Star.
London, England, 1824-07-09 00:00:00

DISCIPLINE OF NETVGATE.

In consequence of having seen a statement in some of
the Daily Papers, to which the names of the several
shopmen who were convicted of having sold blasphe-
mous books in Cartile's shop, in Fleet-street, were sub-
scribed, the City Jail Committee thought proper to meet
at Newgate, and inquire into the matter of complaint,
which the City Magistrates were extremely willing to
remedy, if remedy was necessary.
Friday, the Lord Mayor, Aldermen Wood,Joshua
Jonathan Smith, and Thompson, all of whom are Mem-
bers of the Jail Committee, met at Newgate, and pro-
ceeded with the Inquiry, by an examination of several
prisoners ; and they ascertained, as might be expected,
that there was very little ground indeed for complaint,
and that the regulations of the Pi ison, so far from being
pushed to the extreme, are acted upon in a manner
which at once prove the humanity of the Governor, and
the confidence which the City Magistrates repose in him.

Gibraltar Papers to the 25th ultimo arrived yester-
day. We notice in one of them an atrocious case of
piracy upon the Speranza Maltese brig in the service of
the Greek Government, and stationed upon the coast to
warn vessels from approaching the Turkish fortresses
of Coron and Modon, blockaded by the Gtveks. The
crew, consisting of fourteen, were all murdered. Seven
of the pirates have been taken through the vigilance of
Captain PECILELL, of the SyBILLE, and were to be in-
scantly tried. An article from Malta states that the
troops on board the Turkish fleet were 20,000 in num-
ber, commanded by Mamelukes, and disciplined by
French officers.
Monday morning last, about four o'clock, the pantry
of the Elul of Cu A KLEVILLE, in Cavendish-square, was
robbed of two dozen silver spoons, 18 dessert ditto, 31
silver forks, and many other articles of plate.

COURT OF CHANCERY—THIS DAY.
JUDGMENT—SAUNDERS V. SAUNDERS.
The LORD CHANCELLOR, on taking his seat this day,
proceeded to give Judgment in this cause; which re-
lated to property and estates of very valuable consider-
ation. The cause now came before the Court on a mo-
tion for an injunction to stay certain proceedings at law;
and also praying fora writ of assistance,to enable the
Petitioners to obtain the estates named in the plead-
ings. His Lordship having noticed the prayer of the
Petition and the arguments adduced on the hearing,
took a review of the case as it stood between the par-
ties. His Lordship expressed himself inclined to lean
towards the Petitioners, and supported as he was by
former decisions and authorities, granted the Injunction
and the writ of assistance.
COURT OF EXCHEQUER, JULY 8.
THE PORTUGUESE AMBASSADOR'S (OLIVIERA)
THE KING v. THORNTON.
This was a question, whether the defendant, a re-
spectable auctioneer, was liable to pay to the.Ci own the
sum of 1141. 19s. 3d. which this information demanded
of him for duties. It appeared that the Portuguese
Ambassador, on leaving this country in 1823, employed
an agent, named Haydon, to sell his wines and cordials.
That agent employed Mr. Thornton, who obtained per-
mission from the Board of Excise to sell the whole by
auction to English purchasers. The sale took place at
the vaults, in South Audley-street, and the duties hav-
ing been withheld, the Crown sought in this instance to
recover the amount. The question was, whether the
delendant had received these duties in such a way as to
make him liable?
Mr. IlttouottAst, for the defendant, contended, that
his client had paid over the proceeds of the sale to the
Agent of his Excellency the Portuguese Ambassador,
and that it would be hard to make him pay it again.
The Souctlat-GENERAL said, there was no hardship
in making Mr. Thornton account for these monies,
which in law he was liable to pay. If he had inad-
vertently paid it in his own wrong, he could not expect
the Crown would seek to recover it in Poitugal of the
Ambassador. It was also contended, upon three letters
written by the defendant to the Customs, that he was
quite sensible he was liable for the duty.
Mr. BROUGHAM took several objections, but the most
material point of law was founded on the 7th Anne,
which exempts the property of Foreign Ministers from
the Excise and Customs Duties.
The CHIEF BARON reserved the point for the future
consideration of the Court. In his charge to the Jury
he observed, Ambassadors from Foreign States were
allowed to import wines and other articles for their own,
personal use, free of duty ; but lie did not know that
the law allowed such property to be transferred to any
person for sale, so as to put the duty into his pocket.
The best way to decide the point of law would be to
find a verdict for the Crown. if the Jury, upon the
facts, could find for the defendant, there would be an
end of the cause.—The Jury found for the Crown.
RiCHARDS AND ANOTHER V. BARON DE THIERRY.
Mr. WHEATLEY stated that this was an action upon
a bill of exchange for 2251. drawn by the plaintiffs,
'and accepted by the defendant, Baron De Thierry.
The necessary formalities were proved, and there being
no defence, a verdict was given for die plaintiffs, with
91. interest-2341. 19e.
COURT OF KING'S BENCH, JULY 8.
BARNES V. ANTHONY.
This was an action for goods sold and delivered. The
Plaintiff, Captain Barnes, brought with him from India
in June last year, two Indian bulls, one Indian spotted
deer, two land tortoises, and a hackery, or an Indian
car, and learning that the defendant, who was a watch•
maker in Clerkenwell, had an exhibition of animals in
Pall• Mall, he applied to him to exhibit his car and ani-
mals, and an agreement was entered into between them,
by which they were to share the profits. The car, which
was an old worn one, was painted up, and a new canopy
of silk added to it. Mr. Cruikshank was employed to
paint likenesses of the bulls, which were varnished, and
hung up in the exhibition room, and everything was
done in the way of advertisements and placards to make
it known to the public. The speculation, however, was
attended with little,success, the whole amount of the
ieceipts, from June till October, being under 30/.
Captain Barnes was about to return to India, and he
offered to sell the car and animals to the defendant.
After some negociation, Mr. Anthony agreed to pur-
chase them for 501. but after he paid 151. he set up a
charge for keeping the animals, and other expenses,
and refused to pay the remainder. The case was clearly
proved ; the Jury found fcr the plaintiff—Darnagcs 351.
PREROGATIVE COURT, JULY 8.
IN THE MATTER OF BANTON.
This was an application on behalf of certain relatives'
and creditors of Mary Manton, deceased, praying the
Court to compel Mr. Francis Banton, the executor, to
take out probate of the effects. From the statement of
Counsel it appeared, that the executor had paid several
sums of money out of his pocket witivsut taking out
Probate. The effects of the testatrix were in the hands
of a Mr. Eldon, who did not know how to dispose of
them.—The application was made by Dr. LusitiNGTON.
The COURT said that it was a case worth inquit ing into.
INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, JULY 8.
George Lawrence was opposed by Mr. PoLLocE, on
behalf of William Holland. It appeared from the ex-
amination of the insolvent, that he had married a wi-
dow, who had five children by her former husband,
and a separate income of 3701. alear. About a year
and a half ago, his father lent him a sum of money, for
which he' gave him a bill of sale of his furniture as a
security ; under which he had since possessed himself of
the furniture. His opposing creditor was a man who
carried on several trades ; he was an appraiser, a linen-
draper, a broker, a tailor, &c. and he (insolvent) had
too much reason to believe that his kind attentions to
Mrs. Lawrence were carried to too great an extent. She
lived in one of his rouses, and he supplied her and her
children with clothes and everything else they wanted,.
for which the insolvent was unfortunately liable, as no
deed of separation had been executed between them.
The insolvent's father confirmed his statement re-
specting the bill of sale, which he said lie received from
his son on the day on which it bore date.
Mr. Holland was then examined, and stated that he
carried on all the trades mentioned by the insolvent,
and many others besides. He was a married man and
had two children. Mrs. Lawrence employed him to
appraise the insolvent's goods, which he valued at 1041.
but they were claimed by the insolvent's father, who
took them away, and sold them for 301. He denied
that there existed any grounds for the insolvent's sus-
picions respecting his intimacy with his wife; he had
certainly walked with her, arm in arm, and furnished
tier house; but this was nothing mope than what any

man should do for an unprotected wompt whose bus•
band had forsaken her. On his cross-ciimination, he
said, he believed that she. had a separate income of
3701. a-year, but she told him that the insolvent spent:
a great part of it. He had furnished the house in which
Mrs. Lawrence resided, for the purpose ref making
money of it by letting it in lodgings; he was deter-
mined to have as many irons in the fire as possible. He
had not made the affidavit of debt on which the insol-
vent was arrested; he supposed an affirmation would do
as well as an cath ; he was by persuasion a Quaker ;
he had taken an oath on the present occasion, because
he swore sometimes. He left the affidavit of debt to
his attorney ; he did not understand what Counsel meant
by tho,e technical terms: (after some explanation) he
said that his foreman had sworn the affidavit for him.—
lie did not consider the insolvent and his wife to be se-
parated, although they lived apart. It was her wish to
be separated from him. The witness was here handed.
a letter folded, and directed to say, without opening it,
if it was his handwriting. He at first said it looked
like it ; but upon opening it (notwithstanding the in-
junction to the contrary), he retracted this belief, and

finally swore positively it was not his handwriting.
The Counr, after hearing Counsel on each side, ob-
served that there was a contradiction of testimony in
this case, but the opposing creditor's evidence, to say
the least of it, was such as it would be very unsafe to
remand the insolvent upon. From what appeared be-
fot e them, it seemed very probable that, were it not for
tl.e intervention of the Act, the insolvent would hare
lain in prison at the suit of this man for a very long
time. As it was, the Court adjudged that be was en-
titled to the benefit of the Act; and he was ordered to
be discharged forthwith.
Richard Yeomans was brought up for his discharge.
This poor man is the same person who prosecuted a
man named Gteasley, at the Spring Sessions for Lei-
cester., in May last, for assaulting him, and biting off
his nose. Since his imprisonment he received a debt of
15/, which he now acknowledged, and paid 51. 11s.
into Court. He was then discharged. •
W. Pon/ton came up for final hearing, having been
originally opposed by Mr. Pollock, on behalf of a cre-
ditor of the name of Murrell. It was alleged against
the insolvent that he purchased on condition, that if the
goods were not approved they would be returned.
Mr. Murrell was examined at great length,'and his
books inspected, by which it appealed, that the goods
were entered in the usual way, and it was evident that
an interlineation " on sale or return" was written at a
different time, and with a different pen and ink.
• This circumstance, founded an argument for Mr.
HEATH, the insolvent's Counsel, that the goods were
regularly sold, especially as by the book itself, it ap-
peared that on the 21st of the same month a 201. bill
was paid in part, and a memorandum, with promise,
that the residue, 131.75. should be returned, which pro-
mise was never performed, and the insolvent absconded.
The COURT said, it was evident the opposing creditor
had concealed the facts of the ground of his complairt
from his Counsel, and the evidence he gave went fully
to shew that the transaction was of a bona, de descrip-
tion. There was, however, great reason to believe that
the insolvent had acted dishonestly; and it was rather
from the informality of the evidence against him, than
from hi, own merits, that the Court discharged him.
SOUTHWARK SESSIONS.

Yesterday the Quarter Sessions for the Borough of
Southwark were held before the Lorin MAYOR, the RE-
CORDER, the HIGH BAILIFF, and Alderman J.J. SMITE!.
A man named Pardy pleaded guilty to -a charge of
having brutally assaulted a milkman named Davis.—
The COURT sentenced him to be imprisoned for duce
months in the Borough Compter.
William Perriug, a young fisherman, was tried on the
charge of having stolen two chests of tea from the Union
schooner, whilst she lay in the Thames.—Tbe Jury
found the prisoner Guilty, and sentenced him to be
transported for life.