Star.
London, England, 1823-01-23 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, JANUARY 22.
• MILLER V. CALDWELL.
Mr. ROTCH stated, that this was an action brought
by a poor sailor, against the owner of the ship New
Liverpool. Having performed two voyages, on the
third the vessel was iaken by a French privateer, in
consequence of which he was refused his wages, as
defendant had agreed for at £.B per' month. It unfor-
tunately happened the defendant was in America
when the plaintiff was in England; this occasioned
s lapse of some years in bringing this action. At
length meeting Mr. Caldwell in England, the de-
fendant agreed' to pay him half his wages. Mr.
Larder, the Mate. went with the plaintiff to the de-
fendant's lodgings, in Bury .street, St. James's, to iden-
tify Miller as one of the seamen of the New Liverpool.
The plaintiff delivered his account, giving defendant
credit for money received,which reduced theamount
to £47. The plaintiff was under. the necessity of ar-
resting the defendant, who had pleaded the Statute of
Limitations. The question would now be, whether the'
defendant had admitted the debt within six years.—
His settling with Larder, the Mate, who had sued
him, the Learned Counsel contended, would amount
to an admission of wages due to the plaintiff for his
services arising out of the same voyages.
Mr. Larder, the Mate, proved the hiring the plain-
tiff on a voyage to Quebec and Newfoundland, which
was performed ; also another voyage to Quebec; they
were captured and carried into Boston; the plaintiff
was sent to Halifax, where lie remained a prisoner
until exchanged. Witness saw the defendant in 1817,
in Bury-street, to whom he mentioned Miller and
• other of the mariners, offering to identify them ; in
1819, he met Miller in London, just after the wit-
ness had got his wages ; Miller never could find the
defendant ; witness went several times to Caldwell's
lodgings with Miller; Caldwell was sometimes in
England, and sometimes in America; succeeded in
finding him last March, and he then introduced the
plaintiff to him as one of the poor men, and stated
that his wages were so and so; Caldwell said very
well, and asked if this man had got any money of the
Captain during the voyage? to which witness an-
swered, he had not received a farthing I Mr. Caldwell
then said, I will go and see my attorney about it ;
afterwards 'met Caldwell, and asked if he had seen
his attorney, and whether he meant to pay the man
his money ? lie said' he would tell the attorney
to do what was right; witness told him that the
amount of the plaintiff's claim was £l6 13s. 101—
the plaintiff, Miller, v.kas then himselt in company
with the witness.

Cross.exarnined by Mr. GURNEY—Witness was en-
gaged at 10!. a month ; swears thatcommon seamen,
in time of war, have Si. a month R has known 201. a
nimith given to common heathen, from Quebec, in
time of war.

Mr. GURNEY complained of the severe terms in
which Mr. hutch had spoken of the defendant. Mr.
Caldwell was merely the agent of a commercial
.house in America, residing in England. The defend-
ant had no documents to shcw whether the ship's
crew were paid by the house in Quebec. or not. Air.
Caldwell was abused for pleading the statute of limi-
tations to a claim which bad no existence, as against
him. \Vas it any sailor who might be. picked up in
the street that was to make a claim against Mr.Cald-
eil, and this at the distance of ten years?
The LORD CHIEF Justice, in his charge to the
Jury, observed that, .in his opinion, the defend-
ant's saying I will go to my attorney," was a tacit
admission. This, his Lordship thought, was a' fit
case for the defendant to bring into Court, to see if
the plaintiff had bound himself by anything he had
said to the mate. It was a hard rule for mariners,
but the law had recognised it—that, if the ship was
lost, the mariner could not recover for that voyage.
This claim, however, was for antecedent voyages ac-
tually performed. If the Jury believed Larder, here
vas an acknowledgment that the wages due to the
plaintiff remained unsatisfied.
The Jury found for the plaintiff—Damages V. 31.
15s. 10d. and costs.

QUESTION or FRAUD AND INSANITY.
TURDON, ADMINISTRATOR, C. BROSKBRIDGC.

Mr. GURNEY stated, that the question in this caw
was one ofgreat importance : it was an action brought
by the administrator of one Jane Evans, deceased, to
recover a considerable sum of money which the de-
fendant had possessed himself of, and converted to
his own use, by means of his influence over this fe-
male, who was a person of such weak intellect, that
she was known by all the boys in the streets by the
name of mad Jane Evans. She had some property
in the Funds, the interest of which supported her;
she continued to reside with a widow, Mrs. Pardon,
until after her husband's death, when she went to ic-
side with a person named Jackson, where it was pro-
posed that a transfer of the property, from Consols
to Navy Five per Cents. should take place, and an
investment of part of her property was contrived to
be put in the name of Ann Purdon, the niece, who
was removed from Jackson's house to another with
the deceased, who would consent to anything that
was proposed by givinf: her a piece of plum-cake.,
The defendant caused her to 'consent to the transfer
and re-investment of the 1,000/. Stock, which defen.
dant pretended, after her death, that Jane Evans had
given him; and he stood upon this defence, that the
Stock in question was a gift to him from Jane Evans,
whom he (Mr. Gurney) would shew to have been up
to this time, and for long previous, in a state of per-
fect idiotcy and mental imbecility.
The LORD ClilEr JUSTICE proposed, that as this
was a dispute between relations, it might be referred.
This being rejected, the following witnesses were
called and examined:

Catherine Furnham knew the defendant, who is a
dealer in pearl ash, at Kingsland ; Mrs. Jane Evans
lived with Mr. and Mrs. Purdon ; old Purdon died
about ten or twelve years ago; she afterwards lived
with the elder Jackson, who was a relation of hers,
in Globe-fields, 13ethnal-grten for about two years;
she quitted them, and went to live with Brockbridge,
in Green-place, Blackfriar's-road ; defendant- is' a
coach and bedstead carver; Jane Evans lived with
defendant for five years, until she died last June two
years' ago; witness always considered her an idiot;
she used to flay with toys like a child; she was tarried
of thirty whew witness first knew her; she required
so be coaxed to eat her victuals ;.spineticues she went
up gain raving 144 passiciC shewaseiot alloired to,

Ann Purdon told witness she had' £3OO of her mo-
ney, but that she had given it up to M.r. Brockbridge.
About half a year before her decease, witness went
to see her at 13rockbridge's, but Mrs. Brockbridge
prevented her seeing her. Witness thinks the interest
of the money was quite enough for defendant's care
of the deceased.
Cross-examined by Mr. SCARLETT.—Defendant
had two daughters, one twelve and the other four-
, teen. NVitness's husband will have been dead two
years next March. There was a little demur in the
family of Jackson, so that witness proposed to take
care of her.
Elizabeth Todd.—Knew Jane Evans, likewise old
Mr. and Mrs. Purdon, who lived next door to her in
K highland- road ; has known Jane Evans since she came
from boarditig-school, which is forty years ago; she
was then twenty years of age; she was silly, simple,
and incapable, one day laughing and another crying.
Her idiotcy was known by every one that went along
the street ; she was always the same, and witness has
often hindered her from being ill-used by the boys,
who called her the mad woman.
Mr. SCA ntErr.—Mind that you do not laugh and
cry on the same day.
Mrs. Powell, apparently aged ninety, mother of
last witness, deposed that she lived next door to the
Purdons forty-five years. Jane Evans was a childish,
simple, helpless woman, always so—she did not mend
as she stew older—knew her at ilack,ort's, jun.—can't
tell whether she was comfortable or not.
John Wilson examined.—Knew thel:tte Mrs. Evans
ruo:e than forty years ; witness's father lived nearly
opposite; PurdoL's children were witness's school.
fellows. Nit's. Jane Evans was a person incapable of
conducting her own affairs ; she was a person of
weak intellect.
Wibert Ealam, rope-maker, deposed, that he
worked in old Pardon's field ; used to see Jane Evans
daily ; she used to walk up and down the field, talk-
ing to herself; the boys used to teaze her; used to
call her aunty. •
Western, a baker, used to see Jane Evans
daily ; she was totally insane ; she used to play with
bandaleurs, cups and balls, and used to talk to her-
self; she was incapable of taking care of herself;
was called " the mad woman."
Cross-examined—Never spoke to her in his life;
has seen her at the window playing with her nails.
Mr. Scisrmerr-LPlaying with her nails?
Winless—She used to play pretty handsomely with
her bandaleur and cups and balls ; she never took a
particular fancy to me but once in her life—(A
laugh)—witness once drove away some boys, from
which she called the witness " her good-natured
'baker," and used to smile at him.
Mr. SCARLETT—You do not tall her an idiot for
that?—Oh, yes, I do, indeed—(A laugh).
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE observed, unless the de-
fendant could materially vary the case from this mass
of tvidence, the plaintiff must recover, as the de-
ceased evidently could not be in that state of mind
to bequeath property.
Charles Humphries was apprenticed to the de-
fendant. When Jane Evans and Ann Purdon came
to reside there, witness was aged eighteen, and re-
sided about a year and a half. Whil,t he was there,
she was completely out of her mind, and childish ;
never saw her do anything but talk to herself; de-
fendant and wife managed her ; never saw any ill-
treatment. Witness has heard defendant and wife
say that she was born an idiot. In witness's opinion
there could be no question about it.
Cross-examined by Mr. SestabeTT.—Witness quar-
relled, arid did not serve his time out; was taken be-
fore the Chamberlain and imprisoned one month;
was discharged for an assault on both his master and
mistress.
George Purdon, grandson of old Purdon, resided
in the house with Jane Evans; corroborated former
witness as to her imbecility of•mind ; has seen her
talk to the wall, and then begin to dance and sing.
She had books and toys, and all nib things as chil-
dren play with she has made pincushions, and put
them behind the kitchen fire; she got worse as she
grew older ; saiv her at Brockbridge s two or three
years before her death ; Mr. and Mrs. Brockbridge
began to look cool upon those relations who cape
to see her. •
Joshua Jackson.—Witness's daughter-in-law is
relation of the Purdons. Jane Beans was in wit-
ness's: house about three weeks with his son; for
nearly two years saw her almost every day.- Ants
Pardon was with her ; she could not take-care of
herself ;- Ann, Pardon managed all ter affairs ; she
could not remember anything; was fond of a cake or
a few halfpence tO play with. Witness Used to go

intent Are (_ Aphus) am). tor
the purpose of harassing this poor woman, a warrant
of attorney had been fictitiously filled up by the de-
fendant, and a distress thereupon put in, with the
view of preventing her from prosecuting this action.
Ile should prove that the defendant had attempted
to bribe an attorney's clerk to give up a written
agreement between the parties.. This was a case of
all others which would excite the indignation of a
British Jury. Ile was convinced that the verdict of
this day would be such as would relieve the plaintiff
from that oppressive injury she complained of, and
give the defendant no cause to triumph at the success
of his projects. The Learned Counsel then called the
following witnesses:
Isabella Staniforth—Witness is• daughter to the
plaintiff, and first resided at Demerara. She was in-
forined of her father's (Captain M'Pherson) death by
the defendant, who went into mourning as well as
the rest of the family. The defendant said that he
must purchase the house on Stepney-Green, as if for
himself, lest the £5OO which he had received to pare!
chase it should make it subject to her father's (Cap.
tain M'Pherson) debts; this was after he said wit-
' ness's father was dead. Captain Lovie came to her
mother's, and told witness he was going to arrest her
mother; her mother said she did not oboe him anti
money, and he could not arrest her. The plaintiff
desired the witness to get him out of the house, and
she would shut the door: witness got him out, and
her mother shut the door upon witness and defend-
ant, who were both shut out together ; defendant
then begged her to let him in again, upon which
Captain Lovie seized her by the hand, and said, " By
G—D I have got you now !" and Captain Lovie used'
her mother in the most shameful manner.
Mr. Guar:mt.—This was courtship.
Defendant then called to the officers to jump over
the garden-wall, which they did. Mr. Lovie then
seized her mother by her hand, and threw her down
upon the sofa, and held her down with both his hands.
The officers then arrested her mother; an agreement
was drawn up, and her mother signed it without
knowing what she was signing; witness was not then
married, but was married a few weeks after. Captain
Lovie said, " So Miss, I hear you are going to get
the start of me and your mother." Defendant then
told the witness he intended to marry her 'mother,
and would, as her father, make her a present of some
silver tea-plate on her marriage. Captain Lovie said,
I am to give your mother a written agreement to
marry her. ! On the witness 'asking for what ? the de-
fendant answered, " Because your mother is always
doubting me, and I intend When I return in March
or April, to marry her ; I am therefore doing this to
quiet her mind." Witness remembers dining on board
the defendant's ship herself; her mother, her grand=
mother, and her aunt Wilson, were there; her grand:
mother was placed at the head of the table.
Cross-examined by Mr. SrAnLwrT.—Witness has
been married sixteen months; her maiden name was
Gordon ; is nearly twenty ; .did not live with defen-
dant ; only went to see him when he lived with her
mother ; witness was at school when her mother went
to Demerara ; it was 'either in 1816 or 1817 when
Captain Lovie came home; her mother has had a
daughter by Captain *Pherson.; did not know that
her mother lived with Captain tonic as his mistress.
Mr. SCAR LETT.—HOW long is it since you was it
a boarding-school?
Witness,' don't write down dates; I don't keep
memorandums; it is impossible to remember.
Mr. ScaaLarr.—Well, don't be angry with mai
Witness.—Oh no, Sir, I have no Occasion to be
angry with you!
ScA nt.err.—When was this loves scene acted •
between your mother and Captain Lovie?
Witness.—Scene! what love scene? I don't know
anything of love scenes-*--(4 lough).
Mr. SCA RLETT.—Why the love scene you gave as
when your mother signed the agreemedt. =
WitneWhen she was arrested by Capt. Lousy
that was no love scene—(Laughter).
Air, SCAALiTT cross-examined, but elicited nothing
material.
Mary King lived as servant with Mrs. M'Pherson
in 18211 remembers Captaiii Lovie being there, and
was present once when he said to Mrs. Stanifo;th;....
“.I understand you are going to get married berme
your mother and I get married; and, please GOD,
when I return, your mother and I are going to be
married, and I will make you a present of a piece of
plate on the occasion.` Remembers that soon after,
when her mistress was. ill, Captain Lovie was in'
her bed-room, and milled witness to rensember that
he would MN ry her Mistress when he came back.
Cross-examined by Mr. MARRYATT.---h did not,

: • .
•.. • .
..._. t
• -a.......- *
go to the door wtuamokeoetto•oseqo me she was not with Ann Pardon and. her to the tank to,:rtieve . -material seeing CaptitinLnia
' - her' s like witness as at all
M. A. G. M,Pherson remembers being at the Cion
taken away; she amaastaborterse u a companion dividends. She signed her name with a geed deal in her mistress's bed-room, as she was very in.
to any we; she was often tallting
:and raving to her. 'to do. Had £l5OO inthe three Or Cents,- Wines:sl
olf with a crovid of people round her. Witness recommended a change of the Stock to IficreasCthe , and Magpie when her grandmother Wallace, hem,
considered her to be quite an idiot; it was necessary interest, and it was all sold out ; with it was . :ht ;.[her, and Captain Lovie -were there and had tea ;sea
to pacify her, when angry, with a piece of cake.— in the five per Cents. ElOOO in her name, and ii.o I in Captain Lovie take a letter out of his pocket, nib
' Witness applied to defendant, Brockbridge, to receive Ann Purdon's. None•of the five per Cents. w.:re sold read it, said—" Now, Mrs.•W-a/lace,_resiAssaan
her smiler w4nisser'seevartLyeers ago, for that till after she left witness's son's. Rumfordand-Ashier'lfoltrintend tolniteniy- mind up, and; Pleits-e•Goik-
Ann and William Purdon, relations, thought her un-. were the brokers. . when I return you may know by this that Lint
.
........_
comfortable, and that for the safety of her money Several other witnesses were examined, aft* tiviik . any" your daughter."
they wished hei-io lie.with Went. Witness stated that i Mr. SCARLETT rose for the defendant ; Mr. GURNEY Cross-examinedo—Witness has been to a boardi*
Ann Purdon had 0300 of Jane Evans's money, which : having replied, and the LORD CHIEF Jusrice stun- school, but cannot say within a year or two how limit
she would give up whenever she should be compelled. I med up, the Jury found a verdict for the plaintiff— ago. Cannot. tell when this meeting at the public.
'Defendant said he would take care of the property, Damages £lo4s'and costs. • house took place, but thinks it was in winter._ TN
and every one would have their share. Defendant words in the letter shown at the Crown ald Masph
BREACH OF PROMISE OF MARRIAGE. .. ~
stated that he was to have the interest of her money - were, that if he did not marry her he won d p,i/ liat
M'PHERSON V. LOWE. •
for taking care of her. Defendant's wife was her When witness came from school she_wetit
and said this was
Mr. ADOLPHUS stated tire case,l'.,l'
niece, and is sister to Ann and William Putdon. The to rsingston to learn dress-making, and went to a
an action for breach of promise of-marriage, broughtd
defendant came to witness when she was taken awayay-school there. -- '
by a widow lady against the defendant, a Captain of
to his house, and requested witness to go with her inlsabella Wallace, the mother of the plaintiff, Mic
West India ship. She went out to Demerara in the
la coach. Defendant gave her a piece of plum-cake.roborated the testimony of the last witness as to what
defendant's ship, before her marriage Kith her late
Witness sa.v her very often at defendant's. There
husband,C * MTh I 1801,
Captain erson. n January, passed 'at the public-house, and likewise that Wire
was no improvement of lap intellect. Never was Captain' . she dined on board the defendant's vessel he placed
Lovie same
,home, 'stating that Captain .
consulted about removing her to the house of defend-witness on his right, saying she was to be his Mother.
MaPherson was dead. The lady was then residing in
ant. Remembers being sent for to defendant's house ; England, in-law. 'Mrs. Wilson, her daughter, was on board
in a house which Captain M'Pherson had
saw Mrs. Brockbridge, who told witness her husbandwith she is in
her;
iven defendant 5004 topurchase for her. The dc-
had sold off, lift his home, and had sold out Jane given . . "1 do hereby solemnly promise to yon, ors. Dl' Pherson, tLat
fondant, on coming home from Demerara, came to the I will marry you when I return from Demerara, please Gym
I Evans's money. Then Thomas Brockbridge, the de- house where she resided with her mother, and took (Signed) • 4 JAMES EOM'
fendant, came to witness, and wished her to go to
• up his residence, professing honourable suit to the Mr. Staniforth, son-in-law of they plaintiff, was pre:
Jane Evans, to make her comfortable, for that her
plaintiff. A letter would be put in, in which the de- sera on the 20th of November, 181, on board the
money was all safe, and he had placed it in his fendant promised to marry her. The defendant is defendant's ship ; remembers Mrs. Wallace sitting at
banker's hands. He stated his reason was, that he
forty years of age, the plaintiff somewhat older ; but his right-hand; nothing was said about marriage ;.-..
and his wife had been at variance, and his wife wished that was no topic of defence to answer the action.— the defendant said be would do himself the honest
to have it all in her care, but she should not. De- He understood the defence set up would be, that this of sitting by her. In April last witness waited on the
fondant told witness that every one should have their letter was intended as a demise of the premises which defendant, to know whether he meant to marry his
share of it. Thinks he told her it amounted to nearly Mr. Lovie had purchased for Mrs. M'Pherson, in mother-in-law, or pay her the £1000; as he had
1:1500 ; and that by selling it out he had made which it would be alleged she had filled up a blank agreed ? Witness knew the ship was, going another
rather more of it. with a promise of marriage, where no such thing was voyage, because he gave witness an order for his gm.
Mr: GURNEY.—It will turn out so to be. intended. He (Mr. Adolph; ' should whew that, I series. Ile (Lovie] said he should not - -v her the'

marry her then,
as she had threatened to bring an action against him;
that he would not be driven by any one, but they
might lead him; that when she had commenced her
action, then he would marry her, but not till them..
Ile acknowledged he had given her the a- reement,
and that if she brought her action he knew she would
get tlOOO ; thinks this conversation was on the 9.5rh
of Aptil. Knows the house in which the plaintiff
lived, but the execution was before witness was ac-
quainted with her. Remembers seeing Thoroughgood,
the officer, there inSelitember last ; he was in posses.
sion of her property.
Mr. SCAULETT objected to part of the witness,
testimony, being since tite action was brought.
Mr. ADOLPHUS submitted it was competent to
prove the admission of the defendant, and the me*
sures he had taken to prevent this action.
The Caner JUSTICIL—The promise not being per.
formed, it is for the defendant to shew that there is
some good reason for it. •
The evidence which related to what had passel
since the action was brought was rejected.
Cross-examined by Mr. Scarti.Err.—Thinks the
dinner on board the ship to have taken place on St-
turday, the 19,h of October. Witness does not p 4
the attorney; but has supplied his mother-in-law
with goods, and lent her money, which she-may ro
pay him at some future time, as fortune may fame
her, bat he does not know in what way.
James Makan—ls employed by Mr. Truitt, the at.
torney for the plaintiff. Witness waited on the de-
Itendant with a letter from Mr. Truitt ; when witness
fist went into the coffee-room of the Crown ad
A agpye he was not there, bat came in shortly after.
w ds, and witness gave him the letter, intimating
at the-ea-me time that be (the witnes.) wai awate d
its contents; the defendant told him that he neva
had written such an agreement ; but, if he revisers;
bered right, he had signed his name to a blank sheet
of paper, and had told Mrs. *Pherson that she
might get what she liked Written at the top of it, sad
that as for the matter of £lOOO, she might just as
well have put down 0000. He asked witness:si
take tea with him, or, if he chose, wine, as he bad
something to say to him; the defendant then called
for a pint of wine, and said to witness that he, wit?
ness, might be a good friend to him. Witness asked
him in what respect?. Defendant answered and said,
" By destroying the agreement which they s:fy Ihm
written, and you may as well have part of the money
as the rest;" and added, that if the witness would
make away with the agreement in his presence, Ist
would present him with £150: the defendant fur•
ther said, that the reason he gave it was, that the?
bothered him so that he wrote his name, saying, they
might get what they pleased of him. •
M. A.G. *Pherson recalled by Mr. Seaattvv—
Witness dined with them on board. ship; is omit
was not the next day after they met at the Crowe
and Magpie ; but thinks it was in the same week,
Cannot say how many days before; it might have
been one or two.
Mr. SCARLRTT then addressed the Jury for the der
fendant, and called several witnesses, the ptupedif
whose testimony was to prove that the plaintiffwee
a woman of light character, and had lived with Capt.
Lovie as 'his mistress; and that her late husband.
Capt. *Pherson, was in such circumstances as to be
unable to advance the SOU spoken of.
The LORD CHIRP JUSTICIS having summed up the
Jury, after a short consultation, returned a verdict
. for the plaintiff.—Damages £5OO.

• MINING INTELLIGENCE.—The Copper Ores sold at
•Redruth on Friday amounted to 1326 tons ; standsr4
£lO9. 12s. Copper Ores for sale this week at Truro
—Poldice 471 ; Wh. Unity, 190 ; Pembroke, 639 i
Tresavean, 3064 East Crinnis, 254 ; Wh. Maid. 143;
Carharrack 80; Tingtang, 135 ; Union Mines, 1321
Penstrnthalaik—vg pi* tons.

6d —C1.61.1.1- irt

NlMmio.m.

COAL MARKET, JAN. 22. • '
Adfor;s 44s 6d—Bardon OM—Beaumont 46s 6d—Cherlest
460 an's Primrose 481 6d—Percy Bast 46s—liebburs NW
50s--Pelaw Main 50e—Lion's Main sssl M—WilUniltia WI
—Walasend &Mae 501—Wallsend Newmarcb 51s.
• 04 Ships at Market-25i Ships sold--sei unsold. :
MAIL& &ma. au& .ala. ow&
DON& • a• ' 1 France 0 1
Waterford 0 1 ItiornOsali• 0 •
Guernsey indJeriey 0 0 Flanders • •
Lisbon - •• •
Holland - . 0 1- Gettenbatik 0 L'l
America 0 0 Brawn • •.. 0 1 '
iiitieCWATlLltit UMW* biillatvit•TtXsitA rti ,
Met.ernorningon . -
'•
LONDON less
.riArnit(. ON. 1)7
Afternoon
LONDON : rrtsited.atui published by ILlivra-fila. ,INGSt4I'
place, Temple-Bar.