Star.
London, England, 1825-02-14 00:00:00

there was net evidesiee to stew-that Mrs. Marie had at I
anytime exercised such influence, or that the testator'
was a person likely to be 'affected by it, and in that re-
-sped the defence had wholly failed. With regard to
the second point, the charge.or forgery was evidently
unsupported : at the first opening of the case, and, in-
deed; in the progress .of the cause, it was altogether
abandoned as without the shadow of a proof; and the
same insufficiency of,evicienee existed as to the proba-
bility of a subsequent will having been made and Alp-
pressed by Mr. and Mrs. Marie; and it was evident that
Miss Winifere's own impression was that the will was
genuine, from the fact of her having taken Sir Samuel
Shepherd's opinion upon it, and her subsequent taking
out of administration in the Ecclesiastical Court. As
to the last point, that Miss Henrietta Winifere executed
the deed between her and 'her sister without due consi-
deration, and the benefit of sufficient legal advice, that
was equally groundless with the other attempts at jus-
tification : for the fact 'was, that Miss Winitere was 27
years of age at the time of the execution of the deed,
and the-evidence in the cause spewed that, she was at-
tended by the Solicitor of the family, who took her in-
structions on the subject, and fully explained the nature
and consequences of the inst:ument previous to its-rati-
fication. This was further !•hewn, not only by the evi-:
deuce of other parties, but by the Lady's own letters,
in which the subject was discussed in 1815. On this
head there was the fullest proof to shew, that both the
parties to the deed were fully aware of, and perfectly
satisfied with, its provisions, and that neither expressed
any objection to any part of it when it was read over in
their presence, and executed by them on the 15th of
August, 1813. The evidence chewed that Miss Wini-
fere was not only competent to act on her own behalf,
but that she was, previous to the execution of that in-
strument, and at the time itself, fully aware of her own
rights, as well as what she was relinquishing, and that
she acted from motives honourable to herself, from a
' desire to carry into effect the intention of her brother.
There were three distinct ratifications on her part to the
contract—first, having administered to the will ; se-
condly, having filed a bill for a specific performance of
the deed; and lastly, her marriage settlement with:
Colonel Camac being founded upon it. Under all these
circumstances, the Court had no doubt that the defence
set up in this case had altogether failed, and that Mr.
Marie, the plaintiff, was entitled to the prayer of his
bill ; and the decree of the Court therefore was, that
Mr. and Mrs. Marie were entitled to a decree against
Mr. and Mrs. Camas. With respect to the question of
costs, the Court could not shut its eyes to the nature of
the defence, and to the charge made in the answer, of
forgery, suppression of the will, and undue influence on
the testator ; and while it saw -that the substantial
grounds of defence had altogether failed, and that
charges of such a nature were made without evidence
to support them, it would not be doing justice to the
plaintiff if it did not enforce the specific performance of
the contract against the defendants, with costs. The
Court was unwilling to make further observations on
the answer, as it did not recollect an instance. withiu.its
experience where such an answer was put on its files.
Judgment for the plaintiff; with costs;

The improvements at Windsor Castle are going for.
ward with extraordinary rapidity. In the great Quad-
rangle the corridor on the South and East itlles is suf-
ficiently high to allow us to admire the convenience of
its arrangements, and the beauty of its proportions.
The arch of King Gear the Fourth's Ahtewak is
finished, and the effect of the view of the Long walk
through it is truly magnificent.
Wednesday night las:, a young man named Arbour,
who resides in a court at the end of Ray's-lane, in
Cambridge, between twelve and one o'clock, quitted
the peaceful side of his wife, and springing from the
bed, darted through the sash of the chamber window,
which he shivered 'to atoms, and was precipitated to
the ground, flagged with bricks, a fall of about eight
feet r and, notwithstanding he was dreadfully cut, and
not slightly bruised, yet he was not roused from his ob-
livious sleep ; but, rising- up, he proceeded to his fa-
ther's residence, a distance of 387 yards, at the door
of which he knocked violently until admitted by his
terrified mother, whose feelings cannot be described at
beholding, by the light of the moon, her son, naked
and bloody, standing before her. She led him to a
chair by the expiring embers of the fire, but she in vain
addressed him; so profound was his sleep, that he
heard her not; and it was not till a good deal of vio-
lence had been resorted to that he was aroused to a
state of consciousness. It is unnecessary to add, that
the poor fellow was much agitated, but he could re-
collect nothing, except having been under the influence
of a dreadful dream. He is now confined to his bed
with the hurts he sustained.
PREVENTION or POACHING.—A Gentleman, who is
lord of several manors in the neighbourhood of
Newark, -frequently makes presents of game to the in-
habitants, (including even labourers) in the vicinity of
his residence, and occasionally allows farmers and
others, whether they are his tenantry or not, to sport
upon any of his manors. So beneficial are the effects
of this salutary compliance, that poaching is rarel '
practised, and game is far more abundant on these ma-
nors than in places where strict severity is used.
Lydford, a place about seven miles from Oakhamp-
ton, in the road to Tavistock, was formerly of some
note, though it is now only an obscure village. It is
,famous for its castle, under which there is a most
horrible dungeon—the prison for criminals proceeded
against in the Statutory Courts of Tavistoak, Ashburtoni
Chagford, and Plyinpton ; it being expressly ordained
by the charter of a grant made by Edward I. that if
any of the Tinners should in anything offend, they
should be arrested by the Warden, and in the King's
prison at Lydford, and not elsewhere, be kept and de-
tained until delivered according to the law and custom
of the ealm. Among other matters, a petition to Par-
liament, in the reign of Edward 111. complains, that
there was no delivery of the said jail of Lydfoid for ten
years together, whith at once explains the proverb,
First hang and draw,
• Then hear the cause by Lydford law;
which clearly intimates that it is much better to be
brought to trial immediately, and to suffer a more severe
punishment than the crime deserve, if it be almost
death itself, than to be confined so long in this terrible
and unwholesome prison, where the light of day can
never enter. A pamphlet published in the seventeenth
century, has this passage ;-4, Lydf.ad Law, by which
they used to hang meo first, and endite them after-
ward ;" which alludes to the punishment coming befo e
the trial, since the imprisonment must often, in petty
offences, have been incomparably beyond the desert of
the culprit, who, it appears, was ft eqttently popped into
Lydford dungeon for some trifling misdetnelmour, and
could not be released till the general delivery.