Star.
London, England, 1824-12-24 00:00:00

CARMEN NATALE.

•
•
none ! tiR fulness of that prOniis'd hour
Wises Woman's seed shall break the Serpent's pow'r;
'Tis come—the time preligur'd and foretold,
When Hs," whose goings forth were from of old,"
stould quit His Throne of Majesty on high
With Man to sojourn—and for Man to die !
Bark ! the glad hour attesting Seraphs hail,
And songs of triumph swell the midnight gale ;
Heaven's choral Host to human sight appears,
And strains angelic burst on human ears !
See! in the East, his Herald Star arise,
Type of that Light desired by Israel's eyes;
Led by this guide—their gifts the Magi bring,
And, Heav'n-instructed, bail their INFANT KING !
What, rho' a Manger is his Earthly Throne,
Yet strong in faith the Godhead Pled they own.
There, at laisuatuu.'s feet, see treasures potted,
And there the locaotwara Goo is first ador'd.
What precious gifts attend the God-born Child !
In Hex, opposing claims are reconciled ;
In Has, each jarring Attribute shall meet
In perfect love—in harmony complete !
Mercy and Truth are knit in firm embrace ;
Jusiice appeu'd, now sits enthron'd with Grace.
Oa His, the iniquity of all is laid ;
By His, the price of our redemption paid ;
By His, the fetter'd Captive is unchain d,
Deliverance bon—and Paradise regain'd.
Rejoice, ye Ransom'd ! You your GOD had] freed
From pains pronounced and penalties decreed.
The Grave Hit vanquish'd wit!, exulting wing,
And wrung from Den:, its triumph and its sting.
Pour forth your note of praise; be glad, Oh, FArth,
And speak the blessings of your SAVIOUR'S birth;
By ev'ry Nation, and by ev'ry tongu?,
The joyful Song of the Redeem'd be sung !
Oh ! if the choral Melodies above
Peal the loud Anthem of forgiving love;
To Man forgiven belongs a grateful strain,
Which guiltless Seraphs may attempt in vain ;
No pardoning love awaits that spotless host.
Ile who is most forgiven should love and praise the most.
J. S.

LAW REPORT.

COURT OF CHANCERY. DECEMBER 23.

THE LANCET.
Mr. Rose presented an affiJavit from Mr. Abernethy,
as to the composition of his Lectures, which he ad-
mitted to be orally delivered, with the assistance of
notes, intended for amplification vs henever he could find
time to publish them.
Mr.Hoans thought that the affidavit was too obscure
to be the wotk of the author of the lectures. As to the
manner in which the defendant came by the copies, al-
though solicited to do so by the Court, he respectfully
begged to excuse himself from making any affidavit
on the subject.
The LORD CHANCELLOR did not feel that he would
be justified in granting the injunction upon this stage of
the proceeding. There must be some trial of the ques-
tion, whether these lectures were the same with those
published in the Lancet or not? either before the Court,
or by inquiry ()gore the Master. Before the Court,
however, as he recollected, it could not be; because
there was no sufficient evidence to satisfy it by that
mode of inquiry. As to the cases, he was clearly of opi-
nion, that there was nothing in any of them which de-
termined a right of property in an oral lecture. As to
breach of trust or of contract, either of those cases
might be made out, perhaps; but until one of those
cases should be made out, by :hewing the express terms,
or the implicit contract or trust, he 'could not grant the
injunction. Of course there must be a complete re-
hearing of the cause upon one or other of those grounds,
and so far he was quite ready to comply with the incli-
nation of the plaintiff. Till then he could not grant the
injunction. In the meantime, it was perfectly compe-
tent to the plaintiff to have the inquiry first- mentioned
conducted before the Master.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, DECEMBER 23.
KYNASTON V. BARTON.
This was an action brought by a Lady, residing in
Kent, against the defendant, to recover the sum of two
pounds, which he had obtained from her through mis-
representation. In the year 1823, the plaintiff received
a letter from the defendant, who kept an office at Li.
verpool, stating, that upon her enclosing him 2/. he
would inform her where she would find certain pro-
petty belonging to her. She accordingly remitted
him the 21. and received a letter in reply, acquainting
her that there were twenty-five dividends due to her in
the unclaimed dividencli-office, which he would under-
take to recover for her at a commission of 101. per
cent. The Lady directed a proper search to be made,
and the statement of the defendant turned out to be ut.
terly false. She therefore directed her Solicitor to ap.
ply to the defendant to return the 21. forthwith ; but the
latter, contenting himself by talking big about his cha-
racter and honour, instead of returning the money, the
present action was brought, both as a punishment to
him and a warning to others. No defence was made.
The Learned Judge (PARKE) approved of the good
spirit which had dictated this proceeding; and under
his Lordship's direction, the Jury returned a verdict for
the plaintiff—Damages L'2.
/SART V. JONES.
This was an action to recover damages for a wilful
trespass, committed by the defendant in driving his gig
against that of the plaintiff, whereby the horse of th.•
latter was slverely injured. It appeared in evidence,
that the plaintiff, who is a merchant of the Jewish per-
suasion, was going out from town with two friends lb
a gig, about eight or nine o'clock in the evening in Sep-
tember last. When driving along the new North road,
he came in violent contact with the defendant's. gig, the
shaft of which entered the chest of the plaintiff's horse
(a valuable animal, worth 901.), and inflicted a wound
nine inches deep. The defendant and a friend were
thrown out of their gig, the shafts of which were
broken, and himself considerably hurt. The injury sus-
tained by the plaintiff was confined to the wound in-
flicted upon his horse, which it took a month to cure,
and for which the farrier's bill was five guineas. He,
called several witnesses, who swore, that when the acci-
dent occurred, he was driving on the left-hand side of
the road, and the defendant on the wrong. A number
of witnesses on the other side swore that, the reverse was
the fact. Amidst this conflicting testimpny, the follow-
ing points appeared in favour of the plaintiff : first, it
was he alone who asked for the other Party's address;
secondly the other party gave a false name and address;
third.y, an appleman, called by the defendant, corm.
borated the plaintiff's witnesses ; and lastly, not only
had the defendant, notwithstanding the injury himself
and his gig sustained, not brought an action against
the plaintiff, who, if the defence now set up were true,
seas the trespasser, but he even offered in Court to pay
the fail ier's bill.
The Jury, under these
plaintiff—Damages £26 ss.
The Court, at its rising, adjourned to the 20th of January.

returned a verdict for the