Star.
London, England, 1822-04-17 00:00:00

t 1

to lag &DK* WASAtitili Via 4110Vidaal of a
similar op ton to be made.on the 4 eal day,
which wits not afterwards proceeded on.
Mr. sku.eir *Claimed all knowledge of the fur.
mer application, and assured the Court that the pre.
son voodoo's.' were determined to proceed. The
furt=ll:vacaussion of the subject was then adjourned
tin
lunacies Banter was indicted for wilful and corrupt
perjury. In an action brans,* in November last, in
which the parties were Proctor, Bedingbeld, arid
Windus, v. Granger, the dekndent had appeased aid
given evidence for the defence. It appeared that the
plaintiffs were trustees of the estate of Sr Edward
Bacon, and had raised this action to try the question
whether, by a wall which the defendant had bit*,
he had or had not encroached upon the property a
sir Edward Bacon, situate in Cursitor-street, Chan.
eery-lane. The action was tried before Mr. Justice
Parke, in the Common Pleat, aid the defendant now
at the Bar swore that he was employed to build the
wall in questiOn—that he had built it upon the four.,
dation of the old wall, and had not encroached npf,u
the property of Sir Edward Bacon. The consequence
of this evidence was a nonsuit. It was now avcrrvd
in the indictment, that the defendant had been guilty
of wilful and corrupt perjury, inasmuch as he k. :e..7
at the time he gave his evidence that the wall bad
not been buik upon the old foundation, an..! that it
did encroach upon the property of Sir Edward Bacot..
Mr. MANNING, who conducted. the case for the
prosecution, called Mr. J. P. Windus, to prove the
evidence of the defen 'a it given on the trial. The wit-
ness read the notes he had taken on the trial. They
were the substance of the examination in chief, and
did not contain the whole of the examination.
Mr. ADOLPHUS, for the defendant, contended that
this evidence was not sufficient to convict any man n(
wilful and corrupt perjury. The whole examination
ought to be produced ; it was not enough for the wit-
ness to decide what was important, and what unim-
portant. This point had been decided so long ago as
when Lord Kenyon presided on the Bench.
Mr. MANNING apprehended that if this doctrine
were held, no man could be convicted of perjury ; for
it was almost impossible for every word of the exa-
mination to be taken down. It was, he thought, Alf-
ficiesit that the substance should be stated.
The case for the prosecution then proceeded, under
the direction of the CHAIRMAN; anu two other wit-
nesses were called. By them it was proved th.A. the
wall in question was built art the estate. f Ed-
ward Bacon, and that it had been examined tor that
purpose by opening it in three places. The wall was
built in a slanting direction, so that alth(iugh at one
end it did not encroach, yet in the middle it was
four inches and a half, and at the west end seven
inches over the line.
The case for the prosecntion being concluded, Mr.
ADOLPH Us contended that there was no proof which
called upon him to examine witnesses for the defence.
The CHAIRMAN thought the case was cettmoly a
weak one ; but it was for the Jury to decide whether
there was sufficient evidence to shew a wilful and
corrupt intention in the defendant.
The Jury, after a short consideration, found the
defendant—Not Guilty.
Thomas Agglinton was also indicted for wilful and
corrupt perjury. The facts of this case were precisely
similar to the last. The defendant, who was the w. rk-
man of the last defendant, had also given evidence ci
a like tendency on the trial.—The Jury found a ..e-
-dict—Not Guilty.
John Symonds was indicted for assaulting Rebecca
Burt.—The prosecutrix, who was in the te: vice of
'Miss Deering, of Queen-street, May-fair, wa,, en tlie
evening of the 28th of January last, walking alone n?
Chapel-street, on her way home, about ni::e o'clock,
when a man took bold of her in a very indecent man-
ner, threw her into the kennel, and ran away. She
was so much hurt as to keep her bed for three days,
and Mr. Heaviside attended her five days. She WAS
certain that the defendant was the man who knocked
her down.
Edward Deadman, who was in company with Sy-
monds, corroborated the prosecutrix's statement.
Mr. ANDREWS agreed to a verdict of Gtrety,which
was given, and the defendant was directed to be de-
tained until he made her a suitable compen,ation.
Waddington, of bill-sticking and radical nolo! iety.
appeared to put in bail, and also to traverse to the next
sitting of the Court, on a charge brought against him
by a watchman of St. Martin's parish, for an a-sault
committed by hint last month, when he had forsaken
his literary pursuits, drank plentifully of iVhitbreads
heavy (to which he is much attached) and Hodgei's
"stark naked," and proceeded to perform the pelt of
a Corinthian. The little hero, aspiring to a higher
Court than the Westminster Sessions, declared his in-
tention to remove the action by certiorari to the King's
Bench, in order to display his oratorical talents.

BIRTH.
Saturday, in Baker-street, the Lady of Winiazt James,
M.P. of a son. _