Star.
London, England, 1825-01-08 00:00:00

LAW REPORT.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, JANUARY 7.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE this day commenced the
sittings after Term, in London, and took Common
Jury causes.
LIABILITY OF COACHMEN.
WATERHOUSE AND ANOTHER N. BOSMAN.

This action was brought by Waterhouse and Co.
coach-proprietors, at the Swan with Two Necks, Lad-
lane, against one of their coachmen, for negligent
driving. The declaration alleged, that a Gentleman,
named Amos, was a passenger in the Liverpool coach,
of which the defendant was driver, and that, in conse-
quence of his negligence, or unskilful driving, the coach
was overturned. Considerable injury was sustained by
Mr. Amos, who recovered as a compensation for the
mischief £4OO. The plaintiffs, after payment of £65,
their share of the damages, brought the present action.
Mr. SCARLETT stated the case. On the .2d of June,
1823, the defendant drove the Liverpool coach from
the Swan with Two Necks, and on his way down Buck-
lersbury to go to the Post-office, one of the wheels got
upon the curb-stone, the splinter-bar struck against a
house, and the coach was upset. Mr. Amos received a
,severe injury on his leg, and required the assistance of
a surgeon from the 13th of June to the 3d of July.—
The accident might have been prevented by ordinary
care in driving, but the defendant appeared in liquor.
Messrs. Waterhouse and Brotherton having advanced
their potion of the money paid to Mr. Amos, thought
it would be beneficial to the Public to let persons in the
situation of the defendant, know that the law would
compel them to make good losses sustained by their
employers, in consequence of their negligence or im-
proper conduct. If a man was employed to take care
of a ship, or coach, and he occasioned any injury to his
_ employer, by improper conduct, the law would force
him to make satisfaction in damages.
Mr. SCARLETT called the guard with the coach en
the night of the 2d of June, and several other witnesses,
in support of his case.
Mr. BROUGHAM, for the defendant, admitted that a
serious accident had taken place, and that Mr. Amos
had properly recovered £4OO from the plaintiffs and
other stage proprietors. The money, he contended,
ought to come out of their pockets. He should prove
the defendant was not drunk, and that the accident was
occasioned by a restive horse.
The Learned Counsel called witnesses, but failed in
making out his statement, inasmuch as the restive horse
was not with the coach on the night of the accident.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE said the question for the
consideration of the Jury was, whether they could say
the defendant had conducted the coach with negligence,
to the injury of the coach partners?
The Jury found a verdict for the plaintiffs—Da-
mages £6.5%
TIIWAITES AND FOSTER V. SIR GREGORY PAGE TURNER.
The plaintiffs are wine-merchants in Oxford•road.—
The defendant, in D:cember, 18'20, and subsequently,
resided at 20, Baker-street, and the action was brought
for wine and spirits sold and delivered at defendant's
house. Plaintiffs' porter proved the delivery ; and
plaintiffs' clerk stated, that the articles were charged
at reasonable prices, and that Lady Turner had called
at plrintiffs' office, and admitted the receipt of the ac -
Count. A mongst others it containestthe following items :
8 Dozen Madeira £36
4 Ditto Claret £l4
I Ditto 'Mountain £3
There was no defence to the action, and a verdict was
taken for the plaintiffs for 1831. 115..9d.
PREROGATIVE COURT, JANUARY 6.
CAWBIAZO V. NEGttOTTO.
In this case, administration had been sought on be-
half of the Marquis Cambiazo, a Genoese Nobleman,
to the goods and chattels of the deceased Mr. Ne-
grotto, who had died it. lunatic.. Before granting an
administration on a former occasion,. the Court had ex-
pressed itself averse to permittingletters of administra-
tion to pass, without the parties applying entering into
the usual security, viz. double the amount of the pro-
perty sought to be administered, This was an appli-
cation made on behalf of the Marquis Cansbiazo, that
the Court would restrict the amount of security, to
those sums which were the property of the. deteasedi
lunatic, and under the controul of the Court, viz. a sum
of.money now tying in the Court of Chancery.
'Dr. STODDA RT was heard in support of the applica-
tion, and said, the decninding security. for the whole
property in this case would have the, effect of causing a
heavy tax on the property, as it would not be possible, to
procure persons in this country to justify as security,
• without a premium of five, and probably ten per cent.
Dr. LUSHINGTON followed on the same side, and
said that the statute of Charles H. respecting adminis-
trations, did not apply to foreigners dying abroad (which
was the case here), though it might apply to the case of
foreigners dying in Englapd.
:Sir JOHN Nicnou. said that the question was one of
much importance, that he would take home the dif-
ferent papers in the cause, and give judgment on an
early day.

lIIGH COURT OF ADUIRALTY.
The Court sat yesterday at eleven o'clock, but no
cause of any interest came on to be heard, and in a few
minutes the Cant broke up.

IRISH-SE.SSIONS.
LADY wEsTAIZATH V. LORD waSrstEATif.
For several days a trial of some public interest, but
of the highest, inipcnialice to tha.parties concerned, has.
engaged.the attention of a Special Commission in Dub-
lin. The proceeding, in. point of form, is an indictment
against Mr. Maguire, a solicitor, a woman usmed Ann
Connell, and others, charging them with conspiring
falsely to A4use.Lord Westineath of adultery with Ann
COnaelll and thus to support Lady Westmeath% appli-
citiOnfor a divorCe against Lord Westmeath. "The de,
positions of the defendant, Ann Connell, were read, in
which she swore to many repeated acts of adultery-she,
had:cOmmiited with Lord. W. in hotels; woods, &c. her
fist acquairitanc,4 With hijaa originating in the.cirCuiii-..
stance of her Appearing before him, as a Magistrate, to.
swear an illegitimate Child to another person.* On the
• other hand, Lord W. 'swore that he had never before.
seea.ihe woman in. his ; and all the consequences of.
this general denial would follow as a matter of' course.
The proceedings had run • to a great length, but had
2(4 termipated on the leaving of the last express from
INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, JAN. tt.,
Charles Pratt thamian, late of Crotcon, brewer, was
2a xi' c'e by Mr. ADOLPIIWO, on behalf.of Mr. Charles
man. The Learned Counsel stated, that his first
ground of opposition was erns the lath section of the,

Act, which renders an insolvent liable to further im-
prisonment against whom damages have been reco-
vered in an action for a malicious injury. .In this case,
Mr. Harman had recovered a verdict of 5001. and costs
against the insolvent for one of the most malicious in-
juries, short of actual violence, that one man could in-
flict upon another, namely, for rraving industriously
circulated a report that the plaiotiff had been guilty of
an offence which modesty would not permit to he
named ; and had also been guilty, either as accessory
or principal, of the crime of murder. Such was the
aggravated nature of the case, that the For'eman, in de-
livering the verdict, stated, that the sum would have
been larger, but that the Jury were afraid the defend-
ant would not be able to pay it.
The CHIEF COMMISSIONER ob,.erved, that it was
quite clear that the insolvent had disposed of his goods,
gone into prison, and set the machinery of this Court
in motion, for the purpose of keeping his property in
his own family, and thereby diminishing the fund divi--
sible amongst his creditors ; for which conduct the
judgment of the Court was, that he be remanded within
the walls of the prison for twelve calendar months.
JANUARY 7.
Henry Fisher, whose case stood over from the Bth
ult. for the production of his books, was opposed by Mr.
Johnson,a picture dealer,residing in Southampton-street,
Strand. Mr. MACDOWELL, as Counsel for the insolvent,
explained to the Court why the books were not pro-
duced. The goods of the insolvent had been seiz:d upon,
and sold by his landlord, Mr. Pullen, And a trifling
arrear of rent remained due. Subsequently to the sale,
the landlord refused to deliver up the insolvent's books
until the arrear of rent was paid. After some time had
elapsed, however, he did send the book, but not till he
had obliterated the entries in most of the pages, and the
insolvent would not receive the books in such a muti-
lated state. The consequence of this erroneous. though
very natural determination, was, that he had suffered a
protracted imprisonment for not producing his books.
The CHIEF COMMISSIONER said, that however muti-
lated the books might have been, the insolvent ought to
have filed them, but he supposed that the Learned
Counsel (Mr. Macdowell) would prove his ingenious
statement by witnesses.
Mr. Pullen, the landlord, was called, and admitted
the fact as stated by the Counsel.
Mr. Johnson, the opposing creditor, said, he hoped
the Court would allow him a week's notice.
Mr. MACDOWEIL replied to Mr. Johnson, that he had
deceived the Coui t on a former occasion, by stating that
he was going out of town for a month, on urgent busi-
ness, and thereby inducing the Commissioners to ad-
journ the case for that period ; when the truth was,
that he (Johnson) had not been out of London, for above
a day or two, during the whole period.
Mr. Johnson was examined, and he admitted, that he
had been to Greenwich, and Dulwich, and Camden'
Town; but he had no: been absent from London during
the last month for more than two consecutive nights.
The Commissioners refused to give any further notice
to Mr. Johnson, and an early day was appcinted for
the final hearing of the insolvent.
Mr. Commissioner REYNOLDS advised the person who
had mutilated the books, to be careful riot to do the like
again, or he might be placed in a situation not very
pleasant to himself.

WESTMINSTER SESSIONS, JANUARY 7.
Mary Warner was indicted for obtaining the sum,of
21. from Viscount Dudley and Ward under fake pre-
mimes. It appeared from the evidence, that in the
month of November last, Lord Dudley and Ward re:
ceived a letter purporting to be written by a person
named Mary Hill, who recited a distressing tale of the
misfortunes which had befallen her and her late hus-
band, whO, as well as herself, she stated to be natives
of Dudley. She added, that she was living at a house
in the Kent-road, in the greatest misery, with two young
children, and begged that his Lordship would supply
her with a small sum, to enable her to reach her parish.
,References for the truth of this story were made to
:several persons of the first respectability at Dudley, who
were well known to his Lordship. A few days after the
'letter had been received, the prisoner called for an
:answer, representing herself to be the writer, and re-
ceived, by his Lordship's direction, two sovereigns
'Shortly aftetwards, Lord Dudley and Ward received
information from the Society for the Suppression of
,Mendicity, that the prisoner was an impostor. His
Lordship's steward made inquiries, and discovered that
odic prisoner had deceived his master, and she was con-
eequently apprehended. The landlord of the house in
which the pris oner lived, in the Kent-road, proved that
,the passed by a great number of names; amlogst
Which were those of Warner, Walker, Johnson, Smith,
.Hill, Clark, Lane, Finelly, &c. She received, under
these names, letters containing money from several of
the Nobility. The witness was present on one occasion,
when she received a letter from the Duke of Rutland,
.encicbiag a sovereign, upon which she exclaimed—
"" Here's another sovereign from the Duke, by GOD.'
She cohabited with a man who wrote letters for her to
the Nobility.—The Jury found the prisoner Guilty.
The Collar, after commenting on the injury which
'the prisoner's offence caused to society, and compli-
-qaenting the Society for the Suppression of Menclicity,
by which the prosecution was instituted, sentenced the
prisoner to be transported for seven years.
It has been ascertained that the prisoner has been
'very extensively engaged in practices of this descrip-
tion. • It is also known that persons of her character
have agents in different parts of the country, who send
.:them paqiislays which may, assist them in carrying on
their pleans'of deception.—The Sessions were adjourned
to the ltd instant.
Yesterday, Sarah Inglish, a, genteel looking woman,
was charged with an assault on W.Green, a Frenchman.
It appeared that he was the hebdomadal possessor of an
apartment in Mrs. Inglish's house ; the parties became
displeased.with each other for no obvious reason, the
consequence was various conflicts, first of tongues and
finally of fists; abuse of their respective nations, appli-
cation of lighted candles to each other's faces, and lastly,
the calling is of the watchman.
Thn.parties on both sides contrived to introduce a
great deal of national. hostility into the squabble, but
the prisoner was acquitted.
SOUTHWARK SESSIONS.
. These Sessions commenced yesterday morning, be,
fore the Loan MAYOR, RECORDRR, and a bench of Al-
dermen. After the usual proclamations were read, the
Recoantasharged the Grand Jury, but nothing re.
markable occurred to call for any particular notice.
Return of prisoners at present in Brixton House of
Correction—Males 118; Fensales-18—aotall 136.

PuLICE INTELLIGENCE.

MANSION-HM.ISE

Dr. Leo, who some days ago complained against a person for
having threatened to shoot him, applied again to the Loan MATO/
for a summons against the same persoo, and also for summonses
against two dramatic performers, who, he said, joined with his
rival in persecuting him. The poor man appeared to labour un-
der great terror, and almost wept while be was producing a letter,
commanding him to prepare to receive the contents of half a dozen
blunderbusses.

His Lordship immediately granted the summonses, being deter-
mined to prevent auyfuture annoyance of the poor old man hybinding
over the persons accused to keep the peace. To the surprise of every
one, the Doctor said that Mr. Kemble and Mr. Rowbotham, were
the performers who swore they would send him to Erebus. Upon
inquiry, it was ascertained that two-mischievous fellows bad taken
the names of those Gentlemen, in order to make their joke appear
serious; and the Doctor whose mind was filled with German horrors,
having seen the Der ireisultuts of the London Theatres, was struck
with awe upon being assured that Mr. Kemble and Mr. liowbot-
ham were invoking Zaneiefs aid against his life. Directions were
immediately given at the Mansion-house, to the officer who acts in
the neighbourhood of Houndsditch, to look out for the persons who
dared to use the names of the two performers, for the purpose of
frightening the poor man.

GUILDHALL.
Miss Priddle (Emma Priddle !) accompanied by her partner,
Miss Pearce, attended yesterday to bail the rash inamorata Mr.
Willis Pearce, who had been committed-to Giltspur-street Comp-
ter for his furious endeavours to possess himself of " his true love."
Miss Emma is a tolerably pretty girl—quite enough to turn this head
of any youth who has seen nobody but his grandmother. The
Ladies, not being housekeepers, could not be accepted as bail.