Star.
London, England, 1808-11-25 00:00:00

NAUTICAL, INTELLIGENCE.

LIST OP SHIPS IN THE TAGUS ON THE 15TH INST.
Uncle: Vie Coniniand of Sir C. Corroa.
Hissaarin, I.lver.r,
AUDACIOUS. • COMUS,
PL, IN3 AG/.NIT, UNDAUNTED, •
GANGE:,, MYRTLE,
RI,SOLUTiON, and
NEN 1,11, NAV FILL':.
PLYMOUTH, NOVEMBER 23.
Came in his Majesty's ship DRUID, from Cork ;
and Success, SAUNDERS, frcm Waterford.
PORTSMOUTH, NOVEMBER 24.
Arrived a French privateer (late the Buoy boat cf
this port), captured by his Majesty's ship COQUETTE ;
also arrived the Joseph, —, from Gibraltar; and
Severn, Panntox, from Cork.—Sailed his Majesty's
ships LAVINIA, for Lisbon ; and SEMIRAMIS, On A
cruize.—Wiad F.S.E.
DOVER, NOVEMEER 24.
Arrived in the Do xns ye.terday, his Majesty's ship
KANGAROO, Capt. BAKER, and sent in here the French
lugger privateer, which she captured on Sunday night
last : the K ANGA noo sailed again last night cn a cruize.
—Came in the brig Lit:le William, Captain G4/?TON,
'of and for London, from Gibraltar, with barrilla,
rags, &c. having sustained much damage by shipping
a heavy sea in the late dale.- Anived in the Roa.ls
from a cruize, his Majesty's sloop Cftocus.
i YARMOUTH, NOVEMBER 24.
Sailed the MINOTAUR, of )74 guns, and the Ctrat- .
EATANT praam, with convoy. Arrived the CALYPso
sloop of war, frlm a cruize.--Remain the Roebuck,
Aboukir, Stately, Majestic, Princess Caroline, Stre-
nuous gun-brig, and. Scala: k schooner. Wind N.W.
DEAL, NOVEMEER 24.
Remain in the Downs his Majesty's ships, &c. as
per last. -A signal has just been made fur the out-
-1 ward-bound to get under weigh for Portsroothh.
GRAVI/lIND,NOTILEINVIL 24.—Pasied by tl.e Freedom, Coeur,
from Cortmsra ; and the Ralph Nlekolscin, Findlay, from Lisliwil.
p—Ssiled the Mary Ann, Bernie, for Rio Janeiro; Guam,
Contts, for intnies ; Carmarthen, Sangster, fir Tobago; Prine,ss
of Wales, Hutchinson, for St. Cress; and tLe Elias, kirsKl, far
Ott.enburgh.

-..Y

. •
•

L 4117 INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, NOVEMBER 24.
• THE LING V. auceentnce.
The defendant, an old man of near 80 years of
age. was convicted at the last Assizes for the county
of Kent, of having the illegal possession of naval
stores. He was sentenced to pay a fine of one shil-
ling, to be imprisoned twelve months in Maidstone
Gaol, and to be once publicly whipped.
THE RING V. JOHN COWAN. • pi
Mr. ATTORNEY-GENERAL prayed the judgment of
the Court against the Defendant, the master of a yes- I
sel, who had suffered judgment to go against him by
default, in an indictment for breaking en embargo at
East Bourne, in going from thence to Sunderland, in-
stead of putting in at the nearest port.
Mr. HOLROYD, for the Defendant, pleaded, in exte.
nuation of his conduct, that it was to an English port
the Defendant sailed, and that at Sunderland he had
a wife and children, whom he could with difficulty
support.
He was sentenced to three months imprisonment in
Horsham gaol.
THE KING V. FRAS. B. WRIGHT.
The Defendant was brought up to receive judg-
ment for a libel, published in a newspaper called The
Liverpool Chroni.-le, of which he is the Editor. The
libel was concerning the number of troops at Liver.
prof, and tended to throw blame upon Govern-
ment, and sow disaffection among the troops. The
Defendant stated, that he took the principal part of
the libel from a paper, which appeared to be a printed
slip to be cut from another newspaper.
Mr. Seweenrr addressed the Court in mitigation of
punishment, and the Defendant was remanded till
the last day of the Term.
THE RING v. E. WM. ROBERTS, It. BROWN, AND DORO-
THY COLE.
The ATTORNEY GENERAL prayed for judgment on
the Defendants, who had been found guilty, on the'
14th of July last, of a conspiracy to defraud several
tradesmen. It appeared that Dorothy Cole had died
since that period ; that Brown had been discharged
from the Fleet prison on the Bth instant, and could
not be found ; and the other Defendant is confined
fit Newgate for felony ; but came up in the custody
of the keeper. The Court ordered the latter to be
recommitted to Newgate, and brought up again next
Term ; and, in the interim, perhaps, Brown might
be found.
The Avvonmcv GENERAL observed, he had no in-
structions to make any motion from the Society (Lin-
coln's Inn, Roberts being a Barrister) of which the
prisoner is a member.
TUB ZING v. PALMER.
The Defendant had been guilty of a gross and
violent assault upon a widow, for whom he had been
left a Trustee. A dispute, arose between them con-
cerning an old post in a hedge. The Defendant
went and procured a horsewhip, and laid it on se-
verely upon the defenceless woman, and hurt her arm
and her legs very severely.
The daughter of the Prosceutrix came up and.beg-
ged him to desist, which he did only in order to attack
the daughter. The Defendant was a farmer of opu-
lence in the Isle of Ely.
The COURT recommended him to male some corn-
promise, but he refused to do so en account of the
toe's, which had been incurred by removing the case
from the Sessions into the Crown Office. In consi-
dt rat on of this the Court passed a more lenient sen-
tence than otherwise they would have done, and or-
dered him to pay a fine of '251. and to give sureties
for his good behaviour.
Mr. SMITH moved, that two persons of the name
of Clark and Green, should answer the matter of an
Affidavit by a Mr. Swain, of the Albany, who stated
that he bad been arrested by Clark, on the 19th of
August, and was carried to the house of Green, an
officer to the Sheriff. He immediately offered to pay
the debt with 101. for the costs, under.the statute of
Lord Ellenborough's Act, which the officer refused
to accept, under the pretence that he could not search
the Office. Mr. S=wain was therefore kept all night
and the whole of the next day until seven m the even-
ing, under various pretexts, although he offered bail,
and to tender the money. About seven O'clock bail
was taken, and Mr. Swain was discha Mr.
Swain afterwards applied to Sir Richard hillips, to
complain of extortion by the Bailiff, and when he was
asked why he detained Mr. Swain ? he said, it was
in order to get a writ renewed which WAS out, and
. for which bail was taken together with the for-
mer writ. Sir R. Phillips made him return the money
which had been overcharged, and the Court tow
granted a Rule to spew cause, upon the ground that
the process of the Court had been abused.
* ESCAPE OP FRENCH PRISONERS.
Thema: Feaukr antl Jobs Sturt received the sentence'
of the Court for aiding and assisting French prisoners
of war to make theit escape; which sentence was
pronounced by Mr. Justice GROSE, Who told the
Lefendants, that their crime was correctly described
by his Majesty's Attorney-General,' when they were
in Court on a former day, and when they. stood
committed, which Was—that their crime bordered
upon high treason. In short, the shades of differ:
once between this nitsdemeatiour and that Of .the
greatest of all capital offences on which it bordered,
were ets fine, that they were hardly distinguishable ;
for it was in vain that the exertions ofour brave sailors
at sea produced the captureolourenemieS, and brought
them into our harbours, from whence they were con-
ducted into biar prisons, if they were enabled by traitors
on shore to escape- and return to their native land,
silence thisy came to fight the battles of our enemies
again. But from the lovidence at the. trial, as well as
'front the affidavits produced 'in mitigation, he thought
he could discern, and he hoped he we: right in trust.
ing, that these defendants' guilt sprang mere from
'the corrupt motives of lucre than from any treason-
'able desire to assist the enemy. This, however, wasl
an offesice which the Court must mark with a consi-
derahle.severity of punishznent, for it was a crime most
hostile to the interests of the Country ; to prevent a
repetition or which, the Court &Corder and adjudge,
That the Defendants, and each ,of them, be impri-
sensed in his Majesty's gaol of Ayleibury, in the
c.:unty of Bucks, for 18 Weider months; and that
in t!'^ mean time they be renatauded btu the custody
of we Marshal of: this Court.

COURT OF COMMON PLIWI, NOV.E2.I4ER is.
A Rule bad been moved for to put off the tal of an action on
the ground that a material witness could not attend for the defen-
dant for six weeks. The affidavit, upon which this Rule was
prayed for, statear(and it was the IT4davit of a medical man),
that the witness, who was-the acceptor of the bill upon which the
action was brought, hid been afflicted for six months with a bili-
ous disorder, and that be was so debilitated in consequence, that.
he could not promise a cure within six weeks. There was is
place of residence stated, he being generally described as living in
the parish of Pancras, a pretty extensive one, and the Court upon
this, conceiving the defendant only moved for delay, directed the
Rule to be discharged, as the defendant could not undertake to
bring the money into Court, to abide the event.
=WORTHY v. CHARPROMERE.
An action on two bills oil =change for £3OO drawn by C. J.
Elwbrthy, son of the plaintiff, upon the defendant. It was clearly
• established in evidence, though in the defence endeavoured to be
proved to the contrary, that a valuable consideration had been
given, and the Jury found a verdict for the Plaintiff.

NOV. 24.—HICKS V. FIELD.
This was en action to recover £4 18s. for medicine and atten-
dance en the defendafit's servant daring her aumakesersr.
Te plaintiff is a surgeon and apothecary at Lubberton, in Bed-
fordshire, and the defendant a rich farmer, in the same vicinity.
Mr. Serjeant Starriest's, who stated the ease, reminded the
Jury, that peculiar accidents would happen in all families, and in
this case the defendant's dairy-maid, a floe lass, taken from the
parish, had altered her shape. The defendant, who acknowledged
himself to be the cause of the yotmg woman's portly appearance,
immediately provided board and lodging for her, preparatory to
her arcorchevmst, at the house of James Smith, an inhabitant in the
n. ighbourhood. He then enquired of Sally, Hughes, the deluded
fair one, what Doctor 'she would prefer? And she answered,
" Why, Mr. Hicks, you know, attended me last time, and I
had rather have him again !" The choice appeared very natural,
and the defendant ordered Smith, the housekeeper, to fetch Mr.
Hicks when Sally wanted him, promising to pay all expences.
The plaintiff, consequently, made several visits from his house,
which was some miles distant, and charged at the rate of half-
a-ceown for each journey; he also furnished her with medicine,
and after her delivery his bill amounted to £4.
Mr. Serjeant Bear contended, that the plaintiff's demand was
exorbitant ; and he told the Jury, that the plaintiff had formerly
applied to the parish to discharge his bill. The defendant was
not a large farmer, as he had been. represented; but, whether
large or small, if he. west on as he had done in this case, he was
going the right way to put a large stock of children in his farm—
wouldg)— then said be would call the parish officers, who
prove that the plaintiff had attended the young woman_on
their credit.
Sir JAMES MANSTIICLD here observed, that the parish had no-
thing to do with the case. The plaintiff has been employed by
the defendant, and his bill was 41. odd, which he was entitled to
recover, provided the charges were fair and reasonable.
Serjeant Besr then submitted to the opinion cf the Learned
Judge, and concluded kis address to the Jury by observing, " If
you think this sort of breeding which the plaintiff has undertaken
ought to be encouraged, you will throw off as much as you think
proper of his demand."
The Jury foind a verdict for the plaintiff, damages £4 las.
SHADBOLDS v. WEAVER AND HOLT.
Mr. Serjeant BEST stated this to be an action brought by the
plaintiffs, timber-merchants, against the defendants, upon a pro-
missory note, passed for wood for making musical instruments.—
He understood the defence to be set up by the defendant Holt
was, that the note was not signed by him, and that he was not
the partner of the other defendant, Weaver, by whom the note
was passed for Self and Co.; but he would prove that the defen-
dants were the purchasers of a patent for making ■ageolets, from
a person of she name of Koffman, and that Holt equally interfered
in the conduct of the business with Weaver; and if he did, he
would be entitled to a verdict against them both.
William Shadbold, the brother of the Plaintiffs, and their clerk,
proved that Weaver had often purchased from them wood for
manufacturing flageolets; that Holt paid for some of it, and
that Weaver accepted the note in question for himself and Holt.
—.Upon his cross-examination, he said, he never saw Holt at the
shop, but at the brtw-house of Messrs. Gifford, where be was a
clerk.
Andrew Koffman, the original patentee for malting flageolets,
proved he had sold his interest in the invention to the defendants,
a.id had executed an assignment to them both.
Jacob Meyers, a turner, proved he was employed by the defen-
dants in tl.e manufacturing of those instruments, and that the de-
fendat t Holt used to come two or threw times a week to the shop
of Weaver, and give directions about the business.
1 here was Ile farther opposition given, and the Jury found a
verdict for the plaintiffs for the amount of the note with interest,
£.30 7s. with costs.

' Whatever contributes to embellish or preseive the
charms of the Female Sex, can never be regarded in
this country with indifference. Neglect of the Teeth
has caused many a fair face N wear the appearance of
premature decay. This will be avoided by a timely
application to Mr. BLADEN RUSPLNI, in Pall-Mall, who
in a manner peculiar to himself, supplies all the defi-
ciencies of time and accideiit. Articulate speech, and
perfect mastication, are the substantial benefits affor-
ded, whilst the artificial substitutes, which are secured
without tying, are not to be distinguished by the most
enquiring eye.

1g cy,