Star.
London, England, 1814-09-09 00:00:00

Lior 1141TELLIGENCIL

min-ow; COURT, SEPTEMBF.It
Dk:NTON AND A:4ollKit V. ranNuat,r.
This was a c :se of some novelty and of consider•
aLle tuterest to attoruies. The defendant, a prisoner,
w.ts opposed on the ground that lie had fixed :tis hail
or surety with a Licht of twenty-one pounds, which, 't
was contended, is ceptionable under the Act. The
plaintiffs were attoniies for the prisoner, and they put
in their clerk.; as nominal b iil to the S:3Priff; in an
action ageism him, at the suit of Smith and others, to
appear at the return in taster Teem. They gave
notice of adding and justifying better bail. lame Is
t Rule of Court by which no attorney is permitted to
be bail for his client ; the plaintiffs, therefore, moues-
tt-ai the prisoue: to caU on proper bail, and, in his own
name, s•rlicit them to appear and justify. He neglec-
teJ that advice, and the consequence vas, the bail
put in were ejected. On the '29th of April, which
was a day tots Late, the prisoner found b.il, but they
could justify, and this plaintiffs being fixed, were
obliged to pay the debt. The plaintiffs, under those
circumstances, claimed that the said debt 'should be
an exception to th 2 pt honer's discharge, on lot ground
that he had suffered his bail or surety to becoine fixed,
which was considcaed an offence under the Act, and
a bar tat his discharge.
Mr. PIkINC6 Swill proved the above case, and cone
tended, that the attornies, who had done all in their
power to get the man discharged on a bail bond,
could not be charged with negligence ; anal, as the
p: isoner had suffered them to be fixed, their case was,
within the exception of the Act.
Mr. Setj ant PALMER was of o it ha that the pi.
saner could not be detained on the ground alledged.
The attornies should have put in good bail at first,
instead of putting in their clerks, and have justified
proper bail in due time. Tire matter complained of
was the result, he said, of their own negligence. The
Rule of Court, which did not allow an attorney to be
bail was a good one; and, under alltbwoircumstances,
be was of opinion, that thecase made one was not with-
in the exception. The prisoner was discharged.

• CUMBERLAND ASSIZES.
SIR f. F. VANE, DART. R. NIACARATIf AND °TRIM,
(NoIDNAL DERIGNDANTS.)
This action, the real Defendant in which was the
Earl of Ir..ztrernont, was brought to try the right of
fishing in Derwent, on the estate of Sir F. F. V.ine,
in the Manor of Isel and Sermurthy. It appeared
that twelve years ago the Plaintiff put down a num.
her of stakes in the river, opposite to his aiiinsion.
house of Armathwaite, in order to prevent poachers
from fishing in the water, and trespassing upon his
pleasure-grounds. The fact of t:,e ground on both
sides of, and a small island hi, the river being his
own freehold, was proved by an old tenant's cutting
and wing the brushwood that gretv upon them, and
wearing the hanks to prevent the soil from being'
washed a oay. Sir Frederick ills,' proved, in a tnobt
s itisfactory manner, that the fi,Lery of Derwent,
medi,tely below his estate, belonged to the Laws rr
family, as inkier iting Eel Estate ; as also the
mano:ial rights to the bed o: t:.e river, by taking
from it immense quantities of sol, gravel, and
!stones, at various times, and ti-!inn the river from
time immemorial, between Ouse Bridge and Lel
Bridge, without interruption.
'Vlie defence Iv up was,. hnt the Earl of E3re.
mont had the superior right of fishing in those wate:
as held from the Crown. It was admitted that the

Lawson family had a right under I is Lordship, so ler
as the land extended; hut it was contended that a...
plaintiff had no right of fishery at all. The anctent
tide deeds were producede proving the grants of all
royalties in fishing, &c.
Jane Wane, widow, stated that her husband rented
Bassenthwaite Lake Fishery thirty-five years ago, and
remembered getting leave from Mr. Peat, who had
Lord Lonsdale's fishery at Workington (he holding
it under the EMI og Egremont) to fish in the deer op-
posite Armathwaite, and that her husband and her -
father thew their nets two or three times there, end
also on a little island in the river. This was in Jane I
WAS done for only one day; and witness did not know
whether Mt. Clarke, who then farmed the ground,
was acquainted with the proceeding.
Mrs. Wilson (the next evidence) and her father
were at Cockermouth Castle fifteen years ago ; when
her father was asked by Mr. Benson, Steward to the
Earl of Egremont, if he had drawn the river ? On
the former replying in the negative, Mr. Benson said,
'4 You must do it, to keep up his Lordship's rights."
He accordingly did draw it five or six times on the
Ise' side, at a place called Meadowfacst, and oht.dned
son: tr.:mt. This was done five or six different days,
and all in the same year, except in one instance.
Thomas Hudson said, that he had Leen 20 years
employed by Mr. Peat, who lived at Salition Hall, to
watch the river in close-time, for the preservation of
the bleed of fish ; he proved his having detected a
number of poachers, and getting them convicted. At
one time he pursued a number of poachers, and on
their taking refuge in Sir F. F. Vatne's premises, he
complained to him on the subject ; when Sir F. said,
be would not allow his men to kill the fish, and that
he would porect the fishery for Mr. Peat. Witness
further said, that he never heard any person, except
Mr. Peat, claim the right of lh.hing.
Another person proved his beirg empined to watch
the river in close time ; and Mr. Sattherthwaite, a
Magistrate, explained the mode of conviction of j a-
eons guilty of killing kipper or young fry.
The Learned Judge ( 'amer ), in summing np to
the Jury, observed, that it was clear the freehold be-
longed to Sir F. F. Vane, and that he had a right to
put stakes in the. river. It did not, however, appear
that the Lawson family' fished there ; nor had the
plaintiff proved the enjoyment by him of any right.
With respect to the merits ef the eve as it applied to
the Earl of Egremont, the occasional :.et (f Mr. Ben.
son merely chewed his anxiety to g s,-e his L • &kip a
right ; but the person who conthwed the occupadott
of the fishery had the best right.
After a few minutes cen:uhation, the jury gave
verdict for the plaintiff-6, That as both s'oes of 11. e
river were his, he had a light to put down stakes
where he pleased."
This cause lasted nearly the whole day.

William Smith, aged about seven years, while
amusing himself, on Thisto,ly. last week, upqn a nat.
row plink laid across the Fichte Baldovie, fell into
the water, and was drowned.