Star.
London, England, 1822-12-16 00:00:00

THE BIWA V. BAXTER.

This eras also an indictment for perjury. The pro-
secutor did not appear to support it, and the defend.
ist;t was of course acquitted.

THC MHO V. EDWARD KM.

There was a general expectation that this indict-
went, which is at the snit of the Bridge-street Society,
and has already been hanging 18 -months over the
head of the defendant, who is a poor man with a
numerous family would this day, be finally dis-
posed of : but, cn calling over the list of the Special
Jury, there were only five who answered to their
names, and the Counsel for the prosecution having
declined to pray for a tales, the trial was postponed
until a fre4h day shall be fixed at the instance of the
Society. The charge against the defendant, it will
- recollected, is the publishing of a libel against his
'testy, in the form of a song, which was professedly
wody on some libellous verses inserted in The
Vas under the tide of the "Queer's Seb.
)lion."

SKEPIIERD V AIITLRY.

This was an action of trespau. The plaintiff, a
titan wawa", with A: childreo, had apartments is


the Isount'of the clafenclantjor Oskar she paid a rest
of 4:. e week. On the day mentioned in the record,
.the defendant came u_p to'
The
apartment, and
said he wanted his rtSt. The plaintiff said—" I will
pay you in two minutes." To which he replied—
" He would not wait," and immediately took the
door off the hinges, and carried it away ; and plain-
tiff was reduced to the necessity of hanging a blanket
against the door-way for the remainder of the time
which she was in the house, six. weeks xffd upwards.'
—The defendant conducted his own cause, and con-
tended, as a justification for what he had done, that
plaintiff was an unpleasant lodger, and he wished to
get rid of her, which he could not effect by any other
means. He also contended, that he took of the door
for the purpose of repairing it; and further, that the
plaintiff very much injured the premises by carrying
on her business of a patten-tye-maker.
The Jury found a verdict for the plaintiff—Da-
mages 4;10. Costs, 40s.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, DECEMBER 14.
POLICY OP INBURANCE.-VY.BBEL RECOVERED.
SHEPHERD D. CLEGG.

Mr. Serjeant Lasts stated this to be an action
brought for the recovery of the total loss upon a po-
licy of insurance for £3OOO on the ship William Nel-
son, on her homeward-bound voyage from Holland
to this country. Soon after sailing she encountered
very bad weather, got stranded, and at the time she
was so wrecked, there was no hope of ultimately saving
her ; but since this action was brought she had, by
great expense, been floated again. There would be
OD question, he believed, fts to the facts of the case ;
but the only question would be, whether this altera-
tion of circumstances, since the present action was
brought, altered the relative situation of the parties
at issue ; or whether the plaintiff had a right to reco-
ver according to the loss and injury he had sustained
at the time he sought his legal remedy? there was
no doubt that his was in effect a total loss, when he
gave the insurers an abandonment; the subsequent
circumstances, he contended, made no alteratioe in
the nature of his claim, which must be considered as
resting on the state of things at the time the action
was brought. Nothing happening after issue was
joined could now be taken into consideration. The
usual proof of the policy, the loss, and the abandon-
, ment, was then given.
The• Captain of the William Nelson proved the
sailing of the vessel from the Texel, on her voyage
to. Liverpool, last February ; they encountered strong
and foul gales until.the 1 Ith of March, which kept,
:hem .still in the Texel Roads, and stranded them*
there on that day ; she went on her broadside, and
on cutting away the topmast she righted with twn
feet water in the hold, and settled in the sand. They
obtained anchors and cables from shore, and made
an ineffectual effort to extricate the ship from the
sand ; they then got out the ballast and renewed the
attempt, without success. Atter they got everything
out of the ship, her position became altered, owing to
a gale from the north-east, and she kept still se:tling
in the %ands, notwithstanding every effort.
In his cross examination he stated, that after he
gave. up the ship without hope, the agent of Mr.
Woolcombe, who acted for the underwriters, sent
two men on board to take charge of the ship where
she lay. The place in which she was bedded was
not that in which the Dutch fleet formerly lay. They
warned .nothing but a sufficient rise of water to uplift
the ship ; be knew that she was at last got off by other
persons, at a future time, in a higher rise of water.
Mr. Serjeant VAUGHAN, for the defendant, con-
tended, that upon the teal principles of insurance,
this never could be considered is the light of a total
loss—all that had occurred was a mere retarding of
the voyage for a time, until the ship could 1)z got off,
which was a mere matter of time, dependent upon
the a: rival of high tides, to be expected at a subse-
quent per iod•of the year ; and in the interim the ship
was comfortably bedded in a part of the harbour
where she could sustain no further injury. Insurance
was an indemnity for comparative loss or total loss,
and it was an absurdity to suppose that the indemnifi-
cation should exceed the amount of the real injury
incurred. The question as it stood was extremely
novel, for it was the first time in which a ship had
been got off alter the action had been brought on the
subject, and he had no objection that a special case
should be framed to settle the matter at law. There
could be no doubt that insurers were liable for the
amount of the injury done to the ship ; but certainly
not for a total loss, where the ship•was redeemed by
Mr. Woolcombe.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE.—I tell you how I shall
put this case as the facts stand : whether the under-
writers must not be considered as waving all objec-
tion to • the abandonment, by•sending over Mr.
Woolcombe, and by his taking upon himself the
whole managentent and chances of recovering the
stranded ship ?
Mr. Woolcombe deposed, that he went to Holland,
in the month of April, to examine the state of this
vessel; he found her lyrig on - the- south wall, per-
fectly safe, and abeut two feet'and a half immersed in
the sand and mud; she was perfectly entire, and ap-
parently uninjured. He attempted to have the vessel.
heaved out with cables sear)), in. May, but without
success; and he then resorted to lighters for the same
purpose, but was obliged to desist, in consequence of
a gale. In the July following he made a contract
with the Dutch people-4e get her off.(no pay in case
of failure), for about £240 (2,800 guilders); she was
got off in the end of September, and placed in the
basin of the New Diep. She was got off by heaving.
with cables, and making occasional excavations
through the mud. The only damage the ship re-'
ceived, was in the attempt •to raise her by lighters.
She is now in a condition to come to England.
In his cross-examination he said, that he was 14
days engaged in his first experiment, early in May,
to get her off. In the end of October he was again
in Holland, and beard she .was got off in the end of
September. In answer to a qttestton from the Court,
he said, that from the beginning there was no doubt
that, sooner or later, the ship would be got off.
Mr. Serjeant Laws said, that a question of law
must ultimately arise in this ease ; for if it were con-
tended that this was a mere retardation of the voyage,
then it.would be for the law to decide on what scale
that retardation was. to lsa estimated ; how far or
bow near waa the period when a party was to be held
in abeyance. forhia remedy, Here he held it clear
' that tha.Captain had made every effort to recover the
vessel; and as to hurry, the plaintiffs had *sited all
reasonable time, after making every reasonable am-

.

. .
taintsdn ,t-htellecyasellittlottiestitd, is f,, abect.Grisimciamtoia7ans
.utionetad
atm tahy.,
tatter' perioc4 and more particularly as an:Application
was made to the plaintiff to abide- the issue. of .any
further attempt. •
The LORD Came Jorrice said, thatthetmly ques-
ttiaorndatifoonr tohfe Jas, whether
must decide it upon a matter of fact in. the first
, or a toghtaisl wlosassa; aninecrthree;
instance. If; at the. time this:vessel at nch.there was
party had arigbt.to preeeed•for-a total loss; if,
no reasonable prOhability gettin her off, thenAboen
otltlielecroanntraarsyu,b.sthegereuen.wtseeffaorlts,tope
thenof gthetencnagsehceor
uolffd by
be
only looked upon as a retardation of the voyage.
The Captain at first had a hope of getting the ship
off; but he afterwards abandoned her; but then Mr.
Woolcombe went over, employed at both sides, to
survey the state of the ship; and his qpinion at the
outset was, that the vessel could be got off with
safety : and ultimately that 'opinion was verified by
the fact of her being so got off in a.flt state to pursue
her voyage. The force of the evidence was, there-
fore, against the total loss, and establishing only a
retardation of the voyage.
The Jury returned a verdict for an average•loss,
there appearing to have been only a retardation.
CHELMSFORD ASSIZES, DECEMBER
Edward Braddock, James mil; Williams. Warren,
jun. John Prior, and John Castle, were indicted for
feloniously stealing, on the Bth of September, at Da-
genham, in this eponty, two stacks of wheat, part of
a stack of Talavera wheat, one stack of rye, one stack
of barley, one stack of oats, two loads of hay, a large
quantity of potatoes, and other articles, the property
of John Moseley, Esq.
It appeared in evidence that Mr. Robert Braddock,
brother of the prisoner Edward Braddock, had rented
a farm at Dagenham, as tenant to J. Moseley, Esq.
a gentleman residing at Tofts, near Brandon, in the
county of Norfolk. The tenancy expired at Michael-
'nuts, 1522, when the tenant was to go out, the land-
lord paying him the value of the way-going crop,
according to the custom of the country. A valua-
tion had been made of the crops, and as soon as Mr.
It. Braddock quitted possession, the bailiff of the pro-
secutor took possession of the farm on account of his
master. The subjects of the alleged larceny were
the crops of the farm, which had been harvested at
the expense of the prosecutor. In consequence of a
letter received by the bailiff from Mr. R. Braddock,
the former was induced to quit the farm, for the pur-
pose of going to a place called Norton,.inthecounty
of Suffolk, which was alleged to be a mere blind to
induce him to get out of the way, and in the interval
'Mr. E. Braddock and the other prisoners, who were
mere labourers, went upon the farm, and carted
away the property mentioned in the indictment, to a
Distance of about three-quarters of a mile. This was
dune in the open day, and the place to which the
crops %sere removed was a matter of public notoriety.
On the cross.examinationbf the two witnesses exa-
. mined for the prosecution, namely, George Mudd,
the bailiff, and Mr. Moseley, the prosecutor, it ap-
pea: ed that Mr. Robert Braddock had expended
2,0001. upon the farm, and having been dissatisfied
with the valuation put upon the way-going crop,
had reiorted to this expedient to indemnify himself
for what lie conceived to be an unjust estimate of
!the property.
Before the case for the prosecution was closed,
an I before the prisoner's defence was entered upon,
Mr. Justice BAYLRY interposed, and said it was
impossible to consider this as a case of felony. Mr.
Robert Braddock bad at least a colour of title to the
property alleged to have been stolen, and the priso-
ner Edward had taken possession in pursuance of his
brothel's title. No felonious intention could be im-
puted, even upon the opening of the case for the pro-
secution, and therefore the prisoners were entitled to
be acquitted. The Jury acquitted the prisoners.
The prisoners' Counsel then applied for copies of
the indictment, with a view to actions for a malicious
prosecution, and the Learned Judge immediately or-
dered the -copies to be given.
The prisoners had been commited for trial by the
local.Jastices, under the circumstances thus stated ;
and the prisoners, upon application to one of the
Judges in town, had been admitted to bail the mo-
ment the nature of the case was stated. The prisoner
Mr. Edward Braddock was a young man of gentle-
manly appearance. Occupation for the Gentlemen
of the. Long Robe is expected at the next Assizes, in
consequence of this proceeding.
Benjamin Cooper was indicted on the Statute 39
Elizabeth, c. 15, sec. 2, for breaking and entering
the dwelling-house of Elizabeth Stock, in the day-
time of the 4th of August last, at Thaxted, no person
being therein, and stealing two £5O Bank notes, two
£lO, SO sovereigns, and other monies, to the amount
of £l7O, the property of the prosecutrix.
It appeared in evidence that the prosecutriz, a wi-
dow Lady, resided at Thaftked, in this county. In
the afternoon of Sunday, the 4th of August, herself,
family, and all the servants, attended Divine Service
at the Parish Church, which was very near to her
dwelling; whilst absent, the house was broken open
by some person, who scaled the garden wall and en-
tered the back way by breaking through the kitchen
window, and then forcing the inner doors, which led
to a room in which the prosecutrit's bureau was
'placed. The bureau was broken open, and all the
money mentioned in the indictment was stolen. To
sustain the case against the prisoner, the following
facts were given in evidence:—Shortly after the fa-
mily went to Church, he was seen standinf upon a
post in a lane at the back of the prosecutriz s garden,
which overlooked the house ; about three o'clock he
Was seen near the house, returning in a direction
from it; the footsteps of ,a man were discovered on
the garden mould shortly after the robbery was dis-
covered ; the prisoner's house was searched, and a
pair of high-low shoes werefound,..which he admitted
to be his, and which, when compared with the foot-
marks in the garden, were found•to correspond ex-
actly ; when the prisoner was seen comisg from the
direction in which the house was situated, he was
,observed to wear.a pair of high•low shoes, and in an
hour afterwards he was seen in a pair of low shoes;
that on the day before the robbery he was without
money, and had actually pawned his coat ; and that
on the Sunday hespent the evening at a pablic-house,
and tendered a sovereign to pay his reckoning. The
whole case depended upon these circumstances, and
after the Learned Judge bad minutely summed up
Ikhe saws the Jury found the prisons Guilty—Dada.

•

IN f 7 ENS`

assaa..mems
otrOftn, tIFTEMintlt t.
• Siderdro lbw/ Damn Stekheos admitted Molar tk
-New Cidlege.
Saturday, Lard Ozmanstoirn and the /ion. hi% Cleat
Parsons, min of the Rossey of hisedilet College; am
%Mbar% Schntileid, of University College, were admitted
eltelors'ef Arts.
Thursday, in CommeatiOn, the Rev. B. P. Ilyohnhs,lta
Fellow of Wadham College, was nominated one of the Mk,
gates of Accounts, in the room of the Rev: De. Cotton, et
Christ Church.
Same day, in Congregation, the tolieW4ng wets admittid
to &vets:

whorstAt ob. Awry.
The Rev. Charles Walters, lilarlalen
The Rev. Thomas Rowley, Christ Church.

SACS SWIM OP ACTS.
The Rev. William Within Stephens, St. Mary Hall, testi
Compounder.
Rieltard Henry Millington, Esq. St. Johli s College, Ges...i
Compounder.
R.thunnd n Stuart, Exeter College
Richard Thomas Wilson Taylor, Wadham College.
William Tyrrell Russell, Lincoln College.
Thomas Charles Webber, Christ Church.
James Shackieton, Exhibitioner of• Pembroke College;
Thomas Prosser Exhibitioner of Sr. John's College.
Leoline Llevrellin, Scholar of Jesus College. •
Thomas Underwood, Worcester College.
ECCLESIAS'FICA I. PROAIOTIONB6
The Rev. L. V. Vernon, Rector of Rothbury. has beds oft,
tented by the Archbishop of York, to the valuable living or
&okesley, in Cleveland, vacated by the death of the Very ft„.
the Dean of York. The Rev. C. E. V. Vernon succet.ds to the
valuable living of Rothbury.
The Rev. George Bovines' has been presented by the Lord
nigh Chancellor to the Rectory of Rokeby, vacant by the death
of the Rev. James Wilkinson.
The Rev. T. St. Lawrence, son to the Bishop of Cork, is ap.
pointed to the Archdeaconry of Rocs.
The Rey. D. Creswell, D. D. Fellow of Trinity College,
Cambridge, to the Vicarage of Enfield, Middlesex.
The Rev. Henry Palmer, A.B. ha. been licensed to the per.
petual and endowed Curacy of 13-roadway, by the Ilish.p of
Oath and Wells, on the nomination of the Rev. W. Palmer.

TrruEs.—The Citizens in all the Parishes %% Hai
are groaning under the oppressive operation of t he nth
of Henry VIII. are daily employed in promoting their
object of approaching l'arliame• t in the most effectual
manner, by co-operating, steadily, again-t the demat.ds
of the Clergy under that Act. In the parish elCrip-
plegate, a Meeting was held a few days ago, for the
purpose of taking into consideration a ietter, eceivel
by the Churchwardens, from a Special Commii:ee (if
the Corporation, jated the 7th -1N •rember re-
specting the co-operation of the Parishes in London,
in relition to Tithes, and the eneeavour to obtait: the
'repeal of the 37th Henry VIII. and nn impiovement
in the mode of assessing Tithes in London. Mr. SA-
MUEL STEVENS, Churchwardeo, took the Chair. It
was then stated, that the Chairman had attended the
Meeting of the Committee, upon the subject of the
latter, on the 27th of November, and >onte c,•nver•
sation was entered into relative to the nece-sit: of co-
operating, in the most prompt and decisive manner,
with the Tithe Committee. The feeling was unani-
mous. A Committee of nine was ae•pointed to asst
and advise, in behalf of the Parish, in the MA:I:ICr
proposed to be adopted.

- - .
fl be tee(
Na4iesc
a par(
This
Vita.