Star.
London, England, 1801-10-23 00:00:00

WF.STM PATER SESSIONS.

At the commencement of the Seffions on Wecl-
nefday the Riot Aftwais read, and alfo the King's
Proclamation for eno&raging virtue and good
order.
Yefterday Nickolas Tucker was indhled for keep-
ing a difurderly houfe in Lancafter-court, New
Bond-ilreet. The firft witnefs called in fu.pport
of the profecution was a watchman, named Ed-
wards, who lilted that he has repeatedly feen per-
lons of both feces go into this houfe, which he
knew to be a houfe of ill fame, and has heard va-
rious riots and nodes there. On this man's crofs-
examination, he Paid he had recommended men
and their wives to peep there. In anfwer to a
quellion from the Learned Counfel for the De-
fendant, he could not fay, from his own know-
ledoe, that any woman of a !note defcription
ludo-
ed in the !mule. 4, Why," faid the Learned Coun-
fd, looking at his notes, know this houfe to be
a houfe of ill fame." T'he witnefs immediately re-
plied, 6' So do T." (This created a great laugh
in the Court.) The v. itnefs f.iid, " I have intro-
duced Gentlemen there to get a lodging, as I might
do you." ( An:,ther laugh.) Several other wit.
netres were called, who relide in the court ; they
all concurred in dating that the houfc kept by the
Defendant was one of a moil diforderly dcfcrip-
tion—that they have repeatedly heard the cry of
murd.t, btell alarmed in the middle of Use
night I,! riots and dillurbanccs. The Counfel for
the Del endant endeavoured to prove that this pro-
fecution was inliituted from malicious motives;
bift without
Two witnefles were called on behalf of the De-
Endant, to preve that the houfe in quellion Wai
not a difurderly one. Atmer a flria crofs-exami-
i ation, they acknowledged they had feen gil Is of a
eel tain doteription, and Alb grey headed old men,
G, nticmen's (avant, and in thort all forts of peo-
ple, refort to the Dcfsodant's
The Jury, being fati,lied st ifh the evidence for
the pro!ectitioa, foinhl the Dc • ;ant Guilty. He
%v.'s then fentcref.d to he in:1)1111,nel( fix months.
A5r,,...7:.v —74 n was indicted fur 2iFattlt-
'l:.; on mile if-!:11 of May. The pro.
'lt(.l 11..::-:, that he had been often infulted I,v
I:._ crevious to the day on which he
•
.'01),•:-1.ia • aii.4lllZ, on ssllch day he was
!)tai's-Y:od, We II mintier, when he
;fret was hi.; intention to mo-

lel him, be went off the kirb hone in order to let
him pafs ; tl.e Defendant, howeer, began to abule
him, holding his tilt up td the Profecutor's face,
calling him at the fame time many opprobrious
narms, and challenging him to fight. This was
confo med by a witnefs of the name of Arrow,
who happened to come up at the time.
ra:: Defendant concluded his own defence. He
was entering into a long hiftory of tranfadions be-
tween him and the Profecutor, rtior to the tittle
%%len this affault took place, from which he endea-
cow ed to infer that he was juftified by the previ-
ous ill condud of the Profecutor in affaulting him.
The Court interfered,and reminded him that what
he was Hating was irrelevant to the profeention a-
t him, which was for an affault; and requefted
lie N 1 0111 d confine hirnfelf to that point. He theft
called two witneffes to prove that the Profecutor
was not to be believed upon his oath. They, how-
leler, fo far from proving what the Defendant had
alltdged, clearly afcertained that the Profecutor is
ea man of ftrid integrity and unblernifhedcharader.
The Learned Connie) for the profecution com-
mented on the conduct and behaviour Of the De-
fendant, in endeavouring to take away the reputa-
tion of his Client. He faid he fhould call feveral
witneffes refiding in Weftnainfter, and well known
to the Jury, who would Rate to them that the Pro-
le .-utor is a man of aria honour, and the moft fair
charader; he faid he fhould do this in order to
IheW the malignancy of the Defendant's conduit,
though he had no doubt of their being fatisfied on
that head. He then called Mr. Coffer. a Magiftrate
for Vreftminiter, who gave the profecutor the molt
excellent character for honetty and integrity.—
The Court being fatisfied on that head, the Learn-
I ed Counfel called no other witneffes.
The CHAIRMAN then obferved to the Jury, that
the offence charged againft the Defendant had been
proved, if they were fatisfiedwith the evidence of
the Profecinor, which had been firengthened by
another witnefs. lt was an affault in pqint of law,
though no battering had been proved; they would
therefore confider their verchd, and give fuch a
one as fhould be eonfonant to tht arid principles
of jutliee —The jury immediately found the De-
fendant Gullty.—lie was fentenced to pay a fine of
Five Pounds, and to enter into fecurity to keep the
peace for one year, himfelf in tool. and two fine-
ties hi 01. each.
Dawes Perehd was found guilty of afanking Mar-
garet Rummings. It appeared that the Piofecu-
tor lodged in the I2efendant's houfe, and having
fome words with hitt, he puthed her down flairs.
She was at that time far advanced in her preg-
nancy ; in confequence of his ill ufage, the was
obliged to be attended by a furgeon and a nurfe,
and kept her bed for ten days.—The Court fen-
tenced him to pay a fine of Ten Pounds.