Star.
London, England, 1808-12-16 00:00:00


THE-DLINI) VETERAN.

Ye Friends of the Valiant, attend to my lay;
Nor r►fuse the sad tribute of Pity to pay.
If Sympathy e'er in your breasts raia'.l a glow,
Or compassion, to feel for the Offspring of Woe ;
If e'er the sad fate of your Relatives dear
Excited warm Sorrow's affectionate tear—
My Father relieve—on a Veteran smile,
Who couquer'd and bled at the Mouth of the Nile!
In those climates where pestilence rides as the gale,
And hsrricanes sweep o'er the mountain and vale ;

When the storm rag'd terrific, the blue gleaming light
Deprbed my poor Father for ever of sight.
Now cheerless he wanders in darkness and gloom,
While Charity smooths his rough path to the tomb;
Coniescend then the Wants of old age to beguile,
Of a Warrior who fought at the MOUTH or THa Nitro
My Mother the last debt of Nature has paid,
A white thorn marks the spot where her ashes are laid;
No more can our sorrows or woe reach her breast—
Beneath the cold turf ler remains are at rest,
Forlorn and dejected together we roam,
For dreary and comfortless now is our hoax;— '
In pity, then, deign on a Seareae to smile,
Who sestfuer'd and Wed at the MOUTH OF lite NILS. •
November IBM TIATALGARIOII.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT AF CHANCERY, DECEMBER IS.
DODS V. UPSTONE.
. This was a case which came before this Court by
appeal from the decree of the Master of the Rolls.—
The plaintiff is a widowof the name of Dods, and the
defendant, Upstone, a solicitor, was trustee of an
estate for the plaintiff, and a suit was brought against
him in the Rolls Court, for having, by neglect, and
his own defeasance, permittedthe trust deed to go
out of his Own possession, in consequence of which
the plaintiff was deprived of the property for which
,the defendant was trustee on her account. The Mas-
ter of the Rolls decreed, that the defendant, the
trustee, was bound to make good the loss sustained
in consequence of his neglect.
The case was now brought, by appeal, before this
Court, and it was contended by Mr. HART, for the
defendant, that objections in point of form, lay to the
original bill of the plaintiff, which ought to prove
fatal to it. Besides, there was no evidence of any pri-
vity or concurrence of his client, the defendant, in
making away with the trust property.
Sir S. Rommx, for the plaintiff, contended, that
this was a case of culpable negligence on the part of
a Trustee, though certaialy_not a charge of fraud and
collusion.
The LORD CHANCELLOR, in giving judgment, ob-
served, that this property of the plaintiff was vested
in Trustees, and that the trust deed was placed in the
possession of the defendant, as one of those trustees.
It appeared, however, that he had delivered it up into
the hands of the plaintiff's husband, by whom it was
destroyed. The husband was thus enabled to sell
the property, and deprive the wife of her interests.—
On these grounds, the Lord Chancellor affirmed the
decree of his Honour the Master of thesßolls:

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, DEC. IS.
DAVEY AND ANOTHYR V. NOTT AND ANOTTIEE.
This was an action upon a bill of exchange for
t5l. 2s. drawn by one Main upon, and accepted by
the defendants, and indorsed to one Combe, and by
Combe indorsed to the plaintiffs, drawnat two months
date, and dated the 12th of May, 1806.
After Mr. Grautow for the plaintiffs had shortly
proved the several hand writings, and usual particu-
lars to entitle the plaintiffs to recover,
The ATTORNEY GENERAL, for the defendant, stated,
that this bill, together with another, was made for
usurious purposes. Main and the defendants wishing
to raise money, two bills for 7001. were drawn and
negotiated through the medium of an advertising
money-lender's house, Messrs Humphreys and Co.
of Sion College Gardens:" From some mistake in
the drawing, these bills were not taken up, and after-
wards two other bills were made in order to take up
the forther, and were delivered to Main, who, how-
ever, made some excuses respecting one of the former
bills, and it was still detained by him. The sum
pilid for the diScounting by Combes was 2 per cent.
beyond the Usual rate of interest, or 7i per cent. to-
gether with 171. 10s. to the discounting agent, Mr.
Parks, wlip was the real keeper of the house of Hum-
phreys 'mid Co. t oth Main and Combes had be-
come bankrupts ; and it was rather surprising that
these bills had not been proved under either of their
commissions, although it was two years since the
bills were due.. This circumstance, he said, sheaved
a strong symptom of usury or some defect In the bill,
which made the holder so reluctant to come forward.

Parks' who kept the house in Sion Gardens, and,
another office in Brown's-court, St. Mary-axe, vas
called to prove the usury, and said that lstott agied
readily to pay the interest and premium.
Upon being cross-examined by Mr. Gastativi, be
slid he had lateiy given up business, within three
weeks or a m.nth : that he had been formerly .eon-
idential steward to Lord Keppel ; and that Hum-
phreys lived in Fleet-lane, and was a glass manufac-
turer. He did not advance his own money, but did
business for others, and took what he could get for
agency.

-

Nugent, another bill broker, was present at the I
transaction, and spoke to the sameeffect. He thought
Mott made some objection to tke terms. He remem-
bered the sending for some red ink to write the ac-
ceptance with. He remembered also that the other,
bills were signed with a K in the word Nott.
Upon being tross-examined, he refused to say for
what particular persons he wasemployed ; and Lord
Eu.eirsonounn said, he might refuse to answer that
'question. He answered all the other questions very
!freely, arid spid he did business for a great number of
'persons, and had done- so for Gentlemen at the Bar.
He transacted business at coffee houses, at the

Change, and at his own house in Red Lion-square.
He had ceased to advertise, because he was now so
Kell known, having been twelve years in that line.
Mr. Gmusow, in reply, made several observatiossi
on thy testimony of these advertising money-lenders,
and endeavoured to persuade the Jury that thiy
ou,—ht not to be believed.
Lard ELIENBORQUORb howevtr, said, that they had