Star.
London, England, 1823-01-10 00:00:00

SAMUEL V. MAKIN.

This was an action of trespass, assault, and false
imprisonment.
The case for the plaintiff was this:—The plaintiff

.was attending a sale in the auction room of the de-
fendant, when a watch was missed from the table;
upon which the defendant sent for a constable, and
ordered the plaintiff to be searched, and he was ac-
cordingly watched, but nothing was found upon
him. For this proceeding the plaintiff brought the
present action.

Four witnesses were called for the defendant, and
they stated that they were attending the defendant's
salerooms on the day in question.. A watch being
missed, the cause of the loss became the subject of
some noise in the room, and several persons desired
to be searched. Some individuals pointed out the
plaintiff; who, of his own accord, jumped upon the
table, and took off his coat and waistcoat, and ex-
pressed his own willingne4 to be searched. It was
expressly denied that the defendant had pointed out
the plaintiff, or given any directions to have him
searched.— Upon this evidence the case went to the
Jury, and they found their verdict for the delendant.
It was admitted on all sides that there was no im-
putation on the character of the plaintiff. The watch,
indeed, was afterwards found.

ANDREWS V. MOULD.
This was an action to recover the value of a him til
alleged to have been killed in consequence of thit
negligenee of the defendant's servant.
'The case was this s--In Thaenes•itreet, two
meeting each outer, the Plaintiff's horse, which l
in one of them; -was so severely hurt., that the anima
died shortly after. The question wascost which side
the fault lay. As usual in such cases, there-were wit-.
nesses called on both sides, the one set imputing:the
blame to the defendant's carter, and the other,to
the plaintiff's. . -
The CHIRP Jvirrics summed up the evideneeges,
both tidei, and

Ju;y7ound their verdict for the plaintiff-;.
Damages 221, lOs.
CROSS V. LEXANDSR.
This was as action of assault and lsattery_ebrn-t,
by a diminutive painter and glazier, about five vet.
high, against a Jew bruiser, known by-the rianta•of
the Infaa, not from the smallness of his size, being.
six feet higb,And of prodigious muscular strength.
It appeared that the parties came in couract at. a.
.public-house in Bevis Markt, in the month of Atl-
i/eat last. The plaintiff demanded of the defkmdant
a sum of five shillings, which beulleged to bet:Wet&
him. The defendant appeared to be in a hurry, taunted.
the plaintiff in some abusive terms, left the public-
house, and _said he would presently return and pay
him in earnest. In about a quartet of an hour the
defendant returned to the public-house, and without
any ceremony fell upon the plaintiff, and beat him
most unmercifully.
Mr. GURNEY, for thp plaintiff, recommended the
Jury to give large damages, observing, that a good
round sum would make the vlefendant.remember
" It was glorious to have a glaut's strength,
" But tyrannous to use it."

Three Jew witnesses were called for the defendant
to prove that the plaintiff had previotisly offendedtbe
defendant by calling him a shuflier, and had followed'
him in the street, and vehemently reproached him
for not paying him the .ronney. This, however, was
a quarter of an hour before the assault took' place.
The LORD Clitre JOSTICII told the Jury to give
such damages as the case required, and they found
a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages 10i.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT.
Yesterday; Thomas Mozon was opposed by Mr.
HEATH, on behalf of Messrs. Greenfield and Garland.
Mr. You.ocir defended the insolvent.
The insolvent had for upwards of twelve years
been confidential clerk to a the Carron Copper Com-
pany," in Upper Thames-street ; and 'the opposing
creditors, living next door to the office of the Canon
Company, were consequently personally acquainted
with the insolvent. In the year 1821, the insolvent
was discharged from his situation, being at that time
indebted to the Canon Company in the sum of 11:130:
About seven or eight months. after being.discharked
from his situation, he went to the emoting-house of
Messrs. Greenfield and Co. to treat for the purchase
of a quantity of plate tin. Those Gentlemen not
being aware but the insolvent was still. in the service
14 the Cirron Company, sold him some tin, which
was to be forwarded to a person named Strolman, at
Rotterdam. The agreement was understood by.the
creditors to be for cash, and accordingly a bill of
parcels was delivered to the insolvent, upon which was
*linen—a Cash, with three per cent, discount." BY
Icashit was understood, payment on the first or.se-
cond Saturday after the delivery of the goods.. BE.
fore the day of payment, the insolvent called ,at the
opposing creditors counting-house, and said, "
I see you have fixed neat Saturday lot the payment;"
but made no objection to it, and the receipt,. of the
mate of die vessel for the goods was then handed over
'to him. Five or six days after the day of payment bad.
gone by, the insolvent tailed owthe oppoimg.Ciecß-
ton, and brought with him bills of exchange at .six
months, drawn by Strolman, upon-Merin:
'and Co. of Whitrthapel, in payment. fur thr-tift:—
Messrs. diitenfmad and Co. expressed their 'surprise;
'at this,•- stating .that_their went w fir esub:—,
The insolvent replied, thatlifireet!nderstoodtherenrimt
either cash with discount, or six lgonettiterditiritk,

been , country,
was then - gotte tts &terdam with the...goads.. Plat.,
in this situation, they arrested the insolvent for their
debt, and afterwards'Offered-to discharge him, pro-
vided he would consign the goods on Weir arrival at
Rotterdam to the opposing creature agents there,.
and they, the opposing creditors, would. pay tire'
freightage and all other expenses upon the
The insolvent said that he had sold the goods to
Strolman, and received the acceptances of Learmont.
and Co. in payment for them. All the account that'
the insolvent could now give of- &Tolman was, that
he was a very clever man, and he had occasionally
met him at a Freemasons Lodge.
Mr. HEATH addressed the Court ; the presek Mai
as clear and as serious a case of fraud as ever came

before it; the insolvent, a discharged !main, with-
out a shilling in his pocket, owing his former em-
ployers I.:130, goes to Messrs. Greenfield and Co.
who believed him to be 4611 in the employ of. the
Canon Company, and agrees to purchase goods for
cash ; he contrives to get the goods into his custody,
and then, through the medium of a foreigner, whom
he had once or twice only met at a Freemasons'
Lodge, backed by the assistance ofd bankrupt, con-
trives to get the goods beyond the seas and then puts
his creditor at defiance. • If this conduct was to be
tolerated, no merchant iu England could be safe; he
therefore prayed a severe judgment under the 18th
section of the Stature.

Mr. You.ocat addressed the Court at great length
for the insolvent. He designated the whole as a bona
fdc transaction between 411 the parties, the insolvent
having merely mistaken the terms upon which he
purchased the goods, and therefore could not be
blamed for his conduct.
The COURT deferred its judgment until a future day.
Thomas Harvey Ledge was opposed by Mr. Ile Arn,
for a creditor named Howard.
The insolvent was intermediate assignee between
Mr. Howard and a person named Morris, of some
leasehold premises in the Borough. Howard and
the insolvent were consequently both liable to the
ground landlord for the rent. Just before the insol-
vent went to prison, he called upon Howard, saying
that he wanted to pay the landlord the rent, and re-
quited that he would pay him the money, in order
that.haimight tender it to the landlord. Howard
gas* the insolvent 1:16' for this purpose, hut instead
of paying it to the landlord, he converted it to his own
use, and.immediately afterwards went to prison.
The COURT held, that the insolvents conduct was
grossly fraudulent, and sentenced him to six months.
imprisonment.
John Sergeant, an innkeeper at Sawbridgeworth,
was opposed by Mr. Poit,oce, on behalf of many
creditors. Mr. fisetva was Counsel on his behalf.
L The grounds of opposition were, that the insolvent
had, fraudy-lently given a bilLofesale ofall.his property
to his father. Two witnesses were called, who swore,
that they had freqoently heard,the insolvent say, that
" he intended to go to prisonand•wipe all of ; so he,
should give bit creditors a -betwixt." Upon one occa-
sion, spading of Mr. Gooch, his distiller, the in-
solvent saidische had pod him a good deal of money,
,he. shoold therefore stick .it: into Gooch, for he could
afford it.? Upon another occasion he said, that "he
had assigned all his property to. his father, and th
as. soon as Sawbridgeworth fair was over, a person
would. be put in to take possession of ir. He had
bought a lot of pigs from squinting. Lake, for which
he had agreed to pay ready money; he should not,.
however,. pay him, for Lake had not got any children
to cry for the money, therefore he should have a be-
nefit along with the rest." At another time he said,
" Sir Robert Btirnett, the distiller, was the only per-
son whose debt warsufficient to make him a bankrupt,
so• he should pay Burnett's people enough to reduce
their debt under L',loo, and thee hethad nobody to
fear." Upon another occasion he she wed a witness a
toll of notes, saying, " that they would do to keep
him whilst he was in prison." The insolvent carried
sis threats into execution.
. After hearing the Coonsel- on both sides, the Court
adjourned the case, that the insolvent might produce
the creditor who had arrested.hinh for esentinatioo.
WItSTMI SESSIO,IO.
• Yesterday these SesSions commenced before Mr.
Comm and a full bench of Magistrates. The greater
part of the day was occupied with the following case,
which excited .a.gteat deal of interest. - . . .
Captain Charles Tebiet was indicted for havin,
comnritted RR. assault upon Mr. Kent,: at the Hay-
market Theatre, on the 1111) of October last, the
night of Mrs. Chatterley's benefit there.
Mr. ALLEY, for the prosecution, stated, that his
client had,. white interfering for 'the preservation of
the peace, which was most
,offensively distoi-bedhr
the defendant, received a very gross assault, whieh
was repeated at different periods of the night, The
Learned Cornice' slid, inlhevourse of his address to
the Jury, that their decision would not only effect.
the charge of -assault, but the right of the public
:with regard-to the enjoyment afforded by places of
public amusement.
Mr. Kent stated, that on the Mb of October, he
accompanied his wife, children, and. some young
'ladies, to the Theatre. During the whole of the first
act, and part of the second, the audience were an-
noyed by a voice. He went out of his box to ex-
postulate with the person, and, on going into the
passage, saw the defendant in. a boxing *attitude to-
wards an oldz
ientleman. AN'itness said st was un-
gentlemanly n him to raise his h.and.to a man old
enough tohstiiiiiituher. the reply was a.kick be-
e hind.. Witness-procured an officer, but could not End
the-defendant.-,- Three hour afterseards witness„vent
~ioto the ,saloon, where 4. met the defenckiii; who,
after a very few words, struck him three orfour times
most-violently in the face, andj him senseless.l
The fritit-wOman.and br irriant held his'arms while
the defeadiiitwas •
Ctoas eaminpd. -..Waa.able to takeitix own part in
ca pugilistieseyeasi-htiiiiever 4seeght a pitched battle.
10.4..YePPrt this, u:1.
9:0!A
itiOi EOW"Streig oC9Skoewspaptai?"

ness—Weiet,
prevent

I

or three other Witpeises.reir•ctented •thecoa.
duct of the delaulVitMexctz,"2l4 41e"'"'"
' Mri,4,noLnitls grounoca-
..e
the.toliceaccpt* of the tratuatction, asig6r n a
Morning Paw,. which aceornit-he-.deaktite-itevat
°absurd to denty. that( the pitisecntor lutillftnitoem
teritten. • The.- Iseartied. Counsel ill„h.c4ijsid
ilerahin fume awn,* ulne):of the UPPritsolli
presented to the Jury that it would .belrighipnoiost
to add, by a verdict of guilty, tollsellitrf done
to his client already, by the•virhirdivelhiluttruct
the pro..ecitior'i pen. 'The Learned Counsel addetk
that the prosecutor himself- was• a pugilia,, ha‘igiverl
the first provocation, and was, as -a professed .pu..
gilist deserved to be treated when giving Offehcry I
weU licked.

The fruit woman of the Theatre and her servants
stated, that they witnessed the Fatter part of the row,
and that the prosectitur provoked the defendant by
saying he was unfit -to clean. his boots. They also
stated that the prosecutor offered five, ten, or 20-:
to any one who would bring•the defendant out to
him ; that he went rip to the defendant and
offered to fight him for two guineas.
Mr. ALLEY. in reply, stated that the defendaat had
greatly added to his offence -by bringing forward
evidence of such a nature.
The C/IAiRMAN, in summing up, said, the conduct
of the defendant was most unwarrantable. It was
necessary to add, that the defence rested chiefly' as
idle merriment of Mr. Adolphus upon a 'ludicrous.
report, which Mr. Kent had nothing to do with.—
Verdict—Guilty.—Judgment deferred.

oak discount. Messrs. Greenfield and Co. refired tOiness--14eret Oa the contrary, I. endeavoured. to
iaesive tha,billa. but.asked the • . -0 . mr. I prevent a paragraph about it, but could not effect it."
Staff asy4 at7.o was the actin. • `*. '. • r Mr. Hodgeuv,.an elderly person, . saw the fire
:" Olialtairy; Wnald • • ..: Ibr hi I .. pa..t of the ‘defendaut's conductin the-Theatre. The.
_ schist replied, .7' 4i - to iii ,Nu defendant threatened to hick him out tot e,posto.
m;fg -4r ..estioned are -..t of • 'ming • • 4,.. I.King with him to keep the peace, aad threw a
illit chimed from that .. k• , 0066. is chair at his. sou. The prosecutor. also expostulate'
4:
.. .
'4! puttbn their voyage to dram.Rothw Uptin iruittirr ‘4 ith hien, but used t0...02=11,*,,,..,......r toms than had
it ataifoued tbat*roltrran was-aloreigner. irhahad been stated.'" ::=.4..—..—.,.. ........ ..
"FL) been only a'° rt h -tarte resident in this country,: and , Mr. JohnSilarpe.saw.t._
Air.