Star.
London, England, 1805-02-25 00:00:00

IDWARDS 9. ♦LRGO AND OTNIAII.

The Plaintiff, in this aftion, WAI a crimp, refiding
in St. Geprge's Fields; the Defendants were alto
perfons of the fame profdion, living at Rochetler,
ant contratiors, with different pander, to furnish
fulAitutes for the Militia and Arty of Referve.—
The Plaintiff kept a honfe, which was retorted to
by perfons in dillrefs,to whom he ufed to give credit
to a ccrtain amount ; and then, in order to liquidate
the debt, they- were obliged to enlill for a Ripulated
bounty, out of which, loch debts as they had con
tralied were difcharged. By agreement between the
panics, the Defendants were to have alloweit the

Plaintiff, at the rate of 271. per man, for every per-
fon fo obtained, upon his palling Muller, fwearinir,
&c. ptßocheller, the former advancing filch bounty
as the recruits had'agreecl hpott with the latter, pay-
ing he I,4l.ince between fuch Turn, and the 271. to
the Plaintiff. It appeared, that the Plaintiff had
tranilnitted to Rochelier feveral recruits, according
to this agreement, which he had procured, for from
t.t to 161. per man, and now brought his aftion for
the balance; but not being able to prove the &Clue'
amount paid and received, the Plaintiff was nonfitiled.

Sit VIILI HUNT, kmet. C. DUDIIILY.
• The Defendant in this cafe had contraatd with
the Plaintiff to furnifli him with certain cloathing for
a Voldnteer Corps, of which the Plaintiff had tlib
command. The contraa being paid, the Defendant
afterwards &milled an account of extras, which the
Plalntiff alfo diftharged, and now brunet his a4tion
to recover hack thelattdr fum. After going into Tome
evidence, the parties igreed to refer the matter to at.
bitration.

S

COURT OF COMMON PLIAS, PE& 22.
MINT O. nowtom.
Thelaintiff, a gentleman refiding at Woodbridge,
in Suffolk, brought his anion to recover the value of
8o gallons of Holland., which An Defendant, a fhip.
owner, bad negligently (offered to leak out of the •
calk, while conveying it from London, in his veffel,
to the place of deltination. The liquor was fent inn (
calk fuppofed to be found, from Mr. Gray's diailloy
in Leadenhall-fireet, to the Defendant's (hip, and in
the voyage to Woodbridge, the whole leaked out ex-
cept one pint, whicheras attributed either to the
Captain's inattention in not feeing the calk properly
flowed, or what is termed *hint the ateakty, a pects.
liar mode praetifed by feamen of drinking liquor out
of calks in a fhip's hold ; it however appeared by Iv
venal credible witneffes, that the Holland: had been
put in a bad cafk—The aperture in one of the naves, ,
through which the liquor had leaked, was examined
in Court, and there did not appear any ground to
furpen it had been unfairly made, the Jury thereto('
found a verdiet for the Defendant.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER, SATURDAY, FEB. 13.
HARRISON b. WIER.

The Plaintiff, a Gentleman of fortune, while re-
ading at Hendon, where the Defendant was a 'elat-
ing village apothecary, lent him, on the 28th of De-
cember, 1792, tool. for which he took his promiffory
note ; it was not put into a courfe of payment, until
Onober Lir, when the Plaintiff's uncle prefented it.
He was then told, that there was a fet off ; as it had
never been produced before, time was given, but the
ca(h had not been paid, therefore this anion was
brought. In going into evidence, the fit off was a
hill for medicines, amounting to 691. los. and a
charge of 311. to,. for extra attendance. On going
into the items of fix, eight, or ten mixtures per day,
Mr. PLOMER made a moll bumourous fpcech, and
nearly convulfed the Court with laughter. In the
event, the Jury allowed the Donor pl. for his bill of
toll. by giving the Plaintiff their verdin for pl.—
The Statute of Limitations was alfo pleaded, but
over-ruled. •

DISOWNED kt/AKEIS.

VIXEN V. BADGER, cnr, STURGIS AID OTHERS.

In this very interelling caufe the Plaintiffs and
Defendants were of the Society of the People called
Quakers, and the anion was brought to recover a
compenfation in damages from the Defendants, for
affaulting and falfely unprifoning the Plaintiff, on
the 16th day of January, 184.
When Serjeant WlLLusts had proceeded rt Mort
way in his opening, the Lord CHIEF. Balton inter-
fered, and earneary pit it to the parties, whether
they had not better fabmit all matters in difpnte to
a reference, than to expofe what might tarn out a tri-
fling difpute as to forms, among men whole dune-
terittie is that of peaceable and quiet demeanour.—
The partiesi however, differing as to the mode of ad-
joßment, the cattle proceeded, and difclofed the fol-
lowing fads:—
The Plaintiff, Mr. Henry Finch, lives at Reading,
ha Berkfhire ; he was born and bred a Quaker, and
from his early manhood until he was fixty years of
ale, filled the molt honourable Rations in that So-
ciety. In the year 1797, at a Quarterly Meeting of
the Society, two members were propofed to be ex-
pelled, as Serjeant WILLIAMS Rated, having been
found guilty by their Synod of paying tythes without
a difhefs being. levied. Mr. Finch having under-
taken to apologize for their conduit, fo difpleafed
part of the Friends, that they fncceeded in prevailing
on the majority to ^, difown him," which is a kind
of ptofcription, not from attending the religious part
of their worship, but having any concern in the ma-
nagement of the temporal and charitable part of their
economy. In this way matters Rood until the Quar-
terly Meeting of the Friends held is Bilopfgate-
flreet, on the Atli day of January, when Mr. Finch
prefented himfelf at the Meeting-door for admUlion.
It fhould teem that his vifit was not unezpe.fted, as
the fix Defendants were Rationed, three at each door,
to oppofe him. It was in vain he was informed that
the Q2arterly Meeting being on *fife-Wise only, and
not on evotfiip, and he being dfowncd, had no right to
enter ; he 'till perfißed, until Mr. Badger took him
by the collar, and pulled him from the door down
the pafrage, where he held him for a minute or twc,
and then let him depart. This was the Cum and lab-
Rance of the all'ault and falfe imprifonment.
Serjeant SEatott, Mr. PLOM R, and Mr. Datmeav,
were retained fr,..e'le Defendants. Mr. PLOMEE con-
dufted the defence ; and the whole refolved itfclf
into one point, viz. Whether the Society had a
right to chfplace or difown Mr. Finch and if they
had, Were they warranted in keeping him out of
their meetings by force ? It was held they had, the
meeting not being at that time for religious worfhir,
but for regulating the economy of their affairs, pro-
riding for their poor, &c.
A Mr. Harrifon, an eminent dealer in the tea
trade, in the courfe of his evidence, clearly defined
every religious and moral principle on which the So.
ciety of Friends 4a, and thst in a way fo perfpicu-
ous and interelling, as to call forth the higheß com-
pliments from the Bench.
His Lordlhip, on the Plaintiff's own !hewing, was
of opinion, that he had no right to force his way ;
that be was an intruder, and t:tat therefore the adiou
could not be maintained. He was accordingly no.i-
fuited.
The Court was er-wded with perfons of this per
fuafion, who all appeared highly interefted in the
event, and pleated with the decifon. [Turn o: .r: