Star.
London, England, 1805-01-31 00:00:00

SMITH V. lOULT AND OTANI'S.

This was an anion for the lots of ten pipes of Ma.
deka; on the coal of the Wand of Jamaica. Mr.
l‘faaavar had applied for a rule to chew caufe, why
a commiffion (Mould not iffue to take the depofitions
of John Crawley, Deputy Receiver of Cuftoms at
Port Antonio, in Jamaica, who was...fiated, on the of-
?davit', to be a material witnefs.
Mr. ERSIIIIII (hewed caufe againft this rule ;—he
laid the aftion was brought againft the owners of
the (hip called the Boddington, and that this appli-
cation for a CommifEon, was like many others of the
•fame kind, merely to gain time. There was alfo an
incompetence in the affidavit, which could not, there-
fore, fupport this rule. They did not fwe.a. that
'Olin Crawley was at Port Antonio, or that they be-
lieved him to be there ; the Deputy Receiver of the
Colloms need not give his official attendance in
Jamaica, and inftead of being fulfilling his nomi-
nal duties there, he might at that moment be in
Court, amufing himfelf with the (peculation' on his
place of refidenee.
Lord Ettsiosnaounn.-44 I apprehend whatever
sney be the cafe with the Receiver, it is abfolutely
secerary that the Deputy Receiver of the Cuftoms
Mould he on the (put to difchargc the fanftions of
his ftation. With regard to the other objeeion,
there is nothing from which I can infer intention to
delay."—Rule made abfolute.
The only other caufe which came before the Court,
tras that of Routh w. Warren, to fct allele an award,

on the rolled that it was void in point of law ; and
the gut filen was, if an adion upon the covenant
would lie ? Mr. MOW ea commented on the autho-
rities in the 12th Modern Cafes, obferved upon by
Lord Kenyon, on Sir Edward Clear's cafe, and
others, to thew the award was void. Thefe argu-
ments were replied to, at confiderable length, by Mr.
ABBOT; but the Court having poilponed its deter.
mination, we (ball defer the fiatement of further par-
ticulars, until the judgment null be pronounced.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, JAN. at.
11DFORD qtti#ot V. PARRYMAN AND FALLOW,.
This was an anion brought againft the Defendants.
as printers of the newfpaper called The Morning
vertfler, to recover three penalties of Sol. each, for
inferling in that paper three advertifements, offering
a reward for goods 1011, with no quellions
contrary to the Aft of the 25th Geo. 11. commonly
called, Jonathan Wild': A.
Serjeant SHETHIRD addrefred the Jury, and beg-
ged to know, whether any of the Gentlemen then in
the Box chanced to be Proprietors of The Morning
Advertiftr? and was anfwered in the negative.
He then Rated, that by the A& of the 25th Geo.
11. it was pofitively forbidden that any perfon fhould
infert any advertifement or paragraph, in a public
paper or print.• Rating that certain things were 101 l
or Rolen, and offering a reward to any perfon who
fhould give them up to the owner, and. at the fame
time, promifing.that no profecution fhould be com-
menced, or, as is commonly the words made ufe of,
that no queflions fhould he sifked. He then adverted
to the different advertifements, and Paid, that all he
had to do was to produce the affidavit of the Defen-
dants, lodged by them at the Stamp Office, and to
prove that the advertifements were infected. He
concluded by apologifing to the Jury for inquiring
whether any of them happened to be Proprietors ?
but as lie underßood there were 1768 mares in the
paper. he thought there was no great wonder in tith-
ing the quellion.
Mr. Lionel Booth, an officer of the Stamp-Office,
appointed under the Ad to receive and keep impre4
lions of the newfpapers, produced the papers which
had been lodged with him. The advertifements
were then read. The firfk was on the Bth of Sept.

5804, and began with 4, Ten guineas reward.—:lo
watch-makers, pawn-brokers, and others. Loft, an
old-falbioned plain gold watch, with thain and feats,
&c." Every part of which was accurately defcrib-
ed, and concludes with, 4, Whoever will bring the
fame to a certain houfe (mentioned in the advertife.
ment), !hall receive ten guineas reward ; and if any
one has advanced money on it they than be paid,
and no queftions
The fecund was on the 55th of September, 1804.
This was for Come copper-plates, alledged to be 101 l
or ftolen, and offering to pay any cxpences, if they i
had been purebafed by any one.
The third was for fix filver fpoons, and offering
to pay the espences, if bought, or to redeem them,
if pawned.
Serjeants Bssr and Liss fubmitted, that this ac-
tion could be brought only when goods were actually
loft or ftolen, and that, as there was no evidence of
this, it remained with them to prove that the goods
were loft, and they were convinced that could not be
done, as it was entirely a trick, fur the purpofe of
committing a fraud on the newfpapers.
Sir JAMES Mamsrtsen Paid, that if that were the
cafe, it was a grofs fraud on the part of the Plaintiff;
and that, if any perfect could be bate enough to do
it, every ftep Mould be taken to punifh him ; but he
conceived that their own advertifements were evi-
dence that the things were loft ox ftolen ; and as the
Plaintiff was a common informer, he was not Cup-
poled to know whether theft things were MI or not.
but only commenced the aaious from feting the ad.
vertifements.

Sergeant BAYLEY Paid, that as there were to many
proprietors, it would not be more than three lb
lings each.
Sir Jamas MANMILD explained the Aa to the

Jury, and told them, that, according to law, the
Plaintiff had a right to recover, and any muft find
the three flints, not as damages, but as penalties.—
The Jury afked, whether it were not in their power
to mitigate the penalties ?
Sir limit MA/42211Ln Paid, he did not think it was
confident with their oaths.
They found a verdi& for the Plaintiff, damages to
the amount of t sol. viz. Sol. on each ation.
JANUARY Z 5.

WIMILI V. WITitItHEAD.-- &Tient SHIPHERD
moved the Court, that the Defendant tbould be dii

charged out of confinement. He Paid there had been
an agreement entered into between the Plaintiff and
Defendant, that the latter Would take all the hops,
half-bags, and half-pockets, which the former Would
grow in the year .804 ; and Would pay for them, at
the rate of fix guineas a hundred, as foon as they
were packed and delivered. The Plaintiff demanded
payment for the year's growth of hops, when he
had tendered a part of them, and the Defendant, re-
futing to pay him, was arrefted, and thrown into
gaol. The ground on which he moved that the De-
fendant &odd be difcharged, without being held to
bail, was, that it did not appear from the affidavit
of the Plaintiff, that the hops which had been pack.
ed and offered to the defendant, were ;roperly dried,
and every thing done to them to make them fit for
packing, nor did it appear that they had been put
into bags and pockets.
Serpent Bays.ar (aid, that, he hoped the Court
would think the affidavit fufficient, or, if not, that
they would permit him to amend it.
Sir Jal4 as Maass lELD kid, that by the agreement,
the Plaintiff had engaged to deliver all the hops he
()mold grow in the year, but it only appeared from
his affidavit, that part of them had been tendered;
he did not, therefore, think that the Defendant
mould be held to bail, but that he amid be dif-
charged forthwith.
-Serpent BAYLIY then moved that the Defendant
Would undertake not to bring an adion of trefpafs
for the arreft.

The Court did not think an aEtion of trefpafs would
lie againa him, and granted the rule abfolute.

A poor man having lately briught an affirm in a
&eons Court, for sg Sow be had fold, his Attorney,
after having eked the wittier,' kveral qucitions, to
dahlia his cafe, at laR anted him, " pray my lad,
was the row delivered I"—ig 0 yes, Sir." cries he,
61 sad the little pigs are all alive and welt."