Star.
London, England, 1824-11-11 00:00:00

THE KING W. RUSSELL AND OTHERS.

This was an indictment for a nuisance in building
gears in the river Tyne. The case was removed from
Northumberland to Yorkshire, on a suggestion that a
fair and impartial trial could not hi had in the former
county. At the trial it appeared that the defendants,
who occupied extensive coal-wharfs on the side of the
river, had erected two gears on its bed for shooting
coals into the vessels in a more advantageous manner.
The gears were buildings of wood and iron, 36 feet in
breadth, about the same height, and pojecting 191 feet
into the river—about one-eighth of its bed. Several
witnesses proved that inconveniences to craft navigating
the river arose
,from these buildings. The Learned
Judge, Mr. Justice Bayley, however, left the case to
the Jury on the questions whether a public benefit was
derived from the mode of shooting the coal ? and whe-
ther a public benefit outweighed the public inconve-
nience proved ? The Jury found a verdict for the de-
fendants, upon an agreement, that if the direction of the
Learned Judge shduld ke found erroneous in point of
law, a verdict should be entered for the Crown.
Mr. BROUGHAM moved for a role to show cause why
the verdict should not be entered for the Crown, chiefly
on the ground that the improved mode of shooting the
coals was not a public. bui a private benefit, andcon-
sequently could not be se against the inconvenience
suffered by the public. The defendants, by this means,
were enabled to sell coals better; but it was more pro-
bable they would. sell them dearer than cheaper; and
thus the direct advantage would be entirely their.own.
They were not bound to sell at all, and might fix their
own price. Now, suppose a public-house built across a

public way, that would be snuck uscietu public benefit,
because.the innkeeper would be oblited.to entertain all
who' applied at reasonable hours, an sl yet surely that
would be a public nuisance.—The COVET gran* a
rule to shew causes
THE KINO V. THOMAS HUGHES.

This was an indictment against the defendant for
perjury, which was tried before Mr. Justice Buriou4h
at the last Assizes for Guildford. The defendant, en
182, prosecuted two persons named Chandler and
Bamford, for stealing lead from a house which he oc-
cupied in the vicinity of GuilgOrd. On that trial he
swore that he saw the two prisoners at his house on the
night of the robbery, when they were observed by a
watchman, named Sngar, and cursed him for
them. The men were :•Cquitted, and afterwards
preferred the present indictment, in which perjury was
assigned on the defendant's testimony, at the preceding
trial. The case for the prosecution was principally sus-1
tained.by the evidence of the two men and Chandler's
uncle, and was met by the evidence of the watchman,
who swore the men were on the premises. The Jury
returned a verdict of Guilty.
Mr. BRODRICK now moved for a rule to shew cause
why a new trial shiuld not be had, on the ground that
the verdict was contrary to the weight of evidence. The,
Learned Judge told the Jury, if they believed the watch-
man, the defendant was entitled to an acquittal. He
had aho affidavits, tending. to shew that the case ought
to undergo a second inquiry.—The COURT granted a
rule to shew cause.

AfORSTON V. NANTER AND OrHIRS.
This was an action brought to recover from the de-
fendants, who are stage coach proprietors, compensation
for injuries sustained by the plaintiff, through the neg-
ligence of the defendants' servants. The cause was tried'
at the last Assizes for Chester, when it appeared that
one of the defendants, who was intoxicated, was driving
the coach (the coachman being at the •:me sitting be-
side him on the box), to Chester, at a furious rate, when ,
the plaintiff, who was also going with his horse and
cart towards Chester, apprehending some accident,
drew his cart as near as possible to the foot-path on his
Own side of the way; but notwithstanding this precau-
tion, the defendants' coach came in contact with the
cart, which upiet, and threw the plaintiff into the road ;,
the consequence of which was, the fracture of one of
his limbs. At the trial, it was objected that the coach,
at the time of this accident, was not, as alleged in the
declaration, in the chazge of the defendants' servant,
but in the charge of one of the defendants, and that
one partner could not fix another with tort, and the,
plaintiff was nonsuited.
Mr. J. WILLIAMS this day moved for a Rule, calling
upon the defendants to shew cause why the nonsuit
should not be set aide, and a verdict entered for
the plaintiff for the sum of 2001. (the sum agreed upon'
between the parties, if the opinion of the Court should
be against the nonsuit), -on the ground that the coach'
was in the care of the defendants' servant, who was at
the time of the accident sitting upon the coach-box,
and had only given for a few minutes, to a drunken.
man, those reins; which he immediately resumed after
the accident had occurred.—Rule granted.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, NOV. 10.
GREEK LOA Ne.•DEIVITTS V. HENDRIKS.

This was an application on behalf of the plaintiff to
set aside the verdict ob,ained by the defendant in an
action tried at Guilatll, before Chief Justice PEST.
Mr. Serjeant Patr, stated that he was the plaintiff's
Coonsel, and the question -Which he was about to sub-
mit was relating to a Greek Loan.
The Cuter JUSTICE observed, that when the case was
tried he thought that the plaintiff ought to have been
nonsuited, on the point that it was illegal in the sub-
jects of this country to make a lean to the subjects of
another country then contending against their Sotereign,
who was in alliance and at amity with this country.
Mr. Serjeant Part. said, that this was as action of
trover brought to recover certain deeds. The plaintiff,)
on behalf of the Greeks, applied to the defendant
through a Gentleman named Contess, residing in this
country, to assist him in raising a Loan for the assist-
ance of the Greek cause. The defendant required that
some security should be left with him, and certain
Spanish bonds, together with some instrun:ents pur.i
porting to be warrants of attorney from the Greek Go.
vernment for the purpose of raising a Loan, were placed
in his possession. The business, however, fell to the
ground, and nothing was done. Contess then applied
for the return of the Spanish bonds and other instru.l
menu,. The Spanish Bonds were saleable securities,
and the defendant refused to deliver them up. They
were, however, not things very desirable to have, as
some people knew to their cost.
The CHIEF JUSTICE remarked, that at the trial the
verdict returned was for 4961. when the security of the
bend was for .5,0001.

Mr. Serjeant PELL observed, that Spanish Bonds had
risen lately, and would rise still higher, if the promises
which had been made were kept. The defendant had
refused to give up the bond until his expenses were
paid ; they were then offered to be discharged, but he
still refused to give them up until they gave him the
commission on the Scrip, which was never brought into
the market. The question at the trial was simply whether
Contess had a light under all these circumstances to
recover? The verdict was given in favour of Contess
for all he claimed, deducting the expenses. On the
trial of the case the defence set up was, that the whole
was a fraud, and that the plaintiff had no authority
from the Greek Government. What fell from his
Lordship on the trial was strongly stated to the Jury,
who found for the defendant. The Learned Counsel
said, that supposing this to be a loan' in aid of those
struggling people, even although founded on insufficient
authority, still he knew not on what ground plaintiff
was to be prevented from recovering what he had de-
posited, even although it might not be valid.
Chief Justice BEST—I left the case to the Jury on the
merits, and they found a verdict to my satisfaction. I
left it to them to say whether the instruments were or
were not forged ? The documents were in modern Greek,
and there was nobody at the trial to prove what they
were. (His Lordship, after reading the whole of the
evidence, proceeded to the following effect). It was
proved on the trial that the signature of the Burch at-
tached to the document was made in London and not in
Greece, and there was a doubt even as to the authenti-
city of it altogether.
Mr. Serjeant PELL said,that whether the authorities for
the loan were or were not genuine made no difference to
the plaintiff's right, as those instruments had stamps
upon them, which, on returning to the Stamp Office,
themoney advanced for them would have been returned.
There was nothing offered in evidence to substantiate
the statement of fraud, so strongly mentioned to the
'Jury by the Learned Judge.

aiafJustica Bkat—; am of opinion Aar shot whole'
is fraud—the .h,u7 bare so found. I do. not know
how I can separate Fie part of the cause from another,
nor do I perceive one part more free than another from
the imputation of fraud.
The verdict, consequently, remains undisturbed.
socvoa v. SIMMONS.
Mr. Scjesint TADDY moved for a rule to sheaf cause
why the verdict in this case should not be set aside, and
a new trial granted. The action was for an assault,
and was tried at the la,t 'Guildford Assizes, before Mr.
Baron Graham. The evidence adduced by the plaintiff
consisted of her two daughters, and two other women,'
named Bell and Saunders. There was much contra.
dictory swearing by the witnesses for the defence, in-
deed so much so, that the Learned Judge left it to the
Jury to decide to which of the parties they would give
credit, for there was certainly gross perjury on one
side. The Jury, after a trial of five hours, returned a
verdict for the plaintiff, with one shilling damages.
The defendant now said that he was taken by surprise
at the trial, and was not then able to meet the asser-
tions of the plaintiff's witnesses; but he had affidavits
now to prove, that two of the plaintiffs witnesses,
Saunders and Bell, were not present at the transaction,
and that Saunders herself had admitted that she was
not present, but was determined to swear, in order to
enable the plaintiff to conquer the defendant. The
learned Serjeant now submitted, that though the da-
mages were merely nominal, yet they carried costs, and
the defendant was most anxious to remove the imputa-
tion which had been so injuriously cast upon his cha-
racter by the transaction.
The COURT were of opinion, that though it was very
bard for the defendant to have imputations thrown on
his character, yet they sa:v nothing in the affidavits
which might not have been brought forward at the trial,
and under all the circumstances of ,the case, they saw
no reason for disturbing the verdict.—Rule refused.

POLICE LVIELLIGENCL

M A NSIO N-HOUSE.

Yesterday, the Loan Mayo* sat in the Justice-Room for the
first time as Chief Magistrate. In the course of the day, he re-
ceived several complimentary visits.
.IJorr3tt, the person who was some days ago charged before the
late Lord Mayor, with having committed bigamy in marrying a
widow named Wood, while his wife was alive, was again examined.
It will be recollected that the mysterious conduct of the pri-
soner, with respect to the absence of his first wife, excited much
suspicion amongst her friends, and that the wife was represented as
baying no oLjectiou to the fancy of her husband fur another
Woman. Extraordinary as this circumstance may appear to be, it
terns out to be the fact. The poor woman is in a declining state of
health, and much friendship having beets shewn to her by Mrs
Wood, of Chancery-lane, she offered no opposition to a wedding
proposed by her helpmate which would be likely to make him
more comfortable. She expresses her satisfactiun at the present
condition of things, and does not scent at all disposed to interfere,
at leist so long as she is provided with an asylum: We find that
the matrimonial arrangements had, from the commencement, her
concurrence; that she was removed from her former lodging to
hxr present abode, at her own desire, and that she receives frequent
visits front her husband and his new spouse.
The Solicitor fur the prosecution had no further evidence of the
bigamy; but considered that, upon producing the certificate of the
second marriage, the evidence would be conclusive.
The Loan Matron, could not think of committing a man to
prison upon such evidence. The plainer had been some time in
confinement ; and except proof of the fact with which he was
charged were immediately produced, he should no longer be de-
tained. His Lordship acestrdingly discharged Barratt frost custody.

S. Duval, charged with firing a pistol at his wife, was brought
up. The woman bring sufficiently recovered, attended, and stated
that on the 50th day of October, about nine o'clock in the evening,
the prisoner came to her, and rallieg her by name, presented a
pistol, which he immediately fired, the contents of it' did not touch
her : but he instantly struck her a violent blew with the butt-end of
it, which knuck.ed her down. He repeated the blows until the
watchman came to her assistance. The prisoner was committed.

BOW-STIIEET.
Yesterday, Benjamin Barn, the well-known pugilist and land-
lord of the Rising Sun public-house, in Windmill street, Haymar-
ket, was brought before the sitting Magistrates, Sir R. Buis= and
T. HALL% Esq. by Morris, charged with violently assaulting and
beating James Gardner, one of the patrol of this establishment,
and rescuing James Burn (defendant's nephew), who was in legal
custody upon a warrant of bastardy at the time.
The case having been established by evidence,
Sir R. 11111M11 said that the conduct of the defendant was most
aggravated. liere was a publican, who was bound in a recogni-
zance to keep good order in leis house, and yet he was one of the first
to break the peace and resist the execution of a Magistrate's war-
rant. The defendant might rely upon it that independent of any
proceedings for the assault and rescue, the facts of the case should
be. transmitted to the licensing Magistrates of St. James's, that
they might consider whether he was a proper person to have a li-
cense at all ?

Mr. HALL, said, that as far as he was individually concerned, he
objected to granting a public house license to boxing men at all.
He could not consider it proper that licenses should be granted to
men who were notoriously in the practice of breaking the peace,
whenever it suited their pleasure or their profit.
Burn was then ordered to find bail, himself in W. and two
sureties in 451. each, to answer the charge of assault and rescue at
the Sessions.

Mr. Pitt appeared before Mr. Ilxu.s, to answer to an informa-
tion preferred by 11r. M. Stukty, for placing an iron rail two feet
and a half across the pavement, on the east side of Adam-street,
Adelphi, and thereby obstructing the foot-passengers. contrary to
the provisions of the 57th of Geo. 111. c. 50. The case having been
proved, Mr. Pitt took an objection to the proceeding, on the ground
of the Magistrate's having no jurisdiction, as the house in question
was private property.—This objection was overruled.
Mr. Pitt then proceeded to cross.examine Mr. Stukey, and the
witnesses tailed by him, on a number of points completely irrele-
vant to the case, and in this mode occupied above two hours.
Mr. HALLS then said, that willing as he always was to give every
person who came before him a patient and dispassionate hearing,
he could not, however, be unmindful of the interests of the Public,
which starred materially from this occupvtion of time, he must say
most uselessly.
Mr. Pitt said, the case would last two boors more at least. He
was determined to make the most of his lights, and any be had be
was determined to support to their utmost extent.
Mr. Hau.s conceived, that the mode he was at present pursuing
was not calculated to preserve his own rights, but to infringe upon
those of the Public. _ _ _ _

Mr. Pitt said, if the Magistrate refused to hear him he must re.
main satisfied.
Mr. HALL, said he did not refuse to hear him as long as he pleased
on points affecting the merits of the ease, but surely two hours were
quite sufficient for him, if he only asked irrelevant questions.
Mr. Pitt, then, snatching up his papers, said he had done.
Mr. HALLS thought himself bound, under all the circumstances,
as no answer bad been given to the accusation contained in the in-
formation, to convict him in the penalty of e•e. and costs.
Mr. Pitt thin said he should appeal, on the ground of a refusal
having been given to hear him.
Mr. Haus said he might use his uwn discretion on that subject
Csinttsausx.—Nonce Suniven, a lady from the Emerald Isle,
who is another Madge Wildfire in appearance, was brought up by
Kelly, a Bow-street patrol, charged with uttering counterfeit coin..
Kelly, who is himself a son of Erin, and a most powerful young
man, seemed completely worn out, from the violent struggle he bad
to bring this virago from Battle-bridge, where she bad attempted
to pass off some bad shillings eta bakers shop.
Calton, a constable, who it no very great Mend to the " smash-
ing association," stepped fotward, and having eyed the fair culprit
as she stood at the bar, pronounced her an old and daring offender.
This roused the half-smothered flame of Nonce's revenge, and
despising all foolish etiquette, or respect for the Magisterial pre-
sence, she roared out with Stentorian fury, " You lie, you villain, I
ar'nt--only let me get at you."
Presuming that a few hours' would cool the fervent
heat of the lady's temper, the Ida es ordered her to be locked
up in the strong room, when she was with some difficulty searched ;
and whilst Calton was standing within a few paces, she made a
spring at hint, and whit the certainty of a tiger, contrived to bite a

Lwow mid Published by'. F. KZALT, she Sus Orric*
No. I, licLell-Have, Temple-Aar. -