The Sun.
London, England, 1811-11-01 00:00:00

rociCS

The AvroaNEY-Uet,?ERAL admitted 'kit it WV,.

Air. seryfinitllEsT then Ise should submit to
the Jury %flieshi'r it was not univ,ersally known that
Russia was at.war with this ckinntry ?
UPI ELLENBOROUGH said the Jury must proceed
on Acts. The question fur them to determine was
tot how site tact was, but how it appeared in cvi.
&rice before them. The knowleke k.hich any of
the Jury ought chance to pos4ess, it any or them
had
,knowledge on she subject, must be a legiti-
mate kno*Jedge, on which they [MIA he sworn air
in skit manner communicate to
their. fellows, _

tticliard Thornton, 14sq. was then called as a wit-,
to prove the relativesituation ;o w hick this
country stood with Russia, and not.aPpearing, was'
(.700 on hii subptzna.
Mr. Wooing, n qentleman not sublicznaed as a
witness, but attending the Court as a Special Juror,
offered his services, so lair as he had intorrnation,on
the subject, hoping that he might not be thought
guilty of any unbecoMing intrusion.
Lord ELLEN9OIIOUGII said, on the contrary, he
only discharged a-drity which he owed to the Justice
of the country.
Mr. VENNtNo,being ex-nnined, said he bad been -
engaged. in the Russtari trade, and had a brother there
tit present. He had some property contiscased in
Russia, 6o Jong ago as the year IUO7, no part Of
wiltdt he bad• ever been abie to recover. Russian
ships were atittiittexl into the ports of tins country,
but no British vessel had been admitted into a Rus-
sian.port from that period he had Mentioned.
Mr. Leah-, It .11LItiSia1) Gcmtlernati residing in this
country, stated, that he hail rec.:only received goods
of a pariiculai desuriptlin front ltig:l, in a Russian
V 065131.

1 he Aerroalsay.CaNattAt. contended, that the
witnesses called for the defendant had proved exact-
ly tie reverse of ,what had - been intended to, be
mode put from their testimony. To constitute hos-
Wily between the two countries, it ' was necessary
not: only that Russia should be, Lir should seem to
be, hostilely disposed towards Great. Britain, but
that Gl'eat Britain must alio be hostilely disposed to
wards Russia. Unless Ahat were the case, it Could
no) be unlawful to eileauate a Policy of Insurance
in this country on the property of a Russian subject.
One of the first duties of every Government was,
to use itS best atteaus to ataloy iti. enemies. This
could not be more etfeetually accomplished than by
the issuing of Letters of Marque against 'their
trade and commerce. No such measure, how-
ever, had been resorted, to by this country against
Russia, which was lira greatest of .all roots that
.ye did not conceive that 'power •as hostile to
us. On the contrary, no sooner wits a Russian
vessel brought into any of the ports of this country
than she was released, and sent home. Mr. Venn i ug's
revidence, and more. particularly that of Mr. Leah,
shewed, that so far from treating Russia as an cue-
my, we suffered ber vessels to cuine into our ports.
Mr. Leah swore, that he bad just received a cargo
in a ship belonging -to the Lniperor Alexander.
Russia, therefore, might act as she Veased ; hut the.
question herewas, how did this country act ?. Here
a gentleman had received a.cargo, within tutee few
days,. nut protected. by aoy pretended neutrality, but
openly, in a Russian ship. Mre were glad to see
Russian ships in our ports. So it was plain we did
not exercise against
,them the rights or hostility.
Hepnt the point broadly, and. contended that tree

rteo eases were convertible. It this Government
..vat not in such a state of hostility with Rust
to seize their ships, neither could a pulley of insur-
ance, underwrittemin this country, on the property
at a subject of Russia, be illegal. Ho had made in-
quiry at the Prize Courts, and had ascertained that
it gof,ds of the description specified in the policy in
question had been seized and been brought for con.
deainatioti itt the. Prize Courts of this country, 41$
belon6ing, to a litissian subject, they would have
been Teillined.

Lord.ELLEonoßeutan said, the question for the
'consideration of the Jury was, it, in the terms of
the license, P.. and a Smith and CO. were neutral
,merchants ? Brio*lt merchants they certainly were
not; for, 'hough their name was extremely tamilinr
this,cuuntry, the pittee in which they were domi-
ciled made itselt-evident that they were to be regard-
ed BR Russian subjects and, this being so, the ques
tion was, the exulting 4,tate of ilongs.betweets

this Country, and Rusda, the subjects tit the !Harr
power, were to be regarded 33 neutral merchants ?
Now, it . Russia was, a, country into the ports
of tvhich no Briiish slip would, on any ac.
count, be admitted, bis Lordship had no hesi.

tetion in baying, according to his view of the
matter, that she could not be regarded as a neutral
country quoad Great Britain, nor her subleases neu.
tral merchants. His Lordship could not go the
length of the do trine contended for by. the .‘ttur.

It) at6lvo 1.7111 *1

part of one Or two' countries, caused the country
which had TeHorted to 1103611+4 to beconstdered as
rcniaining in it state ut neutrality ; on the contrary,
,he was satisfied that flagrant acts of hOstility on the
part of any country) towards all the vessels of an-
other country, by denying to all the vessels of that
country admittance into her ports, on any terms,
were sufficient (11 themselves, without any, recipro-
cal acts 01 ticistility on tt►e part of the other Power,
to deprive the country practising such uniform sys-
tem of hostility, of the ,character of a neutral
in relation to the Power against whom the aggres-
sion was pra&ised. At the same time, there were
limited it:is of confiscation, which any country
might find it necessary to resort to against the sub-
jects of anothercountry, withoin thereby breaking
down tI4 relations of amity previously subsisting
between the two States. The question for the con-
sideration of the Jury here would be, if, on the evi-
dence they had heard to-day, that country of which
Messrs. P. and D. Smith and Co. are nietehants, is
or is not in a state of hostility with Great Britain ?
His Lordship here mem itulated the evidence of Mr.
Vetming and of tVir.Leali, as to the telatit e situations
of the two countries. No evidence had been offered
to the Jury as to the cause of the confiscation
of property spoken to by Mr. Venning,—
They had only the bare naked fail of a coi►tis.
cation of British property having taken place.—
An embargo need not necessarily be art act of
hostility. It. might be resorted to with the view
of preventing information from transpiring, as to
the sailing of an' expedition, or for other purposes,
unconpected with hostile intentions. Of the cause
of the embargo spoken to bit= Mr. Vermin, the
Jury would judge. He informed them that the
GovernMent at Russia did permit the exportation
of particular articles from:that' country, on certain
conditions, but not in British Ships. Mr. Leah so
far corroborated this tact, by proving, that Ise had
.recently received a cargo from flip. but that it was
'brought to this country in ,a liusiian vessel., His
• Lordship repeated, that if any country chose to put
itself in a hostile situation as against any other coun-
try, 11 was not necessary in order to deprive such
country of the character of Neutral, that mutual
-acts of hostility should be resorted to by the coon-
, try aggrieved. ,

1'11; Jury, after deliberating for a few'minute-s,
toUild kir tt►e plaintitf---Darnages 3001.

THURSDAY, dCT011:11 31.

DIXON V. NEVR.

This was an action upon 'a Bill of Exchange,
brought against the indorsee, in -which parole evi•
donee wi's endeavoured to be set up against the de-
fendant's indorqement. The bill was paid by the
defendant to the plaintiff forgoods, without the de-
fendant's indorsement ; and 'it " was sworn, on the
part et the defendant, that, upon the plain'iff'a
making application. to the de&ndant to indorse his
bill, it was' represented to him,' that besnever should
be called upon to pay it ; and that his indorsement
was required only for negociating the bill the better.

Lard ELLENROROUGH left the case to the Jltry,
upon, the credit at witneSws, anti they foam! a vet.-
diet for the plaintiff. , .

COHEN V. JONES.

This was an aainn for two promistory notes of
upwaids of t tool. given by the defendant as a secu-
rity to the plaintiff, Ntrs. Cohen, for money which
he had obtained of her to discount bills with.

The defence lArfA, that the plaintiff, in her an-
swer to a bill in Clipncery, had ' sworn, that, for
advances of 118 O. 17s. 6d.. to the 'defendant, she
had received.from lnin 11591. 159. gd, and other ar-
ticles, not 'exceeding the value of Gul. This would
turn the balance the other way ; and it was quite
apparent from the connection of answer,. and
from the bets of the case, that the stun of
t 1591. tss. gd. had been inserted in the .blank left
for the sum n the 'answer by a clerical mistakes.—
The question did not arrive at this point, from the
detendant'S failure to prove that the answer had been
examined with the original record; but Lord EL*
LLSBOROUOTI said, that if it had, he should have
taken the answer, errors excepted, and not have
given it a sense which its context reprobated.
in this case, Lord ELLBNIOROUOti decided, not:
withstanding two apparently contrary decisions of
the Lord Chief Baron and Mr. Justice Lawrence,
which were reported to his Lordship, that an exa-
mination of a copy of a record with the original,
one person reading the original to Roo her in cturem,
and the other correcting the copy from that Teading;
was not a good examination. His Lordship did not
say that there must be two exaMinations cross-ways;
but the examiner must cotnpate the copy. with the
original, and a6tually see that what is read to hirn
is. true ; Oi her% ise, mg! consiat but it may be an in
ion. of the reader.

A cme was mentioned by the ATTORNAT Ga
,
NORAL, amicus curtly), in which the late Mr. Svr-
jeant Williams had ionnecialy obtained a verdict
upon • mistaken reading by a keeper of en oil•
gtual rreord. in the copy ot, which the mistake was
adopted.

Lord ELLENuonouou, in this case also, objeSed
to•recognize a record in a public office as genuine,
unlehs the roll appeared in its proper custody; and
cautioned the keetiers of such records not to unit
thrill out of their handi.

Verdia fi)'r the pia-it:l-4E

EVANS V. !MARQUIS OF HEADFOUT.

This a6V(bn for a bill of exchange was put off upon
an affidavit of the litlious illness of Richard }till: a
material witness for the defendant.

OLD BeiILEY.

1 /WA DAY, OCT. 33,- -SECOND DAY.

lames .iicade was capitally inditteti for slealing a
piece of carpeting, of the value of si, the pro perry
of %chard Middlainore Weight, out of his shop 011
the Bth of Ozt.last.

The prisoner was. found Guilty, but recommend-
ed to mercy, on account of -the good eharattcr be
Adduced previous to the crimes he was tried for.
Carl John &ran, a foreign seaman, was capitally
inditled for privately stealing, on the lath of 'Sept.

i

11

twel-suwerfarrnttweEYWillirlfiheliotea, and i .
note,. the property of Clarks Larose, also ate.
reigner, :Ind a Seaman, in the dwelling-house where
they both ';cadged in the parish of St. Paul, Sh;d'
vial. it-sif-Tis proved that the prisoner had ;Icknow-
ledged the robbery before the Magistrate who had
committed him, and bad proposed to assign bit
wages to pay the prosecutor, on condition of not*
lug prosecuted.
The Jury found him Galty-.-nth.

lilt;tlWAY ROMSERY.
Bichirtd Payne and Jo/vt 11I0luny were cap
itidlY
indicted for assaulting William Duckeits, on t
ye
40
King's highway, and taking from his person n
101. note, one ctrl. note, and three 11, notes, on tbc.
Bth of October. The prisoner, Paine,
.sse rtol,
that the other prisoner was perfectly ionoccil, la
he was not present at the robbery. ' •
The Learned Judge summed op ilia ev.dc.r4
with his usual perspicuity, and the Jury retarded 4
verdid of Guilty.
Thomas Carter, for n burglary in the threllinc
,house of Rice Pace, and stealing Bi. and tywdid liil
in copper in.nies, and other property belongic.g
va
him ; and-l'lmpuus Lung, for stealing in the (I-
ing-house of EliZabeth Web') Iwo rull9 of 1106
of the value of 40i. And I.lpwar4l4, her liten'''
were severally found G%/lily,. vla
. ,
Eleven prisoners were cum icled of !chicly,
John Batman, for stealing a basket, containiella
quantity of pork, die property of George siV4'o9n.i•
John Lot worth and property
Rice, for s'ali'li
quantity of sugar the property of MeSqrS• /I(4'w'
Healer and
.Hill , John Thompsoo, for stedlisg I',
pair of shoes, value ttiree shilhugs, the ptoPenY,°:
Richard . D:ckson ; Mary Smith, for ste,illllg ,':"
pieces of silk handkerchiefs, the property ni '('',l,
Harris ; John Woodliciuse, for h te:ll!ng :iolbs. ''''Y'.l".
of beet,
the
prtlP‘ertY °I jAm" \V in.-Pfdy ; .11
Braei for stealing lour shirts, the proim'lY °l;jviti.i
Starling; Wm. Steptoe, tor 6tr4litlg a qu'lahlY,f
cambric muslin, and other articles, the pn'Per9„,-',j
James Craig ; 'Ann Payne, for stealion, a wittch ";.,
a gold seal, the property of John io, 110 I:,
person ; Sarah' Flowers, fur stealing 201b3. tve4,,.
Johnof
propertyfeathers,
Dutton,ot.
hheiee
ir:parsso,
taieiiirt
tilyt4a ocltlati.ll.,cip la; : it
ourly
(1G
0,1 ei e I
tea,' ut 1;
Two prisoners were attquitted. . .
, .
.11..11........* 0.0......•11...,.....
POLICE.
1 0101 of
_ Bo
own daughter, and charged her ,A.'
w-sTßEET.—Yesterciay, a father arl' 0
brought" before Mr. ROAD and Air. filsstlnotol
bearing theth. On investigating ilibliet‘l7i'litik("i I.l:St
charge by the parties so allied by naturt., tt aPre'sea
e(' that the lather and mother hal tilwart r.,ilobis
her a gold watch, and glbt;t• articles of co''''''.,d igir
hasvalaf, a' soon :Is shp setilcd roc. Ta`' (1431'15(tP
13telY• gut married, KW. O 11e41 Wind too
ther and mother, and (Jointed the.orslCl, sn,„teita
Property, which the father. sod mollies re'witi,.
give tier, on the ground that the rnitrf4c °5..„, list'
cpeariresntdl,_)•Qw,,e
out their cwoent, when a scale enoecl; 0170- i
,si
• tlte father and, mother/00k cut a warrant sg' 1
:their daughter. ' ' Akd rged the
The,Afagistrates cry proPefif ".7,-,,al 1 ter si
..
to
mother,
aot.4sr
sleep
woman,,
if Fp, ,i
nhaanundt aift
Considerablyt
5:11:eo shtidi e
s raydote,
ivc al gitiaici:ree
dot; 1
4,l‘.hri,'portoud::rile.,
.)...,
ern
icor:4
cio_hnn‘rgveedd
leanre not to behave improperly I° •-er nil ail/
in their possession, she dolt vett 't 'n
le—
; n years, "jil
them.
Anwteoni;dlee!atmyrhoeebrlnibcaigitnialgnat.dahoosylaulilseoirr,iropodaioiyyi:idniil:,os'in.w:tisi,,g.ntio.:l9,,lesldije!
Engidnd. notes, also altote for 51. lia''-d,coatti
or discovered ..that his jacket which Cootatr I,h,
notes had been taker) from under his Tired'
,t
charged the prisoner with how, robbed WI ritoeci
she denied it. The people of the house 'Veil ,et
to, endeavour to recover. the propertV, liddr'cor9
siihrreihrkiacoinnalielitl:::or.nt: tcloinfeeossnesdtabllleit v 45: libt:drc:l:::looilit:sis
-11071114::e.rr:teole
by
im diii
,en : could
obwilti o s consent,
tie:: ,
were
.:k man was
ewstlrs
dborilict,..,:bge;hrrif:iflC:lrofniuwrittlSi'ieultirgi'ewiahnaii"Wiciiiiil,ulllll:liq'tl:o,ll.33l:l)l:/,ill,
of lead' g, with ,

1 was committed .! —,------'e
wick,
csiocqi)ahnr I.
o, neon,iti h—oh ceivi22l6.BottsAhlit
6r
isill
ail.
ttr.Hg
a:
aenritettrt Beaty hpelle' IRi house,7: . lio 1. f ,ay iti irii.l,( iii :;'1 I 'i °II 13f
4C'
MA ARIAL). . 13 SII/Ipto,t!
.
Cuoudni:Thloihldlinfiduri:?:: Dcisol,lxotrhwitern:ccouniticih, louiejoa ot lul /I
fit*
tnaotin,
iltiesidenndatiitiur,sy:oimlit INl.goillurtlivic:3:l:nrCin.catrthhe:V'ilsrliii:nlh.ntit..:l:slll):::::Lil
,dun.
nighdat iht:a: ir
l'OlUdl t.. he Kelivi..l). °f
MitlftirdCary(;, °Sif:bictit Newton Shaver, EA' (4.01Ce11gi:03147;°
Hall, Stilliilk, to Nl4s limes eldest daughter Og' ,
ThecsAitid 'by, • Lieu genant . Colonel ,v-
Jonas, LA. ot Stapleton, Clotucestershire. w
of
111°
Youngsoe, O. ,J,,t
Sear, Cumberland, to Elizabeth, Second tiaughle
Locke, Esq. of Walthainstow.
. . .
. • 'DIM), xts
On Tuesday evening last,- at N. rth E oil. d.
tetra taw dry Moths, Taunus Hughan, .I.:q M. l'' t"';,illie
vuVOILIO PLAce, London, and of the Hill Luc",
Way.' •-... I • IC li44'
on Wednesday last, after a long illness, 1,,b'l ' ' •
ol
of I ckeithen.Rouse, near SY x htido. E,gl.
At his lodgings at the Hotwells, Thanes A i bay, ,
Badgworth t. curt, in the County of Sornewt • i covi.'l
•. Al litecon, litter an none; is only, NI oi, I:4 let:,. ot
Aubrey kvi 1
! -‘• ow A, I the late lt'. Gough A übreYi ,
Ynibceitivyn. flue
Mr. Walter Hughes, son of the late Rev: Mr.
it eelor of Twiny. .*
........ . ilatnostes iv,.