Star.
London, England, 1823-11-24 00:00:00

SMITH V. CARPENTER.

In this case, Mr. Serjeant VAUGHAN moved for a Rule
to shew cause why an annuity granted by the defend-
ant in this case should not be set aside. It had been
granted in consideration of a sum of £lOOO. The
grounds of the application were, that thrwhole of the
consideration mentioned in the memorial had not been
received; that the witnesses named in the memorial had
not been properly described, and that the plaintiff re-
sorted to another security.
The COURT said, that the application mild not be
sustained on the last point, but granted the Rule on the
two others.—The other motions were of no interest.

A supply of young lads from that valuable institution,
the Royal Marine Society, arrived at Chatham on Mon-
day. for the skips fitting out at that port.

DEATH NY HUNTlNG—Saturday evening an Inquest)
was held at the TOrf Tap, Grosvenor-place, before Mr.,
HIGGs, Deputy Coroner fur Westminster, on the body
of George Ward, a lad aged 15, servant to Mr. James
Robinson, of the Angel li.u, Angel-street, St. Martin's-
le-Grand. Francis Curzon, also servant to Mr. Robin-'
son, stated that the deceased left the Angel Inn on ,
Tuesday morning about halGpast five o'clock, in order
to go out with the Berkeley hounds; witness also went :
tl e horse on which the deceased rode was a very steady
animal, and very easily managed by the deceased ;
r bile the hounds were in full cry, and the deceased and
itriel riding along the turnpike-road, about a mile
and a half this side of nedfunt, they ran through a
drove of beast , and the deceased's horse took fright.—
The deceased got his feet disengaged from the stirrups,
and in endeavouring to regal!' -diem, the rowels of his,
spurs stuck :n the horse's sides which assisted in sup
porting him on the horses back, and having lost his
seat, he was lying back on the horse. The horse con-
tinued running until he came to an inn yard, when he
turned very quick, and threw the deceased off with
great violence, his head coming in Contact' with the
sign-post. He was taken up in a state of insensibility,
and remained in that state for two hours. He was after-
wards removed in a pug-chaise to St. Georges Hos-
pital. Mr. John Cates, dresser to St. Georges Hos-
pital, deposed, that On Tuesday evening the deceased
UttS brought to the Hospital; on examining his head,
vitness perceived a depression and fracture of the skull,
and his thigh .broken. He was then sensible, and re-
mained so for about .six hours ; but he dir.vi on Friday
in consequence-of the injury he had received. Verdict,:
" ACciskental Death—deoilarid on the horse Is."
A brace of fine cock pheasants paid an apparent
voluntary visit to Hunter Iriolme, near P.tdiham, about
thtee'mouths ago, and , have not since manifested- any
desire to depart. Oa the contrary, they have-become
so gentle and tame, as to follow the servant girl about,
evrteinto the kitchen, and to receive food from her
hand. It is conjectured either that the birds fled from
is domestic aviary, or that, pursued by a hawk, they
took refuge in Hunter Mime, and, from a sense of its

INSOLVENT DEBtaße. Our; Norio%
James Howse was oppcised by Mr. li'oLtoos for J.
Ilennyman and others. The insolvent was arrested in
the country fur a debt of 141. and committed to llches
ter gait Previously to his confinement, he offered to
give up all his property to be divided amongst his cre-
ditors, which offer they declined.. While in gaol be
advertised his property for sale for the benefit of his
creditors, and it was sold for about 701. Upon receiv-
ing this money, the insolvent had himself removed by
Habeas Corpus to the Fleet Prison, and from that to the
King's Baia, where he purchased the Rules. its order to
enable him to procure work as a builder. By the time
he got here, his money was reduced to 341. ind that
was since spent in support of himself, his wife, and
family. When in the Bench he commenced proceed-
ings to supersede the action, as it was not his intention
to take the benefit of the Insolvent Act ; but a detainer
being laid upon him by another creditor, compelled him
to seek relief from this Court. He made no offer, after
his arrest, of dividing his property amongst his creditors.
The Count said, it would be a most dangerous rule
to lay down, that because a man's creditors did not
choose to accept an offer made by him before his arrest,
he was therefore to be at liberty to sell ofall his' pro-
perty and turn the money' to-his own account after-
war is, without giving one shilling of it to his creditors.
If the insolvent had chosen, he might have had his
liberty long since, by paying off the debt for which he
was arrested, amounting only to 141. instead of spend-
ing 701. by removing from place to place, and remain-,
ing in prison until now. They ordered him to be re-
manded within the walls forsix calendar months; •
Thomas Hag) es was not opposed; but it appearing
from his schedule that he had been discharged under
the Act in the beginning of this year, and that a large
portion of debts since incurred were stated by him to
have been contracted without any consideration, he was
desired by the Court to explain the circumstance.
. The insolvent replied, that after his former discharge,
he was maliciously arrested by a party who conspired
to keep him in prison to afford a person, named Char-
tres, an opportunity of eloping with his wife, in which
purpose he (Chartres)"succeeded, but for which the insol-
vent obtained' judgment against him bydefault, and_the
damages were assessed at .5001. which he inserted in his
schedule for the benefit of his creditors. He was then
about going into business in the•Haymarket as a hatter,
he being also an auctioneer, with the assistatice of some
friends; but being induced to endorse some bills to
take a friend out of prison, he was again maliciously
arrested and driven a second time to seek relief under
the Act. He was very sure, however, that none of his
creditors would oppose his discharge.
The Cover observed, that it was so much the better,
as it would be necessary for him to obtain the consent of
three-fourths of them before he could be discharged ;
for it would be impossible to say that endorsing bills,
without any means of paying them, could be con-
strued as incurring debts by unforeseen misfortune,
which alone could entitle a an to a second discharge
under the Act within five years from his former dis-
charge, without the consent of three-fourths of his cre-
ditors. They therefore ordered the'case to be adjourned
generally to obtain such consent..
George Batcheilor was opposed by Mr. HEATH, for a
currier named Browne. The insolvent is a shoemaker,
and worked for Dr. Burney's school. At Christmas,
1822, he owed, Mr. Browne a !silence of 351. and Mr.
Browne declined giving him further credit, until the
insolvent, giving him a solemn, engagement in writing,
to hand him over the amount of his next half-yearly
payment from Dr. Burney, which was generally from
100 L-to 1101. Mr. Brown consented to advance him
another 1001. worth of goods. About a fortnight be-
fore this payment became due, the insolvent received
an attorney's letter from another creditor, to whom he
owed 341. in consequence of which he determined to
divide the money Dr. Burney owed him amongst all his
creditors; and instead of the full sum, as he expected,
Mr. Browne only received= offer of ss. in the pound.
The CouaT said, that the caution observed by Mr.
Browne, when giving credit to the insolvent, as well as
his humanity in doing so, to enable him to continue to
earn for his family, entitled him to every possible pro-
tection within their power .to. afford him.. They must
not, however, be induced; by such a consideration, to
strain the law in this case; and it did not appear to
them, that the subsequent misconduct of the insolvent, in
breaking his engagement, which seemed to have been oc-
icasioned by the tbreatening letterhe receivekon behalf
of another creditor, had the effect of rendering the debt
contracted with Mr. Browne a. fraudulent one. They
could not, therefore, remand the insolvent under the
18th section of the Act; but they did consider it a case
where the very wholesome discretion vested in the
Court, by the 16th section, might be very justly exer-
cised ; and they therefore remanded him for six calendar
months, to be confined within the walls of the prison.
Jacob Anthony Doottnes was opposed by Mr. HIATH
for two tailors; named Fras nod Bunting. The insol-
vent stated that he bad been clerk to a sugar-broker,
and had acted as a sugir-brOker in 1820, but not for
himself. His income, or salary, for the (bur last years
respectively, had been 601. 704 301. and 351. In the
present year he purchased sffl; worth of clothes and
hats from a man named Crosby, of which lie sent 121.
worth of hats to Gottenburgh; the remainder be used
himself. In 1822, be had 181. worth of jewellery of
'Mr. Young, which be gave away. One ring had been
returned ; a seal, a key, and a spy-glass, he had pawned ;
he did not know what be had done with the duplicate;
,he gave it away; he rather thought his father had it;
be gave it to his father just before he was arrested. He
sold four ;kiss for three guineas to a Gentleman named
Jones, wholtved it Roston. He owed five pounds for
wine in 1822. He sent the hats on speculation to Got-
teuburgb, to a Jew named Joieph ; he put no account
of them in his schedule. The remaining WI. worth of
clothes, as well as 201.. worth had of Mr. Bunting, he
had used himself. He never gambled. (Handed a letter,
in which be informed Mr. Fres that it was gambling
occasioned his embarrassment. The gambling there af-
luded to, consisted in an occasional game of whist at
slosts's lodgings, wherethey used to meet for that pur-
pose). He had 321. worth of clothes of Mr. Eras, which,
he seat to an Dieman'sLand.
George Frau, a German tailor, stated, that he first
knew the insolvent in Mach, 1816, when he represented
bimselfies,lse n sugar-broker, and in partnership with
hies tAete. It was upon that representation that be trusted)
him wlb clothes, to be sent to Van Dieman's Land. ' .11
T. Bunting, Sailor and diaper, said be became ajJi
cinainied with the insolvent from meeting him, at 441
friepirs-bouse in the shape of a lover to his daugiiter;st,
tiotishier.) He offered him a ticket for the.Bakers' ball,
of which his friend was steward. In that process (great
&kW he introduced himself to witness as a sugars

broker,fund asssuch he pee blip aredit. He afterwyds
became Very intimate wit& him. Witness hinded in a
lettcr,:in which the insolvent imputed his difficukies:ta
gambling, and Oplore,cl the witness's indulgence.

The Um's.. :af!ei,beitring Counsel on both sides,
ordered the case-to stand over for judgment, until the
insolvent saieiaded his sthedule, by amercing the ven-
ture to Gottenburgh.

POLICEINTELLIGENCE.

UNION-HALL
Ma. Comer arm rue Tocr.-Coccecvons—Elijah Neale, the re-
ceiver of tolls at the Newington-gate, appeared before Mr.Swa any, B.
HMSO ea, J. KIM, and RONA RD% Esqrs. to answer the complaint
of Air. Cobbett, for obstructing a single-horse cart, and refusing to
let it pass the toll-gate, without the payment of a larger toll than
by Act of Parliament the toll-collector was entitled to demand.
Mr. Cobbett stated, that on October 10, he accompanied his car
ter in a single-horse cart, and that upon driving up to Newington-
gate, the defendant denianded the sum of 4id. for the toll. lie
(Mr. Cobbett) refused to pay that sum, and offered 3d. the legal
toll, but the defendant maintained his point, and thus subjected
himself to the penalty. There was no incivility in the man's con-
duct, beyond the refusal to permit the cart to pass without receiving
the unauthorised sum. Penalties were not the object of this corn.
plaint. All he (Mr. Cobbett) desired was, that poor men, who had
paid more money. than they ought to have paid, should receive
back the suns, which had been improperly but successfully demanded.
The defendant's Solicitor contended that his client had acted al-
together under the direction and controul of the lessee of the toll,
who had received his instructions from the trustees; that at the
period at width the lessee took the tolls, an Act of Parliament was
in force, which made the legal demand 46d. as appeared by the,
table axed to the gate-house ; but within a short period afterwards
the late Act passed, reducing the toll on the particular descrip-1
tion of carriage alluded to in this case to three-pence. It, however,
was doubtful v:hether the Legislature intended to put that Act in
force before the 24th day of January next ; and,under those circum-
stances, it was hoped that the lessee would be relieved from the im-
putation of having attempted to impose upon the Public. Had he
supposed that tl:e Act commenced its operations before that time
he would not have directed that the demand should be persevered
in,. any more than he shoulclowhile the old Act was in operation,
have increased the toll authorised by that Act.
Mr. Cobbett said it was quite obvious that the defendant well
knew that he was wrong in demanding the 40. for upon finding
that be could not get that suns, he offered to take the tad. but no
money would be paid to him, as the obstruction had taken place..
It was not, Mr. Cobbett declared, on his own account that he ap-
peared as prosecutor on kith occasion. He wished to protect a
poor men, who be knew had paid ten or twelve shillings more
than he ought to have paid to the collectors of the tolls, and the
only means of obtaining the necessary redress was through the Ma-
gistrates, by receiving a portion of the penalty which the Act gave
to the informer. It was a singular fact, that this was the first Act
of Parliament that gave a protection to the lessee against any ac-
tion or other proceeding by which money could be recovered from
them which they had illegally taken.
Mr.'Hansa (the Magistrate) said, the Office had not the power
of a Court of Requests, and could not award damages.
Mr. Cobbett said, that when spoor man paid ten or twelve shil-
lings more than he ought to have paid, he was entitled in all fair-
ness to receive it back in some sort of way; and if he did not re-
ceive it at the hands of the Magistrates, he would not receive
it at all.

The Magistrates then consulted together for some time, and
finally gave It as their opinion, that the defendant had legally in-
curred the penalty Bzed by the Act; but they said, that taking
into consideration he had acted under an authority which had mis-
led him, theyihought he had a reasonable excuse for what he had
done, and they dismissed the charge on his paying the costs.
The toll-collectors of the Kennington and Vauxhall trusts ap-
peared upon informations similar to the first. The circumstances
were exactly the same, and so was the result.

QUEEN-SQUARE.

J. Manna was fully committed for stealing two pewter-pots, the
property of Mr. Richardson, of the Sun public-house, Scotland-yard.
J. Hausr was remanded, he having concealed himself in the
dweMrig-house of bir. W. Ridley, on Friday night, with intent, it
Is supposed, to commit felony.
LA MBETII- STREET.
Painted Rosy, one of the nymphs of Wentworth-street, who was
in company with a Mr. Clarke, a surveyor, wheu.he warknocked
down by a gang of ruffians near Rosemary-lane, and robbed of a
£5O bill of exchange and some silver, was brought up and re-
manded, on suspicion of being concerned with the ruffians.

HATTON-GARDEN.
Saturday, the long.pending examination' of Ma►garet Stantoa, for
inutilating her husband, took place before Mr. Lam, and in conse-
quence of the great number of Orions who collected out of curio-
sity, the prisoner was Abducted up stairs to the Magistrates' pri.
sate sitting•room. Mr. Laolo gave strict orders that no persons
whatever should be present; in consequence of which all the Re-
porters were excluded. Richard Stanton (the husband) was the first
witness caned up and was examined. The evidence being taken, she
was remanded till Tuesday. .