Star.
London, England, 1814-12-06 00:00:00

mistress.

T..e girl's mistress, Miss Moy, was called. She
said that Mrs. Dyott and her servants, and Mr.
Dunne, lodged at her house, in Sloane-stteet, in Oc-
tober. The List witness strewed her something par-
ticular in the bed linen, which, as she herself was a
single wf—.tan, she shewed to a neighbour, Mrs.
Briggs.
Mrs.Brige, said the sheets were shewn to her, and
she had no s' • übt that the marks upon them were
:hose of
.an inteicourse between the SCX2S.
Mrs. Howe, a chili-woman to Mrs. Dyntt and Mr.
Dunne whole they li d in Asylum Buildings, within
the rules of the King's Bench, said, there were three
bed room:, One the best r‘iom, in Ntr:ich was Mrs.
Dyott's bed, another in which Mrs. Skellett, the
lady's ma;:!, slept, and a tl:•ri a ki:ld of back parlour
in which t!it footman sl-pt. The coachman being
lodged out of the housei there was no other mutt
than Mrs. Dyott's ff.r Mr. Dunne to sleep in, and on
the first Friday morning titer they were there, when
she went at six o'clock, Mr. Dunne put his head out
of . Mrs. Dyott's room window, and seeing who it

was, came down and let her in.
John Bates, a turnkey at .the Fleet Prison, said
Mrs. Dyott shpt in the prison last night. Mr. Dunne
had been a prisoner there since October 11th, and in
that time h. had seen her there, accompanied by an-
other female, whom he supposed t...) be her maid,
perhaps as m.:r.y as twenty times. She was not a
prisoner, but he let her °tit at eight o'cic::k this
morning. Mr. Dunne• was arrested at the suit of
General Dyott —This closed the Plaintiff's case.

There w.ts irt defence.
The L6ne CHIEF iIIoTICE, in summing up to the
Jury, said it was for them to consider what amount
of damages could compensate;—as as money could
compensate the plaintiff for the injury he had sus-
tained in the loss of a woman whom he could no
longer receive as the wife of his bed, or the mother
at his children. He married her a lady of fortune
and character, the sister of ladies Of fortune, but all
his propects of happiness in her society were closed
upon hitn for ever.
The Jury after a few minutes deliberation returned
Verdict for the Plaintiff—Daniages. Five Thousand
Pounds.

[it was stated by the ATTORNEY-GFERAL, tha
the lady could at once realize ten thousand pounds
of her ewn.]

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Dec. 5.
CRIM. LORD AUDI)LETOS.

This was an action brought by the plaintiff, a ~,rent-
leman well known in the county of Warwickshire,
against Lord oliddleton, for criminal conversation
with his wife, the Honourable Frances Knight,
daughter of • Lord Dormer. In other terms, it was
.in action to recover a compensation in damages for
an injury cone the plrintift, whereby he had been de-
prived of the aid, comfort, fellowship, and society
of his wife.

Mr. Serkant BEST, for the plaintiff, said,' the Jury
had heard, by the pleadings, that this was an action
brought by Mr. Knight against the Not-.le defendant,
for criminal conversation with his wife. After the
greatest attention to this case, i.e WAS deeply con-
vinced that it was one in which the Jury, to do jus-
tice, weuid find for the plaintiff. He was aware of
considerable difficulty in the case. Doubts might
arise on matters of law, and those doubts could be
disposed of by the Court, but it happened he had
much greater difficulty. There was a great body ot
wiinesses, and the larger part of them were either
under t e ii; fluence ot the defendant or the adulteress.
_Tile plaintiff in the action was a person of large for-
tune and honour tile lam.ly ; he had been a ;amber
of Parliament, And was, on the whole, a most rt.
spectabie gentleman. The defendant WAS a person
of great consideration ; he seas a Peer of the realm,
possessing one:alba largest fortunes in England.—
There was one circumstance in the case which he
supposed would be pressed by his Learned Brother
on the other side ; namely, that at the time of the
Adultery, which gave occasion to this action, the
plaint:ff and his wife, for causes best known to them-
selves, were certainly not living together. Though
aware of that circumstance, lie was persuaded he
should be able to satisfy the Jury that the plaintiff
was entitled to damages. He had occasion to-state
circumstances as the leundatioa of evidence to prove
that adultery had been committed by the defendant.
The plaintiff resided in Loni.ion, and, previous to the
adultery, his wife lived in Hampton Cottage, situate
at a small village near the the' town of Warwick.—
"The defendant had large estates in that part of the
r country, and one seat near the residence of the plain-
tiff's wife. About the latter part of 1812, the Noble
Lord was in the habit of visiting the Cottage, and it
would appear in evidence that, immediately after
he was a visitor there, he was treated different from
other visitors. When the Noble Lord came to the
plaintiff's wife, he was conducted into a room, where
,he remained with her during several hours together.
He stayed late, and as this happened frequently, the
servants began to suspect that some criminality was
to take place between the parties. In consequence of
that suspicion, one of the servants, who had been
told by another servant to keep away from that part
of the house where Lord Middleton and Mrs. Knight
were, looked in at the window. He had seen the
curtains down, which sanctioned his supposition that
all was not fair. He looked into the window, and
SAW what would go far to prove the adultery. There
were sofas on each side the fire place ; on one the
Noble defendant was seated with his arm round the
plaintiff's wile. The servant, fearful of being dis•
covered, went away without observing any thing
further at that time, but he had no doubt in his mind,
from what he had seen, that the adultery would, or
had taken place. The sante servant would tell the
Jury, that tLe Noble Letd had always kept a num-

Sir of servants, and that he never tilveried without
groorrr, except when he came to Mrs. Knight.—
Oil visiting at the Cottage, he was obterted coming
without any set vault, and instead of tiding pp to the
door, he went by a back way, which no other per-
son visiting this lady ever went. that was not all ;
she defendant was anxious that it should not be
known that he was in the house, and he put his
horse in the stable himself, locked the door, anJ

carried away the key in his pocket. The Jury might
say this would nor prove the adultery ; but it was
possible, by a vast cumber of such circumstances, to
prove it. ‘Vheit all were put together, the proof
would be stronger with facts directl) sworn. In ad-
dition to the Nofile Lord's endeavour to conceal his
visits to this lady, he had to state another circunk-
stance, which would leave no doubt of the adultery.
It would be proved, that who.; th, Noble 1. ,rd was
visitor in the apartment of this lady, atiiitner per;
called, in consequence of which, a servant went ; rn
apartment where Mrs. Knight sat. On oper,,!:g the
dot-r, and going in, he found .1 :.1.31-ileton rising
up, turning his face to the fire, and avarently ;1 the
act of adjusting the lower part his dross. m
Knight was greatly confused, at,i the set .nt would
say., he had little d,,ubt the adultery ha I beent oem
mitted. This was at the latter end of Dec. 18 i 4, or

the beginning of January, 1813, and th.: Leraned
Serjeant was anxious the Jury should understand, that

while this ':%%ts passing betii-v.:n the Fl,,hle defendant
and Mrs. tin'
,ht, the plaintiff was living in London,
where he hid hcic. Lstahlislied x lent; previint3,

without either seeing or corresponding t+•ith his wife.
In Mad+ the servants discovered Mrs. h•ii+tlit exhi-
bited evident symptoms of pregnancy, and on tb: 7th
of October. 1813, nine months after tht_•.last act of

adultery, Mrs. Knight was &livered of a male child.
It v,ould prove.i that Lord Mid.lleton was flund
in the.spring of t!to year still visiting this L.tdy, not
only in the Lou;:try, but in town ; and if so, could
the Jury have any dattbt that this child, which was.
not the child of the plAiatitf, WAS the child of Lord

MiddLtuu ? But he could shew the interest Lord

Middleton took in the child (lid not leave the least

ground to doubt he was the lather.. Mrs. Knight
was rernoved to London in March, IEI3, and having
a liver cf;mplaint, for a short time WAS at the house

of her sister. After continuing there some time, and
as her delivery approached, it was necessary she
should be provided with lodgings. She accordingly
fired a house in Devcnshire.street, with a confidante

named Jordan, and it was agreed she should take the
name of Jordan. She was represented as Mrs. Jcr-
dan, the wife of an offrer in the army. At this
house Mrs. Knight was brought to bed of a male in-
fant, and that Mrs. Knight was adulterous, there
could be no doubt ; but the material question
Whether the Noble Lord was the adulterer? The
Learned 3erjeant said he had put circumstances of
suspicion together to eve the Noble Defendant was
the only person who chia!d commit the adultery; and
he would go further, Le would shew the Noble Lord
was a person visiting Mrs. Knight when she was liv.
ing under a feigned name. He was told the Noble
lord was at the christening ; but as there was some
doubt on that point, he should leave it to depend on
the evidence. But whether he was there or not, be
could prove that after the deliver y of Mrs. Knight he
repeated his visits; he came there at six in the even-
ing, and remained with her till one or 'two in tjte
cnoltniag; she was then living at the house .of Mrs.
Portman, in Manchester-square; and a servant hat,.
ing occasion to !..sro to Mrs. Knight, in the drawing.
room, a iew minutes after Lord Middleton left the
house, found the back drawingroom.door locked. This
transaction was after the chill was born, but it was
a strong circumstance to prove the criminality was
continued. There was ar.afher extrar4d:-,ary feature
in the case. The Noble Lord '. d taken care that
none of the servants who attended about Mrs. Knight
duriug her pregnancy should have an opportunity et
keowing his p- s'n. Under the charactor 01 uncle,
he went to see the child. Would there hive been
this parental feeling had it not been his child? The
Noble Lord ;we additional • of mat the.child was
lux : it was ceristened in the parish of Mary-la-bonne,
in October, I.Blle, by the name of Henry Caarle;,
son of Charles and the Honourable Frances Knight.
"1 have a few observations to make • n that," said
Mr. Serjeant Best ; ‘, but before I come to that,
will prove that the Noble Lord was sa anxious about
this child, that he went to the church under a feigned
name to get a copy of the regist...r of its Imptiard.—
How can you account fLir all !hese visits to the mo-
ther of the child, without coming to a conclusion
that this child was begotten by the Noble Lord ?
therefore lie is guilty of adultery. Neither in this
case nor any other is it necessary we mus: have direct
proof. There is in many cases no eye.witnesses of
crimes ; and it Juries do not attend to circumstances,
guilt may never be brought to justice. It is impos-
sible to doubt, front the beginning of the circum-
stances in this case, that adultery has been commit-
ted by somebody. A child, being born in wedlock,
is supposed to be the child of the husband; but here

I thew beyond a doubt that it 1%15 impossible it can
be the child of the husband : then who has been the
adulterer ? Why, you must decide by circuinstfolces
leading to proof ; if you do not, you will not be
right. If the Noble Lord is not the adulterer, he
can prove to us by his servants who were the persons
who got this lady with child; but I believe the Noble
Lord was the only person who had cominunicaticn
with this Lady. I will call on the Lady herself to
produce evidence, to prove whether there is any other
person to be father to the cl,ild, in order to t it::: the
burthen o'S the Noble Lord.—The only eioci:ion re-
maining is the damages. I have expel ie:ice enougl.
to know th•it I cannot expect daniaws where the hus-
band and wife are separated, equal to what I
expect it the wife was living with her husband : but
in this case yon will consider the rank t.t the parties.
Both stand high in property and character, but the
peculiar situation of die plaintiff entitles him to your
vtrdict for damages on a large scale. Ile has by his
present wife two daughters • he is pout ssed 4nd
settled on his heir male; then it goes to his nephew,
and, in default, it comes back to his daughters. Is
it no prejudice that is thrown on the daughters by
this spurious birth, which is to deprive them of tie
settlement they are to have ? The circumstance of
child being brought into the family, without it is
proved to be illegitimate, may deprive the legal chil-
dren of their inheritance. It may be said, what da.
mages it a man entitled to who has given up the so-
ciety of his wife ? It is true they have separated—

.ind did k folio* they lilight dot hiire been tosetleek
again ? but when addict:l took place it was trhpoi:"
sible. Was it justifiable in any to take adv.intage of
a womAn in Mrs. Knight's situation, for the purplse,
of seducing her from the path of virtue, in ordt,r to
.reduce leer to that seckn and derision of the wild, in

which the husband alwayi participates ? As he might
not have an opportunity of addressing the Jury, it
would be necessary to prove what he bad intimated
respecting the register of baptism. 11 the defenJant
had been a party to it, withing too strong cnu:d bf
said of his cotiductt The Jury would see the child
was registered as legitimate, wlirn it was a Bastard.
It Was registered as the child of Mr. and Mt s. Knight:
that at any time after, when there r.is possiqc
:;seatis of obtaining proofs of its iilegitintacy, this re-
g' aro:::d put it out of the question. It purpnrteds
ti . the child was the son of Chaties and Frances

Kai; .t;. now the name of the plaintiff was not
Chailes, but Robert ; however, if it were a question
some years hence, a Court might perhaps esta'slish
iegitim t_y. The entry wai to make it appear that
the child w.i. the child of the plaintiff. Tne Learned
Serjeant again deprecate, site* an attempt, and con-
cluded by cniiing the folio% ing evidence
James Govee Joduced the tegister of the marrien
of Robi.t and the lion. Fran: •e' Dot:nar, by
special het ~•se, on the lath of June, 1791.
Jannis West 5..1.1, he had knocu Mr. Kiti4ht and
Lis lady ; they heel been s.•pateed -.bout seven or
eight years —witness knew that As. Knight breueht
in action against Colonel Fullerton. ; .:ven years
ago, hr criminal conversation with ht's. -ht ;
tl.d ant keen. whether the damages Were nt; :zed :o
Colonel F ill:: ton; witness had known Mr. K
.ever since his mar.iage; Mr. Kni,,ht told the stint •ss •
;hat lie could n tt nbtaie a dive c., I:ecat•se 1.0 !lasi
been charged with collusitnt in .1...t.ti • co..
Fullerton.
Anne Jordan said, she was aal r : actress, she
knew Mrs. Knight; she lived wiei eur a. s . year,
and left her in the present year; Mrs. Ka7;lit heed
in 1810 at Waspertoth near Warwick ; site went *to
Hampton Cottage 1811 ; it is two miles free 7•rar-.
wick ; her family consisted cf the winless, the e.saki
a girl housemaid, and three men servants; the ti-s:
man was a William Parson, next Robsrt C• Leman,
and John Walford ; she knew Lead Nlidleton many
years ago; his Lordship sometimes visited Hamptan
Cottage; be came alone, and often accompanied by
other gentlemen ; my mistress received him, when be
came alone, in the drawing-room ; he might have re-
mained two hours at a time ; he once called after
dark, and went in by the garden ; Mrs. Knight left
Hampton Cottage the last time in 1813; she had left
it before in the spring of the year, about the middle
of April ; Mrs. Knight went to No. 7, Manchester-
street, anchester-square, and went by her own
name ; she removed to Mrs. Portman's, her sister's,
in Manchester-square, and went back to Hampton
Cottage in July ; she came to twin again to Man-
chester-street, and from thence to Devonshire-street;
I continued with her and she went by my name,
Anne Jordan; she remained' in Devonshire.street a
and during that time was brought to bed of
a son ; she had a nurse, Mts. Delay ; Mr. Thynne,
a medical gentleman, was to have attended ; we re-
tensed to 'Manchester-square House the beginning of
November; I there left her; the child was not
christened while I was with her ; I saw Lord Mid-
dleton in Manchester-square, after the child was
horn; never saw him in Devonsiiire.-street; he saw.
Mrs. Knight ; witness had been with her husband
ever since. It was same distance (rent Grove ark,
the house of LOrd Dormer, and nlisn Lord Middle-
ton went on a visit to Lord Dormer, he had to pats
Mrs. Knight's cottage. Lord M. never viseed in
any other way than other gentlemen who visited Lnrd
Dormer. Tue first separation between Mls. Knight
and the plaintiff WAS in 1803 ; the action was is
1807 ; since that trial Ml.s. Knight had not been ge.
nerally visited by Ladies; the gentlemen of Grave
Pat k called on her, and their visas had been gene-
rally later than Lord Middleton's ; Lord Middleton
nev.r slept at I.tampten Cntuge more than once ;
L ird .Taanworth slept there more than oace ; when
he last slept there it was in Augitst ; the child horn
was a seven MC/lien child: WitllCSa :;ad never seca

any indecency of c..:nduct between Lord Middles n
and this L:►dy ; witness kin:w Uric Mrs. Knight had
ill state of health, a.►d a liver c 4::.,. awt ; wr.ness
never SAW any impropriety, never saw Mrs. K:,►Sht
there.

Doctor Andrew Thynne was not acquainted
Mrs. Knight before he attended her for her
sition ; she was in labour in Devonshire.btreet ; it was
about the first week in October, I i 3 ; witness was
not present when the child was born ; his father was
sent for between three and four o'clock, but being ill
coup not go : he desired me to go to Mrs. Jordan,
in Devonshire-street : I went : returned and told my
father the Lady wanted him : he went with m.., and
Mrs. Knight seeing his ill state, allowed me to ~trend
her : I went to vi,it another Lady, and came back
before the child's birth was complete.

Serjeaut Surseueuri.—Q. Dist ti is appe:r a sovte
months chid ?—.A. The child vst!s p..ts:y and deli-
came : I did not expect the child to liv
John Ccicman said, he WjS in the surv!ce of the
Rev. Mr. Rrgers : he lei i. the saviee of Mrs. Knight
in January, 1813; was with her in January, 1812:
Lord Middleton was in the habit of visiting: his
Lordship appeared to come slyly across the fields :
I never knew his Lordship to come more than twice
Ilwithout a groom : I have put his horse in the stable :
his Lordship has put it iii himself, and the k.y has
been taken from the door: Lord Middleton Was
shewn into the drawing-room : I have klosen him
there three hours : there are two sofas in the drawing-
roo:,) and two windows : in the hunting season, about
Norettib.ar,. 1.813, witness saw the two blinds do Wlls
and looked is at the window : Lord MiddLtou was
on the sofa, with his head appaiently lying on Mrs.
Knight's left arm.
isasoe..." Can you take upon yourself to say, for
certainty, it was so ?—A. "No, I cannot."
Jutiod-44 Ti,is cornett to nothing."
The witness then statesi, that un one occasion a
Gentleman called whin Lord Middleton was there,
and asked if Mrs. Knight was at home ? He said yes,
and swot to inform his mistre.4. Opening the duos
Mrs. Knight bludied more than common, and Lord
Middleton, turning towards the fire, appeared to be
adjusting his dress : witness told her there was a gen.
demon in waiting. She said, for God's sake don't
let Lim in; who is it ? Witness said Mr.eliffoisl—

wee,
She then said. what shall I do? and turning to Lord
Middleton, asked if she should let him in ? Lord
Middleton said please yourself. Witness had observed
other familiarities : opening a green door one day
witness saw Mrs. Knight and Lord Middleton with
their laces together' and his Lordship's arms round
het."—Mr Serjeant Buvr.—What do you mean by
their faces together ?
I saould have thought if it-had been me, that I
was very near kissing her.
it appeared an the cross-examination of this wit-
ness, that Lord Middleton. gave him s£lo, which
Mrs. Knight afterwards told him was a reward for
taking a dog to his Lordship.
John Woolford, a servant so Mrs. Knight, said, he
came to town with her at Christmas List. Mrs.
Keight then resided at the house cf Mrs. Portman, in
tlanchester-square ; witness observed Lord Middle-
ton froqueetly visit there; once his Lordship came
wrapped up in fur, with a fur cap, and brought a
piete e f beef in his hand ; a few minutes afar Lord
Middleton left the house one night, the witness went
up and found the back drawing-room door locked.
Mr. Inhaur, of Upper Berkeley-street, remembered
the christening of Mrs. Knight's child at his house by
theßev. Dr. Heslop ; two gentlemen were present;
me was between 50 and 60, the other appeared
About 40 years.
Ann Bucknell lived with the Honourable Mrs.
Portman ; ale: did not know Lord Middleton per-
tonally, but was told that he was the person who vi-
sited Mrs. Knight, at Mrs. Portman's, Manchester-
square • she never knew him come till last Lanuary,,
when Mrs. Fortran was abiehi at 'Salitsbury ; he
called several times ' • witness let him in twice ; wit-
nessnlways went to bed at twelve o'clock, before ha
'went away; Sophia Roberts sat up and put her mis-
tress to bed; witness remembers he once had on a
fur cleft ; she supposed this was a hunting dress ; it
was trimmed with for ; and he had a cap on : he
did not give his name : witness only learnt from
John Wrenford that he was Lord Middleton; when
he first came he walked in without saying any thing ;
it was then between ten and eleven o'clock, and Mrs.
Knigls had retired with her maid to the bed-room ;
he asked if Mrs. Portman was at home ? witness said
she was not: be then asked if Mrs. Knight was? wit-
ness answered yes ; but it was so late, she did not
think he could see her ; on hearing his yoke, Mrs.
Knight .:arse down stairs, and said, yea, yes !he Mr`
np stairs immediately, saying I have got a message
for you. The other time witness let him in, it was
between nine and ten o'clock ; he asked if Mrs. Port-
man was atrived
.yet ? witness said she was not ; he
den asked f•r Mrs. Knight, and he went up stairs,
end witness saw no more of him that•night, havirg
gone to bed between eleven and tweivi o'clock, before
he went away. •
Wooltord was called to identify the person let in
by the preceding witness, to be Lord Middleton.
• Sciphia Roberts lived As maid with Mrs. Knight;
was :.t Mrs. Portman's, in Maisel-man...square, with
Mrs. Kniolia when she teas there bylierself ; she never
knetv any particular gentleman call there ; ner sae
any gentleman in a far dress ; .does not know the per-
son of Lord Middleton ; never shewed any person up
stairs to-her mistress.
Pal kin, the clerk of Mary-la-bonne, proved that
)acrd Middleton applied-for the register of the child's
Baptista; he did not see Lord Middleton at the
chnstihing. '
Sala') Jarvis proved that nn elderley gentleman
came to sec the child, but she did not know it was Lord
Middleton.
Mr. •F. Gold, a relative of Mrs. Knight's. He
knew-Lord Middleton, who was betwhn 50 and 60.
He. has been at Upper Berkeley-street, where the
child was christened, bat had never seen Lord Mid-
dletosetliete.
The Sougirol GENERAL, on behalf cf the defen-
elanti'commented with considerable humour and in-
genuity on the evidence in support of the plaintiff's
case. He had never, in the course of his experience,
known an action of. the kind brought upon weaker
evidence, and under more extraordinary circum-
stances. He would ask, in the first instarce, what
Was the situation in which the plaintiff called upon
the Court for redress ? It appeared, by the testimony
of his own witnesses,' that he had lived in a state of
separation from his wife since the year 1803; that in
the ,year 1806 he, had•brouOt-.att action similar to
the present against another Gentleman, Colonel Ful-
lerton ; that by some means he found a Jury to give
him damages ; but that, when lie followed up that
verdict with an applicatirni for a divorce, his appli-
cation was refused, on the ground of his having col-
luded with the e.efendant.. Such sk•ere the circuits.
stances under which he new came into a Court of
Law to claim a compensation in damages for the lots
of the society of a wife, whom he had thus volun-
tarily deserted, for the loss of that happiness which
lie must otherwise have enjoyed in the society 'of a
nit*: whom he had himself publicly. branded with
saanea whether, justly or unjustly, by his former ac-
stun. He (the Solicitor Ganerai) was greatly sur-
pti'cd, mused, when he heard the challenge thrown
out by kis brother (Best), that the defendant must
rest under the burteen of this charge, unless he were
able to produce the seducer toahe Court. Was it ex-
pieced that the noble defendant should produce Mrs.
Knight in Court, for the purpose uf revealing the
name of the happy Warwickshire lad who was the
fatheruf her offspring. The charge of seduction was
eedeas oared to be fixed upon Lord Middleton in ei-
ther of two ways—by an attempt to prove the crimi.
rail act previous to the birth of Mrs. Knight's child,
and endeavouring to prove that he acknowledged
ix-nth-11 the father by his conduct respecting the child
at his baptism, and after. But in the latter part of
the case an attempt was made to shew that Lord
Mddietonhad endeavoured to palm this" SIMI( AIS
offspring," upon Mr. Knight, or who (ver had hie
next interest loads pr perty. He (the Solicitor Gro
Uri el) . mast say, that there was no man in Court
or put of it, who would spurn such a transaction '
snore resd.ly. than Lord Middleton. Never, he
Would sa.j., wag• there insinuated in a Court of dos-
tier, a more unfounded calumny, a grosser insinu-
sstion. But what were the grounds upon which the
Vitt of 11•4111060.1 was attempted to be proved. Lord
'Middleton had visited Mrs. Knight at her cottage in
Olt country, but this be bad done in common with
most of the Gentlemen of thy country. He had
vi-
her somrimes without i gruom attending him.
Whitt was more naturist oxalis ictutn affellt hunt-

OLD BAILEY.
Yesterday, Jane Clements was indcted for stealing
two Da:.k nuts t f £2O, toio cf £lO, and six cf £l,
the property of the Hun. Alexander Murray, in a
dwvliing-h!,use. The prosecutor and his Lady re•
sided in Clerges-street, Piccadilly, and the prisoner
was a set gant in the family. On the 14th of Novem-
ber the prisoner accompanied he: mistress into her
bed-room, and assisted her in unpacking some trunks.
Lady Murray hid deposited her ridicale, in which
! was the pocket-book containing the notes, on the bed,
i and the prisoner having got possession of ir, found
means to escape from the house. She was afterwards
detected in the act of offering one of (he Z2O notes in
payment for goods at the shop of Mr. Morris, linen-
draper, Piccadilly. She confessed the robb.rry, and
Pgate up the rest of the notes. The capital part of
ins charge was done away with, from the cir corn-
allOCC of the parish not having been set forth iw the

ing, dressed too in a scarlet coat, by means of which indictment, and the prisoner was found guilty of
he must have b•en seen by many persons, in a place single felunv.—Jorelik Hoare was capitally convicted
where there was scarcely a plough boy to whom his of burglariously breaking and entering the dwelling-
Lordship's person was not known. When he (the house of Mary Freeman, and stealing a quantity of
Solicitor-General) heard of Lord Middleton's being Bank-notes and money.—Ann Cooky was also capi.,
disguised when he visited Mrs. Knight at Manchester- tally convicted cf stealing in the dwelling-house of
square, he was not a little astonished at the descrip- Margaret Donnelly £4O in Bank-notes.
tidn of the disguise, a coat partially lined with fur. If The trial of Bon/ton, who was desperately wounded
this was a disguise, there was scarcely a man of fashion in attempting "to break open a linen-drapet's shop in
in town who was not disguised last winter in the open Picca,iiily, stands over tilt next Sessions. The psi-
day. Bond-street and St. James's•street swarmed sorer is not well enough to appear. .
with such disguises. Nay, even his brother Serjeants , ---
sometimes had recourse, like Lord Middleton, to fur, ' Thursday last a man, calling himself Jthn Brown,
in the frost and snow, and fogs of last winter, to applied for admission into the hospital, Ilirrniw,loim,
seethe themselves against coughing and sore throats.
1 who bad been recently shot in the face and sir.ie by
The next ground attempted was the alledged conduct two fewpads in the neighbourhood of Yarmouth, who
of Loid Middleton, subsequently to the birth of the robbed him of £65. His person answetine; the de-
child. It was attempted to prove, that his Lordship scription ut the man who broke into the house of Miss
was present at the christening of the child, brit in Broderick, London, and was shot by her butler, infor-
this the plaintiff had wholly failed. The parish motion was given to the police officers, and he was
clerk was sent to call on his Lordship, to identify on Saturday conveyed to prison. A discharge from
his person, but he, after seeing him distinctly, de- the navy, which was found in his pocket, led to the
vies that his Lordship was at the christening, whilst discovery of his name (Jotelih King), and he li.ts
he states his belief that it was Lord Middleton who since acknowledged himself to be the person who at-
called on him at the Church, and inspected the re- tempted the robbery of Miss B.'s house.
gister of the child's baptism. But this was most Late can Friday night, as Mr. Pearce, of Greek-
natural. Mr. Knight attempts to implicate Lord street, Soho, was returning home through Bread-
Middleton relative to the baptism of this child; the court, Bow-street, he was attacked by two strong tall
matter is publicly talked of; it reaches the ears of women, who hustled, knocked him down, and robbed
Lord Middleton, upon which he proceeds to the him of his watch.
Church for thiliorpose of inspecting in person this
Saturday an inquest was held at the Three Com-
' momentous register. The Learned Counsel concluded
passes public-house, Vauxhall, on the body of Mary,
with observing, that there was no evidence to reach
the wife of Stephen Eyles, who died suddenly on
the defendant, or if the Jury thotight otherwise, that
Friday last. . The deceased was found on a wretched
the plaintiff presented himself,rinder such circum.
lied, :surrounded by her six children, the youngest of
stances to the Court as should induce the Jury to give
whom was in arms. She had been for some days in
no damages beyond the lowest denomination of coin
in the country. -.. a state of great privation, and had denied basal all
die comforts nceessaiy for the support of a feeble
Lord Chief-Justice Gums, in recapitulating the
evidence,observecl, that it was a principle laid down !ranee that she might administer to the wants ef her
children and her husband, a debtor, confined in the*
by Lord Kenyon, and since acted upon by the Court sleet Owe, • These circumstances caused an apore-
of King's Bench; that where a husband had voluntarily
hension that starvation had pin an end to her existence.
given up the society of his wife, he had no right to i
especially what her
.childrendeclared that sheoad been
claim in a Coati ot Law a compensation in damages
indebted to the charity of some tradesman in the
for what-he had relinquished. It was not his Lord•
steiglibralthorid, a short time before her death, for 6s.
ship's wish, in saying this, to excuse'or palliate the
the only money she had in her possession for a consi •
conduct of Mrs. Knight, whose duty it, wa., under
derableperiod.—The Jury, however, after some deli.
all circumstances, to lead a chaste and decent life.—
beration, gage a verdict of—aed by the visitation of
His Lordship then proceeded to comment upon the
'evidence, which he minutely recapitulated, observing G°n.
Yesterday evening an Inquest sat on the body of
upon those circumstances that seemed to imply a sus.
the newly born infant found murdered in the cm.
picion of the guilt of the defendaos, and how they
two', before Mr. GILL, the Coroner, at the Flask,
were otherwise capable of being obviously and mutt-
Flask-row, Chelsea. Verdict-14We/ Murder avitut
rally accounted for. He stated to the Jury, that if
Cathadne7owner, the infant': mother—and she oasfulls.
they were to judge of the guilt of the defendant from
comillitted to take her trial on
'several circumstances combined, they must conflate the charge- of murder
.on the Coroner's torment.themselves to that period of time limited by the cotni-
nosado in the indictment ; but it they were of opinion ' JOHANNA Souvticorr.—Last week, at Crewkerne,
that there was proof of any 'single act of adtilteryfie. two of the followers of this woman were discovered
yond this, they had a right to-take it into their con flex have been uegociating with a poor woman of that
.sideratton. His Lordship, open slender evidenee, place for one of her to in children, which they intended
allowed the case to go to the Jury, with leave tin- the to forward to the metropolis, there to be anaounced
Counsel for the defendant to move the Court of Coin- as the. true offspring. ot the prophetess. The Iraud
mom Pleas fur a nottsuit, if ii should be deemed ex. being prevented by the discovery, the negocia:ors and
pechear. . . . the Prophetess were paraded a'sout in effigy by the
The Jury. after deliberating a few-minutes without poptit!cts through the public streets.
leaving their box, found their verdict fur the de- A Meeting took ilacoat Guildhall, on Saturday,
fendant. • for the choice of assignees under the bankruptcy 'of
MIDDLESEX SF.SSIONS, MONDAY, DEC. S. • Messrs. MAINWAKING. TWO lists were proposed, one
John Sheperd, keeper of the toll-gate, B.tz:Te-bridge, of them supported by the friends of the bankrupts,
was indicted for an assault on Janu Dobbin, a:s:lrlA, sthe other by the general creditors. The amomit in
aged five years- 'value of the yates was nearly equal, when the agent
Mr. Wakefield, surgeon, proved violence : but as who attended nit behalf of the Bank to prove a debt
the child could not relate the eircurnsta:ice, nor take .of upwards of £lO,OOO, turned the' scale by voting
an oath, the Chairman said it would be to ) much to for the list of
.general creditors. A questioo, how-
call on the
.Jury for a verdict on such' evidencz.— ever, arose en the propriety of the Bank agent voting
Acquitted. in the choice of assignees, and the Commissioners en-
Joke Floc,(, a musician in the Guards, was indicted pertaining doubts on the aufluwity of the agent, the
for obtaining two flutes, two elationets, anti ma vio- . meeting was adjourned Until next Friday.
line on false pretences, from Mr. bannister,
allegingo ' The* War Duties ceasing on the 17th instant, the
that he' wanted them for a Mr. Lewis, of Croydon, duty on coals, after that period, in the poet of Lon-
when .in fact no such order had 'ever been received London, will be 95.• 4d. per chaldron, instead of 12s. 61,
from any 'Mr. Lewis. ' . which it at present is. .
'rite obtaining, the false pretences, and thepledg --
ing having been satisfactorily proved, the Jury return.
ed a verdict of Guilty. .
The Chairman in passing sentence observed, that
this conduct was so.common as tobe of most ruinous
.and extensive effect on honest tradesmen, and loudly
called on the Bench to inflict a 'sentence that should
operate as a w.ffning, especially where she mintier.;
as in the present instance, could obtain an'excellent
living by honourable exertions. Sentence—Treetirer-
ration for treertyeare. .
James Helm", or.e of the sturdy beggars, or rather
robbers, that infest the streets of the Metropolis about
dusk every evening; was indicted for ass suiting Hrs.
Whiggs arid her 'laughter, two very genteel Ladies,
with intent to commit a robbery on them.—Mrs.
Whiggs deposed, that about seven o'clock in the even-
ing, as she was passing along Hatton Garden, the
prisoner came up to her on the pretence of begging,.
asking for halfpence. She had none, and she Loki
him so ; but instead of going away, he instantly
raised a thick stick,and threatened to knock her down
it she did not give him a ahilling. 'Being very much
terrified, she wo about to comply, when a Gentle-
man came up, and rescued her from her perilous situ-
ation, and had. the prisoner socured.—GulitY. -
Me. WATSON lamented to say,. that this was only
one of many cases of a similar character, which oc-
curred every evening, to the alarm and danger of
oenteel females. It was neither more nor less than a
t, , ,‘ _
..
species of robbery, and whenever such charges came
before them, the Bench would punish with the greatest
severity. Sentence—Six months imprisonment in the
House. of Correction.

COAL-MARKET, DECEMBER &
fillips at Market . Mir 644. Pries.
46 N,:wcaele • S7* • 5'16.04. do 690. 0,1..
16i Stinderland • 16* ' • _570. 04. to 4#6. Od.
- ..

PRICES OF GRAIN, AT
Whtr.t, Ktnt and Essex, 4:41.
tilts. per q;.—New 4Cs. 70$.
Ditto, t4uffolk, 6.21 761.
Ditto New, 40s. 68s.
Ditto, Norfolk, 604. ti6t.

Rye 365. 40s.
Barl4, 46% 30s.—New Sts 40s
Wbhe Peas, 461.:04. boilers
541. Mts.

log:

Wheat, Dattzie, 665. 741.
Ditto, Baltic Red, 58s. 645.
Ditto, Roar& or Bremen,
455. 535.

MAEXpLANE. DEC. 5.
Grey Peas, 4 ie. 47..
Small Beans, 404.444.
Tick Ditto, 38s. 425.
Oats, Potatre, 2111. S.
Ditto, Poland, £4s. 28$.
Oars, Feed, 19s. 2Ss.
Malt, 661.76%
Flour, 6 • 70s. per Sack.
Rapesecd, £2B. .e. 30. per last.
&lON.
13arley,lCs. 395.
Oats, Feed, 20s. 261.
Ditto, Brew, ,264.305.
White Peas, 445. 50s.

kifEßAtipE PRICE of CORN in ENGLAND and WALES,
from the returus egeling the f:Geli of November, ISI4.
Wheat. Rye Barley. Oats. Beans. Peas*.
4. •4.1 s. d. Is. d. 16. d. a. d. Is. d.
72 9 143 7 I 86 0 i 23 9 43 7 (45 10
The average Price ot Sugar, computed from the returns made
in the week ending the 80th November, is 77.. lad. per cwt.
RE rust: or WILEAT IN /VIAitIC-I.AINt INIIM N0v.21 toNov. 26,
Total 11,607 quarter:—Average 6866 id—Os 10dbigber than
labt Triune.
RE.I URN ill FLOUR from Nov. 19, to Nov. 25.—Total 18985
sacks.—Average 68s. 7V.-os. Old lower than last week.

NEWOATE AND LEADENHALL MARKETS.
(!3y the Carcass.)
Beef, tsr stone 33 8d to 53 Od I Veal Si 4d to 7s 4a
Mutten - 4s Od to 5s 2d Pork 6s Od toes 0.1

PRICLS OF HAY AND STRAW YESTERDAY.
ST. JAM! S'S. WHITECIIAPIL.
Kay 31 3.; to 51 5+ 6d I Hay 11 Os to 51 Os 04
Straw 11 10t to 11 19$ Od Straw 11 12s to 11 Ifis Od

PRICE 0,

NEV BAGS.
Kent 61 Os to 81 12s
Jp„••; 61 Os to 71 104
71 Os to 91 Os

IF HOPS.

PRICE OF
J'.lnyF% Market Ss 641
ttrkct - Ui Od

WlL;tech tprl Market 51 41
per atone of 81b
Cr.tve4 `2os od—Good
Yellow Soap, 9r4s—Mottled,
Price ~t Candles per doz.

JEW POCKETS.
Kent - 71 el to 91 lOs
Sussex - 61 6s to 81 Os
Farnham 121 04 t.: 111 Os

PRICh. 01. I.I..ATHERIN
Buvs, 50 to LGlbs _lid 23d
Diuo, 54 to Gtilbs 25d 281
Merchants Backs 21d 21. id
Dressics Hiles 20:;k1 21id
Guar Coach Hides 2 hid 23d
Crop 1i4103 for cut. 204 d 210
Dato 35 to 501bs. 22d 2301

TALLOW.
ITown Tallow
Yellow Rus,ia •
White ditto
I Soap ditto .
Dregs 10s Od.
110s—Curd, ills—Palm, 00s.
lis Od—Moulds, 15s 6d.
LEA

938 041
bets Od
948 Od
1198 Od

DENHALL-MEE 1 .
Calf Skins, 30 to 401bs 34J 39.
Ditto 50 to 701bs 36d 414
Ditto 70 to Solbs 35d 39d
Small Seals Greenland 423 44d
Large ditto, per doz. ISto Viet.
Tanned Hone Hides 2its 1101
Goat Skins Its 59,

lii-sired
1.M21 '