Star.
London, England, 1823-02-04 00:00:00

• If
„ FEMALE f:t.SHIONS. FOR FEBRUARY.

• - CALL Thtass.—Dress of Urling's patent lace over white satin ;
the lace dress ala Franchise, made shorter than the satin slip ; at
the bottom of which is a handsome folding of satin, surmounted
by bouquets of roses and ears of corn. At the bottom of the
late dress is a full serpentine trimming of chevaus de (rise; and
between each wave, bouquets the same as those on the satin..
Corsage of white satin and lace, trimmed, with short sleeves to
correspond with the skirt. The hair arranged in the style of
Charles the Second's Court, 'and erowred with a white plume.
Necklace and ear-rings of fine pearls rich armlets of gold, white
satin shoes, and white kid gloves.
OPERA DRESS.—Dress of lemon coloured gossamer satin,

trimmed with white crape or gauze with rauleauz of white sa-
tin, in a very unique and elegant manner. The body of the dress
simply ornamented at the bust; and the short sleeves formed of
quillings of white blond, falling over each other. I-lead-dress,
ala Claude, formed of fine net, and roses without foliage. Am-
b necklace and ear-Pings.--Nero Larla'S Magazine.

In Ash mote's MS. Diary of his Life is the following
entry 1657, Oct. 8. The cause between• me and
•my wife was heard, when Mr. Serjeant Maynard ob-
served to the Court, that there' were ;800 sheets-of
depositions on my wife's part, and. not one word
proved -against me of using her ill,. nor over giving,
her a bad or provoking word!" . ..; y ~f(, •.,
. smart repartee was given the.other day, at.
place in the Trongate, Glasgow, where same repairs
were being made on the pavement, acid a very COti-^,
fifici. space was left for the lieges to walk upon: abeasi-,
tilul .young lady was met at this narrow spot by two,
gentlemen (one of them -an exquisite Corinthine)+
44 I protest.," said the.dandy, 44 this place iSas earrow.
passage" (the name of a narrow lane:id,
Glasgow).—" Xes," said his companion, 44 and. like
Bala.km, rm.' *ogress is arrested by an elngel.'"-,-
• a True," said the =lady, looking him- full in the•face,
' at•the xamM time neatly past. him, "and lam
, stopt by the Ass!" 7.. • - . .
• e ..ter day , an Inipi6t. was- held at, the Butslp's'
Heed, in the Nesir'lloasipte inirsire into a case of al-
leged chili murder, in Gee's4court, i‘lary-la-hoone,
- and which had preriously.undergone an investigation
at Bow-street. The Jury, after a long investigation,
..retUrnesi a verdict, in these words :--41 That Margaret
Mearney
.is guilty of tlvi. crime of -;uncealing,.the
• l'irth.-osf an infant child, of which she had been,deli-
'4-red ; and that a childiwas-faund dead in the house
seven months afterwards; hut that there is no proof
that this 'was the sane child.w. . .
Wednesday meriting agirl.;.aged 17, in the servicel
of a stone-mason, near • Burton-crescrut, committed
Infanticide. The girl had been inset vice only three
months, but after being there a week or two, her Mis-
tress thought she was m the tinnily way, and 'commit-
"heating. her. suspiCions 'tuber. husband, the girl was
examined by aDoctor, whO was also of the same
opinion, but the girl denied it. .OlubseqUently, she
was spoken to by her cousin, who persuaded her to
'go home, but she still denied the fact, and refused to
• *go home, alleging that her f4tlier had a large family.
..On Wednesday morning, -about *eight 'o'elOck, her
mistress went into. her room and• round he(in bed
she at the time tomplahred'of a violent pain. in the
chest. . Her mistress, -codiridtting her in lab Our- sent
.IfOr her aunt; .tint before 'theattiv:ektheYbild 'was
born, no perion being with: theilitkalbe,.foom:4
:the time. Thethild was alive and perfect in every..
• respect, but it bled very Mitch at thy neck. 'the
'Wounds on the neck.afterwards goChTaCk. '3lr.Wate-
field, a medical geotleman,Wittiet4,for? and the neat
. *norning he found.the child detld, with a deal -or cos--
gealed about the mouth 4nd' itkiSte,llsll.Sif some
icratches-an the neck, produced VtgateTitryig.4`ol'o-
. lepCe.,.: • lie was of opinion tniANitence of
• such injuries. On Saturday evening an &pest sat
• on the body at'tte Skinners Arms, Judd-street; Bur-
' ten-crescent, and the Jul, 'on the evidence 'adduced
. betot.e them, returned a verdict of" Wilful Mtirder"
against the girl, but were unanimously of opinion
there was a great neglect on the part of thelnlstress
- in suffering so ',nuns a girl to be left alorie.--The•
Coroner afterwards issued his *are.** for-her deten-
tion, and removal tOliei4gate as soon at sheds suf-
ficiently recovered; she: witnesses:were•boundTstiver.
• An.inqUest •
" wits'hild Yesierday; at the Steel-yard
'Colree-hmise, .I.lliPer'Thairnes-street, bbdy of
John Langton, a.bargeman, Who;.on:TnesdaS Morn-
ing last, gof out of - bed to look at• theice, 'which
• threatened-to=4l the barge adrift, and.felroverboard:
The body 'found updl .4atiird4 ifternoim,'
when a• sherniaii,iibile'dragginglOr'cOils, close to
LOnsion Bridge, honked up 'the deteated by: his leg.
Verdict" Accidental .D&th.''• "1 '7
• " '
'An "Inqiiest 'Waited: ai •SeTholtiatre 11.1, on
the„;body of 'Cafliethie,,- dalrghtei Of 'Mr. Prupteiti a
:•14thterman; bf 'Myer. Road, ..Who, ins atteMpting to
ieath her' Mothei's watch froin the mantle-prates.set
Frei tii'her Cloittisi'hy Which the- was SO much Injured
"Its:tti7Cipiihki death: Veicifci44 ActiefenW Death."
• " Hilo WM4O4* lbiot while sliding at Loosed
thrOulttillielteflnd-*;tfor of going home hi that;
state; lieestiti'deut atotiiiiterable time, tht.Consequenie
of which was that one of his feet became frozen, •and.,
he was obliged to suffer amputation.

LAW INTEIARa 7'
_ .
tteE-011Ascnsoirs COUlt-Tr;DRIJA.RY 3.
illawaßT IP. STUART AND magas.,
The Viee-Catidcat,mid delivered his judgment in
tith causito.day. lie said therigirere two questions
before the Court—the first, whether the plaintiff was
wit ~3i~ ca3Fon The Coo to r-i-declaration respect-
ing the right of pre-emption which he claimed—the
second, vthatlfratsl.edavation of-tire Court should
be. It appeared, said, his I:l9nottr, at the plaintiff;
William Stewart, In the months of Mircti and April,
1819, purchased from the defendants, Daniel Stuart
and Thomas Street, two shares fro* eacli, of the
Courier newspaper, .with a right to the profit arising
on each share from the mont4 of. October preceding ;
and in the month of July follOvriag :they required
:41him that he should sign a' leeei_pt for his share of
the profits, in terms,.which :id effect, amounted to
a renunciation of the right ofire-eMption which he
claimed. Under such circumstances he was en-
tided to call on the Court to declare whether he were
eatiqed to the right he claimed. It appeared that,
prior to the year 1808, the defendants, Daniel Stuart
and Thomas Street, were proprietors of the Courier
newspaper, and in that year, for the first time, they
executed a deed of copartnership, by which they
divided the whole property of the Paper into twenty-
four shares,' of which each was dn." Troprietor of
twelve; and it was agreed that neither themselves,
nor any person who might become a proprietor,
should sell a share to a stranger without, first offer-
ing it to every other proprietor, in the order of the!
share he held ; for which purpose the shares were!
numbered from one to twenty-four. No sale took
place under that agreement till 1819, when each of
the patties sold two shares to Mr. William Stewart,
the-plaintiff, for the sum 2,000/. each share, which
were assigned to him in as full ant ample a manner
as 'they were enjoyed by the defendants ; and the
-question was, whether that assignment did not in-
clude the right of pre-emption created by the deed of
1808. The deed of 180 S was a coJe of rights and
laws agreed to by the defendants for their mutual
benefit, arid the gos ornment of those to whom they
should assign a part of their shares ; every subse-
quent proprietor was to enjoy the rights and privi-
leges agreed on as belonging to the then- proprietors
by that deed, unless by the deed creating him a pro-
prietor,those rights and privileges were limited.—
There was no such limitation in the deed of assign.
'tent to the plaintiff, and therefore he was entitled to
the tight of pre-emption. Ou the question of costs.
'as it was clear that the right of pre-emption was not
'mentioned by the parties at the time of the sale,
and also that the defendants had not that right ire
rcontemplation, lie would leave each party to pay his
!own costs r but•thecross-bill filed by the defendants,
!praying that diesale-of the plaintiff -might be re-
scinded, must bb dismissed with costs.
• 'COMM. 010.)E1kG43 13ENCII, iEBRUARY 3.

••'. ditIMINAL
-• iir..Mivitky'a? chewed cause against a Rule oh-
Aainett•by- Mr. Scarlett, why a criminal information
isho4ld-114ft.issue against two persons of the names of
.1-largrivre and Mott, for the publication of a series of
libeli Brigiktba Herald; also, for circulating a
printed notice iit the town of Brighton, threaten-
ing to. take into considerwsion the conduct of the
'Magistrees.. .
clea The Lono.ClllE, Jusrica demon the matter

could not be brsnightto an-amicable adjustment?
• .11tir. MARNYAT propeedell.—lo the course of the
several publications it would be shewn, on reference
to the files of the Brigldon Herald, that the defend-
ants positively.:disclainned any intention of reflecting
on the -conduct of the: Magittreurs.
. Mr. SCARLET HAMA ;that his clients were not
then present,: but he.: as Cognsel, would under.
take to say, they. wouldl ba,willing to accede to•any
suggestion- that should.- coine.frern the.court. The
Learned Counsel could, baly.express.a wish that the
further discussioi might be allowed to 'stand over
until a communication should,take place bets een the
parties, whether they would accede to the suggestion
of the amicable adjustment proposed by the Court.
He believed the only object of the Nl4gistrates, in the
present application, was in support_of their autho-
rity, and in order to protect that authority from a re-
petition of public insult.
The Count pertnitted the motion to stand over, in
hopes that in the meantime the parties might think the
better of it, and come to some private adjustment.
BLASPHEMY.—THE KING V. SUSANNAH WRIGHT.

It was expected this defendant would be brought
up for judgment to-day; but by mutual consent' it
was postponed Until Thursday next.
JUDGZIENT.THE KING 'll. JOHN IRVING.

The indictment was read against the defendant.
who Was.corivicted of bargaining for the sale of a
place in the'Excise. .
The affidavit of. facts of the prosecutor, Ashburn,
was reacLliy the Officer of the Court.
Aniffidisvit'of the defendant was next put in, set-
ting forth that the deponent supported himself by the
sale of tea and tobacco at Bethnal green ; that the
prosecutor applied to the deponent, offering 901. to
proture him the situation of waiter in the Excise-
Office, and thacdsponent referred him to a person
named Goodhall, who had undertaken to procure
the place in -question ; that deponent signed a promis-
snit note for the796l. paid by Ashburn to Goodhall,
but did not participate in the profits of the. transac-
tion; that, being threatened to be arrested by Mr.
Ashburn, he gave him tAsliburn) household goods of
the value oflo/.-that depooe!tris very poor, and' has
no means tOsupport-hiniself,othis wife atid family,
who must go io the parish if 'her was sent to prison.
The ATTORNET.GratIttit, spoke in aggravation.
Alr—Aranprws, jun. addressed the Court in mid-
gation,.and submitted that the defendant's sole object
in: -being connected with .the.Goodhalls in this trans-
action, was with a view of obtaining, by this means,
payment of monies which. the Goodhalls, the other de-
ftndants, owed him.. The defendant gave up the bed
-og::whiclS he slept to satisfy the promissory note,given
,to Ashburn. Under these circumstances the Learnfd
Gentleman submitted the defendant bad dose.all4a;'
his power. to indemnify the . party alleged ;to have
been defrauded ; and, there being no ditect tevldence
of the defendant's being ta party to the, fraud, he'
trusted that the Coutt. would award. „a xery slight
pmoishinetit, as being all that wwtetluixesktta.iatuiT
,thxxigour,cl the law..
Ale Bich having conferred for, some mounts, • -
Mr. Justice BAYLZY passed the sentence of the

taut on the defendant,- who, he observed, had been
intitictel iiiiinilitdictment at the suitef awe SWliner
General. It *eared du% Joh* C.:rll-don 214,111;
very indiscreetly advertise or app,ointmenOvb
the defendant came forwd tji prsicufe. .it wairk
Very serious offence mulOt an Act of Parliamenlo--
The Legislature thought very Wisely that a man *ha
offered a bribe to-obtain a situazion..utould..have
course to dishonest means to reimburie himself. The
defendant had applied to the Goodhalls himself, for
a Govetoment situation, and was disappointed, before
he introduced Ashburn to Goodhall, whom defend-
ant represented as holding a situation in the Treasury,
which was false. The defendant represented his
having a family; he ought therefore to have avoided
bringing them into distress. The Court viewed the
pecuniary circumstances of the defendant, so as not
to pass any fine, hut sentenced him to six months im-
prisonment in the llouse of Correction.
TUE KING 17. FROST.

• Mr. PULLER moved for the judgMent of the Court
on the defendant, who was found guilty before Baron
Garrow, at the Monmouth Assizes, of publishing se-
veral libels on the character of Mr. Protheroe, a re-
spectable Attorney, pf Newport.
The defendant accordingly arpeared on the floor,
and Judge BEST read the report of the trial.
-The affidavit of the prosecutor was read in aggra-
vation ; after which
The Lamm Cum. JusTicE observed, that the Jury
were vaiting for the sitting at Nisi Prima, and the
Court could riot proceed further this day.
The defendant was remanded in the custody-of the
Marshal of the King's Bench, to be brought up again
this day week.