the night of the 13th
September last, the cows were all stabbed, and the prisoner was
found the following forenoon lying in an outhouse adjoining the
field. On being taken into custody, he declared that he had
never been near the field that night. He was proved to have
knocked at the door of a house close by the field, at two or three
o'olock in the mornink ; to have been seen with a short pipe going
in that direction ; and to have been in a hatchet's shop at Whitby,
at seven o'clock the preceding evening, from which a knife had been
taken. which knife and the prisoner's pipe were found in the field.
A sharp pointed nail was also found in his pocket.
His Lordship informed the jury. that as the law now stood, it
was not requisite to prove that a person had malice against the
owner of cattle to establish a case of this description.
The Jury found the prisoner guilty.—To be transported seven
yam.