Star.
London, England, 1807-04-24 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, APRIL 21.

CRIMINAL INFORMATION.

Mr. Geattow moved for a criminal information
again(! a Mr. Williams, an Attorney of Monmouth,
'for a libellous charge againft the Grand Jury of the
county. It was Rated that Mr. W. having a bill to
prefer at the Affizes applied to the Grand Jury jolt
before they were about to fufpend their fitting, and
go to dine with the Judge. The Gentlemen infor-
med him of this circutnnance' and told him to pre-
fer his bill in the evening, when they would attend
to it. In the mean time he dirmiffed one of the wit.
vacs, and upon the Grand Jury returning from the
Judge's lodgings, and going into the invelligation of
the cafe, they had Come difficulty as to finding the
bill, upon which they applied to the Learned Judge,
blr. Baron Th-tmpfon, and he advifed them that if
the abfent witnefs appeared to be neceffary to com-
plete the chain of evidence, they Ihould throw out
the bill, and leave the parties to prefer another. Up-
on this advice the Jury very properly adled, and, ac-
cordingly did throw out the bill. Inftead of with-
drawing fatisfied, as he ought, of the propriety of
the condod of the Jary, Mr. Williams became vio•
lently enraged, went into the town of Monmouth, and
with a loud voice, and within hearing of fevetal
jurymen, faid the Grand Jury had been guilty of a
blackguard proceeding ; that, if poffible, he would
punith them for their conduct, and that, inftead of
being Gentlemen, they had proved themfelves a fet
of blackguards. Subfcquent to this he went to He.
reford, to prefer his bill, where he told the Clerk of
the indiaments, that he underftood the Grand Jury
meant to move a criminal information againft him
for %hat he had laid ; he added, that he was neithzr
afhanatti of what he had faid, nor afraid of the conk-
quences, and would repeat, that it was a molt dif-
graceful and blackguard tranfadion to throw dnt

bill. .
Lord ELLIKISOILOUGH told Mr. Garrow thaw

had laid abundant grounds before the Court for ot.-
taining a rule to thew caufe; and he ordered a•rule
Nifi to be• granted.

MANDAMUS TO IRTLISR AND ANOTHER.
Mr. PARK! applied for a Mandathus to 1:1:- direfled
to the late. Mayor and Deputy Mayor of the Borough
of &shah, requiring them to deliver up the Common
Seal of the Borough, the infignia of office, and the
key of the dell in which the hooks and records are
preferved. The motion was made at the inftance of
the newly eleeted Mayor. In the ,4th of Gen. 111.
there was a charter granted to eleCt liven capital
bindles to be Aldermen, and then to give them a
power to appoint fuch freemen as they thould think
fit. The. Learned Counfel was proceeding to the
.particulars,
when
• Lord Essassottovott Paid, " Is there any ()era.
Pion to go into further faits ?"
Mr. PARKE—" My objed eras to thew that we
have been duly eleEted. We bad four Aldermen
against three. We (wear that we were to duly elated;
and alto to the demand of the Common Seal, Infig-
nia, &c. which Mr. Buller has in his poffeffion, and
which he refutes to deliver up, nonfuit dean: was re-
turned to the Mandamus before. I thould fuppofe
we may have the mandamus.in the fiat inflame."
Lord ELLENBOROUGH-.-" I think not ; but you
may take a rule.to thew ratite."
SCOTT V. ICHOLEY.

This was an. aaion au,ainft the late Sheriffs of
Middlefez, upon a return of nulla bola, to a writ of
Jeri facial, iffued again{{ the goods, &c. of Mr.
Coleman), in the Theatre, Haymarket. The caufe
.was tried the Sittings after laft Trinity Term (as
-mentioned. in a former Paper), and a verdift taken
for the Plaintiff, fubjea to a queflion at law. That
tqueiiion came before the Court, this day, upon
.special argument. The point to be decided was,
4rhethers under the circumitances, the return of nulla
'bona was a good return? and this involved a quettion
of confidellble importance, namely, whether goods
'held under, an equitable intereft, were liable to be
taken under a writ of iferifoeias ? It appeared that
Mr. Coleman had affigned his intereft in the Thea•
ire, and the Ares and profits arifing therefrom, to
Marrs. Nield and Fladgate, in truft, to receive fuch
iffues and profits, until a debt due by him to them.
Mould be liquidated.
Mr. MARRYATT, for the Plaintiff, contended that
this was fuch an intereft as brought it within the legal
title, tangible-by procefs of law, and liable to the
claims of judgment creditors againft all others.
Mr. RICHARDSON maintained the oppofite pofition;
and the Court confidering it a cafe of confiderable
importance to be fettled, deferred their judgment
until a future day.