Star.
London, England, 1814-03-12 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF CIPINCERY, MARCH 13.
EX-PARTE CLAY, IN THE MATTER OF BROMER.

This was a petition on the part of Clay, praying
to be allowed to receive a dividend on the bankrupt
Bromer's estate, on a debt of reT2,OOO.
In answer to this, an affidavit was filed, stating,
that at a meeting of the Commissioners of Panton
and Gill, the bankrupt fiad stated, that he owed to
Clay £5OOO for three years' interest on money ad-
vanced for him, which, according to the real amount,
would have been an usurious transaction. The bank-
rupt (Bromer) died before he was examined by the
Commissioners under his own bankruptcy ; and this
petition, on the part of a Mr. Campbell, was to per-
mit Bromer's declaration, before the Commissioners
in Panton and Gill's bankruptcy, to be received, as
if he had been examined before the Commissioners
on his own bankruptcy. There were other declara-
tions of a like kind made by Bromer subsequent to
his bankruptcy, and in the presence of Clay, the pe-
titioner.

The LORD CHANCELLOR was of opinion, that the
declaration of Bromer, made at the meeting of Pan-
ton and Gill's creditors, and in the absence of Clay,
could not be received ; as to his (Bromer's) subse-
quent declarati 413 on the same subject, and to the
same effect, he (the Lord Chancellor) would take
some days to consider of it.

VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT, BENCHER'S CHAM-
BERS, LINCOLN'S INN, MARCH 11.

BURGESS v. TWOPENNY AND OTHERS, (ASSIGNEES OF
PARTRIDGE AND BENTHAM).

This was an application to the Court on the part
of the plaintiff, to decree the specific performance of
an award.

It appeared that William Burgess, the plaintiff,
(Richard Burgess, deceased, of whom William was
the residuary legatee and sole executor), Partridge,
and Bentham, were joint proprietors of four cutters,
the Sheerness, the Queensborough, the Admiral Mit-
chel, and the Mary. As proprietors of these vessels,
and on their account, they had received and disbur-
sed various sums of money. Patridge and Bentham
becoming bankrupts, and it being necessary to settle
their accounts so far as related to the four cutters,
their assignees, together with William Burgess, en-

-

teted into a bond, binding thethselves to submit to
the award of an umpire, if the accounts were not
settled by arbitrators, to whom they were to be re-
ferred. The arbitrators met, but could not adjust
the business it was of course submitted to an um-
pire. The !kind of s.ibmission to bis awaid purpor-
ted to refer to all claims and demands touching the
vessels in question. in the recital of die•bond, the
parties represented themselves as holding each one.
fourth part of the cutters; but the umpire not pro-
ceeding upon this representation, made his award
upon the ground that the plaintiff had only a put in
two of the vends, namely, the Admiral Mitchell and
the Mary.
On the part of the Plaintiff it was contended, that
the terms of the reference were general; that of
course an inquiry was to be made as to the share
each of the parties had iu the vessels. The umpire,
id the interrogatories put to him, said that lie made
Burgess an owner only in two of the ♦essels, because
witnesses examined before him proved that such waa
the case; and because Burgess, in the register, ap-
peared only as a partner in two.
The Defendants, in their answer, denied their

having any knowledge of the principle upon _which
the umpire proceeded.
His Honour the VICE-CHANCELLON after hearing
argument on both sides, expressed his unwillingness
to occasion further expence to the parties, it it cool/
possibly be avoided ; but as the award was evidently
In contradiction to the terms of the bond, it could not
be suffered to have effect.
The award was set aside, and the accounts refer-
red to the Master for settlement.
ESSEX ASSIZES, CHELMSFORD, MARCH 11.
THE KING v. &SWAM.
_ _

Mr. HEATH stated, that this was an indictment
against-Mr. Kelham, a printer, of this town, for the
publication of a libel on Montague Burgoyne, Esq.
a Gentleman of the county.
Mr. Serjeant BEST then stated the case. He said,
Mr. Burgoyne, on the late election, was a candidate
for the high honour of representing the County
Essex in Parliament, and during the election the libel
against him was published, which wai one of most
atrocious malignity. His Learned Friend, Mr. Nolan,
who was Counsel for the defendant, would argue the
it was a mere election squib ; but the Jury would
judge whether that was a proper character of it when
they came to hear it read ? The libel was a parody
of a well-known Poem, beginning, “ Pity the Sor..
rows of a Poor Old Man," and it began :
Pity the sorrows of a fallen man,
Whose wounded conscience leaves him uo repose,
Whose honour's dwindled ro the shortest span,
Oh, deign to listen to his tale of woes!
Here the libeller plainly told the world that the Ho.
nourable Gentleman had lost his honour ; and the
next went on to state those fact,, which he imputed
to him as the cause of his honour having dwindled.
Should I a history of my crimes reveal,
'I hat goads with anguish this of bread,
O'er your ftush'd cheeks resentment's glow would steal,
Anti looks-of horror could not be repress.
An honoured name was my paternal Ice,

And pure the joys of lite'suntarnisla morn;
But, ail! too soon their influence I forgot I
My name now brings me but contempt and scorn.
My heart high beating for my coutrry's
I fondly thought that cause would still maintain.
I raised a Regiment to support her laws;
But, ah ! t turned it to my private rsin!
I bought my horses at a lesser rate,
And chug'd my country to the full-amount,
And ev'n the food those horses should have e 4
I sated, and placed it to my own account !
If, said the Learned Serjeant, Mr. Montague Bur-
goyne bad been guilty of this conduct he would 1.
only have been unworthy to halm stood as a candi
date to represent the county in Parliament, but
would have been unfit to it in the box from whi
be hadsjust retired, administering the justice of
county as a Special Juryman. Bet this WAS sat
it went on to add,
Sworn to protect the soldiers' lawful dues,
On ail his dress a guilty price I latd—
Cloak', jackets, leggings, tweeeiscs, gloves, and shoes-.
From his wont purse to me *pins& paid.
This, forsooth, was only to be considered as an eiee.
tioneering squib, which thrust at the vitals of Mr.
Burgoyne's honour and character. He WAS the
man, and so was Mr. Burgoyne, to quarrel wii
mere electioneering squibs. There was one at
bottom of the very libel in question ; whioh,. it
had been all, his client would never have quarrel!
with. It was thus—Electioneering Wit.—"
times like these," said a Freeholder, "we req!
men of energy and spirit; in short, we 'want tried
meni'and no upstarts. " Then" said a wag, " chor4
Mr. Bnrgoyne—he has been twice tried!" Those
sort of paper pellets Mr. Burgoyne would ne,
have noticed ; but an attack upon his honour an,
character he was bound to vindicate. He did ,
from no vindictive motives—and be would now
make this offer—if Mr. Kelham, the printer, woult
give up his author, no evidence should be gi-
against him, and Mr. Burgoyne would even be
tisfied with a proper apology from the author ;
if this overture was rejected, Mr. Kelham mi
hereafter, on the floor of the King's Bench,- ens,
for this publicatilm. He bad said, that the au'
had indemnified him against all consequences,
he would find that there were consequences agai
which the author could not indemnify him. All
remained at present to do would be to prove the
lication of the libel by the defendant, and the conse-
quences resulting from the verdict would not be _
the Jury to consider—that the Court of King's Bench
would adjust hereafter.
_ _

A Mr:Hodges, an attorney, proved that he went
with Mr. M. Burgoyne to the shop of Kelham, who
acknowledged that heprinted and published the paper,
but said he was indemnified, and refused to give up
the author.
Colonel Burgoyne stated, that he formerly raised
a regiment of Fencible Cavalry, which he command-
ed ; that he was twice tried by a Court Martial, and
was acquitted of the charges brought against him, but
he was censured for an irregularity in changing two
horses, though the substituted hories were better.
The libel being read by the officer of the Court,
Mr. NOLAN, on behalf of the Defendant, addressed
the Court at considerable length, and contended that
this must be considered as an ebulition arising out of
the' heat of a general election.
The Jury found the Defendant Gs shy.
The cause was not called on till near five o'clock,
and was not over until eight. A dull uninteresting
cause respecting the property in a diteh, occupied the
greater part of the day.

•
to
Lot
ist
n.
Ir-
he
lie
te.
rd
in ,••
td
at
of
ft
re,
de
Se
Pas
p.
eir
ch
ng
$ll
ild
lot
1
er. ,
flt
he
iq.
id, •
ate
of
cost
An,
aid
;en
dy
or.
the
ted
10r-
not
ndi.
t he
hich
the
!kite
Mr.
last
with
the
it it
In
mire
tried
or.se
hese •
ever
and
d it
now
ould
iven •
Asa.
but ,
nust,,
swer
ithor
but
anist
that
pub-
Dine.
e for
lench
Went
who
apex,
Pe up
, •
.ailed
land.
, and

-

!:

asoi
. .
•
•
•
•
1.
of
with
Due
env]
whit
D
repe
audi
Lion.
Died
t tend
tivAi
1-1
a nu
Gen
gem
p
Tavi
Wid
The.
was
tux h
bum
limit
poses
It bi
man,
issue
open
Cons:
pares
A
tend.
1 the
4 plan;
gives
thous
This
1 Dom.
dowt
'l'l
• MAJ
ac c
act:
atco
T
this •
. the 1
cu
Ta•
To
To
• To
Come
To
Sod
• To
presi
tom
add
'Digb
whit
loom
of A
Vinci
vidu
horn
reeler
• a pit{
CABI
defe:
•
ZENS
Arm
atter
" 'll
.4, 1
4 (Appl
A.
were
41
Off .1
Army
molly
loan
to dt
pf lo;
-at ti;
TI
mein
•-tho
kind:
• • . were
- Mt
:11,41.
' 12.1 Y,
Dtift'sr4,d
• oda'
thoir
:V. :1:- •
• M
TY.O
101 :Cow
*ll.l, !'
trila
bs
vow
•