Star.
London, England, 1802-02-12 00:00:00

COURT OF KING'S BENCH. Ma rt.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL moved fora writ of
Haka: Corpus to be direded to a medical g-entle-
man keeping a haute for the reception of Lunatics
at Newcattle, commanding him to bring up th.:
body of George Robfon, in his cultody as a luna-
tic. From the affidavits which he had, he was
lorry to fay, that the perfon on whole behalf he
moved, was molt clearly confined from improper
motives, and was no ways infane. He was a mem-
ber of a Volunteer Corps and muttered with his
company, after that he went to church, and by'
the affidavits of people who had known biro I,.ir
twenty years, it was clear that diving ail that tire:
he had not manifelted the leaa fymptom of intaiti-
ty ;. yet this man had peen committed by two Ma-
giarates, under the provitions of a late At
Parliament, as an infaue perfon, and dangerous to
the public peace to be left at large. Even Du.
Wood himfelf, in his affidavit in anfwer to theirs,
went not further than to fay,tha.he was liacorred
in his perceptions,' which, in his opinion, amounted
to infitnity.
Mr. Juffice LE BLANC obferved, that the cafe
had been before him at chambers, and he thought
it belt to advife that he inould be vihted by two
medical gentlemen, upon whofe report the Court
would, upon application, know better how to ad.
The ATTOKNEY•GENERAL replied, that he had
been fo vilitcd ; but one of thole perfons was the
family Phyfician of the gentleman who made ti:e
application to the Magitratc to commit the poor
fellow as a lunatic, and he had the affidavits of

ten or twelve of his neighbours who conveytd
him to his pi ifun, . (thinking theinfelses bound to
do lo under the warrant) but they all agreed, that
at that very time, there was not a more foe man
exilling among tae whole of them. With regard
to the certificate of the medical men, they dated,
that while they were with him he was perfedly
calm and very colleted in his refponfes to their
; yet, neverthelefs, they undertook to
date that, from fads which they knew, he WAS
" :coma in hi: Perarti:nr." 11e then proceeded
to date thole fads ; 411 was, that he went to
a place and Wilted-16u the Clerk of the Peace
Iced ti ere, and demanded a Game Licence. He
bAieved, indeed, this part would explain the whole
sranfadion. In that part of the country force
perfons might fancy this was a very convenient
mode of getting rid of a poacher. In point of fad.
however, the Clerk of the Peace had lived there
for 30 years, but was lately removed, which he did
not know, and this was the fird pool by the learn-
ed Dodors of his " incorr.^B pen-Ilion." The
next was, that he faid he had poireifed four houles
and gardens at Hexhtm, but they had been cre-
dibly informed that it was incorred, and he had
but one. So, becaufe he had been guilty of a little
bouncing with regard to the extent of his property,
he was fuppofed to be infane. If that was proof
of infanity, they had proofs every day of perfons,
both within and without that Court, who exhibited
the fame fymptoms.
Mr. Jullice GROSE faid, he thought in this cafe
the writ Mould be abfolute in the fird inllance,and
made returnable before a Judge at chambers.
CottET v. Lord KEITH.—Sir Thomas Living-
tone, a material witnefs in this caule, being abroad
in the service of the country, the rule for a new
trial was made abfolute, with liberty to each of the
parties to examine witneifes by interrogatories.
SMITH V. EDWARDS.

This was an application originally made by Mr.
ERSKINE to fet aside a Warrant of Attorney ob-
tained by fraud from the Defendant. The Plain-
tiff and Defendant had married two tiller., and
were each of them entitled to the moiety of an
elate which the Defendant occupied, and held for
a leafe of twenty-one years, eleven of which were
expired. Some money for rent, from 501. to 701.
being due from the Defendant to the Plai,ntiff,
Smith the Plaintiff, and his Attorney, came to
the farm of the Defendant, near Eaft Grinftead,
and wi(hed him to rellgn his leafe to the Plaintiff,
who was his landlord,- in which cafe he was to
have his hack rent forgiven him, but be declined.
Mr. Barrow then produced a half Ihcet of paper,
which he induced him to fign, telling him it would
not harm him, and WAS merely to fatisfy Mr.
Smith : this was in February laft, and, he fworc
that he never underftood the nature of the inftru-
' ment he figned till, in laft September, he WAS turn-
ed out of his farm—it being a Warrant of Attor-
•
ney to confers a judgment in ejeament.
The ATTORNUrGENERAL and 1V Ir.
I now (hewed cause againft the Rule. They Itatco,
that from their affidavits it appeared that the
Rrument was read over twice to him, and the na-
ture of it explained. That he had been guilty of
;breaches of covenant, by which he had forfeited
the leafe ; and that fo far from objecting to fin--
tender his leafe, he would then have given it up,
but laid it was with tome one at Croydon.
Mr. Jullice GRose fitid, the Courts looked with
an acute eye at warrants of Attorney, and he on-

furred that on the prefent was an .cra (lire. He
could not alfo overlook that the Plaintifffeemed
very anxious to get polfietTion, and yet, though his
warrant of Attorney was dated in February, I:e
took no Reps upon it till lallseptember. He thought
that at lead this matter ought to be put into a train
of enquiry.
Mr. Justice LAWRENCE raid, there was great fitf-
picion upon the face of the tranEtetion. The Dts.
fendant was an illiterate man, not being able to
write. The Plaintiff and his Attorney cam to
Coln by furprife, and, while he had no legal affi
ance near, got him to execute this warrant of At-
torney. The releafe of breach of covenants, and
the arrears of rent which the Plaintiff Rated as t.l'e
confederation,-relied merely on verbal promife, and
if denied, the Defendant had no means to enforce
it. He thought, therefore, that fome further in-
vaigation into the trantaftion thould take place.
It appearing that the Sheriff's Officer was in
poffeflion under the writ of enquiry,
The Court diretrled that 701. litould he brought
into Court to cover the rent—that the whole thould
be referred to the Mailer—and that, in the mean
time, the Defendant thould remain in pofeflion of
his farm, and the Warrant of Attorney to Ran 4 a
kenrity for the breaches of covenant, if theMitf-
-1 ter thould rer•rt there had been any.