Star.
London, England, 1824-08-05 00:00:00

AFFAII=MNOUR.

Yesterday morning a meeting took place within about
a quarter of a mile of Kensington. The principals
were Major C—, formerly of the 17th Light Dragoons,
and a French Gentleman, named Fi oissart ; the former
F. was attended by Captain P--, the latter h_y S
EA. An ineffectual attempt was made by their rat-
a, ective friends to bring about an amicable conclusion,
lu; the determined hostility of the Frenchman bore
dawn all argumcw, and the pistols were delivered ac-
cordingly ; the first fire, which was by signal, proved
!armless, but the second brought M. Froissart to the
earth, badly wounded is the abdomen. A surgeon was
on the ground, and attempted to extract the ball, but
without effect, as the unfortunate gentleman bled pro.
fusely, and seemed in great torture ; being placed in
a coach, he was taken to the White Hart, Kensing-
ton, where the wound was dressed, and restoratives
being administered, it was judged expedient to con-
'lane the journey to town.
The Major and his friend remained with him the en-
tre time, and M. Froissart expressed, in unequivocal
terms, a sense of his own impropriety, in resisting an
konourable accommodation) and also admitted that the
Ldsiness was conducted in an impartial and gentleman-
iike manner ; at the same time repeatedly exchanging
forgiveness with his antagonist. His recovery is consi-
dered as very precarious, fever being likely to follow,
from the irritation of the wound. We could learn, that
the quarrel took place at Rouen, from whence M.
Froissart followed the Major, who knew not of his design
Emil meeting him in London.
Another duel took place on Monday morning, on
Mr,
Common, between Lieutenant Williams and
xvir. GM. The quarrel arose at billiards. The parties
met, and fired by signal, when Lieutenant Williams re-
ceived Mr. Gill's ;hot in the right shoulder. The party
l'as Conveyed off the ground in a hackney-coach, and
we have since heard is out of danger—the ball having
been estracted.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' couAr, AUGUST 4.
aort!y before the Court ruse today, Mr. Massey, the
ctcer, read an application from " Her Royal High-
less, Olive, Princess of Cumberland" (as the applicant
herself), for permission to amend her schedule,
inserting the assignment of several large sums of
and adding the names of some creditors. " Her
Kr)yal Highness" complained that her Solicitor refused
tortocted with her business.
Collin. observed, that they had ordered the case
to stand over for the insolvent to file certain documents,
snd as in her present affidavit she had omitted to state
that she was ready to file those documents, they could
~,,Ta7t her application until it was amended.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

-...gam---

WORCESTER, AUGUST 3.
Mary Hallpenny,the wife of a farmer at Bretton, in
this county, was indicted for.the wilful murder of her
servant, Mary Walton, who died on the 21st of March
last, accomplished by giving her blows on the head; and
throwing her upon the ground. She was also charged
on the Coroner s inquisition with the same offence. She
appeared at the bar with a very fine child in her arms,
and was allowed a seat. She pleaded " Not Guilty."
Mr. Cross stated the case for the prosecution. He
represented the deceased as an orphan, who was of sickly
constitution, and incapable of bearing any severe inflic-
tion. On Friday, the 20th of March, she was beaten by
the prisoner for some alleged misconduct, and having
fallen, was again beaten while on the ground ; and on
the Saturday night she died. The prisoner attempted to
hasten the funeral, and stated that her servant had died
of an infectious fever. From the testimony of the sur-
geons, the Jury would hear whether her death could be
attributed to the usage she had received from her mis-
tress. If they thought a resulted from this cause, they
would then decide, under the direction of the Learned
Judge, whether the circumstances of the case amounted,
to murder, or whether the prisoner was guilty of the
lesser offence of manslaughter only?
Thomas Walton the brother, and Martha Jay the
fellow-servant of the deceased, with several other wit-
nes-es, were examined for the prosecution.
Two surgeons'who wereexamined, stated, that taking
the evidence as true, the death was not occasioned
by the treatment the servant had received from her
mistress ; and another witness deposed, that she had re-
ceived a blow on the head by a windlass, which had
fractured her skull.

Mr. Justice PARK charged the Jury, who returned a
verdict of .vof Guilty; and the prisoner was discharged.
Mary Brindle, was indicted for a misdemeanour, in
exposing her infant child with intent to starve it, or do
it some great bodily harm.
Mr. RYAN opened the case for the prosecution, and
characterized the offence of the prisoner as one of the
deepest moral guilt.
It appeared in evidence, that on the Bth of May last,
the prisoner was delivered of a male child at a place
called the Block-house, near Worcester. On the 13th
bf July, she set out, at three o7clock in the morning,'
from that place, with the child. At ten in the same
morning, it was found deserted in a field near Brims-
grove, among some thrrns, by the side of a pit. The
prisoner was then at Bromsgrove, in company with
several soldiers, and was followed, and taken in ,he
same society at Burton-upon-Trent, in Staffordshire, 54
miles from the spot where she had left her child, which
was far from any house, and was not likely to be visited
by any one who could preserve the infant from death.
The prisoner, being called on for her defence, said she
exposed the child to save her own life.

Mr. Justice Pear said the case had been justly repre-
sented as of an enormous nature; and he believed was
without a parallel for a hundred years. There was an
instance so long ago, in which a mother left her child in
an orchard where it was devoured by a kite, and she
was convicted and executed for its murder, as this wo-
man must have been, had not the child been providen-
tially saved. By leaving it in such a spot, she could in-
tend nothing but its death, though that intent had been
happily frustrated. If the Jury believed the witnesses,
they could entertain no doubt of her guilt.
The Jury immediately found the prisoner Guilty, and
she received sentence to be imprisoned and kept to hard
labour for two years in the House of Correction. She
held the child in her arms during the trial.

CAMBRIDGE, AUGUST s.
VANDIRUZULZN V. VANIIZIIMEULEN.

This was an action brought by a sister against her
brother, to recover the sum of 1561. for the funeral ex-
penses of their father.
The plaintiff's case was, that her father, Mr. Joseph
Pomfret Vandermeulen, had died in the year 1622.
Being left his executrix, with a very limited income (not
more than from 601. to 100/. a year), she had intended
to bury him respectably, but inexpensively, in Cam-
bridgeshire. Mr. Frederick Vandermeulen, the defen-
dant, however, who, by the bequest of his grandmo-
ther, enjoyed a very considerable fortune, thought such
a course derogatory to the honour of the family, and
insisted upon carrying his deceased father to the family
vault at St. Alban's. In doing this, a very heavy ex-
pense had been incurred, which, in the first instance,
he had declared should be his ; but which; when called
upon by the executrix (who had paid it), he now re-
fused to defray.
Mr. Leworthy, a Clergyman, of respectability and a
Magistrate for Cambridgeshire, proved the case.
Mr. H. Coopan, for the defendant, endeavoured to
shew that Mr. Leworthy was the real plaintiff in the
cause, he having in fact brought an action against the
defendant, and failed in recovering at the very last
Assizes. He denied any intention on the part of the de-
fendant, at any time, to render himself liable for his
father's funeral. Miss Vandermeulen was the father's
sole heir (and to considerable property) as well as his
executrix, Mr. F. Vandermeulen not being even men-
tioned in his will. All that the defendant had wished
was to see his father buried respectably, which he knew
his sister had assets sufficient to afford.

The LORD CAM BARON said, that the short question
for the Jury was, whether the defendant had under-
taken to indemnify the plaintiff for the expense of con-
ducting their father's funeral in the way in which he
desired- to see it done? He (the Chief Baron) thought it
questionable, whether the positive undertaking neces-
sary had been given.
The Jury, after retiring for half an hour, found their
verdict for the defendant.
YORK, AUGUST 2.

Jones Woodfield, aged 25, was put to the bar, charged
with having, on the King's highway, robbed John Broom-
head, of Elland, labourer. Verdict—Not Guilty.
Henry Williams, aged 2S,late of London, well known
in the metropolis by the name of Harry the Groom,
pleaded guilty or having committed a burglary at the
house of Colonel Beaumont, of Bretton Hall, near Wake-
field, on the 17th September last.—Guilty—Death.
Jolla Brough, aged 24, pleaded guilty to having
robbed the wash-horse of George Hall, of Norton,
near Malton, of various articles of wearing apparel and
other linen.—Guilty. Last year the prisoner was tried
for robbing his own mother.
Samuel Thorpe, aged 3.5, was charged with having
wilfully, maliciously, and unlawfully cut and stabbed
Edmund Holt, of Huddersfield, with intent to do him
some grievous bodily harm.
Edmund Holt,the prosecutor, stated, that as he was re-
turning home hom a public-house about half-past seven
o'clock in the evening of the 7th of April last, he heard

,
,

the cry of " Matcierrwhich proceeded from the pri-
soner's house, whereupon he tried the latch, but fobnd
the door fastened. On forcing the door open and en-
tering the house, a man, whom he believed to be the
prisoner, rushed upon him with a knife, and cut him
four times over the forehead. Witness seized him by
the hands, and' they both felt to the ground. On his
(witness) calling out " Murder," the wife of the prisoner
jumped out of bed and fetched one George Carter. The
blood was issuing from witness4ead, which was after-
wards dressed by a surgeon.
Cross-examined by Mr. &Actium—The prosecutor stated that
he had formerly lodged with the prisoner and his wife, and ad-
mitted that after leaving them and going to live at Leeds the pri-
soner's wife followed him there, where they lived together lift- a
month, until the prisoner fetched his wife home. It further ap-
peared that subsequent to that time the greatest familiarity had ex-
isted between the prisoner's wife and Holt.
George Carter stated, that when he got to the pri-
soner's house, and saw the prosecutor bleeding, he said to
the prisoner--" Thorpe, thou hast killed Holt." The
prisoner replied—" If I have not, I wish I had ; and I
would do the same to any one else if he broke into my
house, and interfered with my affairs."
The Learned JUDGE said, that this crime did not come
within the cognizance of the particular Act of Parlia-
ment under which the indictment was framed. Had
death ensued, the crime would only have been man-
slaughter. The prosecutor ought to have apprised the
prisoner of his intention to break open the door.
The Jury returned a verdict—fs'ot Guilty.

John Ryder, of Ballarby, in the North Riding, stood
capitally indicted for cutting and maiming John Rat-
cliffe, of Leyburn, near Bedale, .with intent to murder him.
Mr. JONES stated the case to the Jury. The prose-
cutor was servant to Mr. Blenkinsop, of Le)buin,
whose barn bad often been robbed. On the night of
the nth of March last, the prosecutor secreted himself
in his master's barn to watch ; soon after which, some
person came in, and filled a sack with corn. As he
was about to take it away, the prosecutor said, "I have
long looked for thee, but thou hast come at last." No
sooner had he said this, than he was brought to the
ground with a severe blow on the head, which was af-
terwards repeated. The prosecutor succeeded in es-
caping, but not until he was severely cut.
The prosecutor now swore that the prisoner was the man, al-
though it appeared be had before expressed some doubt as to his
identity.—Several witnesses were called by the prisoner's Counsel
to prove an alibi. but failed in the attempt.
The Learned Judge directed an acquittal, on the ground that the
prisoner had not cut the prosecutor maliciously, but merely to
effect his escape..—Verdict—Nos Guilty.