Star.
London, England, 1809-11-07 00:00:00

MIDDLESEX SESSIONS, NOr. 5,

THE KING V. Moi.En.—This was a prosecution
instituted by Mr. Elli Jtt, Chief Officer of the East
India Company's ship Wexford, for an assault com-
mitted by the Defendant, the Captain's servant.
Mr. Elliott stated, that lie had been in the India
Company's service upwards of twenty years, and he
had put himself to the expence and trouble of this
prosecution solely in the hope of checking the spirit
of insubordination which constantly reigned in the
ships, on their homeward bound arrival in the River,
when the ship's discipline was discontinued, to the
frequent imminent danger of both ship and cargo.
He said, that in the evening of the day laid in the
indictment, he observed one of the Lascars fixing a
cot to the starboard side of the cuddy ; the prosecu-
tor said, that as he occupied himself the larboard side
of the san.e birth, he was by no means desirous of so
near a neighbour, and directed it to be taken below ;
on which the Captain's servant, who ordered the cot
for his own accommodation, came into the birth,
much intoxicated, using the most opprobrious epi-
thets and expressions, and assaulting the prosecutor ;
which he was restrained film) chastising on the spot
by the impropriety of being involved in personal con-
test under such circumstances ; he therefore pr.fer-
red the present indictment.
The facts were proved by witnesses, and the De-
fendant having no defence to make, he was instantly
found Guilty, and sentenced to three months
inipri-
sonment in Cold-bath-fields prison.
Saturday Edward Bittern and Edward Clark were.
indicted for stealing a pint of rum, value ten-penae,
the property of a Mr. Bujon.
It appeared that the rum in question b..d been
stolen from a hogshead lying in the West India.
Docks, marked V. G. No. 4, and consigned to
Messrs. Butter and Pilgrim, brokers, for Mr. Bujon,
whose property the hogsheads were.
Mr. ALLEY, for the prisoners, ccintended that the
trespass did not attach to the property, but to the
possession, and the rum in question never having
been in the possession of Mr. Bujon, that therefore
the prisoners could not be properly charged with a
trespass as against him. He knew his Learned Friend
had resorted to this experiment, in consequence of a
defect ia the West India Dock Act, where it had been
omitted to protect property which might come into
the hands of the Company, criminally as well as ci-
villy, by allowing certain individuals to prosecute as
well as to sue and defend.

Mr. GI:liNeY, for the prosecution, argued that the
Dock Company could only be viewed here as the
warehousemen of Mr. Bujon, the proprietor, and that
their possession was to be esteemed his.
Mr. ALLEY, in reply, quoted cases in point which
occurred before the Old Bailey ; but agreed to a ver-
dict of Guilty being taken, the Court reserving con-
sideration of the sentenge till they should have made
up their mind on the point of law. This was accor-
dingly done.
A young boy was indicted for stealing two pair of
stockings and two handkerchiefs, the property of
George Henzell, at Shacklewell Green, Hackney.
The prisoner, it appeared, had been servant to the
prosecutor, whose service he quitted first on the 10th,
• l,lly on the 13th of October. On the 17th, be
ret an officer, having a warrant against his
mastei.'''.7rl3; 'prosecutor, however, took this oppor-
tunity of hiving the prisoner's box searched, and in
it, which was without a lock, or other fastening, were
the stockings and handkerchiefs found.
Among other evidence for the prisoner, consisting
of the most respectable people in the village, a Mt s.
Burgess swore to a fact which occurred in her pre-
sence, a few days previous to the charge in question,
when the prisoner delivered to Mrs. Henzell a bundit:
which he had found in his box, and %%hie]) be said he
did not know how it had got there. Mts. H. then said
it was of no consequence ; she supposed Sally had
put it there, but they Here nothing but rags. When
the present charge was made, Mrs. Burgess called
for Mrs. Henze'', reminded her of this circumstance,
and observed that the articles found in the box when
the charge was given were rags also. The Jury im-
mediately found the prisoner 'Not Guilty. They also
made a subscription among themselves for the poor
boy ; an example which was followed by many per-
sons in Court.

Yesterday Ann Harper, alias Gadyns, a wretched
pauper, was indicted at the prosecution of the Go-
vernors and directors of the poor of the parish of St.
Mary.la-Bonne, for perjury and fraudulently °brais-
ing from the parish the sum of R 8.5 by small sums, at
different times, as a pauper entitled to parish relief,
for the support of a child.
In appeared from the evidence in support of the
prosecution, that the prisoner came before the Board
of Directors in the month of December, 1799, and
claimed relief for her child, stating that about three
years before that time she had married a man of the
name of Gaskyns, is the parish of Rochester, who
had gained a settlement in Mary -la-bonne parish, by
a year's servitude to a gentleman residing in the
neighbourhood of Portman-square. In um sequence
of which settlement, she demanded relief for her child,
which she alledged she had by Gaskyns. This repre-
sentation being credited by the Governors, and after
the prisoner had deposed iyn oath, they ordered her a
weekly allowance accordingly.
From that time down to the month of September last
the prisoner had been receiving parochial aid, to the
amount of £8.5. However, in the month of Septem-
ber the prisoner inadvertently confessed to the Clerk
of the Board, that she never was married in her life,
and that she did not know any man named Gaskyns.
This circumstance being communicated to the Gover-
nors, it was thought ab,clutely necespary to make an
example of the prisoner, in order to prevent future
depredations of a similar kind.
The Parish Clerks of Rochester proved that there
was no entry of any marriage between the prisoner
and a man cf the name of Gaskyns entered on then
books, either before or since the time alluded to.
The prisoner pleaded excessive poverty as the in-
ducement to the step .she had taken, and threw 11,2r-
self on the mercy of the Court.
The Jury found a verdict of Guilty, but with great
humanity, strongly recommended her to mercy.
She was sentenced by the Court to six months im-
prisonment in the House of Correction.

HIGH WATER AT LONDON BRIDGI• J 0-MORROW.
Morning 26 minutes atter 2
Afternoon