Star.
London, England, 1807-06-08 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGkNCE.
IH SONTINOSTION PROM THE PRECEDING PAGE.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, JUNE 4. . •
THE RING V. MEMEL LOVELL.
Mr. GARROW moved the fentence of the Codrt
upon the Defendant who had admitted judgment to
go by default, on an information filed againtt hint
for a libel upon Peter Climate, Efq. a Co-partner in
the firm of Media. Lang/ton, 'rowgood, and Co. of
Clement's lane.
The affidavit of Mr. Cazalet Rated, that the De-
fendant was an infurance broker, and having received
;nitrations from a foreign hook, of the name of
Provitte and Co. in the year 1794, he preluded a
policy upon a cargo of fugars !hipped in the Dame
Martha, for 'the fignatere of the Defendant. With
'hie requeft, Mr. Catalet complied, to the extent of
fool. The cargo of the vetiel, in its way to this
country, received damage, and an average loft was
claimed 'of the per fons who had underwritten the
policy, by the owners. Moll of thole whole names
appeared upon the infirument, fatisfied the demand,
among whom were the executors of the Profecutor's
brother Mr. Willam Cazalet. When, however, the
Profecutor was called upon to pay his proportion upon
the film which he had underwritten, he refuted to
fatisfy the claim, Aligning as his reafon. that a fettle:
ment had taken place between him and
.a Mr. Du-
bois refpeding the infurance, and that his name ought
to have been crated from the policy. By this non-
compliance, the Defendant conceived, that the houfe
for which he a.fted was intened, and a correfpondence
was entered into between him and the Profecutor,
the fnrmer thinking that Mr. Cazalet only employed
the affedged fettlement as a pretext to avoid the pay-
Ment of the average. After numerous letters had
been written by both parties without any ultimate
explanaticn being given, the Defendant addrefred the
following note to the Profecutor:
" Sta,—.Previous to a general circulation of the
inclufed papers refpeding the infurance, I think it
proper to fend one for- your perufal, and (ball wait
for your reply until Friday next. I am, Sir,
48 Your humble fervant,
78, john-ftteer, Fitzroy fquare. v. Lovit L."
One of the incloted papers alluded to in the above
note appeared to be in the form of a hand bill, which
had likewife been interted in a newfpaper, and purpor-
ted to give notice of a file by public andion, if not
difpoted of fooner by private contralti at Garraway's
eoffee•houfe,on a day mentioned, of a claim of 1461. as.
creative of intereft from the year 1794, upon Peter
Cant alet,Efq. After Rating at length the nature of this
demand, it concluded with the talloriing expreffl, n
e. The above claim oiling out of a policy of infur-
ante got a foreign merchant rtirel, fettled by all
thdintriters but Mr. Cazalet, who has hitherto
tvaded piyineut by retorting to the meaneft fubtcr
Asp and claleanet7.l* The other papers contained in
the 110 W were general printed flatements of the na-
ture of the tranfaftion, reprefenting the conduct of
the profecutor id >t light highly derogatory to his
eharietet.
The di urt engttired what were the words charged
to be libellous, and it was anteered, that the words
charged in the information were, " who has hitherto
evaded payment by retorting to the meaneft fubter-
rage and chicanery."
The affidavit of Mr. Cazalet likewife contained
various other letters, written by the defendant to dif-
ferent gentlemen in the City, which alto were in-
tended to injure the profecutor in the opinion of the
world. One of them, in particular, was addretred to
a gentleman of the name of Welton, in which the
defendant, after having given a general outline of
the tranfadion, wrote as follows: " If Mr. Cazalet
thinks to vindicate his innocence by his fortune, he
will be molt egregionfly minaken; but I know full
well, that be will preferve his fortune at the expense
of his honour."
The affidavits of Mr. Jafeph Kay, the Solicitor for
the profecution, and Mr. Peter Hyatt, confirmed the
flatement made by Mr. Cazalet.
The firft affidavit read, on the part of the defen-
dant, was his own. It entered much at length into
the general nature of the trantadion, and traverted
the Itatement made by the profecutor. The objed
of it was to prove, that no fettlement had been made
by Mr. Cazalet with Mr. Dubois; but, on the dm-
trary, that the average lots upon the turn underwritten
by him was Hill due to the hoqfc of Provitte and Co.
Affidavits were likewife read from James Dubois,
Efq. and Mr. Wm. Cazland, to corroborate the Elate-
went made by the defendant.
The ATTORNEY Get/Last felt it a painful talk to
addrefs the Court on the part of the profecution. ft
would, however, be his duty to make forme obleiva-
Lions upon what the defendant had faid, what he had
written, and what he had fworn ; for they were all
contradictory to each other. If the Learned Counfel
might be allowed to judge fiom the condutfl of
men in the ordinary intercourfe of life, he muff fup-
pole that Mr. Lovell had a deep intereft in the reco-
very of this money from Mr. Cazalet, for he was lure
that no good man would have condefcended to con
dud himfelf as the defendant had done; and he was'
convinced that none but a bad man.unlefs he had been
greatly interelled, couldhave ventured to placehimfelf
in fuch a fituation. It appeared that a .policy had been
fubfctibed by the profecutor and fume others, and in
eonfequence of a lots, a demand was made upon thole
who had underwritten for a per ceatage. This claim
Mr. Cazalet had tefilled, on the ground of a fettle
meat with a Mr. Dubois, about which there could be
no difficulty, becaufs happily it was in writing, and
ligned by that Gentleman. In favour of the 'Defen-
dant, Mr. Dubois was not unwiUing to go as far as
truth would permit, in the affidavit he had made.--'
Even the libel already publifhed did not feemtr have
fatisfied the mind of the Defendant, for in the year
4504 he profeffed his intention of publilbing fuch a
'calumny as would effectually ruin the charm der of
the profecutor. The prcrent information was not ex-
hibited fur the purpofe of injuring, in the finalleft de
gree, the Defendant: al•hough Mr. Lovell's °tied
was to traduce the protectstor, Mr.Cazalet's with was
so vindicate his own, without atperfing the charader
of another.
Mr. GA tt ROW, on the fr.me tide, contented hinsfelf
with making this tingle obtervation r " The and ag•
7Tav .tiog fad in this cafe was, that after the Defin.
slant found that he could not enforce his demand in a
Conn ti Ju(Uce, he reforted to the expedient of at.

tacking the Prclecutor's eh:rater, to extort payment
by intimidation."
Mr. TA DDY iv ifiled no more than that jullice Mould
be done to the Profecutor. From the year t 794 to
the prefent time, Mr. Caaalett had been fubjed to
the libels of the Defendant, a fpeeimen of which had
been read to the Court in a letter to Mr. Welton.—
The offence offered to the Profecutor had been pUblie,
and all that was defired was, that the vindication
might be as public as the afperfion.
Mr. DAMMIL contended for the Defendant, that
at lea there exifled a probability that no fettlement,
with refped to the policy, bad taken place ; fur it was
the known caftans when any payment had been
made, to (tribe the name of the underwriter from the
policy, whereas no cancellation of it, with refped to
the Profecutor, appeared upon the face of the indru-
ment. At any rate, it was evident, that a claim did
exit*, and in the opinion of the Learned Counfel, the
demand for the payment was juk and the refufal
improper, efpecially when all the eo-fobfetibers had
fettled the lots. The condud of the Defendant was'
not to be jullified, but he hoped there were fume cis-
curaftances of mitigation.
Load ELIANBOROOGH...'" To be fare it mull not
be endured, that any man (hall be driven to the pay-
ment of any demand, which could not be enforced in
a Court of Law, by the lath of a libeller. Let the
Defendant Rand committed, and be brought up on
Sattirdzy the 13th Want."

JUNK 5.

THB ICINC V. ABRAHAM NICAAN AND ANN CRANK.

This was an indictment againft Abraham Hearn
and Ann, the wife of John Crann, and the
anent had two counts—one for again; ihr, and beating
.Ann Haverton, with intent to kill and murder her.
Another was an affault with intent to rasa her;
tried before Mr. Jullice Hearn, at the Taft Affiaes at
Ann Haverton had taken a place in the waggon
of which Hearn was the driver, and his brother was
the owner. Ann Crann was a paffenger alto, and
there was a perfon of the name of Hewett, alfillant
to Hearn the driver. The unfortunate young woman
who was affaulted, being auleep in the fore part of the
waggon, was awakened by Hearn pulling her about
and behaving rudely to her ; (Le refilled him as well
as the could, but became afterwards fo terrified that
(he did not know what happened to her, except that
the was taken out of the waggon about eleven
o'clock at night. She was taken down into a lane,
and led by the arm by Hearn, where the was beat
cruelly, kicked upon her fide, and cruelly abufed,
and there left by Hearn. The mail coach guard
difcovered, about three in the no sting, by his'
lamps, where the lay ; he took her up as the lay al-
ma lifelefs, he rut her into a waggon, by which the
was carried within three miles and a half of Colchef-
' ter and was fuppofed then to have fallen out, for
fhe was afterwards found between three and four
hundred yards from the road. She was then brought
to Colchefter, where the had the alfittance of a me-
dical gentleman ; i,y whole evidence it appeared.
that her perton had been violated, and that the had
been cruelly beat. Ann Crann was heard to fay to
her, that if the was not filent the (hould be put cut of
the waggon. She loft her fenfes, and has never gained
them lince, although this was in Joly talk. F,,r eight
or nine weeks her life was defpaired of, and dunng
that period Hewett was in cutlody, on fufpicion of
having committed the outrage ; but for all that time
there was r.o opportunity of inquiring properly into
the particulars, until the unfortunate woman had an
interval in which the had the power of telling what
the reconciled of the Rory ; and the reafon why
Hewett did not relate the whole at firft, as he did at
laft, was, that he was under the influence of his em.
ployer, the owner of the waggon, Hearn's brother.
Hewett did not know that the poor girl was left in
the line he thought the bad been brought in again
with Hearn and Crann ; but after they had gone
fome miles tot ward, he went into the waggon and
milled her, upon which he propofed to Hearn to take
a horfe and go back to fetch her. Hearn Paid, never
mind, people will think it was fome body die did it;
and Lid, if the witnefs wanted any money he lhould
have it ; and defired him never to mention it.

The perfon in whore waggon the poor girl was
brought within three miles of Ipfwich, never after-
wards was met with. The unfortunate female was
of weak intelleds, and had been drinking a little.
Lord Eta.zszoioncst took notice of the favage
inhumanity of Hearn, who refuted to let Hewett go
back fur this helplefs victim of his brutal lull and
cruelty. This poor female was infirm in her under-
amusing, and that infirmity was increafed by drinking
on the road, and of that infirmity a bafe and cruel
advantage had been taken. The Jury believed the
evidence, and therefore flound Hearn and Crann guilty
en the fecund count in the indiftment, which WAS the
aleph with intent to raving ; and they came now to
receive the judgment of the Court.
Mr. Guxszt who had been of Count's! for the
defendants at Se trial, fuggetled that the matter had
appeared very doubtfol to the Learned Judge at the
trial as to who prepttrited this *ft ; tut the verdia
was now fatisfa4tory to the Court ; his province was
at an end ; it was impiEble for him to fay any thing
in rapport of &eh perfons.
Mr, Huvraan Paid a few words for the profecution.
Mr. Plaice Gaose pronuoneed the judgment of
the Court on the prifoners as foflows:
Abraham Hearts, and Ann, the wife of John
Crann, you have been convicted, on very tiger evi-
dence, of which the Jury were the ledges. That
evidence has been believed, and I agree with the Jury
in the refult of it. What we confider ilk the circuni-
(lances, Poch a cafe as the prefect hae hardly ever
before been brought before this Court, marked by
-filch force and violence, upon a poor helpiefs woman,
iluch as the profccutriz was. The aggravation of this
cafe is very great, bush as it refpeds you, Abraham
Hearn, and you, Ann Crams. As to yon, Ann
Crann, your fez fhould have prevented you fiom'af-
fifiing in this force and violence on an unfortunate
woman ; and as to you, Abrahank you were a pat-
ron who ought to have proteded tsia helplef. woman,
from violence, rather than offer arty'-,--you were the.
driver of the waggon, and ought Co* proted all per-
tons and property committed to your care ; and the
'lds the was able to take care of herfelf, she mote
care was doe _front you to her. It is impnfiible not
to fee that yaulniiter, and that was at one time pro
bable, have to r fur a capital crime in the cafe;
for it is not owing to any mercy- which either of you
[hewed to this unhappy creature Ile did not loft her

life. She has, tower*, -liappenel to fur vive, in
cvfequence of which you are here to anfwer to the
juice of your country, as fur a nalemeanor only.
As I Paid before, a work cafe than this can hardly
era When one react% bow many pea •ns are
obliged to travel by night in waggons, of which, if
fuch as you are the drivels, we know not what to
think. It was your duty to have protelted the pro-
fecutrix, inflead of treating her as you did with fuch
abominable cruelty. For the fake of example, we
mull take tare that the public !hall be fatisfied, that
our punifirment on you shall be fuck, as that another
fuch atrocity as this thall not foon occur. We have
taken into confederation the punifhment you have al-
ready (offered [imprifonment (ince the month of
July lan], which is a confiderable portion ; and hav•
ing taken all the other cireutnltarices of your cafe
into confederation, and intending that your cafe (hall
be a warning to other: ; and to prevent, we hope for
ever, the like abominable violence, this Court cloth
order and .adjudge, that you, Ann Crann, be hip
prifoned in his Majelty'i gaol at Chelmsford, for three
calendar months; and that ycu, Abraham Hearn,
be imps ifimed in the fame gaol for twelve calendar
months ' • that during that time, you, anti each of
you, do nand in and upon the pillory, in the Mat kct-
place in the town of Chelmsford for one hour on a
market-day, between the hours of twelve at noon,
and two in the aftersoduP