Star.
London, England, 1830-06-03 00:00:00

FELL V. LORD KENSINGTON.

This was an action to recover the balance of an account
for plumber's work done at the mansion erected by Lord
Kensington in Carlton-gardens. The amount of the de-
mand originally was about 7001. 4001. had, as was ad-
mitted, been paid, and the plaintiff, by this action, sought
to recover the remainder. He failed, however, in proving
more than 481. beyond the 4001. and the defendant hav-
ing, before the action was brought, paid 111. and ten-
dered 401. the plaintiff was nonsuited.
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Jules 2.
(London Sittings, before Lord Chief Justice TINDAL and a
Common Jury.)
STRANGE V. WIGNEY AND OTHERS.

This was an action of trover to recover the amount of
a 1001. Bank post-bill.
Mr. Serjeant WILDE and Mr. KELLY conducted the
plaintiff's case; and Mr. Serjeant TADDY and Mr. CoT-
TINGHAm that of the defendants.

The facts were these :—The plaintiff, Mrs. Strange,
keeps the Kentish Hotel at Tunbridge NVells. Having
occasion, on the 16th of September last, to come to Lon-
don, she took her place on the outside of the coach,
and arrived in town in due time. She carried in her
hand a silk bag, in which were deposited a purse con-
taining the Bank post-bill in question, and some money,
also a silver knife, and some other articles. She and
a friend of hers got into a hackney-coach in Smith-
field ; but on quitting it she forgot her bag, which re-
mained behind her on the seat. Upon subsequently dis-
covering her loss, she sent to the Bank of England to
stop payment of the bill, of which she gave the par-
ticulars. She afterwards gave information at the hackney-
coach office, and caused handbills to be printed, offering
a reward of 51. for the resto:ation of her bag and its
contents. She had these handbills distributed in the
neighbourhood of Smithfield, Chcapside, the Exchange,
and several hackney coach stands. She also caused an
advertisement to the same effect to be inserted in the
Morning Advertiser on the 24th of the same month.
She shortly afterwards received a communication from
the secretary to the Bank of England, informing her
that the bill had been presented for acceptance by
Messrs. Masterman and Co. bankers. Learning that
it had been remitted to them by the defendants, who
are bankers at Brighton, she caused a letter to be written
to them, acquainting them with the circumstances under
which she had lost the bill, and requesting as much in-
formation as possible as to the party from whom, and
the manner in which, it had come into their possession.
In reply, she was informed that the bill had been pre-
sented by a person who called himself Wilson, and gave
his address Great Queen-street, Lincoln's-inn-fields,
adding, that he was going to Southampton or the Isle of
Wight, and that he had received 51. Bank of England
notes for it, but no entry had been taken of the numbers
of them. Besides the name of Wilson, there was also
that of Thomson on the back of the bill, and both these
names were believed to be fictitious, as no trace of
any such persons could be discovered. It had, how-
ever, been regularly indorsed in blank, and the Bank
of England having received it from proper respon-
sible hands, declined to give it up to the plaintiff,
except upon her lodging 1001. when they allowed
her the use of it to assist her in tracing the parties, if
possible, through whose hands it had passed to the de-
fendants. Under these circumstances, the present action
was brought by the plaintiff, on whose behalf it was con-
tended that the defendants had not used due caution in
taking a bill of this large amount, without seeking for
some satisfactory information respecting the party v.-ho
presented it to them, and without entering the numbers
of the notes given in exchange, whereby all clue to the
discovery of such party was destroyed. On the other
hand, it was argued that the defendants had done all that
could reasonably hare been required in the way of in-
quiry respecting the person from whom they had received
the bill; and that the plaintiff's loss had been occasioned
by her own negligence in carrying a note of this amount
through town and country in an open reticule, and after-
wards contenting herself with scattering a few handbills
amongst some hackney coachmen, instead of taking
proper steps to inform the commercial public of her loss,
so as to guard them against taking the lost bill.
The Loan Cu Er JUSTICE left it to the jury to say
whether or not there had been any negligence on either
side, and, if so, on which, and find their verdict ac-
cordingly.
The Jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff—
Damages, 1001.

OLD BAILEY SESSIONS, June 2.

NEW COURT.

This day the sessions having terminated, the Court
adjourned, and at a quarter to two o'clock, the Rs-
CORDIR, attended by Alderman A IiSLE T and F.% it !-
BROTHER, took his seat on the bench, for the purpose
of passing sentence upon those prisoners who had been
convicted during the sessions, who did not receive judg-
ment instanter.

The awful sentence of death was passed upon the fol-
lowing 11 unfortunate individuals:—
Thomas Brown, and John Crawley, for maliciously cutting and
maiming, with intent to kill; Jeremiah Collins, for a robbery upon
the person; William Norton, Thomas Garland, John King, and
Robert Durley, for stealing goods and monies, above the value of
61. in dwelling-houses; Thomas Smith, Lazarus Hart, Joseph
Evans, and George Froggatt, for housebreaking, and committing
larcenies therein.

The learned RICOADIR addressed these convicts at
great length, and in a most impressive manner. He la-
mented that persons so young, and who, in some instances,
had worldly prospects once before them, should, by a fatal
propensity to crime, have rendered themselves amenable
to the extremest punishment which the laws of civilised
countries inflicted upon transgressors. As the issues of
life or death were alone vested in an executive power, he
trusted that they would prepare for the latter, and then
in cue the sovereign should, by the advice of his council,

remember mercy in the midst of judgment, they wrii,!4i
become better subjects in another country, to which thy
might in all probability be exiled.
During this address, the most profound silence u 4,
observed in court, and the prisoners appeared to he
deeply impressed with the awful situation in which they
were placed.
The following were ordered to be transported for life
viz.--Hugh Hughes, James Harris, William Horton, :ow
Margaret Brown.

For fourteen years.—Jano Lovell, whose ca,c
curious defence appeared in the Star of yesterday, atid
John Jones.

The following were also adjudged to the sante term of
expatriation, viz.—John Dewart, Henry Newman, lA,
Carrington, John Rose, Philip Porter, Sarah Jones, Johi.
Tubley, John Dean, Vim. Deacon, and John Barnes
The latter was convicted on Tuesday of a robbery at the
mansion of the Marquis of Bath, to whom he had been a
confidential servant.

The following were sentenced to be transported foi
seven years, viz. :
Win. Walker, Ann Armsworth, Wm. Wells, John Crouch
George Brooks, James Nicholson, Geo. Box, John Wenma;
Samuel Baker, Geo. Brown, Thos. Bolton, Henry Rose, Msry.
Stevens, Thos. Collins, Wm. Williams, George Topper, Thorns::
Smith, Jeremiah Rogers, Maria Payne, John Line, John Hedges,
M'm. Green, Margaret Gorman, John Wm. Coxon, John Edward
Adams, Henry Little, Thos. Smith, John IVardrop , John IVat.
ford, James Roberts, Robert Roster,Win. Illingworth, Mary.lener,
Louisa Hewgall, Mary Dunn, Benjamin Stem, James Steers,
Charles M'Carthy, Edward Burnett, John Baptiste de Alatthews,
William Everett, John Cross, John Clow, Edward Low, Thomas
Lancaster, Mary Charlotte Moore, John Carney, Jelin Itrysm,
Thomas Ferrell, Henrietta Williams, Amelia Anderson, Chnks
Smith, Joseph Vares, Edward Simmons, John Mapleton, Samuel
Cooper, and William Cosgrove.
A great number were sentenced to be imprisoned and
kept to bard labour for various periods from seven day..
to two years ; others were ordered to be privately whipped
and discharged ; and the judgments, in some cases, were
respited until the next sessions.
The sessions were then ordered to stand adjou:r.,
until Thursday the Bth of July.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.

BOW-STREET.

Yesterday, Mr. Joseph Lilly, bookseller in Me m..
se,:m..,
Bloomsbury, was brought before Mr. HALLS, charged by a your:
gentleman, named William 'Delves, rcaiding in Mary.s..n.et,
gent's Park, with violently beating and kicking him.
Mr. Delves, a delicate looking young man, stated that on Tutsti.”
evening he was standing in front of the London University, hen .1
dog ran at him, and caught hold of his trowsers with his teeth.
which, however, did not penetrate to his skin. He gave the anima:
a kick, upon which he defendant came up to him, and said.
" d—n you, Sir, how dare you kick my dog ?" To which cue..
plainant replied, " Sir,• instead of abusing me, yon ought
have apologised for suffering your dog to run at me and attempt :,
bite me." The defendant upon this again abused him, and said
uttered a lie, and complainant then called bhn an Insolent scoundrel
The defendant in answer said, " if you call me an insolent EiCOtlr. •
drel again, I will knock you down.." Complainant did repeat if:
epithet, and the defendant gave him a blow on the face, which I'.
yelled him. As he was rising the defendant was coming to him again.
when he called out " for GOD'S sake don't strike again, for I
am in a delicate state of health." He, defendant, however,
knocked him down with a blow in the mouth, which ant his Elm
very severely. Complainant, on rising once more, recovering his
legs, endeavoured to retreat, but the defendant followed him across
the street and again knocked him down. He (Mr. Delves) af.
terwards followed the defendant until he found a policeman. t
whom he gave him in charge, and he was conveyed to Eagle:
street watchhouae, but there the inspector on duty refused to de-
tain the defendant, as the police-officer had not himself seen the
assault committed. The defendant gave his card of address, art:
complainant procured a warrant against him at this office. PI,
defendant had a female with him during the whole transaction.
Mr. Lilly, in his defence, said, that he believed the dog had no%
attempted to bite Mr. Delves, and that when the latter called him
a scoundrel, he certainly knocked him down" and (continued the
delkndant,) I would do so again to any man who dared to apply such
an epithet to me. Wu Ito submit tamely to be called a scoundrel
in the presence of a female, and that female my wife ?"
Mr. Hau.s—l admit that the language conveyed great provoca-
tion, but you had no right to take the law into your own hands.
Mr. Lilly—But what other remedy had i, Sir?
Mr. HALLS.—If you had contented yourself with the first blow, I
should, considering the provocation you received, have viewed the
case in a very different light ; bugto follow it up as you did a second
and a third time, and especially after the appeal made to you by the
complainant after the first attack, evinces a degree of savage feeling
which deserves punishment. The Magistrate then ordered the de-
fendant to pay a fine of 40s.
Mr. Lilly raid he considered the fine most unjust, and asked i.
there was no appeal ?
The clerk told him there was not an appeal, and he must :E.! Lr
pay the money or go to prison for a month.
Mr. Lilly paid the fine ; but expressed, in warm terms, his dirt..
tisfaction at the decision.

QUEEN SQUARE.
A FIGHT PREVENTED.—On Tuesday last a number of
inhabitants of IV*lham.green and Fulham gave infonnation to the
Inspector of Pollee of the V division, stationed in that district,
that there was to be a pitched battle between two men on the same
afternoon ; and as these fights generally ended in riotous and elite
orderly conduct, to the terror of the neighbourhood, the inhabitant.
expected that the police would interfere to prevent any fight from
taking place, and preserving order. Accordingly, several hundred
men met near Walham.green Church, and no sooner had the cont.
battants stripped for the fight, but they were interrupted by a
strung body of tie New Police. The men immediately desisted on
the appearance of the Constables, and decamped ; but the bye.
'tandem who did not appear to like their sports interrupted, wire
not so easily dispersed, and they assaulted several of the police. no;
only with their fists, but with stones ; two of the ringleaders, Til.
berry and Cumlin, were secured, and two others were soon after
secured. and taken to the watch-housc and yesterday morning they
were placed at the bar, and a long investigation took place, when
the above statement was detailed in evidence, and each defendant
was fined 4lls. and, in default of payment, to be imptisored ont
month.

John Collier and George Reid was afterwards placed at the ha%
charged with being the principals in the above-mentioned
The prisoners were fighting a pitched battle in the Kines.road.
Chelsea, that morning, and were apprehended by the police. t.i
there being no evidence to prove they were the same 'ilea that oven•
sioned the riot at Walham-green, the magistrates only fined
half a crown each.

RANK POPERY.—" Sixty years since," an English
lady, who could not conform to Scotch habits, requestetl
of the minister of the kirk to allow her to have her pew
cleaned and lined, that she might not spoil her clothes:
but he refused, saying it was rank Popery."—lreland
and its Economy.

111ARRIED.

On the lat inst. at St. Mark's, Kennington, Joseph, eldest son
of J. Radford, Esq. of West Brixton, Surrey, to Mary, widow of
the late J. Dimwit, Esq. of Claremont-place, North Brixton, and
only daughter of the late J. Thompson, Es q of the Manor-house,
Chelsea—On Wednesday, the 2d in►t. at Willesden, Mr. Toiler,
of Conduit-street, to Ann Gertrude. cldcbt daughter of H. Jarvis,
Esq. of Kilbourne.

DIED.
On Tuesday, the Ist inst. at Stoke Newington, in the Bth yeas
of his age, Julius, youngest child of A. H. Rivas, Esq.—On
Thursday, the 27th ult. Ann, relict of the late Rev. 1. Taylor, of
Onset, in the 73d year of her age—On the 30th ult. at Leek, in
the county of Stafford, in the 66th year of his age, MT. S. Lucca.
of the 6rm of Gaunt and Lucas, silk.manufacturcrs, one of du
oldest establishments in the trade—On Wednesday, the 2d inst. Eli.
sabeth Nary, wife of J. Rawlins, Esq. Paradise-row, Islington.
aged 87—On Tuesday, the Ist inst. aged 55, Mary, wife of J.
Dimis, Esq. of Upper Clapton, and late of Si. Ann's-fare,
A ate-street—On the 31st ult. at Lowndes.plam, Holloway-
road, 1r..1. Randall, in his 78th year, after a short illness; many
years an inhabitant of the Broadway, Westminster— On the 21st
ult. at Stonehouse, Devon, much esteemed, aged 79, Mrs. Le Grlce,
widow of the late Rev. C. Le Ghia, rector of Wiekbampton, Ic
Norfolk, and of Thwaite, in Suffolk, and lecturer of St. James's.
Bury St. Edmund's.

H I 6 H. W ATER at LONDON-BRIDGE TO-MORROW.
Morning 23 minutes atter ••••
•
Atter:woe • 44 album attar •••••

Lomas: Printed and Published by Jou' MATINS, at she teas-
Ormuz No. l, Pleketuphee,Tesopie Bar.