Star.
London, England, 1822-06-24 00:00:00

IA IV INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, JUNG as.
THE KING V. SIENKTT.
Mr. SOLICITOR-GENERAL prii)ed the judgment of
the Court on the defendant, who was convicted at
the last Yoi kshire Assizes for the breach of his duty
as an Excise-officer, in wilfully omitting to enter the,
full quantity of hides manufactured by a Laurier in
his district in the proper book, fur the purpose of de-
frau..ing the Revenue.
Mr. Justice THAN LEY read his notes of the proceed
lugs at the trial, ti oni which it appeared that the,
Jury deliberated for nea I y "two hours " before -pro.
flouncing A verdict of guilty. An affidavit of the de-
fendant was put in, the scope of which was to exo-
nera-e him from corrupt motives in the omission.
Mr. TYNDALL, for the defendant, alluded to the
hesitation of the Jury, to the extensive trust previ-
ously dicharged with fidelity by his client, and to
Lis state of health, which would render long inipri-
soument.dangerous to his life.
Ali. SurAstrOß-GENERAL contended, that on read-
hug the evidence no one could entertain the least
doubt of the propriety of the conviction, and that the
offence was aggravated, by the trust which the de-
fendant had broken.
Mr. Justice BAYLEY, after expatiating on the of-
felre, and observing that the defendant's state of
health induced the Court to shorten the period of im-
prisctinent, passed sentence that he should be impri-
soned twelve months in the Castle at York.
THE KING V. CANDICE. "
Mr. NOLAN moved the judgment of thisqllmat on
the defendant, who was convicted of a misikeeemiour
at the last Assizes for Surrey. As undertaker MINK,
county, he was employed to bury the body of a ma-
lefactor, named Edward Lees ; but instead of doing
s.), he sold it to Mr. Brookes, the surgeon, in whose
dissecting room it was found, and received his fees for
its interment. When the relatives of the deceased re-
quested permission to see the body, he informed them
that it was already buried; but suspicion having arisen,
the coffin was dug up, and found full of rubbish.
Mr. %VALFORD said a few words in mitigation of
punishment. pleading that the defendant was ex-
tremely poor, and deeply penitent for the offence
which he had committed.
Mr. NOLAN, for the prosecution, described the of-
fence as one revolting to humanity in itself, and ag-
gravated by the mean and mercenary conduct with
which it was attended.
Mr. Justice BAYLEY pronounced the sentence of the
Court. The law had, he said, nude this distinction
in the punishment of capital offences of different de-
grees of enormity—that in the case of murdet the
body of the- offender should be dissected, but that
lesser crimes should be followed only by the forfeiture
of life. This distinction it was very important to pre-
serve; and the administrators of the law were bound
to take care that its inflictions were never exceeded.
Here the conduct of the defendant had been merce-
nary and cruel ; he had denied to the distressed rela-
tives of an unfortunate man the melancholy satisfac-
tion of knowing where his remains were to be depo-
sited, and of following them to the grave. The Court
felt that the case was one which called for exemplary
punishment, and therefore adjudged that he should
pay to the King a fine of £2O, and be imprisoned in
the House of Correction at Brixton for six months.
EX-JAUTE HIGHMORE, LL.D.
Dr. HIGIIMORE, after the Lord Chief Justice and
Mr. Justice Best had left the Court, rose and begged
leave to move for a mandamus requiring the Arch-
bishop of Canterbury to issue his fiat to the Vicar-
General of the Province of Canterbury, to make out
a rescript commanding the Dean of the Arches to
admit the applicant to practice in the Court of Arches,
he having obtained his diploma as Doctor of Laws.
It appeared, in answer to the questions of the
Court, that this application was the same which was
refused by the Court of King's Bench in 1807 ; but
the Doctor stated that he had new grounds to lay
before the Court, which might induce them to pro-
nounce a different decision.
Mr. Justice BAYLEY said that the Court could not
entertain such an application in the absence of the'
Lord Chief Justice and Mr. Justice Best, especially
as it affected a case already solemnly decided. He
therefore advised Dr. Highmore, if he wished still
to move, to take an opportunity of doing so when
the Court was full.
Dr. Highmore bowed, and retired.
PALACE COURT, JUNE n.
DEERHURST V. MARKHAM.
Mr. EARLE stated to the Jury, that the declaration
in this case charged that the defendant, on the 11th
of April, assaulted the plaintiff with sticks.and fists,
and destroyed his hat.
Mr. Citeaers Pmeeirs said, the plaintiff was the
son of a very poor woman, a widow, who was strug-
gling to give him such an education, and such a pro-
fession, as she hoped, after her death, he depending
entirely for subsistence upon her life, might, perhaps,
afford him an bonourable independence. He, if per-
sons were to be considered in Courts of Justice, stood
under very disadvantageous circumstances; because
his antagonist happened to be the son of a very ele-
vated man--no less a personage than Admiral Mark-
ham ! The plaintiff was apprenticed to a surgeon, and
early in. this year he purchased, or his mother put.-
chased for him, a ticket, which entitled him to attend
Dr. Brookeres Lectures. On the day in question, he
was eint:.bvy the Gentleman to whom he was either
irtiele4 ye apprenticed, to wait upon a person pro-
fessienally,- in the neighbourhood of Westminster
&boo/ He proceeded to the house of that person,
mid Ending that he was not at home, but that in the
course of half an hour he would be likely to be in the
way, the boy, recollecting the great distance between
the patient's and his own home, thought it better to loi-
ter about a few minutes in the neigbbourhood, and call
the courseof an hour, and deliver his message.
ingly he was standipg upon the stairs, looking
boats passing up and down the River, when a
iproached the stairs, in which was a crowd of
inster scholars. These young Gentlemen were
tricks with one another innocently enough,
‘e Oeleud.aat happened to slip and fall into the
. Whether he was irritated from falling into
,ater, or the natural impetuosity of his disposi-
influenced him, he (Mr. Phillips) knew not, but
tine up to the plaintiff, accompanied
his brother stuaants, and demanded

tghing at ? The plaintiff said, " I could

gairlin the cour
Accordingly he
at the boats pas.
I boat approached
Westminster scb
6, playing tricks v
and the detendal
water. Whethe
the water, or tb
On influenced
1•
1 he instantly can
1 by a crowd of
what lie vras laud
1