Star.
London, England, 1804-03-17 00:00:00

MSIZES.

NOILTNAMPTSIN MMES.—A. Maxwell was found
silty of a burglary in the dwelling houfeof H.
Janes, of Rowell, and received fentence of death, hut
was afterwards reprieved. John Chettle was indiaed
for Reeling a letter containing bank notes and Bills
of Exchange,out of the Poft Office at Wellinbnrough,
the property of Meffri. !dander and Co. of Wolver.
bumpton. The letter box to this office is of a pecu-
liar form, an exalt model of which the Cnunfel ex-
hibited in Court, to demonfirate the popility of the
letter having flipped back through the bole the let-
ters are ufually put in at, into the gateway of the inn,
from the hands of the perfon employed to remove
them from the letter box. This poliibility being ac-
knowledged by the witnefs who transferred the let-
ten from the box into a bag, the prifoner was acquit-
ted. The prifoner was afterwards indiled for (teal.
ing the contents oldie letter, fuppofing he had found
it • but the profecutors failing to prove the note he
had' uttered to be one of thole iuclofed in the letter,
be was alfo acquitted.
COILEISTORD Assives.—Befides the unfortunate
woman, for the murder of her child, the following
prifoners were capitally convieed, aid received ten•
tense of death : J. Todd, for a felony ; S. Fincham,
for being found at large before his term of tranfpor-
tation expired; 1). Williams, a boy, is year:, of ape,
for Reeling out of feveral letters belonging to the
Poll Office at Colchefler, feveral bauk notes and
other bras; J. Garrod, for Sealing a houfe, the pro-
perty of J. Appleton ; R. Humerfton, for fleeting a
black gelding, the property of R. Lewis, of Down-
end ; J. Purlis, for Reeling a mare ; W. Hodge%
for burglarionfly entering the dwelling Haiti of W.
Radley, and (leafing a watch, &c. ; J. Lloyd and
11. Beam. Ur Reeling various quantities of printed
cottons and other goods. the property of A. Davie,
J. Green, and others ; and G. Smith, for Reeling a
snare :--6f whom D. Williams- only is left for es-
coition.
Edward Bird was conviaed of bigamy, by many-
tag Sarah Riff, widow, on the IR Sept. laf, his wife
Judith, to whom he had been prertoufly married,
being alive at the time of fuch fecond marriage.—
Upon the priToder's receiving a very impreflive re-
primand from the Judge, and a (entente of feven
years tranfportaticu. he anfwered, 4. that be did not
value the (encore two pence."
Sergi-After prifoners. convi&ed of different of.
fences, wereordered for tranfportation, imprifonment.
kfasorroas Aso zrs.—R. Cunningham was in-
dlaed for murdering W. Fox, by Nabbing him with
a bayonet. The prifoner and the deceafed were
private giddier'. Serjeant Manningbarn Paid, that
the deceafed being drunk, was committed to' the
guard houfe, in Chatham Bell racks, on the Bth of
November left. The prifoner was at that time the
rescind, and it was his duty to prevent any one's
ofeaping. The deceafed wifhed to get out, and came
forward fevers' times for that purpofe. He (truck
the prifoner two or three times, and the prifoner
Smelt him. The witnefs did not fee the fatal blow
given, but heating the deeeafed groan, he turned
mood, and law that he was Wog with his face upon
the ground. He lifted him up, and found that he
was dabbed in the ribs, and he died immediately.
Edward Maddoekhanothev (oldies-, gave the fame
account of the tranfaaion. He added, that the pri.
foster. as fanzine!, carried his bayonet unateathed.
Under the advice of the Learned Judge, the Jury
immediately (wind a verdict of Manniughter, and
the prifoner was fentenced to be fined one &Ming,
aad &Merged.
The following two cafes were tried at the above

Affises
Tot Stove v. Powts.—This was an information
tried by the Arroassr GIIISRAL again& the defen.
dam, a brewer, at Greenwich, for atraulting and
ebthating two Excite Officers in the execution of

ihsir dtttj.
Mr. Serjeant &SWARD, who led the caufe, pro-
duced a model of the brewhoufe, in order to thew
bow, as the officers fuppofed, the defendant defraud-
ed the revenue. It was in an endeavour to difcover
this fraud that, the affanit complained of took place.
William Robins faid he went in company with
Fletcher, another Officer of the Rdenne, to Curve).
the bomb ufe. After they had done below, they
Gard for the keys which lcd to the apartment above,
where the fmali beer refervoir was fituated. The
defendant laid they were very troublefnme fellows,
and that the keys had been ufed by another officer
not a quarter of an hour bef ire. This produced
Come little altercation, which ended in the defendant
feizing Robins by the collar, and giving him Tome
very fevere blows ; he alfo proceeded to other atcis
of violence, by which the two officers were prevented
from going on with their furvey. This flatemcnt
was corroborated by the evidence of Fletcher the other

officer.
Mr. Serjeant Bess. made a very able fpeech mt be-
half of the defendant, arid called two witnetfcs to site
the tranfaftion another colour.
The Jury, however, found the defendant Guilty.
THE KING v. IS. NI. N as
an information againfl the Defendant, for affaniting
and wounding Mr. Bamford, a Supervifor of Excite,
in the execution of his effice.
Mr. Bamford gave the following seeount of the
.tranfaeli•os : he laid he was a Supervifor of Excite
at ftriebeller ; about five in the morning nf e
of rebrnary, as he was going Out on duty, at the
end cf his garden he few a bone gn by laden with
three tubs ; he: immediately purfued it, and catch-
ing it by the bridle, he told the eider to alight, or he
would knock him off. The man !irritating, he gave
him a blow witli the horfewhip, which he had taken
from him. The rnan immediately cried out that he
was a cripple, and could not get down fo exptdi-
tionfly as another man, but that he would alight;
he did fo, but when down, intlead of being a trip-
le, he fell opin the witnefs, knocked hint down,
knelt upon his tiomach, and beat him solently over
the hrad and face with the butt cod of the hot fe
whip. He cried one tor affiflance, .and f•-t . women
in a honfe oppofite looked out at the wird, is. lie
faid he was Laing murdered, if- itcy had no man, he
begged that they would come to liis
Shortly the door of the bottle orioles!, and a boy
came out. The prifoner then lett him, and ‘'.:ove
Ins boric away, but before be moved lie dropped vric:
tub. He defired the boy to flay with the tub,
was flayed, while he iollowcd the pi/Omer. llc

follow until be was feized with a fudden &knell and
vomiting of blood, from the heating he had receiv-
ed: then the prifoner made his ekape, but be drop.
ped his hat, his bridle, and. a glove, which were
produced. He faw the prifoner about fix weeks af-
terwards in a fireet in Chatham, and knew him again.
Two witnelies were called in fupport of this It:de-
ment, whn admitted that they had noes,. come for.
ward until after the reward of 501. was advertifed

for dilcovcring the offender.
Mr. Serjeant BEST availed himitlf of this circur:.
Rance, and, in his addrefs to the Jury, contended,
that neither of thefe people were credible witneffes.
The Jury found the Defend..- t—Not Guilty.
MARCH 15.-DOR ON DLMISt OP ANGEL, V ARGIL.
This was an aaion of ejeament, to recover a con-
(linable dime in this county, deviled by Will in
manner as isbelow Rated It was a caufe of coat.
derable expeaation, not only on account of the
magnitude of the property in difputc, hut alto be-
caul: nine different claims have been tried within the
lag twenty years, not one of which has proved fuc-
cefsful.
The cafe, as opeped by Mr. &rjeant Bost, and
which was partly in evidence, was as follows—A
.Gentleman of the name of Angel, refiding at Stock-
well, in Surrey, made a WV, dated Sept. :6, 1775,
by which he bequeathed all his real and perfonal
elates in Surrey, Kent, and Suffer, " to the male
heirs, if any, of William Angel, the firft purchafer
of Crowhurfl, the father of his great grandfather,
John AngeL" He then deviled to the other branches I
of his family, fubjea neverthelefs to have their tight
defeated, whenever the heirs of the above-named
William Angel could fubftsntiate their claim. Hay-
ing made this will, he died in the year 1784, and the
elate has been poffeffed by relatives, not the right
heirs of William Angel, the firft purchafer of Crow-
hurft. The Learned Serjcant Rated, that his client
claimed as the right heir of the perfon named. He
admitted that he muff thew his client's decent from
the above.delcribed John Angel, whom the teltator
had defcribed as his own great grandfather, and the
fon of William Angel, the firft purchafer of Crow-
hunt. He accordingly went through the pedigree,
which we (hall endeavour to Rate—William Angel,
who, for this potrpole' may be confidercd as the
founder of the family, died in 1629, leaving a fon,
John Angel, who inherited the chief of his fortune.
iliis fon John kft fevered children ; but, for the pur-
pofe of this caufe, it was nccefrary to name only two,
John and Julliniatt. The teßator, Angel, of Stock-
well, was the grandfon ofluffinian ; when therefore
he left his eftate to heirs of William the firft purcha•
ter, it is clear that any one who could claim this,John,
Jutlinian's elder brother, was entitled to preferecce.—
It had, however, appeared that John, JuOinian's elder
brother, had quarrelled with his family, and went
away, no one knew whither, never having been heard
of afterwards by his family. His father, the Ser.
jeant Rated, bad himfelf caufed an extent to be fent
into his honk, which had fwept away all his pro-
perty. The prefent Plaintiff, John Butt Angel, of
Gloucellerthire, traced his defcent to a John Angel,
who came into that country about the time that
John Angel, of Crowhurft, difappeared; and he
admitted it was for him to offer filch circumftances
in evidence as fhould afford proof that the John An-
gel. of Crowhurft, and the John Angel, of Leigh, in
Grouceflerfhire, was one and the fame parfon. He
mould therefore prove, that it was a tradition,
among the ancient people of Leigh, that the Angels
'of that place came from Kent or San, where
they had rich relations. It was a I remembered by
a very old man, who died left ye a t the age of no,
that the family used to bury under yew tree in the
corner of the church-yard. In co uence of this,
that part of the church-yard had been fearched, and
an old tomb-Rose was dug up,•which contained an
inrcription, in his mind, decifire of the cattle, and
cnnclufiee in the favour of his cli:nt. The inkription
on the tomb lone was as fillows :—" In memory
of Jobs Angel, of Allion in the paryb of Gil teSiWW,
late of Crow the county of Surrey, who died grove
3, 1690, aged is years." 'std.:pendent of this defcrip-
tion, which perfealy pointed out that this was the
John Angel who quitted Crowhurft, he fheuld (hew
by the regiller of his birth at Crowlitn n, that he was
baptized the 6th May, 16:8, in that he would ex•
aaly be 6a years old at the date of his death, as the
tomb none had dcfcribed. He was aware of the an-
fwer which it was intended to let up, namely, that
this tomb done was a forgery, and a fabrication of a
much later date ; but he fhould lbew that this flone
WAS above ground in Leigh church yard near thiity
years ago. long before the teflator made hi. will.—
At that time he would prove that it was dug up by
Freeman, the old sexton, who was 'wending the late
altzes at Maidlione, to give his evidence, when. he
caught the fmall pox, of which he died ; but he had
now hi., dying declaration of the Get, which he rub-
mined mutt be teemed as evidence. Betides, the
Clone under a yew tree, which all the world knew
was one of very flow growth ; he fhould produce inl
Court the fibres of pan of the rout, which had grown
until they came againa the Rone, and there finding
_refinance, they hadrown in a curve over it.
The will of Mr. John Angel, of Stockwell, was
fitti proved, in which he deviled his Oates to the
right heir of William Angel, the father of his great
grand father, John Angel. The monumental in-
scriptions of William Angel, and of the frit John
Angel, were read, which proved that John Angel
left a fun, named John Angel, furviving him, who
was older than Justinian Angel, from whom the tel-
tator derived his &tient. lire will of Wm. Angel,
the &ft purchafer of Crowl,urlt, was alto read,
wherein he dcfcribed himfelf a Citizen and Fillonun-
ger, and left, among other things, the Talbot Ta.
vern to Iris ("n, John Angel, the father of the firft
John Angel. The refiner of the birth of the loft
John Angel. was produced, by which it appeared that
he %k As baptized at Crowhurft on the 6th of May,
_ - - - .

George Mineltin, of Stonehm fl, (aid, he was born
and lived many years at Leigh. About as years
ago, as he was paring turf under tire yew tree for a
grave, he found a tomb done buried. He reco4leil.
et! that it had the name rf John Angel upon it, and
Crowlurt I+, in Surrey. He believed it defcribrd the
deceafed as aged tiny, or thereabouts. He put it
upright main in the ground, near the church door,
erh-re it reeved as a feraper for the feet. He had
lett Leigh now fur fifteen years.
William Trinder raid, he had ben) many years
chipsliwaalco of Leigh; he Luew Freeman, the late

Sexton ; he died of the fmall pox, which he caught
at the hate Maiditone Affixes; he knew the hone
found in the church yard on the 6th of Ausall, 1788.
He was fent for about ten minutes after tt was dug
up. lie Laid that John Butt Angel, the plaintiff,
had breakfailed with him the morning it was -found,
and that he and the old. clerk went to the church
yard, where they dug the hone up in about half an
hour.
The Counfel for the Plaintiff then propofed to ex-
-1 amine this witnefs as to the dying declaration of the
Parini Clerk, which was oppofed as not admillible
evidence. The point was argued for above three
hours ; when the Learned Judge decided that it
could not be received.
Minchin was then called back, and allied if he
could fwcar that the hone produced was the fame as
dugup 25 years ago? He laid he would.
Phe tomb hone was then produced in Court, cu.
tiouily preferred in a wooden cafe : on the face of
it it exhibited fufpicious circumftances—the letters
were all (harp and chffinift, and the (pelting contain-
ed notte of the redundant vowels uteri a century back.
Mr. Buckham, none cutter to Wehminher Abbey,
Paid, from the appearance of the hone, he lhould con-
ceive it to be of the date it purported to be of.
Mr. GARROW was about to trots examine this wit.
nefs, when Mr. Baron Hormast interfered, and the
Plaintiff's Counfel eanfented to be nonfuited.