Star.
London, England, 1830-07-26 00:00:00

THE HAYMARKET.

Saturday evening, the pennormances at this theatre concluded
with UAINICIL'S very amusing farce of " Hon Ten." We may
call the present performance a revival, and it has proved so success-
ful, that the Manager will no doubt favour the public with frequent
repetitions of it. Whatever objections may lie against the produc-
tions of the old school of dramatists, it is impossible to deny that in
strength in power—in all that can be termed the essential of the
Drama, they are far—very &r.-414th few exceptions) Bawler to
any thing that has yet emanated front the pens of the mo race.
Why this is so, would be foreign to our purpose, at present, to in-
quire : the cause, however, is pretty obvious. Although there is
nothing novel in the plot of " Bon Ton," there is a sparkling of wit
about the dialogue, and such an air of liveliness and elegance per-
vading the piece throughout; at the same time that it lashes, pretty
freely, the vices and the follies of fashionable life, as strongly and
strikingly contrasts with the petty puerilities and Frenchified hashes
which it is now uniformly the custom to serve up to an English
audience. The characters in the piece were very well cam. Reays,
VINING. WILLIAMS, Miss F. H. KELLY, and Miss 11101 DAUNT,
had the principal parts, and acquitted themselves very successfully.
Miss KELLY, who looked extremely well, and whom we should be
glad to see more frequently before the public, was received with ap.
plause on her entrance ; and certainly such a compliment is de.
servedly due to a lady who, in the present state of the stage, is alike
distinguished by high professional talent and the excellencies of pd.
rate life. We know the tribute to be well merited, and we render
it cheerfully.

ASSIZES.-(RECEIVED THIS DAY.)

OXFORD CIRCUIT.-.OXFORD, JULY 24.

PRITCHARD T. AUSTIN.,

This was action brought on a romixory-note for 2001. drawn by
the father of the defendant. The action was brought against the
defendant as executor of his late father. The hand-writing of the
defendant having been admitted, Mr. Sergeant It ussru. raid, the
defence to this action was, that at the time Mr. Austin, ten. gave this
note of hand he was not in a state capable of managing his
affairs. If he proved this fact, the defendant would be entitled
to a verdict. It was proved, that on the day the note bore
date, he went to a neighbour's house, and said he was going
:e:give all his property away, he w in a very hurried state,
ttl wassaid he was going to give a note of hand to Pritchard
(the plaintiff,) for his son and (the defendant) had sold his mother,
and was a" go between" with her and Harry Williams. Pritchard
was his son.in.lay. There was also a person named Walton, that'
married another daughter, and who also received a similar note
for 2001. which he (Walton) however, had given up. In the even-
ing of that day he went home to the poor old woolen, his wife,
and with great exultation called out—" I have done it, I have
done it." His wife was alarmed and asked what he had
done ? "Oh (be replied,) you will know soon enough ; I have
done something tor that devil of a Tom for selling his mother."
—lie supposed that Williams had promised his son the whole
of his property for favouring his intrigues with old Mrs.
Austin. Th< Learned Counsel said a more dutiful or affectionate
son tl:an the defendant never existed, and as it had been proved that
the note which formed the subject of the present action had been
given whilst Austin was labouring under such unaccountable &In.
sion, both in law, and agreeble to common sense, the defendant war
entitled to a verdict.—Mr. TAITXTON replied. He said a tither
had a just right to make whatever distribution of his prorrty he
thought proper, and if he gave more to one child than another, that
was no reason why he should be accounted mad. He thought there
was nut sufficient evidence to convince the Jury that be was inca-
pable of managing his affairs. and therefore the verdict must be fur
the plaintiftl-31r. Justice BOSAKQUET summed up, and the Jury
immediately returned a verdict for the defendant.

CHURCHILL ?. PARKER.

The plaintiff is a farmer, and the defendant a corn-facto► in this
city. The action was brought to recover the sum of 341.6 a. 4d.
the amount of 2equartera of barley, which the plaintiff had sold to
the defendant. The defendant admitted that the barley had been
sent in to his warehouse, and that the sum now Nought to he reco-
vered was the price agreed to be paid ; but the defence was. that the
barley had been bought by sample, and when it was compared with
the sample, it was found not to be so good, or worth as much by
2s. a quarter; the defendant, therefore, refused to pay for it, and
told the plaintiff he might take it away again. Several witnesses
proved that the bulk sent in to the defendant's warehouse was infe-
rior to the sample, and the Jury, under the direction of the Learned
Judge, returned a verdict for the defendant It being market day,
a great number of farmers were in court, who appeared to take con-
siderable interest in the decision.

THE WEATIIER.---The fa
weather from Whitsunday 1829,
from the day-book of a gentleman
counties of Scotland :
State of weather from Whitson-
day to Martinmas. _ I

Alowing is a register of the
till Whitsunday 1830, compiled
l's overseer in one of the southern

State of weather from Martin.

Days.
Sunshine 20
Dry and cloudy •
Showery ... 96
Frost I
Snow filling I

mu till Whitsunday.
Days.
Frost, without snow ... sh

.
!mow lying .. .. 36
Snow falling heavy ... I
Mild, not frosty ... 21i
Dry and cloudy ... 36
Shovel'', with wind .. 44
Sunshine ... ... 12
Thunder, with showers 1

-
185