Star.
London, England, 1805-07-06 00:00:00

COURT OF KING% LENCIL DUBLIN, JULY t.

Tli s day Mr. Archibald Hamilton Rowan was brought
up by Habeas Corpus, to of gn error upon the Re-
cord of Outlawry for High Treafon.
His Counfel then moved, that the Outlawry Mould
he reverted, for errors which Mr. Rowan himfelf de-
livered in to the Officer, engrolled upon parchment.
The errors affigned were two in number : PHI, that
the addition to the name of the prifoner, as it flood
on the Record, was error in fait, lie being therein
Riled Efquiie, whereas l►e was but a 7 eoman, and
ought to to have been filed : Second, that the aver-
ment on the Record, flaring the prifoner to have been
within the realm of Ireland at the time of ti►e Pro-
clamations in Outlawry, was error in fad, he having
been at that time in North America, in parts beyond
the feas.

The ATTORNEY GENERAL then, by virtue of 11:s
Majefty's Warrant, confelfed thefe errors; and the
proceedings in Outlawry were reverfed accordingly.
Mr. Rowan was then put to plead to the original
indittment for High Treafon, upon which he pleaded
his Majefty's molt gracious Pardon ; which being read
and allowed, he WAS told that he was !ifcharged.
Mr. Rowan then addreffed the Court. He begged
to be permitted in a few wor3s to exprefs his heart-
felt gratitude for the clemency of his Sovereign:
When I IA (raid he) had the honour to hand in this Court
before your hordniips, I laid that I did not know the King other-
wife than as the head of the State; as a Magiarate wielding the
force of the Executive Fowl-. I now know him by his clemency
—by that clemency which has enabled me once more to meet my
wife and child= ; to find them not only unmolefted, but cheriih-
ed and prote..tcd during my oh', ICC in a Cord vi country, and my
legal incapacity of rendering to them the alfittanee of an hufband
and a father. Were Ito be infallible of that clemency, I thould be
indeed an unworthy man. All are liable to error. The conre-
queNees have caught me deeply to regret the violent meafores which
I once purfued. Under the circuroftanees in which I Rand, were
I to copiers all I feel upon this fubjedt, it might be attributed to
bare and unworthy motives; but your Lorilfhips are aware how
deeply I muft he afieded by my prefent fituation, and will give me
credit fur what I c:.nnot myfell expref."
Lord Chief Ju ice Dow m Mr. Rowan, from
she fenriments s-hich you have expreffed, 1 have rea•
fon to hope that your future conduit will prove that
his Majs pardon has not been unworthily bellow-
ed."—Mr. Rowan then bowed and retired.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, LONDON, JULY S.
PCNN se. SCHOOLEY, Eso,
This was an a&ion againtt the Sbcriff of London
nominally, for having returned nalla bona to a writ
of Fieri Facia:. The only queflion was, whether the
Plaintiff's judgment againli the goods of a publican,
named Prod, in Whitechapel, ought or ought not
to have taken precedence of another judgment, en-
tered up two days after by Meffrs. Godwin and Co.
Mr. Froit's brewer, under which the Sheriff had le-
vied. It appearing, however, to the Jury and the
Court, that the Plaintiff's judgment was nothing more
than alnii to Pave the property of Frail from being
fwept away by Meffrs. Godwin and Co. the Plaintiff
was nonfuited.

lIILLIVONAId w. 110WAIM.

This was an aelion for 241. For maintaining and
lodging the Defendant's witnefEs, who had been
brought out of Eifel to attend a trial in London,
and during their flay were quartered at; the houle bf
the Plaintiff, an innkeeper in Whitechapel. The De-
fendant firft pleaded a fee off, which he afterwards
withdrew, and then contended, that he bad paid for
the eating and drinking of his whittles as they re-
ceived it : and further, that the Plaintiff had worked
a mare of hi in the way of his bufinefs, for which he
bad a right to be paid. The defence altogether was
treated with great feverity by the Plaintiff'sCounfel.
The Jury, however, made a trifling deduaion from
the Plaintiff's bill, and then gave him a verdift.