Star.
London, England, 1830-12-30 00:00:00

LAW REPORTS.

SECONDARIES' COURT.—Dee. 28.

WILLATTS V. WUUTOW.

This was an action brouglHiitheplain Willatts, an Ac-
countant of great respectability in the city, against the defendant, John
Weston, jun. Tailor at the West End. for an assault. :in which judg-
ment had been suffered to go by default.
Mr. PHILLIPS attended on behalf of the plaintiff; and was proceed-
ing to open his ease, when
Mr. M,MAHow (interrupting) said he believed he could save the
time of the Court and jury by the apology he was Instructed to make
on behalf of his client the defendant.
Mr. POTTZft observed that an apology in Court at this stage of the,
proceeding could have no effect, as the jury knew nothing of the case.
Mr. PHILLIPS said his client was very opulent, and it was not for
money he had come into Court. If, therefore, the defendant was ready
to make a public apology, and express his regret for the assault he
had committed, which had deeply injured the plainttff's feelings, he
should feel content.

Mr. 111‘Mattort said that was just what he was about so do. His
client acted at the moment under very excited feelings, from informa-
tion which he had received, and which on further inquiry he found to
have had no foundation in truth. lie bad therefore instructed him
(Mr. Willahon) to make this public declaration, that he deeply re-
gretted the assault be had committed, and felt sorry for what had
passed.
Mr. Panties was happy to hear it stated on the part of Mr. Wes-
ton that he believed the pkindff to be a man incapable of being the au-
-1
thor of any slander ; and after the apology that had been made, the
jury were to understand that the plaintiff desired not to have one
farthing awarded at their hands.
Mr. POTTER directed the Jury, however, to find a verdict for the
plaintiff—Damages is. Costs to be paid as between attorney and
client.

Two whet cues of not the slightest public Interest were also disposed
of, and the Court adjourned.

FEMALE MISER-SINGULAR ACCUMULATION OF

RICHES.

A curious case, respecting the validity of a will, came
before the Prerogative Court, in which an Irishman, named
Featherstone, sought to support a will against the claims of
the distant relatives of an old beggar woman. It appeared
that on the 26th of March, 1829, an old and pretended
blind beggar woman, named Elizabeth Henrich, died, leav-
ing behind her, in Bank of England notes and specie, pro-
perty to an enormous amount (said to be nearly one hundred
thousand pounds.) During her life-time, she had pur-
sued the occupation of a beggar, feigned blindness, in or-
der the better to excite commiseration, and had been in the
habit of being led about from the door of one patron to that
of another, to collect subscriptions for her maintemnee.
She was an Irish woman and many years ago introducei
herself to Lady Caroline Murray, stating that she had bean
deserted by her husband, and left quite unprotected in
this country. Lady Murray interested herself in 11.)-1
behalf, placed her name at the head of a list
subscribers, and recorr.n., Tided her to several
volent persons. In this wav u old woman obtained large
sums of monk y, which she h rded up in a parlour and
cellar, whiLh she rented in NN'arrcn-street, Golden-square.
She was extremely cautio is of admitting any person into
this parlour awl wrist` and w li, n the girl, whom she em-
ployed fr,r the Tnirpcwie of - woeping the former was
engaged in that occupation, she constantly bold her by
some p'ut of her dress, in order to prevent her from ap-
proaching some particular part of tho room. In this house
leaving property to the amount above stated.
She had, during her life, been in the habit of visiting
Featherstone, in Saint ohn's-court ; had often been
known to drink whisky, sod sing Irish songs with him,
and had been heard to say she would leave him thou-
sands when she died. Mrs. Henrich did die on the 26th
of March, 1829, from the effects of a 6t. On the property
being discovered, advertisements were inserted in the news-
papers, advising her heirs or any of her relations to come
forward. It was not till some time after this was done, Fea-
therstone appeared with the will in question, by which he was
appointed universal legatee. The evidence for the defence
went to show, that at the date of the pretended will (Fe-
bruary 13, 1829, and whidh purported to have been drawn
up, signed, and attested at the residence of the plaintiff, in
St. John's Court,) the deceased was unable, and had been
unable for a long time previously, from a general decay of
nature, to leave her own house. The defence, in fact, chiefly
rested on an alibi. It was commented on as a singular cir-
cumstance, that to Green , the subscribing witness, since dead,
nothing whatever had been left by the deceased. The case on
both sides having been gone through, Sir John Nichol gave
judgment against the will, and in favour of the defendants.

The writ of Supersedees, directing that all proceedings
under the writ for electing two Members of Parliament
for the borough of Evesham should cease, was delivered
at the Sheriff's Office in Worcester, by an official messen-
ger from town, at ten o'clock on Saturday morning, and,
io obedience thereto, the Under Sheriff immediately for-
um-clod a precept to the Mayor of Evesham, be suspend the
proceedings under the Sheriff's former precept.—Worcester