Star.
London, England, 1809-11-14 00:00:00

HABEAS CORPUS.

LAIC LVE2LLIGEATE.

ONnrl ymaIy1.10•••••

COURT 0'.7 COANCERT, NOV.
AND tiT 11 Far:`rt'.%X.
prlis Wa, qiietion relative to the division and in-
closure of a corum.in called 11ilhorough I,llvor,
in
Yor7zs'.,'re. This Mora- was enjoFed :is a C.-annum
by a numbcr of adjoh:ing Proprietor:;. some of whom
:ot its division, and others did not. liy an
old deed, it had been at:,reed, that if the Common
should be divided, the division and allotment should
be made in shares, not according to the extent, but
the value of the adj"ining properties ; and it was
now contended by Sir S. Romilly and Mr. Hall, that
as this ratio was quite mice, tain and variable in its
nature, such division could not possibly take place.
The relative value of the adjacent properties never
remained the same one day together, and of necessity
was quite different in the opinion and estimate of any
two individuals. They contended, therefore, that
the Court could not order a division upon the princi-
ple laid down in the deed, on account of its uncer-
t .ty and v:niable :raw c.
011 the other hand, it was contended by Mr. BELL
a lid Mr. A. tn, ihat the Court, in ordering a division
of this kind, had often overcome equal or greater
difikuities than the present. Of this kind was the
division of Cald-Bath-feltis, ordered by Lord Hard-
wicke, where the ground was intersected by water
pips beli:nging to New River Company, of dif-
ferent dirnenslons, and the liberty of laying which
was paid for Accra ding to the size of the Pipes. Not-
withstanchng the great apparent ditlicuity of dividing
this ground into proportionate shares, yet by the inter-
fenence oohe Court this division was at last accom-
plihed.
After hearing the Learned Counsel on both sides,
t7aie Lour Noni,Lon rose at two o'clock to be pre-
sent at the nowaination of Sheriffs in the Exchequer
Chamber.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, NOV. 13.
WA LT ERS V. JOHNSTONE.

Mr. C A itnow Inc ved for a Rule to shew cause why
the Defendant, an Attorney in that Court, shonld
not pay to the Plaintiff the Costs of the Nonsuit which
had been obtained in this case. The plaintiff was a
baker, and the action was brought for the sum of
four guineas for bread furnished to the defendant's
family. Tice plaintiff's attorney called at the defen-
dant's haute for the purpose of sulycenas on his two
nraid servants, who knew of the furnishing of the
bread, but he requested that the subpanas might be
left with himself, and that he would deliver them
to the two girls. It appeared that the defendant did
indeed deliver the notices to the servants, but with
orders, at the same time, ar,t to go till he should tell
them. This he took care to omit to do, and, in con.
sequence, the plaintiff was nonsuited. In these cir-
cumstances, the present must be regarded as a very
lenient application.—Rule granted.

Mr. WEVROUIZN moved -or a Certiorari, to remove
from the ;Middlesex Sessions, into this Court, an in-
dic:ment with which he stood charged for a nuisance
in working a Steam Engine ; the erection of which
had cost him £.5000, the working of it was essential
to his trade as an oil-man ; and whether he had or
bad not a right to work, depended chiefly, as he had
reason to believe, on a point of law, to the determina-
tion of which this Court was peculiarly competent.
Writ graffted.

Mr. JErivrs moved, that a writ of lidless Corpus 1
cormnand.ng Ow Captain of a ship of war at ,Ply
paonth to bring up the body of Jacob Appletwist, a
nazi-•. of Sweden, to be discharged, on the
ground of I.i, not being a subject of the impress ser-
vce, shocld be quashed, on account of its having been
improvicknily issuey.
The COUla asked, whether this motion to quash
Imai founded merely on the affidavit on which the
girt iaurd ?

Mr. duavis said it was not ; but upon circumstances
which had been disclosed since. Such as, that the in-
dividual who was the object of the writ was a priso.
ner of war, taken in a French ship in the East Indies,
since which he had entered into the service of this'
cotintry.
The COURT asked why these circumstances might
not be returned on the Habeas Carpus, instead of ma-
king this motion to quash it ?
Mr. J rims said, there was no other than that of
t' se expence of bringing the man up from Plymouth,
srliich could not be avoided by any other mode than
that of quashing the writ. The Learned Gentleman
;hen quoted several eases, in which writs of Habeas
Corp:: had been quashed, under circumstances ana-
kozous to the present ; but they were all cases in
swEieh the application to quash the writ depended on
the ground on which it had issued, not on circum-
stances disclosed after the issuing of the writ.
The COURT, therefore, held, that a writ of Habeas
C.;.-ilus may net be quashed for having been issued
trnorovidently, on any ground disclosed subsequently_
r. its icsning ; and that in every such case, the writ
smist be returned, and the special matter indorsed
Vpr,il it, in order that the Court may determine whe-
ther the individual who is the object of it shall be dis-
rhat ged t,r remanded :—Motion refused.

,
• .r.ag00r55aw..a7.m......?...........4
. -
.I..iilr iNI:2I.I,IGE I
r, ...._..__.-......•
A" i (701310' Og CiIANCERT,
AI A li, 11 AS H oT 11 t:lui s'. 1.•
71is .cat, .t qiitotionrehnive to t
closure el a conim•ar called 11i11)
1 or7o,:,'rc. This Mora- was enjoy
b: :t ntimla-r of adjoh:ing Proprieti
I wis:ied :or its division, and other
old deed, it had been agreed, the
should be divided, the division ant
be made in shares, not according
the value of the adjoining proper
now contended by Sir S. Romilly
I as this ratio was quite uncertain a
1 : nature, such division could net I
; The relative value of the adjacca
remained the same one day togeth,
. . was quite different in the opinion
two individuals. They contend
the Court could not order a divisi
pie laid down in the deed, on a
t .i .ty and wliiable maw c.
1 011 the other hand, it was cont
•
i and Mr. As- % n, that the Court, in
1 of this kind, had often overcon)
difficulties than the present. Of
$.
0
i . division of* Cild-Bath-felds, ord;
wicke, where the ground was in
II pipes belcogiog to the New Rive
! ferent dimensions, and the Tiber
,' was paid for Accra ding to the siz
1 withstamUng the great apparent e
this ground into proportionate sha
il felence oche Court this division
plilled.
After hearing the Learned C(
t7Aie Lotto CH ASCU:IA.(IH rose at tv
t sent at the noutination of Sheriff
Chamber.
cOuitT OF KING'S BEN
WALTERS V. JOHN'S
Mr. CAlinOW moved for a Ru
the Defendant, an Attorney in
not pay to the Plaintiff the Costs
4 had been obtained in this case.
baker, and the action was brut
four guineas for bread furnishc
family. Tice plaintiff's attorney
dant's haute for the purpose of s
maid servants, who knew of tl:
bread, but he requested that the
• left with himself, and that he
to the two girls. It appeared a
indeed deliver the notices to the
orders, at the same time, not to
them. This he took care to om
sequence, the plaintiff was none
,
, cumstances, the present must be
lciiemt application.—Rule grant
THE KING V. H
1 Mr. WEVROURN moved -or a i
1 • from the ;Middlesex Sessions, it
l • dic:ment with which he stood cl
in working a Steam Engine ;
had cost him £.5000, the workii
to his trade as an oil-man ; and
had not a right to work, depeni
reason to believe, on a point of I
Won of which this Court was peg
Writ granted.
• HABEAS cotta
Mr. Jtatvzs moved, that a 1
coromand'og tho Captain of a
month to bring up the body of
saikr, nati-e of Sweden, to 1
ground of I.k. not being a subje
i . vice, should be quashed, on acct
11 -I improvidently issuey.
. i
1 InThe COUHT a kod, whether
as fouoded merely on the of
girt kstied ?
Mr. jEkvii laid it was not ;13
I • which had been di-.closed since.
i . dividual who was the object o
me:- of war, taken in a French sl,
, i
since wh:ch he had entered ini
coliatry.
d 'Lite CounT asked why these
not be returned on the Habeas I
1 l'
king this motion tc quash it ?
Mr. Joavis said, there was
t'•e expence of bringing the ma
. .
iv1.1.:11 could not be avoided by
! that of qua,hing the writ. Th
Irn qiuitA ,everal eases, in
Cori:.: had been quashed, and
i 10 Zi nIS to the present ; but th
•
IO ;i v:i.i.:ll the appii,ottion to quash
oi i rite mound on which it had is:
I'' 0
-st.ii.ce..s di,,cb)sed after the issui
The Coutn, therefore, held,
•.2 i ! C:ofais mat' not be quashed f
:, • -- • I -'y ground
sroorovo, en o , on any
iif i. to its ksoing ; and that in eve.
:4 ; ' 311WIt be returned, and the sl
I..iti i two it, in order that the Corr