Star.
London, England, 1809-02-24 00:00:00

LAP IArITLLIG7':NCE.

Cflil7RT, DOC-1 OR' CO FEB. 21.
TOXIN v. TONY'S.
wv a sn't dlytiece, or separation from bed, board, and
:0, b:otti,ht by the Rev. John Vredericlt Tonyn,
against Ai.na To.ivii his w ice, by reason oi adultery, alkt.l.,;ed to
sae 1, e-Anliiitted with the Rev. Mr. Lynham, his Curate.
It appear. d that this was an appeal, prcsecuted, on the pin of
Mrs. 'roue, the wife, from the sentence of the Chancellcir of the ;
Consistorial Court o' the Diocese of Worcester, who was of opt-
:lion that the tact of adultery was clearly proved, and accordingly
rrimounc::il the usual sentence of separation.
• !le obtuse ealne on upo u the same evidence as adchiccd in
althe
Coiirc below, w:iich stated the several acts of adultery ;
and so ;
the verdict at damages obtained by the Rev. Mr. Tonyu against
the key. Mr. Lytham, the common Law Court.
0.1 the p.trt c f Mrs. Ti.nyn, a responsive allegation was plead-
ed, t.t.t Rev. (SirToyn with negligence arid connivance. •
The I.earn_ll Judg ions: Nicnocc), after hearing the
evid..nce read, and the Advocates on both sides, was clearly
waos
f
up; u, that the tart of adultery was proved; and that
nothin: lit:tore hint to show that the Re:. Mr. Tonyn hadbeen
ttii!ty of criminal nezligence and connivance on his part, and
to-ref i:e Air:lied the sentence of the Court below.

COURT OF CHANCERY, FEB. 14.
Tile CHANCELLOR animadverted with much severity on the
con-loci ;!ii attorney, for having filed a defamatory affidavit, re-
fire in no the •;i:iracters of, ct.rtain underwriters, at Lloyd's
w:re elescrihed as a gang of swindlers, taking
premiums for insurance, without the most distant intention of
paying :h.: ri,k insured against, should a loss take place. His
Lordship cot only orlered the affidaN it t 4 be taken off the file,
but directed the attorney to pay th:l costs of su itincurred by it.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, FEB. 10.
WINTER tr. MILES.
Lord F.t.LaNecntot.C.ll gavdadgment on this rule for a New
Trial. Thi, action was brought against the Sheriff of Middlesex
for a return (51•,R.1 hon.; on an execution against the Duke of
Sussex ; and the tines:Um was, whether Kensington Palace was
a Royal Puiace, such as exempted it from the execution of legal
process ?
Lori ELLENBOROUGH said, that it had been plainly proved
that the King had resided at Kensington Palace, and that the
Palace was kept in a state of preparation to receive his Majesty,
when: ver he cho ,:. to return to it; and he was to be considered
as virtually residing there.
The Court were therefore of opinion, that the finding of the
Jury was warranted, and that the Palace was exempt, and pri-
vileged from the service of legal process.—Rule discharged.
FEBRUARY 15.
Lord ELLF.NBOROUGH, this day, held the first Sittings for
London alter Term, and of I welve causes that were tried, the
two that excited the most interest were rONTIVLI V. PHILLIPS,
and :so si ME R } V. r-MITH. *lhese were actions for defamatory
word;. it: the tithe case, the defendant had said of Mr. Pontifex,
who is A , opper•anith, that he ought to be transported; and the
Jury recompensed the injury by giving Ox Penny damages.
It: :Ile second case, the parties were females, in a low condition
of lite, r.:.d the defendant bad called Mrs. Summers an old bawd,
a...ci itY.illuated that she kept a disorderly house. Tkis the Jury
tecon,pensed by giving Is. damages.
Inli. Ir).—THE KING v. KAYE AND REID.
Mr. (;:s s so %V stated that this was an indictment for an assault.
r Mr. Thomas Dobson, the prosecutor, a flour factor in Mark-
L.ne, st.ied, that he was invited to a meeting of the Fund for Ba-
kers' o:p%fans, at the Crown and Anchor Tavern in Fleet-street,
and after dinner there was some hesitation to receive the sub-
scriptions of seveeal bakers present, who sold bread under the as-
size rice, ad at last it was decided that their subscriptions
should net be rec. ived, and that they had no right to be present.
They were accordingly turned out of the room, and the prosecu-
tor, upon telling one of them to go out by himself, was abused,
and asked if he took the underseller's part ? Upon this, the de-
fendant Kale rushed forward, and, with other persons, forced
the prosecutor down the room, striking him, and keeping his
head euoiltied ke-iiist a table for some time. The prosecutor had
never spoken to Kaye in hit life.
NIT. Bryan Ste,thenson proved, that Kaye said to the prosecu-
tor, " You serve the und,rst tiers : you are as had as the under-
sellers. D-- -n his ( yes, at with him !" He also proves
the assault, and that the prosecutor give not the least provocation.
Me. Tte th proved the assault of thedefendatit Reid.
11r. M tn./AT i , for the defendant Reid, called several wit-
nesses, who sat mar oim at dinner, to prove that he never stirred
from his seat durinL the affray ; but they ;Mowed that the whole
pa; t„ of which hi. formed one, moved during the affray to a
more Tete: part of the room ; and all they could say was, that
they did not sties hint the whole time. The Learned Coutist.l abe
Called whn: -sus, who saw the assault ; but they could not poi',
tively say tln.t Reid s. a, 1:ot one of the assaultei s.
Mr. IiF.T, forth, der.ndant Kaye, called no witncsses.
The Jury toii;el b.eh the defendants Guilty.
Nro:-.D0.Y., re, 'O.—ii lt. KIN,: V• RICH.
The Dei.:-:dam v...i foerel -oiler of selling indecent prints.
1 fiE N.. \ 6 v. SMIT:I)SQ.
1I.;, Vla , :ea itelictinters aeitinst Mejor John Carrington Smith, I
I ..: .c, ;: .s.o.h up e.: --- :....W.11.111, the groctu of Lord Ranelagh.l
I.e.:vv.:lan, the Pros cuter, stated, that on Sunday, the 21st 1
of Au :its: is tt, while his wester was giving him directions by the
• ie 0: :he Nitelt Read, thelatet, the Defendant drove furiously
hy ii: a pie, :net struck the l'itesectitor twice with his whip,
sayirg, - bet out to the say, you d—d rascal." 'flee blows also
Lit tie, hiirse :: !itch the rros...cutor rode.
Ui..m ins c ..oss-exe mination, he said, there was plent y of rcom
for the D: fentl , tet to have passel without touching h m.
I seal Hanel .;;:h proved the assault, but thought that as the De- .
f..etlaitt was di it ing at the rate of 10 or 11 miles an hour, and did'
not SZ,:il, there was time fur only one blow. There was room 1
for two earri..;t:ts to have pasted by his Lordship and his groom.
Upon Lis cross examination, his Lordship said that his groom's
horse might heve been a little out of his parallel with the road.
'I he blow, be !bought, cant,: over kis groom's shoutelers, and the
burst's flank,—The Jury found the Defendant Guilty.
Tilt 1:1NC. V. SMITH.
This was another indictment against the same defendant for
pi-v.:of:Mg Lord Ranelagli to light a duel.
Nit. (t AP.g 0 W stated the case, and commented very severely
upon the conduct ::: those bug-bears of the road, who when they
have conimittt d an assault appeal to a breach of the peace as a
just;ficatidn of it. The Learned Counsel said, that his carriage
was "nee obstructed by the vehicle of a notorious boxer, who,
what he was asked s. hat he meant by the obstruction, paid that
I:, would slow the Learned Counsel what he meant by a good
Ihi i siting. N!r. G.:lt ltoW, upon this, shut the turnpike-gate, and
a friend of his, who came up, said to his assaulter, " Surely you
don't know it's Mr. GAR/LOW." UpOtl this, the man fell down
upon hi: knee,, saying that if he had known who it was, he would
nverils iv- acted as ;le had, and hoped the Learned Counsel would
let the ma ..1 erop. " No;' replied Mr. GAR ROW, " that is the
reason w.ly I will not let it drop."
Lori Ranelagh, the Prosecutor, said, that after the assault, of 1
which the last iadictment complained, he rode after the Defend- 1
...t, alai LA last mice( eded in stopping him. His Lordship then i
asked hi::: for e. bet reason he struck his Lordship's groom? Here- I
plied," tt is a lit ,s on d—d rascal ! I did not strike him." The 1
Pitt:se:titer thee.tek.al who the Defendant was; to which he repli-
d, -.• 1.1.) .:vu 1... A.: lite fur a Cockney, driving a hired gig on a
•I 'Lela, ? :.,:, eir.l am . ( ;melt:man, and an Officer upon duty."
•I'Le l'ro•.catior repiied, that was impossibki ; for his Lordsnip
thought his cootlenn was very unlike either the one or the other.
Upon this ;l ie 1....•;:-1ti...11t S"ill. 41 c,,,1,1--- )ou, you rascal! who
ate you ?"'11•e tics :cuter nOd Lim,and the 'Defendant then said,
that Lord Ranelazit was it particular friend of his-wife's, Mrs.
Smith, of R;,...,,,,a. TLe Prosecutor replied, he was very sorry
Mrs Smith's it.: beed had acted so impropt Ely. The Defendant
then melt:A.l,le.: el- Ltd lane„uage, and said, " If you have the spi-
rit of a mat., 3,:.!et me i:1 iVi 4) hours." The Prosecutor Declined
this, and suremoned the Defendant to NI eilhorough-street, where
chef met tile 1....ixt day. The Defendant then said, this was a very
c irious way of settling a difference between Ceetletnen ; be
thougla titer,: would be a fight, and that the husiness would
I.lot come there.
1/Ir. Keats: W*AS riding in the King's Road at the time of this
e..ii.versx.tion between the Prosecutor and the Defendant, and
p;oved, its tenor to be like that which his Lordship had stated.
There was nailing offensive in the conduct of the Prosecutor.
.-flee Defer.dant gave the Prosecutor the lie repeatedly ; he
wtes %rely violent and insulting, and his Lordship very cool and
. o.tciliatory. The witness was at the Police Office the text
• h •it the Defendant acknosvledged that he had challenged
...ty. w t.
t .. /Prosecutor, soil said he alsoulditave been harpy to have met
:1.1.1
.4111MENIMMEMMI

I:"