Star.
London, England, 1825-08-02 00:00:00

PP

'u:-

I

SUMAIEE A SSIZPS.
EXETER JULY tte.
MANSLAUGHTER IN A PRIZE FIGHT.
John Rivet, William Rivet, John Morris, and William
ten:.;ort, all labourers, and Mr 1 homers- lic:rris, vete-
r'l ary surgeon, were charged with manslaughter, in
killing William R;chards.
Mr. LUDLOW said, that the substance of the charge
was, that the prisoner, John Morris, had killed the de-
ceased ; and that the others were aiding and abetting
hint in so doing. This WAS cite of those unfortunate
cases which arose from a pitched battle, and they would
be told by his Lordship whether the persons aiding in
such cases were not themselves liable to be tried as
principal. in the offence. On the 15th of May, Morris
and the deceased met at a public-hoibe at Shifnal, and
the deceased deposited one pound, and Morris deposited
two pounds, to abide the event of the fight, one of the
Rivets and Clemson acting as seconds, and Mr. Harris
lending them a field to fight in, and handing round a
glove to gather money for the combatants. S xty
rounds were fought without any decisive result, it being
put an end to by the bystandev, and the deposit re-
turned, each man taking his own share. The deceased
received some severe blows in the fight, and after that
he went borne very ill, and became convulsed, and
died the next morning. The great quesion would
be the time of the death of the deceased? and lie
eould, for that purpose, shew that be bad received
blows, and that he had returned home sober. It would
also appear that both externally and internally there
were mar ks of the blows. He understood that it was to
be contended that the deceased died from natural causes;
if they thought so, they would acquit the prisoners.—
The prosecution was directed by the Magistrates, but
was not, he believed, in accordance with the feelings of
the town of Shifnal.
Several witnesses proved the participation of the
prisoners in the fight. It appeared by the evidence of
medical men, by whom he was examined after death,
that the deceased died in consequence of a rupture of
an artery in tie head, which caused an effusion of
blood upon the brain. There was evidence to prove
that the deceased had drank a small quantity of gin
and a quart of beer after the fight. Several medical
men gave it as their opinion that the blows received at
the fight were not the cause of the rupture of the artery.
o,her medical men gave a different opinion.
/Jr. Justice BIIRROUGH said, that the question was, whether the
deceased died of the blows received in the fight? His Lordship
recapitulated the evidence.
After a deliberation, the foreman of the Jury stated. that they
were of opinion that t!..e deceased did nut die of the blows.
Mr. Justice Beatiounn—Then, Gentlemen, you must say the
prisoners are not guilty.
The Jury then Acquitted the prisoners.
There was another indictment against the prisoners, charging the
offence as an affray, but this was traversed by the prisoners to the
neat Assizes. On this charge they were admitted to bail.
• JULY 30.
Richard Baker was indicted for having, on the 21st
of May, and other subsequent days, feloniously as-
saulted, known, and abused Emma Lavillen, a child
under tenlears of age, at Plymouth.
The prisoner was a man of disagreeable and disgust-
ing appearance, carrying on the business of a grocer
in a small way—a sort of I,4lipop dealer—in James.
street, Plymouth. The child's father was a hair-dresser
in the same town. She gave her evidence in the clear-
est manner, but at the same time as reluctantly and
modestly as the disgusting nature of the prisoner's
offence admitted.
Her mother, a woman of appearance and manners
above her present station, proved the child's age to he
within ten years, the standard which made the plea of
conseot of no effect. The prisoner's own admission to
the gaoler of Plymouth, during his confinement there,
was aho proved. The prisoner told him that the child
was a crinseating party—that she came to his shop—
that he invited her into a room behind it, where, with
her ersn assistance, he committed the offence. He (the
g i3lcr) held out neither hope not reward to the prisoner
when he told him these facts.-
The Learned JUDGE advised the Jury to dismiss from
their minds every feeling of prejudice or disgust which
the horrid nature of this crime was calculated to pro-
duce against the prisoner, and to decide eccording to
the evidence. His Lordship also reprobated the practice,
new growing so prevalent among constables and gaolers,
of extracting from prisoners admissions, afterwards to
be advanced in evidence against them on their trials.
The Jury found the prisoner 'Guilty.
:tlg. Ems, Counsel fur the'priruer' took an objection to the
manner in which the indictment was framed. Ile did Ibis with a
view to move nn it in arrest of judgment.
The Learned JUDGE, after hearing Counsels arguments at length,
and after consulting hii brother Judge, over-ruled the objection;
and then, in a vet)? solemn address to the prisoner, passed on him
the sentence of Deuth.
William /taker, aged 67. was indicted for felqniously
killing and slaying Elizabeth, his wife, on the 4th 01
Apr a last, at the parish of Linston, in this county.
From the evidence, it appeared that the woman was
of a most violent temper, and had quarrelled with the
prisoner on the morning of the 4th, when she got into a
ter: ibis paslon. Again between two and three o'clock,
she quarrelled with him, and lie gave her a blow on
the head, by which she tell. At eleven o'clock the same
night she died, and on opening her head some extra-
vasated blood was found on the right hemisphere of the
brain. Tire blow was given on that side.
Mr. Jacnbu3 Butter, the surgeon, was of opinion that the blow
was the proximate cause of the death.
Other parts of the evidence strewed that the, woman
was subject to apoplectic fits. and this, added to the
violent rite to which she wrought herself, was supposed
to produce such a violent eacitation as "night have
caused the bursting of a blood-vessel. It was also proved
that Mr. Jacob Butler, a surgeon, and father of Jacobus,
N 4 Lc) saw the deceased, but was not then in Court, gave
it as his opinion that the blow was ton slight to occa-
sion death.
The duty Acquitted the prisoner.
VORK, JGLY
STENIENSON v. ay.:NS:TT AND C,THERS.

This was an action brought by the plaintiff; the
`.!ptity Register of the West !tiding, v.) recover com-
t, t,;ation in damages for an injury sustained by him,
in. consequence of the upsetting of the Ebor coach,
against the defendants, proprietors of that coach, run-
ning between Wakefield and York.
Verdict for the plaintiff— Damages £lOO,
The Assizes terminated to-day at eleven o'clock. The map coo-
riaed of the rape has been respited.
At Shrewsbury Assizes, Mr. Thos. Hardwick, .aged
16, son of a respectable Solicitor in Bridgenorth, was
tried for a libel on William Lionel Lambert, of the same
place. The libel WAS contained in some doggrel verses,
published and supposed to be written, bythe defendant.
v, hick accused the prosectitor of hypocrisy, and 0(
havitig been gulity of sublimation of perjury, in the
prosecution of a game-keeper, for assaults be had cot*
rated oa two men, and of.which he was found Unary.

Mr. Baron GARROW, Wire whom the case was tried.l
strongly recommended an amicable adjustment, and the,
prosecutor offered to consent to a verdict of acquittal,
on an apology being made, and his costs paid.
Mr. Cnftwoon, who was Counsel for the defendant,
said his client was ready to make the apology ; but his
father refused to pay any costs. The trial, in c •ase-
quence. proceeded, and the publication of the libel by
the defendant, whJ had givers copies of it to several
persons, was clearly proved. A very few lines, as a
specimen of the defendant's poetry, we are satisfied will
be sufficient for our reader;. After celebrating some
other of his townsmen, the Poet says of the prosecutor:
Another chap there is in store,
As great a one as him before,
Lasupet in name, though no renown,
For which well challenge all the town;
Hint all Bridge North do fairly hate
Because for all he lies in wait.

The libel was contained in the following lines, which imputed
subornation of perjury to the prosecutor :
For to outdo poor Herbert quite,
Lampet told Brosnley Jones to swear
Before the ensuing Sessions were,
All kinds of oaths and perjury,
In order Bob might poisoned be.
Mr. CvawooD took an objection to the record, in which l e al-
leged the libel was not correctly set out, and solicited his Lord-
ship's inspection of both.
Dlr. Baron GAKROW sail, he did not think it was any part of a
Judge's duty to decipher noti,ense.
Mr. Cuswoon addressed the Jury, and contended that the pub-
lication was not a libel.

Baron Gwastow told the Jury they were the judges in the
caw, but in his opinion it was a libel.
The Jury deliberated a few minutes and found the defendant
Guilty. He will be brought up for judgment next Term.