Star.
London, England, 1802-12-02 00:00:00

MOORHEAD V. ROGERS.

This was an aaion againft the Defendant for
courfing with greyhounds without a licence, and
for refuting to thew a licence to a perfon who duly
demanded it of him. The real Plaintiff was Lord
Berkeley.
George Molton, his Lordfhip's gamekeeper,
Rated, that on the 21(1 of September, ;Sol, he law
the Defendant conning with a Mr. Slater and four
or five others; they had killed a hare, which Mr.
S. held in his hand ; he went up, and (hewing his
certificate, aiked for Mr. S.'s. Mr. S. (hewed his
he then demanded Rogers's, who faid h3¢ no

threatened to horfewhip him ; he was then upon
a manor of the Duke of Northumberland's ; he did
not fee Rogers make or meddle with the chace. Mr.
Slater is a gentleman of large property, and qua
lifted ; the Defendant is the fon of farmer Rogers,

who is likewife qualified. . .
Mr. Gibtbn, who had been of the party, was
next called, and Rated that Mr Slater had carried
out only two dogs, and that they were joined by
young Rogers, who brought another. They at-
tcrwards found and killed.
The defence was, that the dog belonged to the
Defendant's father, and that Slater, not be, was
the perfon who, in the language of the Ad, had
soled it.
Mr. Ifaac Slater (wore, that as his father, ano
ther gentleman and himfelf were going with two
dogs to a place where they had heard there was a
hare, they accidentally met the defendant riding
along with a dot,. underftood to belong ro l
Rogers. His father, who had heard a good cha-
raCter of this dog, afked to be allowed to run it
againll one of his; the defendant confenting, they
went and courted as above defcribed.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH laid. that whatever opi-
nion might be entertained oldie Game Laws, they
were undoubtedly to be adminißered according to
their fair meaning, as others the moll palatable.
The queftion was, whether the Defendant came
within the penalty of the AEI? It could not be faid
that every one tiled Jogs for the dearationof game,
who participated in the chace. This would !neon'.
pletely dearoying the diverlions of the country. In
that cafe it would be impollible even for a gentle-
man to he attended on a thooting or hunting party
by his fervant. Principals alcne were meant, not
thole who were prefent.under the aufpices of others.
The Jury would therefore confider whether Rogers
bad boaape lent his dog to Slater,and parted with
the controul over him, fo that he attended Slater
afterwards only as his companion? or whether ibis
tranfaetion was a mere colour to evade the law,
and he acted during, the courfe when the hare
was killed, as a principal ? Upon a review of the
evidence, his Lordthip teemed pretty clearly of
opinion that he was to be confidered in the former
capacity, and the Jury, without hefitation, found
for the defendant.
In the courfe of the trial a very important point
arofe, whether the penalty of Sol. attaches for not
(hewing the certificate, or telling the name and
abode attaches upon a man who refutes to thew a
certificate, hut is not anted for his name and abode,
thefe being futhciently known to the perfon enquir-
ing? Lord EL LENZOROUOR thought that it did not,
as the object of the A& was not to compel every
man to carry his certificate in his pocket, but to
furnifh the means of profecuting him if he thould
be found to be without a certificate.

MOORHEAD V. EMMONS.
This was an aition of the fame nature, by Lord
Berkeley againft a fervant of Mr. Rogers. It ap-
peared that in 08. 1 Sor, Mr. Gains, fon of the
Regiftrar of the Court of Admiralty, young Ro-
ws, and the defendant, were feen courting on
Heitham Common by Molten, Lord Berkeley's
game keeper. An aftion was brought againft Gof-
ling, which he compounded for 3IL The defence
here was, that Simmons merely aged as a fervant;
but the noble Judge was of opinion that where
there is not Come one of the party with a certifi•
Bate, all prefcnt are guilty. The Jury, however,
gave only the penalty of sl. under the Ratute of
Anne.
In the neat cake a Welch paviour recovered
sol. for a beating given him by a carpenter's ap-
prentice in the ward at Deptford.
DECEMBER 1.

An application being made to his Lordfnip to
put of the Trial of a Canfe which is not in the Pa-
per at prefent,his Lordfbip obfervcd,that he could
not hear any application in any cafe which was not
before him ; and defired that fuch motions might
not be repeated ; for this was the fecond inflance
in which be was under the neceffity of making this
obfervation, and he was unwilling to treat any
Gentleman at the Bar, othetwife than with per-
fea civility.

lIIROWN 9. HART.
Mr. Glass Rated, that this was an Altion
brought by the Plaintiff, the father and admini-
firator of a perfon of the name of Alexander
Brown, who is dead • he was a feaman, to whom
confiderable fums of had become due on
account of a prize,captured by la Pique, onboard
of which he was a failor ; againft the defendant,
Mr. Hart, who had received this money by virtue
of a Power of Attorney from Alexander Brown.
The Action was for about 2501. The defendant
had paid zBl. 16s. 6d. into Court, and Paid it was
"all that was due to Alexander Brown : on the
true Ratement of accounts between him. and the
defendant, and out of his own mouth, would he
make out the Cafe againft the defendant, then he
fhonld wait to hear what argument was to be
urged on his part in anfwer to it. Alexander
Brown, as he had Paid already, was a Seaman,
Who had ferved on board la Pique, and went af-
terwards on board le Tigre to Contlantinople.—
The defendant, Mr. Hart, was a Member of the
Jewith Perfuafion, and he was a Slop-feller reftchmt
at Portimouth ; he was likewife, what moll Slop.
fellers are, an Agent for Seamen to receive their
phoney by virtue of Powers of Attorney, and upon
the faith of which they fomctimes gave Sailors a
little credit for Slips.—Such was the cardiac.—
Ales:ander Drown, before he went on board the
Tigie, was on board la Pique When the took a very
valuable prize, in the year 1798. It was .iipnted
whether the veffel was a prize or not? and it went
before the proper Tribunal to decide it ; and it
was not determined that the was lawful prize
uhtil the year 1800 : and the queßion here to be
fubraitted to the Jury, if a queftion it could be
called, would be, whether there was any jußice in
the demand which the defendant now fet up for
money advanced to this Seaman in his lifetime,
'bile this claim for prize money was in the course
-veftigatiob, and before it could be known
-ran-

The

•
which Mr. Hart had rendered to the Father of this
Sailor, after his death. When this Seaman went,
on board the Tigre, he gave Mr: Hart a power of
attorney to receive prize money for him, and in-
formed his Father, at Greenock, in Scotland, that
he had done fo, and defired his Father to apply to
Hart, from time to time, to learn whether he.,
had received any prize money on his account?—
The father did fo ; and Hart wrote to the Father
at Greenock ; but then he had not the fagacity to:
contemplate the poffible event of the death of
Brown, the tailor, and that he was writing to a
perfon with whom he might afterwards have to
contend as an adminiftrator; and therefore he
wrote to the Father a letter, dated the zBth of
November, 1793, direded to John Brown, at a
place near Greenock, and figned.David Hart, Gof-
port. " Your fon, Alexander Brown, on board
the Tigre, is well: His prize money is not paid ;
and as Won as it is paid, I have your fon's inftruc -
firms to tranfmit it to you as foon as paid, which
I will take care to remit as foon as paid, which
will be.in about fix months.—P. S. There has been
a trifle of prize money paid, of 305. a man, whieli
has been advanced to your fon. The moment any
prize money is paid, I will fend to you." This
letter would prove that this was all that was ad
vanced at this time by the defendant to the tailor,
and would make the defendant accountable for
every thing that he had received afterwards on ac-
count of this feaman, which was upwards of 24.01.
But if any thing were wanting, there was another
letter from Mr. Hart to the prefent plaintiff, dat-
ed. Gofport, sth of March, 1799 41...64 I have re-
ccived yours, I am to inform you, that the Tigre
man of war is fare arrived at Conftantinople, all
well. The prize money is not yet paid for la Pique.
I have paid your fon for five [hares, the fum of 61.
19s. which I have advanced your fon when he
went to tea. As loon as the prize money is paid,
I will write to you again. As foon as the prize-
money is paid I wilt let you know." So that it
was clear, that all the money which the defendant
had advanced to this feaman, on the sth of March,
1798, was 61. 195..
In the year 1890, there came accounts of the
death of Alexander Brown ; and this news ope-
rated wonderfully on Mr. Hart, who was a gene-
ral adminiltrator of all feamen who die leaving
powers of attorney in his hands. He was afraid it
would turn out that nothing was due to this tea•
man, or that if there was, there would be a great
deal of difficulty in obtaining it • and here Mr.
Hart entered into a great deal oelamentation on
the hardfhips to which feamen were expofed, the
difficulty of recovering what was due to them when
they applied for it themfelves; and a great deal of
very jolt reafoning came from Mr. Hart, on the
advantages which were taken of their relatives
after their death; fo that he, Mr. Hart, had upheld
this diftreled man, Alexander Brown,with money
and goods to the amount of t7ol. and that at a
time when there was no certainty that he would
ever be able to pay him, for hitherto it was not de-
led that he would be entitled to any

,erroini , prize-
money. It was wonderful that Mr. Hart should
have been fo generous. Mr. Hart, however, gave
in his account of the fums advanced by him, or
rather raid to have been advanced by him, to Alex-
ander Brown, from the ad of ORober to the zad
of Odober 1798; the Jury should fee it—ln the
mean while he would read it as a curious article—
Odtober 1, 1798, C 241 (at once) • • Ls* 0
,-Silver Watch- - 6 6
Silver Chain and Key - - .. - oz 6
Silver Buckles - • - • 1 Z
7tb. Cath - - - - 20 0
So that here were about Sol. in five days, and
the account was made up as it were by weeks.—

Again,
From the 7th of Od. to the t 4th—Callt - ‘2O t, •
Check Shirts - - - - si i 6
Linen ditto - - - - 2 2 0
14th. EA - - . _ - . so 0 0
- . _ _

.4tn.
This, with the addittion of 41. lofted-until the
22d, and then—
Oa. 2%,—Caet Lso o o
To this was added a mad( charge by Mr.
Hart, in the true Jewifh ftyle, that was to fay the
worft of it, for he fhould be lorry to fay any thing
to the prejudice of the beft. The charge which
Mr. Hart made was, to his own commiflion, 51.35.
Now, to be Pure, this was model to charge a
tailor this fum, by the defendant at Portfmouth,
for receiving his own money. In a word, this
defendant, after Rating in a letter of his own hand-
writing, that there was no money paid to this failor
but 61. 95. and that he had received about 2501. as
would appear by the evidence of his agent in town,
there could be no doubt about the verdia.
Mr. Glass faid, he could prove every word of
this, for, as had been faid on a former occafion,
he opened the circumfiances of this cafe with the
veracity of a witnefs.
On application to the defendant for a fettlement
of thefe accounts, confcious of what he owed, but
relying on the difficulty which might attend the
proof of the Plaintiff's cafe, he a(ked, " What
he would take Why," faid the Plaintiff," to
get rid of you altogether, t501."—" I will confi-
der of it," laid the defendant, not fo much as fay-
ing, the fum is not due.—So much for the inte-
grity of paying 281. into Court.
It then appeared in evidence that the defendant
had fent letters to the plaintiff at Greenock, pre-
cifely as opened by Mr. Glees, which were read,
and alto that he received, on account of Alexan-
der Brown, various lams of money on account of
prizes, to the amount, in all of about 2501. and,
therefore, the balance due to the Plaintiff (after
taking the money out of Court, kc.) as admini-
firator of the deceafed Sailor, was 2241.
Mr. GALROW, for the Defendant, faid, there
was no perfon in that Court who would be more
fatisfied than he fhould be that the Plaintiff fhould,
have a Verdi& for every. (killing that was due so
him, provided the cafe was clearly made out again%
the Defendant, who was his client • but it was the
chartiaerillic of the laws of this Country to have
no regard for perfons, but have the fame meafere '
of jußice for the very worft as for the very belt of
men. He had watched the proof, and found it
was. fathifaitory in this cafe again( his Client, and
thesi his linty soled ; tulle's his Lordlisip fhoiald
_ __J

1111311 C 111
of invel
wbethei
Sailor t

el embe
ly prize looney co d ever belong to this
to Cum is th laid he aci-