Star.
London, England, 1822-12-23 00:00:00

:rT,:tr

To A HUSBAND.

;

Oh I were I hi M dying hour,
And Mon beside me mourning stood,
Still WOlll.l I own sfection's pow'r,
And searceiy welds a dearer good!

Though Heaven were open to my eyes,
And bliss supreme awaited me,
Ny struggling soul would grieve to rise,
Deeming earth heaven, while blest with Mee !

And, nh! if in the spheres above
Stints have one spark of earthly feeling,
Still would my thoughts be with thee, love;
And froth celestial regions stealing !

For one short hour I'd earthward stray,
To snatch thee from a world of care ;
Point to mg home the 'gust way;
Nor.call It heaven, till this wen there !

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COVIIT 07 CHANCERY, DECEMEER si.

- - _
Some' ttiotions occurred of no public. importance:
one of them having Been called on, in which Mr.
116ALIY was retained, Mr. Haar stated that he was
at Chambers.
The Lotto CtraNcEt.con said, gg Renumber, those
motions which can be made to-day, and are not made,
shall not be made on Monday."

VIdE-CHANCttLOTS COURT; D'ItaMIRR Si.
TILE ATTORNEY-GENERAL a HIS GRACE Tat DOKI

Olt MARLBOROUGH.

Mr. *RAY stated, that this was a petition Iry the
part of his Grace the Duke of Marlborough, praying
that it should be referred to the Matter to inquire to
what extent the cutting down of timber. pursuant to
the order of the Court, should be carried. The peti-
tion of his Grace stated, that he had caused what was
termed the Little Park at Blenheim to be surveyed by
two surveyors, and that it was their opinion that it
Would contribute highly to the ornament of Blen-
heim, if the plan which they (the surveyors', had
made were carried into effect. It was also prayed
that the balance of the sale of the timber cut down
upon the estate should be forthwith paid into the pe-
titioner's hand:3.
Mr. It appeared on behalf of the plaintiff', the
Marquis of Blanchard, and would not object to any
ordpr which the Court thought proper to grant to the
petitioner, as far as respected a reference to the Master.
He wished, however, to explain to the Court tire'
nattily of the proceedings which had been taken since
the order for felling timber had been pronounced.—
He did not mean to say that that order was not a
most proper one at the time it was made, nor did he
mean that it was improper even at this moment; but
it was necessary to call the attention of the Court to ,
the steps which had been taken, in order that it might
judge Whether its order had been abused.
• The VICE-CHANCELLOR observed, that he could
only send a. reference to the Master in the words of
the order already pronounced by the Court.
Mr. HeAt.b said that, according to the petition of
his Grace the Duke of Marlborough, it seemed that
the plan of these surveyors was to cut down an im-
mense avenue of fine grown trees, and convert them
Into clumps. This would have the effect of convert-
ing. Blenheim, at present a noble park, into some-
thing like a box or villa, of which many were to be
seen in the neighbour hood of London. He thought
that if this plan were adopted, it would be going fur-
ther thafl the Court had Originally intended. He
rarticularly objected to the latter part of the petition,
elative to the balanceon the sale of the timber being
paid into the hands of the petitioner.
The VICE-CHANCELLOR said, he was now called
upoii to ileteiene Aether the plan of improvement
made by these surveyors ought to be adopted. This
he had no power to do, and the Master only was the
proper person to c'Onsider the subject. If the peti-
tioner was dissatisfied with the Master's conclusions,
he Might then apply to this Court. With respect to
the park of Blenheim; eve was only one way of
*left Tt iYr Sts read character, and artery one would
regret to tee it convened litto k mere 'county villa.
He shoila direct that it be 'refeared to The Master to
inquire (and these were the words of the order) whe-
ther it would he expedient, for the purpose of the
. mproviirient f the 140-attire grounds, par and plan-
aucins of Blenheim, to adopt the Plant =lnbred ist
the report, with any and what variations.

COURT OF KING'S BENCE% IMClEttleitiu.
Tilt KING V. ME 'RtV. itICITARD BINGHAM.

This wasan indictment against a Clergyman, the
perpetual ;Curate of Gosport, for perjury.
The perjury Imputed to the defendant was as;•
signed On the statements made by 111.011 in 'an affidavit.
to ground 'motion for setting aside an annuity or:
£450, granted by bins in 1815 to persons nansed:M.
vington and Boston. Before this .period, Mr. Bing-.
°barn, being in great embarrassment, employed hit,
Attorney, Mr. Hugh Lewis, to obtain for him UNA:
and he, conseqnetitly,'ap plied to Mr. Benjantiti.Lewis,
of CrutChed4riars,to obtain the money of his-clients..
Mr. B. Lewis stated that he had succeeded in pre-
vailing on Messrs. Kilvington and Boston to advance
the'mdney as the purchase of an annuity of fASOrper
annum,. to•be secured on Mr..Bingliant's freehold
estates, On the'payment of a mortgage then eneOM-
bering the premises, and the satisfaction of the judg-i
went creditors. The 23d of December was fixed'firr,
the execution of the deeds, and the final arrangement
with all-parties, and the meeting was appointed .for
that evening at the'house of Mr. Benjmnin
It was on the transaction of this evening that the de-
fendant, having failed in defending an ejectment
which was brought for the recovery of the estate .on'
non-payment of the annuity, grounded his motion for
setting aside the annuity, and on which. he was now
indicted for perjury. It was admitted by the wit-
nesses for the prosecution, that before the execution
of the deeds, it was agreed that themortgagres should
be paid principal and interest ; that a sum sufficient
to satisfy the judgment creditors should beleft in the.
hands of Mr. Levi is, and that Mr. B. Lewis should
receive three hundred guineas for his trouble in the
ne,,ociation, and for the expenses of the deeds; and
it was further admitted that, in point of fact, the
£3OOO was disposed of in the following way—£llB3
10s. paid to the mortgagees; £l5Ol. 10s. left in the
hands of Mr. Lewis to satisfy the judgment creditors,
and £315 given to Mr. Lewis for his own bill and
charges. But Mr. Bingham, iu his affidavit, further

.-~---..

3,7 :41-111•' .1
swore that he had never • had- dm,
.•. or con-
trout of thepurchirse-moneye, y, or any
part of it; that Mr. Lewis. predated' a quantity of
' notes which were never counted, and. held' his hand
on one part of them, while he was req' nestedle touch
the other as matter of form; and that 74. Lewis, and
not himself, paid Mr. Rouse, the mortgagee% the sum
of £llB5. 10s. which he attended to receive. Upon
this affidavit a rule was granted to sly ervhcame.why
the annuity should not be set aSidel but the affidavit
being positively contradicted by Mi.. Lewis and his
clients, the Rule was afterwards discharged~ The
statements in this affidavit, with respect .to the cere
mony attendant on the settlement, were now charged
to he wilful and corrupt falsehoods, it being alleged
that the whole £3OOO was paid to Mr. Bingham, and
placed in his manual possession ; that it was counted
down, and that he himself made that disposition of
the money, which in substance was not disputed.
To prove the falsehood of Mr. Bingham's state-
ments, Mr. Prujean, the conveyaticer who prepared
the deeds; Mr. Esdaile, a, clerk of Mr. B. Lewis;
Mr. Kilvington, one of the parties who advanced the
£3OOO ; and Mr. B. Lewis, the Solicitor, were called,.
who swore that the money was counted. out to Mr.
Bingham, was paid into his hands, and was alter-
`wards distiibuted by him in the manner already
stated. They admitted that, before they went into
the room, the disposition of the money had been ar-
ranged, though the interest on the Mortgage remained
'to be calculated, and a blank was therefore left for:
the amount iii the deeds. On cross-examination, Mr.
B. Lewis admitted. that a letter produced had been
'addressed by him to the defendant, in which he ex-
pressed his readiness to compromise the prosecution
ler £l5OO, but refused to take up, and declared that
"he would never return the sword to the scabbard"
on other terms; Mr. Bingham had, after the dispo-
sition of the money, begged fot £lOO, which Lewis,
after some hesitation, gave him.
• Mr. Soartuctr addressed the Jury for the defendant.
he felt it due to him personally to state, that having.
long known •him, he was convinced that he was ut-
terly incapable of the crime laid to his charge. He
had been unfortunate—perhaps imprudent ; but when
acquaintances were often unwilling to take a man by
the hand, and coldly took to themselves the credit of
having predicted his downfall, it became the duty of
those who knew the integrity of his heart to come for-
ward and protect him against calumny and oppression.
Embarrassed' as he had been, his worst enemy would
never have suggested the possibility of his committing
perjury, until he encountered the dangerous friend-
ship of Mr. Benjamin Lewis. In the course of his
(Mr. Scarlett's) experience, he had seen enough of
prosecutions of this kind to suspect that they were
often instituted with the hope of obtaining money
from the defendant, but never had he till to-day heard
such a candid and unblushing avowal as that which
had been made by Lewis. When he saw such a man
attempting to use a prosecution of this kind as a
Sword to be thrust into the vitals of another, he would
interpose his humble shield to protect the intended
victim. On all the material facts of the case, there
was no doubt that 1f r. Bingham bad sworn truly; the
very recitals in the deed proved that it was the inten-
doh of Lewis, that this unfortunate man should not
-quit the room with a shilling of the money for which
the annuity was granted. Phis might be right in it-
self: it was right to secure the judgment creditors,
and right to take care that the mortgage was paid ;
and it might possibly be right to secure 300 guineas
for himself; but whether right or wrong, could any
one doubt that, in point of fact, Mr. Bingham never
had the controul of the £3000? If he hair not—if
he would have been stopped had he attempted to
leave the room with the money, it was really imma-
terial whether the notes were or were not counted
into his hands. And if he ever had the controul of
this money, would he have begged and implored,
Lewis to give him a wretched pittance out of it to
supply the necessities immediately pressing upon
him ? It Was quite needless to offer evidence as to the'
result of the prosecution; but still, as he must put in.
Mr. Lewis's letter, he would not rest there, butwould
call witnesses, who would These that there was not the
slightest pretence for this cruel imputation on Mr.
Bingham's honour.
Mr. Hugh Lewis, who attended as at:tomer for
Mr. Bingham at the exectstant of the deeds; was then
sworn. He stated that, Wore going into the room,
it was arranged that the balance of the purchase-
money of the annuity should remainitt Mr.B. Lewis's
bends, to satisfy the judgment creditors. His im-
pression was, that -after interest had been calculated
'on the nrortgages a parcel of bank-notes was handed
ar Mr. Lewis to Ihe defendant, who merely touched
them, Mr. Lewis holding one end of the parcel, and
that the mortgage money was paid to Mr. Rouse,
not by Mr. •Bingham, but by Mr. Lewis. He could
not, however, at this distance of time•, positively
swear that Mr. Lewis laid not count out ;henotes,
that Mr. Bingham did not personally satisfy the mort--
gagee, though the centrary was his impression. He.
'believed the judgment debts exceeded £1,500.
The LORD CRIMP JUSTICE here interposed, and.
said ihat, .on this evidence, he thought it would be
impdssible for any Jury to convict of wilful-and cor-
rupt perjury. When it was-agreed that the disposi-.
tion °film money was previously arranged, and that
the only question was, whether more or less of care-
•mony took -place in the manner of paying it, and
ss hen one witness, who had given his evidence with
an impartiality and a caution highly creditable to
himself, concurred in his impression with the state-
ment made .bythe defendant, he thought it .was too
much to expect that any Jury would find that de-
fendant guilty.
The SOCICITORAGINRRAL observed, that the de-
greetif ,ceremony was very material to the question
whether theammityshould or Should not be set aside.
The Loan CHIEF .JUSTICE replied, that he had
not said otherwise. All he meant was, that when
one.tespectable witness agreed with the defendant in
his account of a transaction dependent on cere-
mony, •it was a .fair • inference that the defendant.
Might honestly entertain the same opinion.
1. The SOLICITOR-GENRUAL said, that alter such an
intimation, he could not, in a criminal case, think of
proceeding further. His only desire that the cask
might proceed arose from his wish to repel the attack
which had been made on Mr. Benjamin Lewis, who.;
he was confident, might he shewn to -have acted,.
throughout the transaction, with • the strictest pro-
priety and honour. •
The LOAD Cllll./ JUaTICE said, in this case no