Star.
London, England, 1822-01-30 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF CHAN(T,RY, JANUARY 29. Ii
DREWE V. CROUCH.
Mr. SHADWELL stated that thiS was an application
relative to an infant female ward of the Court, who
had been clandestinely married. It appeared that
Miss Di ewe, the infant, is only 18 years of age, and
resided with her aunt and testamentary guardian, '
Mrs. Ilyefield, of Old.Ciampton-street, Soho-square,
since December, 1820; before that she was at Miss
Grimani's hoarding— chool, at Blackheath. On the
morning of the 20th of the present month the infant
left Mrs. Byefield's house before any of the family
were up, and without their knowledge. Every in-
quiry and search were made after her on that day.
On the following day, Mrs. Byefield being apprehen-
sive that she had eloped for the purpose of getting
married, caused notices to be served at the different
Churches in her neighbourhood, forbidding it. On
the same day Mrs. Byefield's husband received the
following note without a signature:
" Ste—Fearing that an accidental circumstance should have
prevented the delivery of a note from your niece to yourself or
Airs. B. i beg to assure you that she Is in perfect health and
spirits, and that you may expect to see or hear from her oa
Wednesday or Thursday neat, and trust that matters will prove
satisfactory to all parties."
On Wednesday, the 23d, a Mrs. Turner called on
Mrs. Byefield, and inforolned her that the infant was
married to her son, William Turner, of Cullum-
street,Fenchurch-street, on the Sunday she had eloped,
but refused to give her any satisfactory answer as to
the Church they were married at. She did not deny
that she and her family knew that the infant was a
ward of Court, and acknowledged that her son, John
Turner, and her grand-daughter, Elizabeth Turner,'
were privy and assisted in the marriage of the infant
with William Turner. What he (the Learned Coun-
sel) had therefore to ask his Lordship was, that he
would order Mrs. Turner, her two sons, and her
grand-daughter, to attend this Court to answer for
the contempt.
The LORD CHANCELLOR—Let them attend me at
ten o'clock on Friday morning.
COURT OF KING'S BENCH, JANUARY 23.
WOOD E. FIELD.
This was an action to try whether there was a
public right of way over a piece of ground belonging
to the defendant, near Abingdon-street, Westminster.
The Jur), atter hearing evidence on both sides, re-
turned a verdict for the defendant.
Mr. GURNEY now moved for a new trial, but the
Court refused the application, being satisfied with
the verdict of the Jury.
JAN. 29.—cox V. TROY.
This was an action on a bill of exchange for £999,
drawn by Roche and Co. of Cork, on the defendant,
in London, payable 61 days after sight. The plaintiff,
received the bill by due course of post, and on re-
ceiving it left it at the counting-house of the defend-
ant for acceptance. The plaintiff did not call for
the bill till three days subsequent to that on which
he left it ; but the defendant accepted it the very day
it was left. On applying for the bill it was handed
over to the plaintiff, accepted ; but it appeared that,
in consequence of some circumstances which had
occurred in tl:e course Of the three days during which
the bill was in his hands, he had erased the accept-
since. The question to be decided by the present
action was, whether or not this was such an accept-
ance as would realer the defendant liable?
The Jury found for the plaintiff, subject to the
future opinion of the Coat.
Mr. CHITTY now argued in support of the verdict;
and contended, that upon the established law of bills
of exchange, a drawee having once accepted a bill
could not revoke that acceptance ; this doctrine had
been fully recognized in the case of Fernandez v.
Glyn, and Bentinck v. Dorrien. Ile cited the opinion
of Monsieur Pardessus, a modern French writer on
the subject of bills of exchange and negociable secu-
rities, as being strongly in favour of the doctrine for
which he now contended.
Mr. DENMAN was about to argue the question on
the other side, when
The COURT intimated that it was unnecessary, their
Lordships being clearly of opinion the judgment, in
this case, must be for the defendant. The opinion of
foreign Courts, and foreign writers, would always
be duly considered by the Court, and as much weight
given to them as was consistent with our own law
and custom. In this case, if the plaintiff's Counsel
had looked to the very next sentence in Pardessus,
lie would have seen, that the opinion he had now
quoted related to bills of exchange which had been
negociated; but Pardessus agreed with Portier, and
other learned writers, as to the law relating to the
cancelling an acceptance previous to the bill passing
out of the hands of the drawee. Such was the fact
in the present case, and no doubt could exist that the
defendant had a right to cancel his acceptance before
Ile returned the bill.—Judgment was therefore en-
tered for the defendant.

JOIIYSON V. BIRLEY.
This was a proceeding against the defendant for
an assault, arising out of the transactions of the 16th
of August at Manchester.
Mr. TYNDAL now applied for a Rule to shew cause
svhy the plaintiff's Solicitor should not give up the
residence of his client, the defendant having repeatedly
applied on the subject, but without success.-,.The
Court granted a Rule to shew cause.
THE KING V. GEORGE CLARK, OTHERWISE JOHN JONES.
Mr. G. MARRYATT moved to quash the plea put
in by the defendant to the indictment preferred
against him by the Society for the Suppression of
Vice. He was first indicted by the name of George
Clark, but pleaded in abatement that his name was
John Jones, on which that indictment was quashed,
on the motion of the prosecutors, and another pre-
ferred against him, as " George Clark, otherwise
John Jones." To this indictment he pleaded again
in abatement, treating the alias as incorrect, and af-
firming that he never had been called George Clark.
Mr. G. Mat ryatt now contended that this was no plea.
The LORD Qum JUSTICE.—Then yon may demur.
Mr. MARRYAIT.—The plea, if it were anything,
amounted to the general issue ; and in this case, ac-
cording to the authorities collected in " Comyn's Di-
gest, Pleader B. 14, p. 200,'" the proper course is not
to demur, but to apply at once to the Court to quash
the plea on motion.
The LORD Cuter Jerrtcz.--Those might be pleas'
in barb
;but they could not be pleas in abatement.

—Mr. MARRTATT submitted that would make no •
difference.
Mr. Justice BEST.—How can this plea_possibly be
said to amount to the general issue? The general ,
issue is—not guilty ; and how does a man, by saying
that he never was called George Clark, plead that he
is not guilty ?
Mr MARRTATTo•-•These will be an end of all
aliases if this doctrine should prevail. • .
The LORD CHIRP JUSTICR.—YOII must demtii.—
Motion refused.
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, JANUARY 09.
M&NCB D. HAMMOND.
IR this case an action had been brought by the
plaintiff against the defendant, to recover the arrears
of two annuities granted by two young Gentlemen of
the University of Cambridge, and for the due pay-
ment of which the defendant had become security.
It appeared that the grantors of the annuities were
both minors; the defendant was of age, and had, to
oblige his two young friends, become security for the
payment of the sums granted. The payments were,
however, suffered to run into arrear ; and to recover
those arrears the plaintiff brought his action. This
was met by the defendant by a motion made last
Term nn his behalf, by Mr. Serjeant Hullock; for a
Rule to shew cause why all proceedings in the action
should not be stayed, and why the annuity deeds
themselves should not be set aside. The ground of
the motion was, that part of the consideration money
given for them was retained as compensation for hav-
ing, procured the advance. A Rote nisi was obtained.
Mr. Serjeant VAUGHAN and Mr. Serjeant ONSLOW
now shewed cause against the Rule, and contended,
that from the affidavits before the Court there was no
evidence to shew that any of the consideration money
had been retained.
Lord Chief Justice DALLAS said, that whether this
Rule was made absolute or not, he must mention one
circumstance. By the 17th Geo. 111. c. 26, the pro-
curing infants to grant or secure any rent-charge or
annuity was a misdemeanour, and this clause had not
been repealed by the 53d Geo. 111. c. 141. Ile was
anxious that Attornies in the two Universities should
pay attention to this, as a breach of the law in this re-
spect would subject them to fine and imprisonment.
Serjeants Osst.ow and VAuoriAN denied that their
client had any knowledge of, or intercourse with,
any party but the defendant, who was of full age at
the time the annuity was granted. The Learned Ser-
jeants then went on to contend that these were not
sufficient grounds for making the Rule absolute.
Mr. Serjeant Hum.ocK replied in support of the
Rule, and contended that the affidavits put in on the
part of the plaintiff did not state positively that no
consideration had been given to the parties for pro-
curing the advance. 7he whole of their contents
turned upon the word ,4 retained," and they said that
none of the consideration had been retained ; but they
did not say that none of it had been taken in some
shape from the grantor of the annuity. Ile therefore
submitted that the Rule should be made absolute.
Lord Chief Justice DALLAS.—The Statute upon
which this motion is made was enacted to protect
those who are not able to protect themselves, or who
from their necessities may fall into the hands of per-
sons of the description before the Court; and there-
fore it should receive the most liberal construction,
and when a complaint is made of its violation, the
answer should be clear, explicit, and satisfactory, in
every part. Now, the answer given is anything but
satisfactory; and, without applying a2y harsher term
to it, I will say, it is shuffling, and not swearing.
The complaint made is, that a part of the considera-
tion given for these annuities was kept back. The
answer is, not that no part of it remained ultimately
with the grantees of the annuity, but it turns on the
word that it was not retained. From one end to the
other, I do not think the answer at all satisfactory;
and therefore I think the Rule for setting aside the
deed should be made absolute.
The other Judges concurred in this opinion.—. Rule
absolute.—ln a short time after this decision,
Mr. Serjeant VAUGHAN applied to the Court to
make it a part of the Rule, that as the annuity deeds
were quashed, the consideration given lor them should
be returned.
The COURT ordered the parties to go before the
Prothonotary, in order to let it be seen what sums
had been received Ly the grantors, which were to be
returned with five per cent. interest; but that what-
ever sums had been paid as part of the annuity,
should be deducted therefrom.
INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, JANUARY 29.
John Smith was opposed on two grounds—first,
for obtaining goods under false pretences; and, se-
condly, for incurring debts without any reasonable
expectation of being able to pay them.
The insolvent two years ago was a bankrupt, and
afterwards set up in the silk trade. In this he totally
failed, and incurred debts now inserted in the sche-.!
dule amounting to £4OOO. Subsequently he entered
into a speculation with a Company, and by shipping
goods to a very. large amount, again'lost property to
an immense extent. On the Bth of April he entered
into an engagement with the Company, telling them
nothing about his insolventcondition; and on the 18th
of the same month was unable to pay a bill of £l5,
upon application being made to him.
The Conn.'. thought that the first part of the oppo-
sition could not be maintained—viz. the obtaining
goods under false pretences ; but in order to screen
the insolvent from the 18th section of the Act, his
conduct must have been very different from what it
appeared to be. The words of the Act were-44 a
reasonable and probable expectation" of being able
to pay the debts. Now the insolvent had entered into
a wild and desperate speculation, for which he must
take the consequences. The insolvent was then di-
rected to be imprisoned twelve months from the date
of filing his petition.

A fire broke out about half-past eight yesterday
evening, in a house of ill-fame, on Garlick-hill, which.
shortly reduced it to a heap of ruins, but was pre-
vented, by the acti►ity of the firemen, from injuring
the adjoining buildings.
TRAVELLING IN THE UNITED STATEL—From
Washington to Baltimore, with the President's Mes-1
sage—one express, one hour and 57 minutes; the
other, one hoar and 55 minutes; distance, 37 miles.
The Rev. Dr. JQIIION, of Wisbeeb, last week sent to the
Tremors: of Addeubroke's Hospital, the sum of £lOO, as a
beneiscdon ta that...scollops institution. The Rev. Doctor has
also sent a donation of On so the Treasurer of the Society for
the Relief of the Punt Widows 04 Orphans of Clergymen in the
Dineen tiny.

.. .1.

POLICE.

BOW-etasee...-Sosne unfortunate girls were yesterday brought
to this Office, charged by a watchman with having been guilty
of disorderly conduct in Charles-street, Covent-Garden, on the
'preceding night. Whilst the others appearate quite indifferent to
,their wretched situation, one of them, n Amelia Murray,
a pretty-looking girl, whom the watchman stated he had only
observed In the streets within the last two or three days, wept
bitterly, and seemed fully alive to the wretchedness of her con.
dition. In reply to some questions of Mr. Harts, she said she
had only come up to town, from East Sheen, about a week ago,
for the purpose of seeing a fellow-servant of ber's who was living
with a family in Bond-street. She saw her accordingly, and was
proceeding to the White Horse, in Piccadilly, with the intention
of returning home by the coach, when she was accosted by an
elderly respectable-looking Lady, who inquired if she wanted a
situation? She said yes, and. the Lady told her to follow her.
Sbe did so, and was taken to the house of Mrs. Conway, in
Ltdo-streei, where the unhappy girl soon became the victim
of deception. She had been there ever since, she added, a
prey to all the misery and horror of her dreadful condition;
and all she wished for was to be once more restored to her borne.
Finding that the woman's name who first led her to Mrs. Con-
way's was Bayley, and that she lived in St. Martin's-lane, Mr.
Haus had her sent for immediately. In a few minutes she
made her appearance, dressed out in the modern fashion, and
not a bad personification of Hogarth's procures,. She admitted
having met the young woman in Piccadilly, and having taken
her to Mrs. Conway's; but said it was six months ago, and that
she was not aware that Mrs. Conway kept houses of accommo-
dation.—Mr. Haas assured her, that both she and her friend
Mrs. Conway should be prosecuted by the parish.—Mrs. Bay-
ley implored him not to have her indicted ; and assuring him of
her undoubted respectability, conunenced making all sorts of
wry faces, in Imitation of a person who was crying, but not a
tear could she extract.—The Magistrate directed that the poor
girl should be sent to St. Anne's Workhouse ; and that measures
should be adopted for having Mrs. Conway and Mrs. Bayley in-
dicted at the suit of the parish.
Charles South, a very respectable-looking young man, was
charged with stealing a pair of boots from Mr. Bishop's shop, in
Castle-street, Leicester-square.—The prisoner admitted having
taken them ; but begged to observe that they were hanging out-
side the door. He also said that this was his first offence.—lle
was fully committed.
James white, of Holborn-hill, baker, appeared on Monday
evening to answer to an information, lodged against him by a
man named Johnson, for selling bread deficient in weight. The
hread in question had been purchased from a woman who keeps
a chandler's shop in Southampton-buildings, of the name of
Odes ; and she svore that she had it of the defendant. In four
quarter and five half-quarter peck loaves, there was a deficiency
of 42 ounces. One quartern loaf, in particular, was deficient
ten ounces and a quarter. The defendant was convicted in the
penalty of £2l, being 100 per ounce.—He appealed from the
conviction.

INtoy-Hatt.-.-Yesterday a man named Daniel Carroll was
brought before I. IL ALLEYN 4 Esq. charged with.having been
concerned in a highway robbery of a very desperate kind, com-
mitted on Mr. Samuel Mason. The unfortunate Gentleman is
not yet recovered from the injuries he sustained when he was
attacked, although the assault and robbery took place upwards
of five mouths ago. Indeed, had he not been a most power-
ful and determined man, the violence of those who rubbed
him would in all probability have deprived him of existence.—
Mr. Macon stated, that he resided in Cross-street, Newington,
and that on the 24th of August last, at about twenty minutes
after eight in the evening, while he was talking to two Gentle-
men, in the road opposite to Newington Church, he observed
two men on the other side of the way, under the Church wall,
in deep conversation. After some little time, the men crossed
over, and one of them sprang upon the witness, and pushed him
violently in the breast, while the other snatched the watch from
his fob. The thieves ran down Church-passage, and Mr. Macon
followed, crying " Stop thief !" A Mr. Church, upon hearing
the noise, ran out of his house in pursuit of the thieves, but was
instantly knocked down with a blow of a stick by a person who
ran in the same direction. Mr. Mason continued the pursuit,
and was gaining upon the fellow who robbed hint, when, at the
end of the passage, he was seized by the flap of the coat, which
gave way. lie then got into Hampton-street, at the end of the
passage, where he was collared by a man named Eaton, who had
since been committed, and surrounded by five or six men, all of
whom commenced a most ferocious attack upon him; they kicked
him in the body, and beat him with sticks until he fell down in
a state of complete insensibility. He was conveyed, in a dreadful
condition, covered with blood from head to foot, to the hcuse of
a Mr. Cordell. Ile could not identify the prisoner, but he could
positively swear, he said, to the person who snatched his watch.
Mr. Kirkpatrick stated that he was in conversation with Mr.
\Jason at the time the robbery was committed. lie identified
the prisoner as one of the men who bad crossed over from the
church wall to the place where Mr. Mason stood. Witness
added, that at the time of the robbery the prisoner bad on him
a dark great coat, and a low crowned hat. The prisoner was
differently dressed yesterday. Snow, a constable of Newington,
stated, that on the night of the robbery be met the prisoner in
company with the man who, he had every reason to believe,
snatched the watch, walking arm-in-arm, and three other men
following them, towards Newington Church, at a quarter before
eight o'clock. Witness heard of the robbery and assault com-
mitted on Mr. Mason next day, and, from the information
he received, at once suspected the gang he had met with to be
concerned. Ile lost no time in his endeavours to take them into
custody but they kept out of the way. He apprehended the
prisoner at the Golden Lion, in Kent-street, in the midst of a
crowd of thieves. Eaton, who has been already.committed,
was taken into custody at Worship-street, to which Office he had
been brought up on a charge of assault committed on a watch-
man. Snow was accidentally present, and immediately identi-
fied him as otie of the persons who committed the robbery in
question. A pawnbroker attended, who stated that a female
pawned a dark great coat at his shop in the name of Carroll.—
The female lives with the prisoner. The prisoner was fully com-
mitted for trial.

Wednesday morning, as the-mail coach was pro-
ceeding up Framwellgate, Durham, to the north,
one of the leaders, a valuable horse, the property of
Mr. Ward, of the Waterloo Inn, dropped down and
died almost instantly.
Extensive silk-mills have been established at Cog-
geshall, in Essex, at which 140 persons are already
employed.

The very great satisfaction the plan adopted in
former Lotteries gave to persons residing in the Coun-
try, has induced T. Bloc to re eat it in the present,
especially as he had been so fortunate in selecting,
for advertised numbers, so many Capital Prizes. The
undermentioned Tickets are reserved for such per-
sons as may order them ; and,,as many of the num-
bers, formerly advertised, were approved by various
individuals in London, it has been thought advisable,
for the convenience of the Public, to have part at the
East and part at the West end of the Town. The fol-
lowing may be had in Whole Tickets, Halves, Quar-
ters, Eighths, or Sixteenths, at Bisn's Offices, 4,
Cornhill, or 9, Charing-Cross : .
5127 3199 2666 2682
1393 1441 No. 328 No. 693
5678 5658 5287 4448
4203 4045 5184 ' 5165
2681 2668 1415 1414
• IJo. 669 No. 649 5616 5571
4419 4355 3560 5200
2693 • 2683 • 1444 1443
1391 No. 699 No. 314 5656
1 - 5425 4441 4554 3726
The present Lottery cortunetwea on the 26th of Near Mowry,
and contains FIVE Money Prises of £2o,ooo—Seventy other
Money Capitals—Not Two Blanks to a Prise—No Stock Prises
—No Classes—Every Ticket drawn singly, each deciding its own
fate, abd no other..--Present Price :

Ticket ......... ..£l9 IS. "
Halt. £lo 17 o I Eighth ...12 IS
gainer ...... S 9 0 Sixteenth ... 1 • 0
In last Lottery Bon avid IS Capital—the whole Lottery • .ly
had !!!

•.• Letter*, paellas duly unmet!.