Star.
London, England, 1807-02-04 00:00:00

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, JAN 3T.

A young Gentleman, Mr. Samuel Barratt, was
brought up for the judgment of the Court for an afTault
on a perfon of the name of Currie. It appeared from
the various affidavits, that the profecutor, Currie,
had let a furnilhed honk to Mr. Plummer, brother-
in-law of the defendant, who, when he quitted it,
fettled every charge for articles deflroyed or loft dur-
ing his refidence. It alio appeared, that after Mr.
Plummer went to the Welt Indies, the profecutor,
r.ot contented with the payment of all his demands,
returned, with oilier charges on Mrs. Plummer, for
pillows which he pretended had been taken away and
not paid for. In ooe of thefe vifiti he was encoun-
tered by Mr. Barratt, who, fired at hearing his bro-
ther and fiiter called fwindlers, (book his cane at the
profecutor, but he, not difmayed, (till continued
abufive, the young Gentleman's patience was at laft
completely worn out, and vexed at having his filler's
fervant and a crowd of people affcmbled to witnefs
this fhameful affair, he applied the cane with good
will to the prolecutor's flcui:. This matter altogether
Teemed to the Judges fo difgraceful to the profecutor,
that though a hc.inous offence in the eye of law, and
not to he pafted over without fume penalty, they
miffed the prifoner with the trifling fine of 205.
A Mr. W. Wood was alfo brought up for judg•
ment, for an afrault QR. the brother of a Gentleman
who had eloped with his filter. It appeared that Mr.
Wood went to dine at his brother-in law's, where he
(pent part of the day in great good humour, but
getting warm after the Lady had left the room, and
recurring to unpleafant tefleCtions from fome circnm-
fiances attending her fettlement, which he confidered
as itfuflicient,he committed the affault complained of.
It was recommended by the Court, as it was a fa.
may matter, that it (hould be compromifed cut of
doors, hut this the Cmnifll for the Profecutor übjeet-
ed to, as there leas a Suit in Chancery on the bull-
rids of the fettlements, and it would be improper to
mingle the two matters together. The Court, there-
fore, feriteneed Mr. Wood to pay a line of rol. and
be committed to the cultody of the Mar fhal till paid.

GI NERAL ELECTION.

Mr. Pr 1. movrd for leave to file five feveral
Criminal Informations, in the nature of ,"'lrro ll'arranto,
William Courtney, Anthony Buller, John
Lealle, and JAMCs Kelfon, Efgrs. and 1)r. Edward
Pde, free Burgeffes of the borough of Salina', to
thew by what authority they ftverally exercifed the
p: ivileges of Eurgetfcs of the Paid Borough. The
Learned Counfel Ibortly Dated, that he moved thefe
Inform 'lions prerVely on the fame grounds upon
which Dir. Dampill obtained a fimilar Rule, againft
Ole Rev. John J Howell, a Burgefs of the fame
borough, on Wednefday 1411, when it was foppoled
thete Burp Hes were trade for eleBioneering purpofes.
The Court granted the feveral rules to thew cattle.
THE KING ABRAHAM HEARN, AND ANN THE V.IFE

J ,HN CRAN.
The defendant, Ann Cran, a decent looking and
rather pretty young woman, uas brought tip from
the county gaol of Effex, to phad to an indiament,
thatAing her, in the full count, with affaulting one
Jane Habberton, with intent to kill and murder ;
nd in the fecond count, with aiding, affifting, and
• betting the laid Abraham Hearn, in committing a
tape upon the laid Jane.
To this indiement the pleaded not guilty, and was
then ordered to be remanded, to take her trial at the
.nluing Lent Affixes.

MONDAY, FEE. 2.

LiTTTZWOOD V. BEATTIE.
This was an ration for goods fold and delivered.
The Plaintiff went for fol. the value of five loads
f draw, cintrafted fur by the Defendant, at 4os. a
'lnd. The Plaintiff called a wirnefs, who proved
he contrail and the fubfequent delivery, as far as
hat delivery could be made, the Defendant refuting
to take the ttraw. The defence fet up was, that the
?raw wa• not of the quality agreed upon, arid that
he delivery was not rliade for feveral months after
the contra:t.
When Cunard had been heard, and the depofitions
tcceived,
ELLerramtotrom raid, that by the Statute of
Fraud- (29 Charl-s 11. c. 3), when a fate to the
amount nt tol had taken place, in order to bind the
porcharer one ut three things was necelfary ; either
that a memorandum in writing (Mould be entered
into, a l.arr payment be made by way of earneft, or
that a proportion of the commodity, the fubjefe of
the bat ga-it, ihottiel he delivered. In this cafe none
1104 e itgitiliech hAd been cumplied with, and the
.23,41-3.4 f mutt be noutuited.—Plaintiff nonfu.t., ed.

smite v cos.
an altion of dander, the Defendant hay.
ing ,mpuird by hi:, etprelfions, that the Plaintiff was
inCilvent.
Sir Vicar f G• ass ',blared, that the valne of chst-
rarir to a Adana:at was inefltmab e, and the lof,
of it hi% ruin. The words fpr.ken by the Defendant
were not uttered in the moment of pat Lon or of in.
tozication ; Lilt were coolly and deliberately urged.
The Plaintiff, he (aid, was a rept/table ironmonger,
and was employed by Government, hut it fn happen.
ed that he was at times that of cafh, by reafon of his
payments not coming round to quit k as he could
have Oiled, and he was put to fome little inconve-
niences in trade. The Defendant, knowing this, and
being binifelf an ironmonger, raid of the Plaintiff,
that he was a ruined man that he had little or 'no
materials to carry on. his bofincfb ; and that he muff
!non be a bankrupt. - Sir Vicary added, that there
was no ncceflity for him to emblazon the mifehie roue
areas of filch a declaration concerntng a Man LA

trade. The Jury are themlllyea tradefmen, and
would fay what damagesthe Plaintiff ought to receive
untier all the circumftances of the cafe.
A witnefs was then called, but as he was unable
to prove force r.f the principal averments in the de-
claration, his Lordiltip advifed, that a Juror fhould
be withdrawn, as the Plaintiff was unable to make
out his cafe—at the fame time, he agreed in what
the Learned Counfel had Paid with relpeCt to the va•
lue of charafter. It was ineflimable, and there were
fume cafes of Bander where no adequate compenfa-
tion could be made. But it was neceflaty, in all
altions for words, that the averment% in the declata
tion fhould be made out, before the Plaintiff was en-
titled to a verdift.
A Juror was then withdrawn, which leaves the
parties to pay their own colts.

TUESDAY, FES. 3.
CRIMINAL INFORMATION.

Mr. Wreson find, that he was inftrnaed by Mr. I
Anfell, one of the Sheriffs of the county and city y of
Norwich, to apply to the Court, for leave to file a
criminal information againft a Mr. Charles Hardy,
a grocer of that city. On the ld of November tall,
while the eleaion for Norwich was proceeding, feve-
rat riots were excited in the Market-place, and Mr
Anfell was called upon, in his official capacity, to
quell the difturbance. Accordingly, attended by coo-
(tables, he proceeded to the fpot, where he found a
confiderable mob, and learnt that a gentleman had
been dragged from his hotfe by the populace. The
Sherifidirealy took into cuftody one man, who feemed
to be particularly aaive in creating this confulion, and
was proceeding to the Guildhall, u commit him for
his mikondua, when he was oppofed by Mr. Hardy,
who placed himfelf immediately in Mr. Anfell's path,
held up his fist in his face in a menacipg polture,
abufed him molt grofsly, and called upon the popu•
lace not to Coffer the perlon taken by the Sheriff to be
concluded to the Guildhall, and a refcue in confe-
quence was effected. The man ran away towards a
lane lea ling from the Marketplace, whither Mr. An-
fell followed him. As form as he arrived at the en-
trance of the lane, he was again met by Mr. Hardy
and the mob, and the perfon of whom they were in
purfuit efcaped. Upon this, the Sheriff feized upon
another rioter, but when he attempted to carry him
away, Mr. Hardy again interfered, and, with the
molt vociferous abufe, fwore, that he would ungown
the Sheriff, and at the fame time, rufbing upoq him,
tore his robes from his fhoulders. The man taken
into cuflody the lall time was likewife refcued, and
Mr. Anfell was obliged to return to the Guildhall
without being able to quell the diftutbance railed and
fupported by Mr. Hardy.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH." Yon fay, Mr. Wilfon,
that this affair took place on the 3d of November :
Why did you not apply in the Taft term ? The Court
expeas perfons who are to receive its extraordinary
interpofitioa to come in the &ft innance, or the mat-
ter muff be left to the ordinary tribunal, unlefs full •
cient ground of delay be (hewn."
Mr. WI esors.—,, The faa, my Lord, i 9, that the
Sheriff was then engaged in the eleaion for the city
of Norwich, and immediately afterwards the eleaion
fur the county took place. In confequence of the
frequent riots which occurred, Mr. Anlell was very
much employed, particularly as his brother Sheriff,
from infirmity, was unable to pet formhis public duty."
Lord ELLENBOROUGH.—" I think that reafonahly
, accounts for your not coming earlier. Take a rule
I to thew caufe."

WHALE! V. VANSITTART.

This cafe came before the Court on a demurrer to
the declaration in an aftion brought by the Plaintiff
againft the defendant, a Magiflrate, for an affault
and falfc imptifonment. A difpute had arifen be.
tween the leffees of a turnpike gate leading to Mar-
low, and the plaintiff, who refuted to pay the toll.
On this account, Mr. Whaley was taken before the
defendant, who committed him to pill-on for two
months. In fupport of the demurrer it was obje&ed,
that the plaintiff had declared for an affault, when in
fat no affault had been committed. . _

Mr. HULTON, on behalf of the Plaintiff, argued,
that hib client, in pleading the affault, was perfealy
correet, for the Magittrateb had caufed Mr. Whaley
to be apprehended, and that faCt implied in itfelf
corporal touch, which was in law an alfault. Ano-
ther (Adel:lion had likewife been made, viz. that the
refidence of the plaintiff's attorney was not fufficiently
precife, inafmuch as though he lived in Holborn, it
was not Rated to be either in the County of Middlefez
or the City of London. In anfwer to this, the
Learned Counfel laid, that the truth was, that Hol-
born was fituated in both thofe places, and that,
therefore, a more accurate adds efs could not be given.
The Court, however, fent the cafe down to be
amended, becaufe it did not appear upon the face of
it, that the Plaintiff had paffed over any part of the
turnpike road, the toll for which paffage was claimed.