Star.
London, England, 1805-06-11 00:00:00

L 49/ MTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, JUNE so.
NEGLIGENCE OF MAIL COACHMEN.
SAMsoM V. Haysw.—The Plaintiff, who is a Lieu-
tenant on board Sir John Orde's Flag firip, brought
his adion againft the proprietor of the Portfmouth
mail coach, to recover damages for an expence which
he was put to, in confequence of being obliged to
hire a poll chaife at Guildford, after he had been
prevented from 'Meiling his journey to London in
the mail coach, by tht negligence of the Defendant's
fervant. It appeared that the Plaintiff took a place
on the outride of the coach at Portfmouth for con-
veyance to London in November laR, and fhortly
after they fet out the paffengersivere greatly alarmed
for their fafety by the unßeady manner in which the
driver concluded his horfes. The coach was fre-
-citiently in danger of being upfet, and when they got
within half a mile of Guildford the coachman gave
Up the box to the guard, and declared he was una-
ble to drive them further. On the fic,ppage of the
, coach at the top of Guildford Hill, the Plaintiff 4nd
the piffengers got out and walked to Guildford,
where they took poll chaifes and proceeded to London.
The Jury found a verdia for the Plaintiff.—Da-
mages 191.—Colts Ors.
Sir JAMES klaitsiisLo obferved, it was an dif-
grace to bring an &talon for fo (mall a fum, becaufe
it was for the benefit of the public fuck &ilium Humid
be brought.

COURT OF MG'S BENCH, JUNES.
THIS KING T. GIOR•11 HOST.
This was a charge of confpiracy again() the De-
fendant, an eminent boot and (hoe maker in St.
James's-ftreet, for entering into a combination with
a number of journeymen boot and (hoe Makers, to
Mire their wages in different parts of the kingdom.—
It, perhaps, may be ufeful to premife, that bout ma-
kers and boot clofers are perfeCtly chitin& branches
of the fame trade, and it was in confequence of the
difpute between there two claffes of perfons that this
profecution was commenced.
Melts. Ecsaret, GARROW, and Gnaws, raid,
it was a confpiracy which tended not only tedeftroy
the commerce, but to subvert the conftitution of this
free country ; and whith mull, therefore, be put
down by the ftrong arm of the law. Bye regulations
had been made amongft the makers and clofers of
boots, and there patrons prefumed to ere() them•
(elves into a tribunal of juftice, to proclaim laws,
and to extort penalties. To forward filch a delign,
there were two diftind Courts eftablilhed, the one fu-
preme, the other fubordinate ; the latter was called
the (hop meeting, the former the affeinbly of delegates.
In imitation of the maxims of juriiprudence in the
time of Elizabeth, there Legirlators enaCted, that
their companions in the trade ilhoula only take one
apprentice, or, if they had two, the firft mull be
within fix months of the expiration of his time. The
clofers refitted this arrangement ; the makers refufed
to work with every clofer who thould not comply ;
the trade was thus completely obaruaed, and the
matters were threatened with ruin. Numerous fins
were impofed, which the parties had no leuthority
to enforce, excepting by the means they employ-
ed, of wholly abandoning the barriers. ln this
fituation of things, the Defendant, as the molt
eminent in his trade, was the molt confiderable
Infer ; and for his own mercenary purpofes, op.
pored to the intereft of trade, to the maxims of
law, after haring preferred no Ids than a hundred
indiaments againft the offenders, he himfelf paid the
fines which were due, entered into an agreement to
corroborate and eltablith there by laws, and thus
encouraged fuch illegal, nefarious, and deftruClive
combinations.
Two witneffcs were then called, Lewis Richards.
and Thomas Ilamborough, who depofed to the fads'
hated in the opening of the Learned Connie).
The Clerk of the Court read the engagement enter-
ed into by the Defendant, by which it appeared that
he agreed to advance no further in the profecutions,
and to exclude from his employment perfons who
were confidered as refraltory (fcalu and tramp:), by
the orders of the fociety.
Lord ELIANISOROUGH" This k a compromife,
but no confpiracy. The engagement entered into
by the Defendant, he mull by no means aft upon—
it is a nullity, becaufe it is illegal. The Defendant
thould underhand, if he thould again come before
the Court, his condlidt will appear in a more °fen-
five point cf view ; for the law will frequently infer
:he criminal purport from the criminal confequences."
Mr. GARROW—" It thould be underliond.what is
the nature of a confpiracy. hly Lord will toll the

D-retlant, on his own ttittotity, that if twenty men I
go feparately to their matter, and. each ofthem says he
will not work, this will be evidence of a confpiracy."
Lord Essrhaoscucu—" Perfons may be con-
fpirators, without having Peen or heard each other.
tt Gentlemen of the Jury—The Defendant has in-
tended to cool the paflioiss thefe parties, but in the
endeavour he has nearly burnt his own fingers.
There does not feem to be any criminal defign, and
I think hz is entitled to your acquittal."
Verdia—Not Guilty.