Star.
London, England, 1824-02-17 00:00:00

MEXICAN MINES.

Some little confusion having arisen with the Public, from the
titles of the two Associations which have been recently formed for
working the Mexican Alines not having been kept suffiziently
tinct, it may be convenient to give a skort,account of each, taken
from their respective prospectuses.
A NGLO-hIP3EICA N AIININQ ASSOCIATION.

The capital o 6 this Company is a million sterling, divided into
10,000 shares of 1901. each. It has entered into contracts with
the proprietors of the following Mines, for working them on terms
of mutual advantage, consisting in some cases of a share of the pro-
duce of the Mine for a trm of years, and in others cf the cession
of part of the proprietorsfßp, viz. Valenciana, Tepeyaci Sirena, Cata,
La Luz—situated on the mother-vein, in the district of Guanaz-
uato; and Parissima Conception, in the district of Potosi.
The Mines are private property; the Asseciolon has, by the
terms of the contracts, the administration of them jointly with the
proprietors.
The first instalment of five per cent. has been paid, and the re.
mainder is to be called for by instalments of five per cent. each,
from time to time, as the concerns of the Association may require.
Thirty days' notice to be given of each call. -
The following are the names of the Directors :
Matthias Atterood, Esq. M.P. J. D. Powles, Esq.
.1. IL Anderdoti, Esq. It. M. Raikes, Esq.
David Levan, Esq. I
Bepj. Shaw, Esq.
David Barclay, Esq. _ W. Thompson, Esq. M.P. and
Charles Herring, Esq. Alderman.
George Lyall Esq. Wm. Ward Esq.
S. Marjoribanks, Esq. M.P. •
AULlTOn—Williahi Fry, Esq. and Thomas Richardson, Esq.
liatiznitsa—Messrs. Barclay, Tritton, Bevan, and Cu.
Secitrrnar—Joseph Lowe
EntnazztsJohiti Taylor, koq. .

-

• ,_, .~ , r
~ ~r

COURT OFKING'SBENCH..TIIIS D. 4 Y.
BIRKS V. !ARNIM!. •
This, was an action for defamation -of character.
~Mr. C. PHILLIPS, for the plaintiff, rose and said e
had a proposal to make to the Learned Counsel 03
the other side, which was, that if the defendant paid
the costs of the action, and acknowledged in o; en
Court he had accused his client wrongfully, there would
be an end to a subject of the most unpleasant nature.
The defendants Counsel then consulted with their
client, when Mr. Ex-Sherilfrose, and said he consiee e 4
it prudent to accede to-the proposal suggested ;at ti.e
same time he intimated his intention of moying'for a
new trial in the action of-We preceding day.
His LORDSHIP said that was anotiier business.

. The Juiy then returned a reldict for the plaitniZ
damages 40s.

BYRNE V. PARKINS.
This action was brought by the plaintiff, •wlio
long the object of public subscription, in consequence of
injury which he had sustained by preferring a charge
against an Irish Prelate, to recover money had and re.
ceived by the defendant, Mn Parkins, Er-SlleriT, t",,r
his use.—lt is generally_ known that the defendant took
an active part in promoting the subscription, and the
question was, how much money Mr. Parkins had re=
ceived for the use orMr.*Byr ne?
Mr. CHARLES PHILLIPS, in a vei rable speech, stated
the, case. His object was to chew tint tne plaintiff had
claim to a considerable balance, which Mr. Parkinshad
refused tn.pay" over. rt wratld appear, that tl:e defend-
ant had boated of having received subscriptions to the
amount of L:306, and that he had given in a written
account of no more than El5l. 6s. (V. There was, as
he should probe, a balance of, 1390, which the plain.•
tiff, a poor man, with a yde and six children, now
sought to recover.
John Scott, cletk to the defendant, was the first wit-
ness. Ile stated, -that the defendant said the subscrip-
tion was going on rapidly, and that he had SOU iii his
hands, including 51. received from Sir Francis Burdett.
Mr. W. Cobbett said, he conversed several ri es a ita
the defendant on (he subject of the subscriptions. In Se
tember, 1822, before the plaintiff arrived in England,
the defendant said he had about 1501. in•his hands.
Mr. Robert Bell conversed many times with the de.
fendant about the subscriptions, but never could learn
how much he had received. Mr. Parkins acknowledged
he had received more than was given to Byrne—he
gave a reason for not paying over the surpirs. " Do
you think," said Mr. Parkins, " I would give the
Scoundrel the money ; he means to run away, and leave
his wife and children onsome parish in England." The
witness asked if he had given him a coach and horses,
according to promise? The defendant 'said " No ; I haie
done a better thing for him ; he is taking care of my
stables, and now in my employ." The conversation
was eithei at the beginning of February, or at the end .
of March, last year. •
Mr. MARRYATY then addrested the Jury for the de-
fendant. lie called upon them to look at the case di.
vested of.fringe and ornament. Mr. Parkins had de.
livered an account, stating item by item, down to the
smallest sum received by Byrne himself. He would
sliew that the total of money received by Mr;Parkins
amounted to 1511. It could not be prb'ved- that the de-
fendant had received one shilling more, and, ifso, what
ground was there for the action?
The account was then pqt in and read.—lt appeared
to consist of money paid to Byrne, money paid for ad-
vertisements and placards. There was a sum of 91. for
wages to the 'defendant's clerk, Mr. Le Moire, for at-
tending to Byrne's subscription. This witness was em-
ployed in the general business of benevolence at the
-office of the defendant in Bridge-street:
A number of witnesses were then called, to make out
the items of the account.
Mr. PHILLIPS replied, and expressed a hope that the *
Jury would not allow the defendant to wear the smile
of triumph.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE summed up, and theJurt
having retired to consider their verdict, returned in A
quarter of an hour, finding a verdict for the plaintiff—
Damages 1941. 4s. 4d.
There is another action pending between the parties,
for defamation.

i .

SPORTING- INTELLIGENCE.

BETTING-ROOM, TATTERSALL'S, FEB. 16.
The Subscription Room was well attended by Gentlemen of the
first respectability on the Turf, and betting was tolerably brisk.
The engagements made were principally on the Doncaster St. Leger,
and the alterations either on that, the Riddlesvrorth, Derby, or
Oaks Stakes were but trifling-, as will be seen by the following

S to 2 agst Reformer
9 to 2 apt Prudence
5 to 1 agst Quadrille
8 to 1 agst Don Carlos

5 to 1 agst Swig;
6 to 1 agst Reformer
11 to 1 agst Agnes
14 to 1 agst Bansitee
15 to 1 apt Jesse
16 t) 1 apt Ridicule
20 to 1 agst Dun Carlos
It 3 to 1 agst Hurley Burley