Star.
London, England, 1805-11-29 00:00:00

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, NOV.

THE IC iNG H. EVELYN PIERREPONT DORMER.
The Defendant was this day brought up, accord-
ing to the order of their Lordlltips, to receive the
fentence of the Court. Mr. Dormer had permitted
judgment to go by default, on an information filed
againft him for feuding a challenge to Robert Knight,
Efq. his brother-in-law : the circumftances of the
cafe we have already given fully to the public in our
Paper of Wedncfday
. Mr. Mice Gear, in delivering fentence on the
Defendant, laid, •
64 Evelyn Pierrepoint Dormer, you are to receive.
judgment of the Court, having confeffed that you
are guilty of having fent a challenge to Robert
Knight, Efq. to provoke him to fight a duel. It is
contained in a letter, in which you declare yourfclf
the brother of the Profecutor's wife, and in which
von hate, that the condira of your fifter, fince her
41)s:ration front her boiband, has been according to
the firiaeft rules eftahlilh-cd by the world, and that
you fhpuld give her your utmoft affiftance ; that fhe
had been grofsly abufed and ill•treated, and that you
were to be found at Kirkham's hotel.' Had this
letter alone appeared before a Jury, they could bath
entertained no doubt upon it ; but if your intent had
not been clear, the fecond letter would have obviated
all difficulty; in that you Rate, ' that fince Mr.
Knight was determined to commence a criminal pro-
fee mion againft you, you begged the Court might be
ini-ormed of your prefent opinion of his charaaer,
which wa,, that he was a liar, a coward, and a
fcoundrA.' Thus you bade all defiance to every
Court of Jolliet. In this criminal traofadioa, what
was your intention? It was to take away the life
of your fitter's hufband, and to imbrue your hands
in your bruther's.blood. Although this may be con-
fittent with the millaken laws of falfe hondar, it is'
totally inconfiftent with the law of the land. It is
much to be lamented, that after the unwearied pains
taken by this Court to publith the law on this fubjea
that you, as a gentleman of education and fenfe,
thuuld have been ignorant of it. If you did know,
and have thus tranfgreffed it, it affords an additional
ciicumilanco of aggravation. The letter is not only
a challenge, but it was defigned to vilify and de
grade the Prufteutor. Imagine that your brother
had fallen a viaim to your mifguided pal Eons, and
that you had been %nought before site awful tribunal

to receive the dreadful fentenee of the law fi,r a linr-
rid and inhuman murder : it is not for the Court toll
diaate what wuuld then have been your feelings ; it

leaves you to ponder on what would have been your
unfortunate lituation, and it is only for the kind ap.

plication of the Profecutor to the law for hi) defence,
that you are not probably placed in that predica-
ment. The Lot, will nut delay to vital, with the
greaten feverity, the fe who, like you, bid defiance
to Courts of Judicature. As fir circumllances of
mi'igatinn, we are furry to fee there are none, and
in your affidavit there were only fume topics turmif-
ed, but not Rated to the Court. To fuch grounds
of mit.gation we can pay no attention, and we arc
unable to take them into our conlideratioa. Under all
the circumstances of the cafe, this Court does older

and adjudge, that you pay to the King a fine of 501.
be committed to the cuttody of the Marthal of the
Marl:aka for three months, and give fccurity for
your peaceable behaviour for tit:cc years, yourfelf
in sod. and two fureties in 2501. each.
JOHN ►ING'S ISANKRUPTCT.
Mr. ERSKINE faid he hoped the motion he had to
make to day, in which Mr. King was fo materially
interefted, would not fairer from the unfortunate

motion of yefterday ; but that he might rather hype
for the indulgence of the Court, in making the pre-
fent motion, when he Rated (without any with to
convey a reflation againft Mr. Plowden), that he
bad refuted to make that motion. The Learned
Counfel then proceeded to (tate the clanks of the
Infolvent Ad, on which the prefent motion was
grounded, by which 164 was clearly meant to be
given to every perfon atually in cuftody on the ill
of January, tBo4, for debts not exceeding ;
and the gaolers of the different prifons were dirated,
without reference to the amount of the (urns for

which debtors might be imprifoned, to furnifh a lilt
of all perfons then Ulna'', in cuftody, to the different
Quarter Sefllons, &c.
The bankrupt, John King, it appeared was debtor
to Polland and Co. in the fum of 11501. for which
he was taken in execution, and a Commit Eon of
Bankrupt was afterwards fued out againft him. The
debt was proved under the Commalion of Bankrupt,
and an VeCtion was granted by the Lnrd Chan-
cellor to Poilond and Co. tin a dividend Ihould come
to be made, either to avail thcmfelves of the Corn-
=Mon, or of their right at Common Law. They on
the lath of December, 1803, made their EleCtion, by
claiming under the Commit-Iton ; but fill their debt
flood on the Marfhal's books, and, in ennfequence it
appeared. that on the la of January the Bankrupt
flood indebted, not in a turn under 1,5001. but in
2,3001. comp, ehending, neverthelefs, this fum of
1,1501. due to Meffrs. Polland and Co. In January,
1805, an application was, on this ground, made to
Lord Ellenborough, and his Lordthip granted his
warrant, difcharging Mr. King out of cuftody on this
execution. The Magiftrates, however, at the QEar-
ter Seflions, at Guildhall, in April laft, confidered
the Bankrupt's having been in cuftody on the ill of
January, 1804, for a greater nominal fum than
1,5001. as a bar to their proceeding, recommending
it however, to them, to apply to the Court for their
inftruetions.
Lord ELLBNEoaoucM afked, if this was not an
exifting debt in January, 1804 ?
Mr. Easrslns fubmitted it was not fuch a debt as
the creditors could have fued for at Common Law.
They had made their elation in 1803.
Mr. Juftice Le Bi*wc.—The Chancellor gave
them till a dividend fhould be made, to make their
elation. _ _

Mr. Easton maintained that they had departed
from the right of eledion. What he afked was, that
a Mandamus !Could be direfted to the Magifirates, to
inquire if,in January, 1804, the bankrupt was aau-
ally in custody for a larger fum than isool. If not,
that they fbould then inquire, whether he was not
entitled to be liberated ? It was not by the Warden's
book, he fubmitted, but by the judgment of the Ma.
gilirates, that the fait muff be afcertained.
The Court laid it down, that without fuch a cafe
being made out to them, as thould inftrua that the
entry in the books was &lie at the time, they could
not interfere. It was in the contemplation of the
Legiflature to relieve only Inch perfons as, on the tlt
of January; 1804, owed under r goof. If the bank.
rupt, in this cafe, aaually owed more than that lam
at this date, of which there could be no dispute, no
eircumnance which might afterwardsoccur, by which
the debt might be diminiflied, could entitle him LO the
benefit of the Ad.—Rule refilled.
1.1,71110 C V. CLAGGET.,

This cafe had been frequently before the Court,
was twice tried at Guildhall, and feveral motions
made, from time to time, during term. It was as
aftion upon a Policy of Infurance, where the (hip
infured had gone an illegal voyage, and was 101 l
we have already given the circumaances of this cafe,,
at large, in former Papers. The queftion Were the
Court was upon a motion to fet afide the former
trial, and enter a new one, with liberty to withdraw
three of the Defendants, and fubftitute three others,
upon payment of coils. After hearing' all the
ar-
guments of Counfel on both fides, and the Court
agreeing to acquiefce in whatever Rule the parties
between themfelves might propore, which, in the fe-
quel, not being accomplilbed, their Lordfhips dif-
charged all the former Rules, and diretied them to
make a fpccial application to the Court in the next
Term.
MANDAMUS TO THa MAYOR AND OTHER MAGISTRATES
OF THE CITY OF YORK.

Mr. PARK applied for a Mandamus to be dire&ed
to the Mayor and other Magifirates of York, to com-
pel them to interfere in a cafe of forcible entry,
velich interference is fantlioned by the flame of 8
Henry VI. c. 9. The Learned Counfel dated, that
a perfon of the name of James More became feized
in right of his mother, of four houfes in York, and
poffeffed them from March until July, when More
was forced from the poffeffion of his elate by Ca-
therine Emmerfon, and numerous other perfons.—
Application was made to the Magiftrates, and they
would not hear the complaint. In confequence of
this refufal, the party was under the meaty of at•
treating the alliance of the Court.
Their Lordlhips granted a Rule to thew carafe, to
be ferved on the party who had forcibly obtained
poffeffion, and on the Magiftrates who declined to
interfere.

Tilt ZINC V. }MTH.

The defendant, who is an attorney at Neweaßle-
under Line, by his Cotinfel, Mr. Clifford, this day

ftemed canfeagain(4 a title for an Attachment, tor
fending a witnefs away from the affixes at Stafford,
and preventing hitn from going beforethe Grand) ur y.
He depofed that he was aka his aaivice, and finding
the witnefs was not fubpcenaed, and that his eri•
dence might go to criminate himfelf, be adsifed
I him to leave the town, but it was from a motive that
no perfoa was bound to criminate bimfelf except be-
fore GOD. The witnefs was an under-gaoler, who
had fuffered a perfon to el-cape out of has culkody in
coming to the affixes.
The Court thought that he had not fufficiently de-
nied all conne&ion with the perfon fo efcaping, and
that it would be right he fhould further clear up the
imputation upon him before the Mailer upon interro-
gatories.
The Solicitor-General, as Conflict for the protect,.
onion, faid, that he brought the cafe before the
Court for the fake of enquiry merely, and that no
harfh meafures fhould be adopted againft the Attor-
ney—he fhould not even be taken upon the Attach-
ment, but might put in bail at a Judge's Chambers.
- -

ESCAPE OF FRENCH PRIFONERS.
The Grand Jury bave found bills againfl two
perfons for aiding in the efcape of French Pnfoners.
The SOLICITOR GENERAL made the ufual motion
at the end of the term. that the rule for perfons under
recognizance to attend this Court during term, might
be continued.

Being the !aft day of Term, a number of Infolvent
Debtors were brought up and difcbarged ; and a
variety of motions of courfe, and others, uninterelt
ing to the public, were difpofed of. -

Wednefday as a child about eight years old, was
playing in the yard of Meux'sbrewhoufe, he fell into
a deep hole, improperly left open, whereby his arm
was broken, and his head wounded in a !hocking
manner.

On Tuefday night about eight o'clock an alarming
Ire broke out at Mr. Afperne's, bookfeller, Cornhill,
but which, owing to the prefence of mind of his eldeff
daughter, in (hutting the door and confining the
flames, and the great exertions of his neighbours and •
the firemen, was got under, after having totally de-
ftroyed one bed-room and all the furniture. The ac-
cident was owing to the negligence of a fervant, who,
in turning down the bed, fet fire to the furniture.
About a week fence, as a box, containing about
a hundred weight of wage paper, was lodged on the
pavement at the outride of the Black Bear, Picca-
dilly, two men had the audacity to run off with it in
the daylight. One of the fervants of the inn-keeper
purfued and took one of the men who were carrying
it away, the other efcaped. The man who was taken
was on Wednefday examined a fecond time at Marlbo-
rough-ilreet, when he endeavoured to exculpate him-
fell by laying that he accidentally castle up to the
Iplace at the time, and that both the thieves efcaped.
The fervant, however, pofitively fwore that the pri-
foner was in the aft of carrying the box at the time
of his apprehenfion. The prifoner then attempted to
find nut a quibble, by faying, that it was not ware-
houfed previous to its being taken away. But this
was of no ufe, as the article was booked, and the
inn keeper was anfwerable for its contents. Befides
that, he raid that his name was Matthews, he was by
trade an upholflerer, but had not at prefent any em-
ployment.—Fully committed for trial.