Star.
London, England, 1805-07-08 00:00:00

DISTRIBUTION OF PRIZE-MONEY.

The Minotaur, Audacious, Expedition, Pheenix,flaarlent, State-
ly, Charon, Pallas, Ultio, Veftal, Petendl, Port Mahon, Santa
Donate*, Perfeus bomb, and Pigmy cutitbr, for a row-galley cut
out of Genoa, by the boats of the fquadron„,on the at ft of May,
taco, will be pond on Wednafday the tit idiot. at N.. 9, Ncw
Broad -Itreet, and recalled every Wcdnefday end Thurfday for
three years.
The Nautilea, for the capture of the Spanifl; ibip Carnets, wiU
he paid on board the Nautilus, on her arrival at Plymouth, and
recalled every Monday and Saturday for three year., at the office
of John Boger, Plymouth.

The Emerald, Warlane, from London for to(ton and ja-
maka, was aU well on the 26th of May, in lat.
,it. long. 64. in
company with the Trelawncy Planter and the Atnelo!.e, alto bound
to Jammu.

Lille INTELLIGENCE,

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, JULY 6.

BARtiIiTT V. SIR JOl4llll ctn.
The Plaintiff is an attorney, refitting in Sao
for..te, and this aEtion was brought for the rum of
19 iI. for money paid for the ufe of the Defendant
and for coils of fuit.

The SoLlcrrot GENERAL, for his client, raid, the
Defendant had a lady in his family, who was the
wife of Captain Jofeph Turner, and Who enjoyed a
feparate maintenance. They refilled in a fuitable
Rile in Chapel-greet, near Grolvenorfouare, until,
at ;he inflance of fome rude creditors (Mclfrs. Arm-
tlrong and Moffatt) Sir John was arrefted. While
he continued in cdltody he fent for the Plaintiff in
his profeffional capacity ; told him to procure bail
was impoffible, and dellred him to procure the rate
of the furniture, that he (the Defendant) might ob-
tain ttis releafe from his prefent difficulties. Under
this ahthority, the ufual Reps were taken, and the
goods were fold : fubfequently Captain Turner
claimed, of the produce, 3681. ; and a Mr. 04Iteiley,
1191. The demands being jug, and being enforced
by law, the Plaintiff was under the necellity of m-
ill theft rums, although he had given before the
principal part of the produce to Sir John, to remove
the immediate caufe of his embarrafTment. The
claimants were fa urgent, that they proc,eded both
civilly in an staion of trowel-, and criminally, by an
indiement for a confpirsey againft Sir John Cox,
Barilett the attorney, and Barnett the auaioneer.—
The two (urns fo paid, and the coils of fuit incident
to thefe proceedings, conflituted the total of 11911.
fur which this anion was brought.
Mr. Loofe was then called, who depofed to the
tranfaaions limed in the opening.
Mr. GAR ROW crofs-examining the witners.
Qz_ You fh3ll not play (aft andand loofa with us. How
long was thi. prodigious bill accumulating ? A.
Between the llt of June, 1803, and the 12th of May
following.
Qy How did the Plaintiff get isoffefflon of thefe
goods ?—A. The ceremony was performed of awry
9/ fin•
What of chattel property ? was the Newt,. domi-
nium obtained by the iltoe, as with the Jews ; by the
cloak, as with the Goths ; by the clod, as with the
Saxons ; or by the virge, as with us ?—A. Sir John
obeyed my admonition upon the law of the fubjeft,
and gave into my hands a bottle Rand.
Mr. Gmtßow.-66 Without prefuming to dirpute,
my Lord, the profound learning difplayed by this
witnefs on the ceremonial of inveßiture of perfonal
property, I contend, that only4l.of this large amount
is proved in the cafe, and againil this item I Gall
put in an undertaking by the PlAintiff, to account
with us for goo!. to which, contrary to his •expeeta
tion' we have provided the legal damp."
Lord ELLENananvatt.—" When Inch a demand
is made in there circomitances, we snot c,stsclusie
that people imagine the juflice of toe countiy is
afleep."
Uuder the direaion of the CH it J timer. the J .
found a verdkl for 41. lubjea Cu.. Cut of the ;,..;
ties) to a reference to Mr. Dao.vier.

SAM& O.
This Won was brought to recover from the De-
fendant the turn of 91. due by him to the Plaintiff.
Mr. &Altar, the Plaintiff's attorney, Rated, that
he had called on the Defendant for payment of two
fums of gL and 41. due by him to the Plaintiff. The
Defendant admitted that both fums had been owing
by him to the Plaintiff'; but Rated, that having in-
troduced the Plaintiff to a Gentleman of the name of
Keating, formerly at the Bar, who had prepared a 1
memorial and written force letters for the Plaintiff,
he had thought himfelf bound to fee Mr. Keating
paid, and had accordingly given him rol. for his
trouble in the Plaintiff's affairs, fa that the Deka.
dant's debt to the Plaintiff was now cancelled, and
the Plaintiff was indebted to the Defendant in the
fum of IL The withers, on this, obferved to the
Defendant, that every Gentleman ought to be al
lowed to pay his own debts.
Mr. GARROW called no witneires for the Defendant.
He fubmitted, that from the flaternent of the Attor
ney for the Plaintiff himfelf, there was here a clear
fet-off, and that the Plaintiff could not recover.
Lord ELLEN 'manual' raid, if the debt due to Mr.
Keating was to be confidercd as the debt of Mr. Bar-
kins aline, the Defendant, although he had paid it,
not having any authority from the Plaintiff to do to,
could not be entitled to plead it as a iet-off. If, on
'he other hand, it could be conceived to be Mock-
ler's own debt, and that he had paid it to difcharge
himfelf from an obligation which he had come un-
Jer for Bat kips, he was entitled to charge it. The
jury would judge whether, from the circumflance of
their ;ping together. and the Defendant introdue.
ing the Plaintiff to Mr. Keating, be was entitled to
look to the Defendant as well as to the Plaintiff for
.1 recompense for his trouble. If fo, they would find
for the Defendant; otherwife for the Plaintiff.—
Verditt for the Defendant.

TNIt tIMC V. !MCKIM AND CHEVALIER•

This was in indielment for an afranh. The parties
live at Mile End New Town. A difpute vole be.
tween the profectitor, Richard Vining and
Becket, refpeCting the repairs done to tome railing
which purled their premifes. The former intimated
that the latter bad purpofely fet fire to his houfe, and
4 kick a pleriori was the confequence. The Defen-
dant, Chevalier, alto interfered, and were) both
found guilty, though his Lordthip intimated, that i.e
hoped.the profecutor would cam& a founder dif-
cretion after filch an aecufation, than to bring the
Defendants up for judgment.