Star.
London, England, 1802-07-07 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, JULY S.
Ll)ht.)% SON N. PLA'STFD.
The Court pronounced their decificn on the mo-
tion for am:fling the judgment in this cafe; this
CAC, which was tried before Lord Ellenborough,
has been already communicated to the public (fee
our former report.) It was an adion brought by
a common informer, to recover feveral penalties
of 501. each, againft the defendant, who is an At-
torney, tot feveral at done by him as an Attor-
ney, previous to his entering. his certificate at the
proper office, as by law required. The defendant
had, in point of fad, paid for the entry of his cer-
tificate, previous to his fo ailing as an Attorney,
but on account of the multiplicity and profs of
bufinefs then at the office, it had been negleded ;
as the defendant had, however, pradifeJ as an
Attorney without fuch entry, the informer had a
verdiift on the trial for sal. the Court now arrefled
the judgmedt on this verdict, on the ground that
the At of Parliament, which created thole penal-
• ties, did not give an adion for the recovery of them
to a common informer, but that they thould have
been Coed for by the Crown. The informer has
been, therefore, in this infiance cempleatly de.
feated, to the great fatisfadion of thole who were
prefect at the trial.
DAINIT 9. GOILPND AND SON.
The Court pronounced judgment alto in this ,
eafe, which was fomewhat of a fimilar complexion,
and governed by the fame principle. It was alto
* pm tam anion, brought by a common informer,
againft the defendants, for ading as Prodors, with-
oat obtaining or entering the neceffary certificates.
On the part of the defendants a great many ob-
jedions were made in point of law, to the decla-
ration of the plaintiff, but the objedion on which
the Court decided,was the fame which determined
the laa cafe ; namely, that the Ad of Parlia-
ment did nor give an adion, in fuch cafes, to a
common informer, but that the penalties ought to
be filed for by the Auorney-General, on the part
of the Crown.
On account of the abfence of Mr. Esselte!,
whorn. the General Eledion has called out of
town, feveral law arguments and motions were
palmed.

CRIMINAL INFORMATION.

As the Court was riling, a rule rot a criminal
information was moved for againft a perfon in the
borough of Wells, for libelling a Mr. Taylor, one
of the candidates, by calling him, in printed pa-
pers, 0, a convithd adulterer," and a person
who ground the faces of the poor." This, at the
eve of a General Election, might be very preju-
dicial to him.

Lord Essinaoitonow raid, that it meta be car-
ried before the ordinary tribunals ; it was not a
cafe that called for the extraordinary interpofition
of the Court.

MY 6.
The Court gave judgment in the cafe of the
11114 and the COSSIRVATOII.II of the Ittvca TONS,
which was, that the order of Selnons mull be
goon:ed. At the fame time Lord ELLENSOROVGH
recommended that an application Mould be made
to Parliament, finally to adjull that complicated
bannefi.
Mr. PARR, moved for a Habeas Corpus to
bring up three perfons of the names of Rea, Beau-
mont, and Morgan, in order to their being ad-
mitted to bail. They flood committed by the
Lords of the Privy Council, upon furpicion of fe-
lony, and of being 44 vehemently furl:cited"—
Lord ELLENBOROVON interrupted Mr. Parke,
and obfervcd, that thofe words of commitment
were the in ecife words dircEted by the flatute of
11(1, of Henry VIII. and that all commitments
by the Privy Council were fo worded. The war.
rants in the cafes of Governor Wall, Mackenzie,
and Roach, were in the fame form.
The Learned Counfel for the Crown fitid, that

the perfons making the application had been fent
home by the Admiral, commanding at the Cape
of Good Hope, charged with murder. Rea, as
principal in a duel, and the other two as feconds.
He alfo fubmitted that the warrant was regular.
Motion refilled.
Mary, the wife of Robert Bye, exhibited articles
of the peace againa her hufband. They Rated
fevetal inglances of abufe, and a threat that he
would cut her head off. The ground of his dif-
content was Hated to be that he could not get
fume flock the was entitled to.
The Bar was very thinly attended again to-day,
and only tilde things taken, in ohich the Coutifel
were ptefent.
James Porter exhibited articles of the peace
again(' Jane Porter, his wife. The articles Rated
that the parties were married id die year 1774
and were parted by mutual agreement in the year
1790, when he agreed to allow her forty pounds
per annum, which he had always paid. They
further Rated, that her ill conduZt had been fuch
that A= was obliged to leave many lodgings which
he had provided for her, and that the Ipent her
money, and fold her cloaths to buy liquor. She
frequently came and made a riot about his door,
on all which occafions the declared the would put
an end to him; and in the courfe °flail year, when
he made a tour to vifit his friends in the country,
fie followed him on foot, and declared her inten-
tion of doing him harm.
Mr. PARKE moved againft an Attorney at Lan-
caner, whom he did not name, that be lhould
aa-
fver an affidavit, dating the following fails:—
That he was employed to fell an age of the per-
fon who made the application, in order to pay a
debt of the feller's, at Manchener, amounting to
3501. He accordingly did fell the elate, and
received for it fool. He was dire led to pay the
debt at Mancheiler, and received a bill for that

purpofe. This bill he brought back, Paying, he
could not get it difcounted, becaufe it was not
made payable in London. He accordingly got
another payable in London; hut indead of paying
the debt for which he received it, he paid it away
in difcharge of a debt of his own in town, and

client, who was an illiterate man) in other re:
fpeCis.
Lord ELLEWBOROUGH raid; this was not merely
an abufion of his charafter as an Attorney—it was
Matter for an indiklment, and not to be difpored
of by the prefent application.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, DUBLIN, JUNE. 3a
A cauft came on before the Right Hon. Lord
KILWARDIN, and a refpenable Jury, wherein
Mary Roache was the plaintiff, and a James
Hughes and Wm. Langan were the defendants.
Mr. &THIEL opened the pleadings by laying, it
was an anion of trefpafs vi et orn'u, committed by
the defendant upon the plaintiff in entering her
houfe and premifes in James's4lreet, on the 19th
of February lafl, and taking thereout a variety
of furniture to the value of 3o guineas, and that
the defendants had pleaded the general iffue.
Mr. C. BALL, as Counfel on the fame fide, Rat-'
ed the cafe in a manner honourable to his feelings;
he depined in glowing colours the wretched fair.
ation of the poor plaintiff, which aggravated the
offence, intruding upon her quiet and her com-
forts under the pretended fanaion of the law, and
unwarrantably taking poffelfion of her property,
and turning the unfortunate woman, with (cur
infant children, into beggary and ruin.
The fie ft witnefs was Mr. John Lamb, who
proved that he gave the- quiet and peaceable poi:
faun to the plaintiff on the t fth of February,
and that the continued in the fame till removed by
the defendants as above Rated.

Mr. M.Cullion was the fecond witnefs, who
proved the outrage committed by Hughes and his
followers; alfo William Nevin, who corroborated
that teftimony.
The defence fet. up was, that the plaintiff was
an intruder who had got into the premifes irregu-
lady ; that Lamb had no right to let them, being
an under tenant, and that therefore the plaintiff
ought to be non-fuited.
His Lordhip Laid, that if the Counfel for the
defendants jailed upon the point being &rid,- he
would do fo.—The Connie' for the plaintiff con-
rented. His Lordfhip then charged the Jury in
an able and impreflive bile, telling them that it
was a profs and abominable liberty taken with the
law of the land and the right of private property.
After many conftitutional and legal obferva-
tions, the Jury retired, and in a Ilion time found
a verdiel for the plaintiff, Sol. damages, and 6d.