Star.
London, England, 1814-02-24 00:00:00

DEAL, FEBRUARY 23.

Arrived his Majesty's ship --, and the Ac-
riva hired armed cutter, from the Roompot.—Came
down from the River the Diadem, CHARLTOW, fur
Tarragona, and remains in the Downs with his Ma-
jesty's ships McmuouTra, Camay, GRIMM, GROW*
LER, 'WALD°, and CaAmen—and John and Mary
transports, and a division of transports, with the Ger-
man Legion on board for Germany.—Wind E.S.E.

A barbarous murder was committed on Monday
evening at a village called Newton, near Fenny Strat-
ford, in Buckinghamshire, on the body of Mr. VAR•
rrsv, an aged *ban, who kept a chandler's shop in
that village. It appears that he was robbed, and af-
terwards most inhumanely murdered. A Bow-strait
officer was yesterday dispatched in pursuit of the
perpetrators.

i
Alin J2VTELLIGENCE. i

COURT OF RING'S BERCI% tEli 22.
Tit* JUNG o. rincesi-r.

. -- -
Mr. CuaWool, stated that this • was an. indictment
against the defendant for perjury, In swearing that
• certain land .was not formerly part. of the waste of
Clapham CoMmon.
Mr. Gomm then stated the case, the outlines of
which tie-as follow t.—The prosecutor, Dr. Edwards,
a Gentleman of eminence in the Civil Law Courts,
had, in the month of May, 1811, agreed to purchase
of the defendant a house and grounds on Clapham
Common, which formerly belonged to Lord 'reign-
mouth, and which afterwards came to the defendant
by purchase. This agreement was completed, and
the premises Conveyed to Dr. Edwards in the month
of July following. Soon afterwards the Doctor dis-
covered that the ground on which his coach house and
stables were built, was formerly inclosed from the
waste, and that he had to good title to them, but
was liable to be ousted by the Lord of the Manor.—
Upon this. he applied to the defendant to rescind the
contract, and restore him his purchase money, but
the defendant refused to do this, and Dr. Edwards
was obliged to file his bill in Chancery for relief.,—
The defendant put in his answer to this bill, and
swore that the ground in question, to the best of his
knowledge and belief, never constituted 2 part of the
waste; and upon this answer the perjury was assigned.
The Learned Counsel then stated the circumstances
acid evidence by which he proposed to prove that the
place in question was formerly part of the Common,
and that therdefentlant Well knew it. It was first in-
closed in the.year 1781, by Mr. Thornton, the present
Member for Surrey, with a slight Paling, afterwards
it was inclosed with a dwarf wall and open paling,
and planted with shrubs.; then' it was sad to Lord
Teignmouth, and by him to the present defendant
whir others, and they divided. the place into two
pasts and built' the coach house and stables previous
to the sale to the present.prosecutor. The Learned
Counsel also stated a variety of others, to thew a
le.noWledge of the fact *of the inclosure in' the present
defendant. Upon the production, however, of the
defendatit's inover, it appeared that be hid
,sworn
that•the apatite*, and not the coach beau, had not
been btolton. the waste, and on this defect the delta-
lent was. acquitted..

' • VIII KING V. SAwDEN.
.• •
This was an indictment preferred extinct the de-
fendant, at the- prosecution of Messrs. Holmes and
Grant, the Sitting Members for the Borough of Tre-
gony, charging, him with wilfnL and corrupt perjury
in. testimony before a Committee of the anise of
commons, accusing these Gentlemen of having pro-
cured their return to Parliament by means of bribery
and corruption-
It appearing, however, that there was an error in
spcliing the name .of the person with respect to whom
the perjury was assigned, which must prove fatal to
tie indictment, the ATTORNEY GENERAL bßid, he
shobld refrain from going into the case, and the de-
fendant was acq.titted.