Star.
London, England, 1822-07-01 00:00:00

SONG-,, MEN OF ENGLAND."

ET T. CAMMILL.

(From the New Moray Magazine.

Men of England ! who inherit
Rights that cost your Sires their blood!
Men whose undegenerate spirit
Has been proved on land and flood !

By the foes ye've fought uncounted,
By the glorious deeds ye've done—
Trophies captured—breaches mounted,
Navie4 conquer'd —kingdoms won !

Yet, remember, England gathers
Hence but fruitless wreaths of fame,
If the pateotinm of your fathers
Glow not in your hearts the same !

What are monuments of bravery,
Where no public virtue blooms?
What avail, in lands of slavery,

Trophied temples, arches, tombs?

Pageants !—let the world revere us
For our people's rights and laws,
And the breasts of civic heroes
Bared in Freedom's holy cause !

Yours arc Hampden s, Russell's glory,
Sydney's matchless shade is yours,
Martyrs in heroic story,
Worth a hundred Agincourts!

We're th.: sons of sires that baffled
Crown'd and mitred tyranny :

They defied the held and scaffold
For their birth-rights—so will we!

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH', JUNE n.
FAGAN V. lIUCKLE.
This was an action by the plaintiff to recover da-
mages for an assault committed on Iris wife by the
defendant's dog. From the evidence it appeared,
that the plaintiff's servant was going along Angel-
court, where the parties lived, and had her mistress's
favour ite dog with her; the defendant was passing at
the time with his dog, and the animal commenced a
fivirt. Mrs. Fagan hearing of the perilous situation
in which her favourite was, came out to part them,
and took her dog up in her arms ; when the de-
Undant, not liking his sport should be put an end to,
encouraged his dog to persevere, by clapping his
hands, and other gestures, well understood by the
canine race Thus urged on, the defendant's dog
mane a spring at little pug, but missed his object,
and fastened on Mrs. Fagan's arm, which was lace.
rated in a very serious manner. On the part of the
defendant several witnesses were called, who swore
that the defendant did not encourage the dogs, and
teat Mrs. l'afz ar, struck the defendant's dog with a
w lrip.—The 'Jury, after some deliberation, gave a
verdict for the plaintiff—Damages are Farthing,
costs One Farthing.
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, JUNE 29.
ASTLEY V. PITT.
This wa, an action in trover, brought to recover
the value of two horses fiom the defendant, who is
a livery stable keer.er at Brighton.
Mr. Sea jeant LENS stated the case for the
who is a livery stable-keeper in town, and who had
lent two job horses to a Lady, who left them at
Brighton, in the care of the defendant, who is a
livery stable.keerer at that place. When they were
scat tor, he charl,ed EU 10s. but the charge was
considered as exorbitant, and £2O was tendered,
which was refused, and the action was now brought
to recover the value of the horses detained.• Tire
Learned Serjeant said, that this was the first time
that the question as to the right cf livery stable-
keepers to detain the horses lot the expenses had
tome before a Court of Justice. Ile argued, at great
length, to prove that the situation of the innkeeper,
and that of a livery stable-keeper, were totally dif-
ferent; and that the latter had not, like the former,
the tight of detaining hones for the expenses.
Evidence was called on the part of the plaintiff,
to prove the tender of part of the money to the de.
feudant, and that that sum was a fair remunera-
tion.—On the part of the defendant, Mr. Serjeant
'PADDY denied that any tender had been made, and
asserted that the witness who had been called to
prove that fact was unworthy of credit.
Chief Justice DALLAS gave it as his opinion, that s
the livery stable-keeper could have no lien on the
horses or property, for his situation was widely dif-
ferent from that of the innkeeper. The innkeeper
was obliged to receive the horses of travellers, and
to entertaur them ; but the livery stable-keeper was
under iya such obligation, and received the horses
only upon a contract, and upon that contract he
might bring his action.—The Jury returned a ver-
dict fpr the plaintiff—Damages £75. •
COURT OF EXCISE.
• IMPORTANT TO STATIONERS.
THE KING. V. RIGIIARDs AND WILSON.
This was an information against the defendant,
John Richards and George Wilson, stationers, in S:.
Martin's-court, Leicester-square, charging them with
unlawfully having on their premises a number of
paper wrappers, with the stamps and marks uncan-
celled, so that they might be wrongfully used again
in enveloping paper which had not paid the duty,
and thereby defraud the Revenue. The defendants,
for every pair of wrappers found on the premises,
were subject to a penalty of £lOO.
Mr. MAYO, the Solicitor to die Court, informed the
Commissioners, that he should only seek to recover
penalties on two complete sets of wrappers, the others
he should lay out of the present case.
Mr. Sheriff Venables sworn. He knew the de-
fendants to be upright, honourable men, and that was
the chat acter, as tradesmen, that they bore generally.
Six or seven workmen, in the employ of the de-
fendants, were called and examined ; they all stated
that an injunction had been given to them, and to
every workman individually, by Mr. Richards, and
also by Mr. Wilson, to cancel all stamps on wrappers
as they were stripped off the reams of paper which
they enveloped.
The Court consulted for some time, when the
CHAIRMAN rose and addressed the defendants. lie
said, that there was not, in the opinion of the Court,
the slightest imputation cast on their characters by
the present proceeding; but there had certainly been