Star.
London, England, 1808-11-09 00:00:00

• .
..014t 4,

- 00UkT Or NANWOJIINCH,I4trers........_
TVA WO 111.-.llllli AND *NOM* • ';
1 :.-
Witen these casesovhich stood in the p pa-
per were called on, M. GAsacz ii they m
esreqight
stand in the paper for a fortnight. He said they weer
motions for criminal informations on behalf of a Co.. 1
lonel of a volunteer corps in Cornwall, against. Some
of his officers. He bad hoped, that in that time the
matter might be settled without any further applies- 1
tion to this Court.
The Court assented to the application.
szov. B.—woman v. 11111411 t.
This was a motion for a new trial. The Plaintiff
brought his action against di. Defendant, the late
Sheriff of Middlesex, for a false return of ' solo Jim '
to a writ of execution, upon which the Defendant MRS
to IkaYe 'pried of the goods of the Duke of Etailei.--i;
His Royal Highness had apartments in Kensington'
1 Palace, where there vrisa small quantity of furniture,
1 such as a clock, a bed waggon, an old phaeton, and
1 a little scrub poney, worth iliout "101.. These good*
the Defendant had at first seized, but conceiving that'
the Palace at Kensington was privileged, be returned
that there were no goods from which to levy.
The cause was tried before Lord ELLENBOROVCJ&I
‘and, under his' ireCtion, the Jury found a verdict for
the. Defendant, upon the ground that Kensington was
privileged as being a Royal residence.
It appeared upon the trial, that a house keeper was
kept as Kensington, and, there were apartments for
- the Lord Chamberlain. There was a Throne there ma
-state bed, and state apartments, and a guard, but the
ging had never resided there. The inhabitants of
' 'tfteffed*e had apartinents there, nxerelyby the licence
' tithe King, and had no mare interest in the place
-theneedvants have in their masters dwelling house,
dr pstekbis ma poor house. '
• Loud Ezisareoecninw cited rerieral cases, partica.:
lady fide II Lord Reyes. 918. and 6 Mod. 75, to the
elucidation of this question ; and seemed of opinioso
that a palace continued to-beroyal, unless there wan
. circlimstances to discontinue ii. After the death of
the late King, its character of royalty continued, and
the question was, had it been lost ? If the Palace
had been dismantled, so as to-tender the King's ha-.
bitation impossible, it would be another thing ; and
as to all the present occupiers of the palace, they wer
liable to be turned out to-morrow.
Mr. GADROV/ put the case on a level with Windsor
Castle sind St. James's Palace, and said that nobody,
would any they were Palaces, because he did net see
the flag eying upon the tower of the one, and beta .
the King had not resided at the other for a long
time. His Majesty enjoyed= security of his protec-
tion for a moment, if his presence was to be the only
test : the cart . that carried away goods from his Pa-
lace might drive out at one gate as he drove in at
another. What quantity of residence, Mr. Garrow
would ask, constituted a Palace ? This could never
be -ascertained. The question of the fact was left to
the Jury, and in his opinion they bad found the truth.
Lord Etutimonouom cited an Act of the 4th
. Henry VII. Chap. 5, where a place of occasional use
for the refreshment of the King, in passing to St.
Paul's, was called a Palace.
- Mr.' CUMMING instanced proclamations made by
the present King, immediately after the death of the
1. late; from Kensington Palace. - - •
Mr. Serjeant WILLIAMS and Mr. Masmar sup.
ported the rule. .
Mr. Serjeant WaL:,uus said, It' - was Immaterial
whether it was a Palace or not ; the question was,
whether it was exempt from the execution of legal
process .? He urged that the King had never resided
at Kensington with all his suite : as to the house-
keeper that was there till the King could dispose of
the Palace, he must put somebody m it. Why were
Palaces exempt from the execution of legal process t
Beale of the King's dignity, and that no malls-
whence might happen nt his presence as could 'be
occasioned by inch etecittiem.; ' This argument could
not hold, when it was admitted that, for a long reign,
of 48 years, the King had never resided there. ' 'l'
Learned Serjeatir then 'cited all the parallel cases he
could find, beginning with Lord Coke's definitions of
the word Court, in his Proem to the 4th Instit. aid
commented on them with much ingenuity.
Mr. MARRYATT said, the . question :e4s, whether
the privilege arose prefilter reverential" loci ant *re*
whether it was the spot or the person that was sacred ?
and the privilege evidently was insanities' to prevent
a disturbance to the Sovereign, andisertahis deputy
housekeeper (for there was onlri, Aleputy house-
keeper to be found at the Palace); There was a
housekeeper at Newmarket-house and at the C 'to
but nody ever drearnr that thoftrippidentes
Palaces. The* had been Welt WWI prod
'to
tion from -Cornell/ p—but nebeifiy oupposed •
Rose's house ,was privileged from an elettaioo...l/4
to the guards that were mounted at Kensifigtea, fhb*
were guards inointed at the Tower.; and to talk-Of
a preacher at Kensington Nice. Chaiieti 41 Whi
hall there were two doyen. litho King left his Pa-
lace with an anima: reverinsa, it was 'undoubtedly still
a Palace ; but the Learned Counsel • that
the immitnity cnased4 when or
ceased. ' -.` .notirt - ::-:.• :..
Lord Ettsktliestinion...4-011111alien iof n-
__. ..
terest -

. and impornusee, ad the Cbtdi Wait take tome
time to look into it -Pesti any one.tniaw , is* matter,
,of information. whetherpmcesuestemlitisk is Holy-13
ret,dfr. Arroaner GHouse ?" . ,
• ktnetur,.--81 4,0, my Lord, it is
liors an& this cotiSidemtfors iptOintililttlevital Pet-.
;to reside there." ,: vii -4 41. tt:;!,,l, i • . :
,-:.1 ~.., : ma Kum e. stotarmisiimiwrif '''".*. ';' .3
Mr. Giassow rose to ,shew caster' • . '• ' '
which was for a criminal inform-49k .
may recollect that the Rule was .
Term against the Defendlintt. atir felsetSie of :itilk
Hunter, the father-in-law bt the'ethiglitit
,410 an
affidavit. which state that theDeikinsleni*l., ..
with the daughter of the Proseesocolhakeist ageilisp..,
torins
, time onlj 16
The
of age, aad.thi.kDefea
' wards of 35. The eAdarst thel.!..espi 1.. shy
of ' ill - niege, and nMMatell thirgbe born-. - .t.
Mr. limiter, was likened in the pia ci- of e level
published by the Defemahuit ; be Amitee
lished an accotmt of his accompleith
_plainent's!
daughter in anadokittaings. - .0. a
Discovery.". -- -- -- • - r--' '_.—;•••tAL-g•bv 7' • ' i
Mr. (AIIROW tiiiiiilileieed DT '
.; ..'utlsat tr.
Dogherty in the aifitiliits which he 'put in,d I