Star.
London, England, 1807-04-30 00:00:00

THE 'LOMB OF MY FATHERS.

Cult& 'd by misfortunes, and bowl down with pain,
fought on the boforn of peace to recline:
I hied to the Home of my Fathers again;
But the Houfe of my Fathers no longer was mine.
The look that fpoke gladnefs and welcome was gone ;
The blaze that shone bright in the Hall was no more.
A Ranger was there, with a Wow of atone,
And cold was his eye as I entered his door.
' lyres his, deaf to pity, to tendcrnefs dead.
The falling to crulh, and the bumble to fpurn:
But I Raid not his fcorn—from kis marlion I Bed,
And my beating heart vowed never more to return.
What Mane (hall receive me! One Home yet I know;
O'er its gloomy reeds, fee the pine branches ware !
Tis the Tomb of my Fathers ! The world Is my foe,
And all suy it beritauce now is a grave.
Tis tie Tomb of my Fathet s ! The grey snolitized
Deelini,ng to earth, freak aloud of decay:
The gate, off its hinge, and half opening, can.,
" Approach molt unhappy, thy dwelling of clay !"
Alas. thou role dwelling of all I hold dear,
HoW little this meeting once angur'd my breast!
Pram a Wanderer accept, oh my Fathers, this tear,
Iteceiwe him; the Taft of his race, to your re it !

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF RING'S BENCH, APRIL sp.

SEER V. PRENTICE.

This was the cafe of the fboemaker who Cued as a
pauper, againff a furgeon, for unfkilfulnefs and ne-
gligence in curing the Plaintiff's brr ken arm. The
eanti was tried before Mr. Jußice HEATH, the lag
Mires for Hertfc;rd, and a verdia obtained for the
Defendant.
A few days ago, Mr. Gliartsv obtained a midi-
tional rule for a new ti ial, on the grounds of swiicli-
veilion by the Learned Judge, as fully reported in
our paper of Saturday, the iSth inflant.
From the Judge's report of the trial below, it ap-
peared there was no evidence adduced to prove the
negligence of the furgeon ; and the Learned Judge
Enid, he could not try a matter fo uncertain as the
fkilfulnefsor unfkilfulnefsof any furgeon or phyfician.
Mr. terjeant Sir EPH ran, In fumenrt of the original
verdiit, obfetved, that in truth this Was the a&ion of
Mr. Kingßon, the furgeon, who had completed the
cure of the poor fheemaker, and made ufe of his
name, to defttoy the reputation of his rival and
neighbour. He then adverted to an exprefflon of the
Learned Jude who tried the caufe, which (truck
him very forcibly, and which was, -;at " unlefs ne-
Pligence was proved, no verdift could be given to the
laintiff ; as ocher wife country furgeons would be put
in a very unpleafant predieameot, if they were to be
tubjea to anions for unfkilfulnefs, becaufe, perhaps,
they might not perform a cure wish as much (kill as
Mr. Cline, Mr. Abernethy, Mr Hsflop, or Dr. Hume
might du." The Learned Judge alto had faid, that
it was not fit to balance the (kill of a furgeon in fetch
very nice fcaleb; and, unlefs aaual negligence was in
proof there was no ground to affea the Defendant.
Mr. Gnawer, on the other band, contended, that
lyt was not permitted to go into proof of unflcilful.
nets opnn the trial below, as the Learned Judge had
put a flop en further examination of witneffes ; and,
therefore, upon there grounds, there fhould be a ucw
trial.

Lori! ictansoaovon-11 I obferve that Mr.
Kinglion imputed it entirely to careleffnefs in the
Defendant, and therefore, the evidence did not raife-
the queflion of unfleilfulnefs ; and, however I may
differ from the Learned Judges, with refped to the
kill necefiary for a country furgeon, the queflion of
carelefliseis came fairly before the Jury, and upon
that they were to decide."
Rule difcharged.
KIRK V. DIRRINIIS, IsO

This was alto a motion for a new trial, the Plain-
tiff having brought his aftion againil the Defendant
for 901. for cockades and ribbons fupplied to him at
the time of the elation for the borough of Leiceller,
and of which the Defendant contended that his bro-
ther, Sir William Manners, bad guaranteed the
payment.
The Court Paid, from the report, it futEciently ap-
neared that the Plaintiff confidered the Defendant his
debtor throughout the whole tranfadion, and not Sir
William Manners ; and that the Defendant teemed
to have confiderad him in the fame way.
The Rule for a new.trial was confequently refufed.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, APRIL 29.
JACKSON V. COLIMAIII•
This was an Action for Affault, tried at the late
Affizes for Norfolk, when a verdia of aool. damages,
was found for the plaintiff.
Some days ago, Mr. Serjeant Sst-Lon obtained .a
Conditional Rule, for a new trial, on the grounds of
exCellive damages ; and this day Mr. Serjeant Barr
(hewed tante again(} that Rule, in fupport of the
Verdi&
It appeared, from the report of the Learned Judge,
who tried the cattle, that the plaintiff in this cafe
was a QLtaker, and the defendant a Clergyman, both
of whom were upwards of 6o years of age. Upon a
Vifitation, held by the Bifhop of the Diocefe, all
the Clergymen of the diocefe, truftees of the poor,
Sec. dined with his Grace, as ufual upon fuch occa-
fions. The Plaintiff, being one of the truftees of
the poor, (at two or three perfons diftant from the
Defendant ; in the courfe of the evening they pro_
ceedcd to tranfaa tome public bufinefs, and the De.
fondant was in the chair. It being necelfary for the
plaintiff to fign tome papers, the defendant called to
him for that purpofe, in a very infulting manner ;
• (aid, " He had no brains," and " he would pull his
afs's ears, &c." The defendant then inquired for
the Plaintiff's daughter, who it was undertiood had
been debauched by a perfon of the name of Kendall
or Kemble, and carried into Yorkfhire; and told him,
66 If he would take Come of Kendall's phyfic, it
would clear his brain." The plaintiff anfwered,
that, " If he repeated that perfon's name again, he
was a fcoundrel ; upon which the defendant imme
eliately role from his feat, went up to him, and (truck
him a violent blow acrofs the face with hit open hand.
Mr. Serjeant Ski.l.oll. contended, that the gal
pro:lineation was given by the plaintiff himfelf ; it
at the Action was brought- for an injury fuffered
fro*" Ora, which was co very trifling, end not for

fcandalons words cpyken, he trufled the Court would
fee, that this was not a tate for fuch exorbitant da-
mages.
The Count., however, thought the fide provoca-
tion came from the defendant ; for, it was impollible
to fay, what might have been the infult intended, in
(peaking of the plaintiff's daughter, and her feducer;
betide., to other refpeEts, the plaintiff feemed to have
condueed himfelf with great temper and modera-
tion, throughout the tranfatlion ; and it was to be
alfo recolleded, that this affault took place in a pub-
tic affembly. The belt way, therefore, of making
this gentleman keep the peace, in future, would be
to let the verdia gland as it was.—Rule tcfufed.

WHITCOMBE V. V AVOItAN.

Mr. Serjeant CLAY Tort (hewed cant:: againa a rule,
obtained in this cafe on the firll day of Term, to fet
.Bide the verdiEt, and enter a nonfuit. The plaintiff
loft his mare, worth thirty five guineas, by toiling up
a halfpenny with the defendant, and afterwards
brought his a&ion on the Ila.ute of Queen Anne,
which enacts, that any perfon toting above tol. at
cards, dice, or other game of chances, may recover
the fame within•three months, and obtain cons of
fuit, as in an a&ion of debt. At the trial, the plain-
tiff obtained a verdift. The ground for the nonfuit
was, that the plaintiff had not brought his aelion
within the time fpecified in the A.:I of Parliament ;
and after the arguments t f Counfel had been heard
on both fides, the Court were of opinion that a non•
fuit ought to be entered.