Star.
London, England, 1807-06-30 00:00:00

■

r -

V.

;. • .

jay•ff.r..s.aats...rr.r—r.--r--7.
LAW it&nuoikoe.
COURT OF lUNGI 111031111 i JUNE 5....
••
gown? V. WALCOTT. .
This waxen arm brought by the plaintiff, to re.
cooerldansages of the defendant, for criminal cos.*
vterfation with his wffe.
. The defendant. yo years of age, known in Me;
works by the title of Peter Pinder, refided in the fe.,
cond floor of a bottle kept by a tviri. Dyke, at Cam.
den Tows: and Mrs. Knight, a fprightly plaYful
woman, of 25 years of age, refided in the fir( floor
with her hothead. According to the evidence ad,
duced on the trial by Mrs. Dyke, and other witnefes,
Mrs. Knight kebed to have formed an attachment
t• the defendant, which increafed fo much, that bee-
habiliments were often noticed to have been difor-
dered after the had left hie room. This was poll?,,
tively (worn to by the witnefes ; one of whom (wore
he heard Mrs. Knight in the defendant's bed-room
one evening, and it was his full belief they were la
bed together. They all knew Mrs. Knight. Ad 1
to receive theatrical letlons from the defendant.,..'
There were fevers) other fads (worn to by thefe wit;'
nefes, which oecafioned much laughter. However,
there was a good deal of incontinency in the evidence.
Mr. Nall, in addreffing the Jury for the defen
dant, laid that he did fo with more than ordinary
zeal againa fo foul a confpiracy. The Jury would
have no hefitation in feting through it, and finding
their verdictaccordingly. Dr. Walcott, the Learned
Counfel contended, was an infirm old man, and-very
poor, for his writings had never been prt.duaiee to•
him. He was in a Rite of infirmity, and required
a nurfe to ttadrefs and put him to bed. Mrs. Knight
had often alined in undreffing him, and in holding
Warm bottles to his feet after he was in bed, the ft,•
vain of the houfe having at that time left it. The
Dolor had his %hare of fphits, and he uted to talk
of half,inntulted allots. Mn: Knight had Come nb.
Lion of Thefpian fame, and the Doctor was invited
to inflcult, her in recitations. Mr. Plans contltided
bY.tintioning the jail not to giye credit to the wit-
alike. '
Lord Kor.smamtovon Otortly rimmed tip the cafe,
about which he obferved there was a great del of
itoprolmbility ; and the Jury, without fiefitation, re-
tained a Verdia for the defendant.
• iUllt 29.—THt typo o Col.ollllt. DRATIR. •
Aritill was an infbrmation filed againft the Defen-
dant -for publitbing a libel upon the Right Hon.
' John &Miran. The libel was contained in a paw
entitled " Fieonian Controverfy," in which'
the iet'
Defendant undertook to -vindicate the charatter
andreputation of Cohtnel Piton from.the cal:mums'
prom*ated arsenal:int ; and the attack spin Mr.
ftlfivan proceeded upOn a fuppofition that be had.
*aide -a communication to a Gentian% named.
Lynch, which inferred that the recal of Colonel Pic
--
top from his Government of Trinidad was a motet
previouOy fixed upon ; and that the invenigation is.
to his:mode& was a thing in furtherance of that de-
tenishmtion. In than the libel treats the communk
titian alluded Mil, IMlllldOebted fa& and Colonel
cir Drape tells Mr. &Meats, that while he has a pen or
a t ,he (14r. 8) %AU hear of it. .He INV an-
cafes r, S.. of an attempt (by his caudal/ towards
Colonel P.') to undermine and. defiroy the charalier,
et the army ; and to liave circulated repine for
which he had no legitimate anthorhy or honourable
pretext: The Defendant, after further comment,
goes on to auk, " In what language am I addrefs fo
black and cowardly • tyrant f'• and concludes by all
felting, ".that Mr. S. bad rowed the feeds of difeon-
tem in-the arniy,and that he bad uncloaked a Riletto,
which he had endeavoured to plunge into the heart
of a limitations °Seer." - This was defended by
raying,. Mat what Colonel Draper had publifited-he
let poled to be warranted in feet, and that Mr. Sulli.
Van being a public man, he (Colonel D.) bad aright
to animadvert, ftiblillly NMI) hi, ahuseer. The De.
feedlot, is .addition, called. leools Grofvener, :sad
Iltubuty, and-General Manners, and koala o:hersi
to prove, thee they thonght bias incapable of publith.
ittg as true any thing lio.hnew a; helieweal to be falfe;
but-Lord- Sox so loaounit is:tamped the examina-
tion, and .laid that might gt! in mitigation of kids.
meet, bat tould notha.retemed ne evidence to do
away the libeL It was no lect a libel becaufe the
Defendant thought his prespifes true ; the Cobler. of
Mama thought himfelf jellificd in Ihootift every''
man he rust, whom he shaven inimical to his no.
lions gf Gomrnment, but be was no le4 a nun deter.
The jury found the Defendant Pal.

T.HII KUM V. 11.11,4. ASA OT11111111.„'
This was an indiftment agairtll the Dgfaidasto,
for a licit, and pulling down the profeoutor's cot.,
tape, on Illingdon h199r., ' It.appecred that die pro:
fecutor had been permitted to, era, a cottage on the
land in quellion, and had reisted there, with the
Uowledge of the Lord of the-Manor, for fl years.
aving,ltowever, voted for Sir Frauds Burdett in
right. of his fuppofed freehold,' the Defendant (Hill)
irbt) is the deputy steward of the Manor, and the
. tuber Defendants, who were• peace officers, want to I
.the fpot, turned the profccutor out of poffefenn, aria
pulled the cottage about his ears. It appeared,
however, that they were, in fome aseafure, warranted
In this proceeding, es the cottage had been prekitted
,as a nnifance ; and the Homage at the Manor Court
bad found it to be filch. His Lordfhip faid it was
not a riot in point of law, and therefore the Defen•
dant% mull be acquitted ; but he trotted the profe-
cutor would be permitted to enjoy his cottage in the
lame way he had done fur the JAN fix years.
Mr. Paean, replied that nn objeBinn would be
offered; provided the party would no longer confi•
der himfelf a Freeholder in right of the inffrage.
The Defendants were then acquitted.
THIC KING 111. DAVVIRSS STIPHENSOM, JOHN ISIS, MID
ANOTHER.
This was an indiament for a confpiracy to pa.
there the relesfe of the Honourable Butler Danvers,
•citlist *lady of the Keeper of the King's Bench
:Srt*n.
ctssee of tome irregularity of theproceed•
- The Wasdants were acquitted.
RA
THE itiso V. ',MEN.
indiarnent for perjury. The Difen•
*pit was an.autuney,‘ccfiding in Furnivars Inn, and
M' ardlismetits of perjury were upon an affidavit of
/Jet'; but it appearing that "the lurit of the affida-
%if Appearing as (worn in the City of London; and
-aft being brought in Middlefez, this was a
"Pan aact,the.ll:f.c4dant was acquitted.
• "iv: •
itf •

~.

'• . •
A

:Y:: '- • -