Star.
London, England, 1818-12-12 00:00:00

INI'F.Lt.IGEtiCE.

AIr.S.COURT, DECEMEHR. it.
Two:Ctlawcit.i.oit was occupied
motions from the LORD CHAN-
well as some from his own ; but
d any particular importance, Ox-
nmediat:lly concerned.

(SHOP Or'BATH' AND ►ELLS AND
OTHERS..
moved, that the • injunction in
dissolved. A Mr. Highmore pre-
to the Rectory of Wausted, but
prevedt the Bishop of Bath and
at presentation, it being in the
within his diocese. It now ap-
ighmore had waived his right of
fr. Mitchell his claims to the Rec-
Ise present application was made.

MS BUNCH, DECEMBER

KING V. ALLCORN.

as indicted for perjury, commit-
the King against Guy the elder,
Nthop, and Bridger.
:ed, that these persons had been
af Exchequer. for an alleged act
to coast of Sussex. In such case*,
the precise act or time of smng-
ified in the indictment, but it is
illy; that the defendant has been
smuggling within three years. At
y innocent, therefore, must come
to meet the evidence that may be
tim, and. if the fact is positively
t must go against' him ; leaning
edy than to prosecute the witness
id.not state this with any view of
the law, but merely for the par,
at was the fact. If a man were
be no inconvenience ; for he would
ectly well ; but if he were inno-
ible for him to divine what sort of
out to be necessary ; and it could
useless expense to bring witnesses
might prove to be perfectly ima-
mdeavoured to establish an al6l as
red in the information, the prose-
usually did; immediately have re•
It was true there was the same'
tments for other offences ; but the
re occasioned was not so great.
inns that persons were hired every
in cases of bankruptcy for a single
kct a shilling, to swear to debts of
or commissions, it might well be
gratuity and good living neces-
iesses in prosecutions by the Crown,
heir statements. On the trial of
tt inldrivorn that he was assisting
landing of some smuggled goods,
aid Newhaven, at eleven o'clock at
Wad and Newhaven there were
slates, both strictly watched by the'
Tiers: hnd Scarcely accessible for
uld be proved that Guy, the elder,
all nighty 11 Miles off. Guy, thi;
Mies offend it would be'provcd
n •his uset'all night, and not at
the I.didintiilace inqueston. BP;
es Offi'dfiXit,woulil be proved tins!
datance,':payisig Ili Addresses to
whom,lof was, about to be married:
be proVed, that the defendant, who
F, was also at home ; so that here
identity, hitt a most intentional and
which had nearly ruined the un-
in the fbnner cause.
witnesses were then produced, to
the prosecutors.were not near the
)ut were at home in their own houses,
ant represented them to have been
nsaction mentioned; and, secondly,
lefendant himself was at the distance
from the place in question, at the
en he pretended to have seen the
in the smugglers.
t•GIMERAL addressed the Jury on
Fondant. apologising for his soap
ng that the Crown had felt it to be
rd the defendant such means of de-
would afford him, which he could
cure as a man in an humble station
mood Attorney made such observe-
d most favourable to the defendant,
it was possible for the witnesses for
to bennstaken in the evidence they
admitted, however, that hi was not
o contradict them, and therefore he
urrender his client into the hands of
,ould pronounce such a verdict as the,
n would witty:int.
thout hesitation, pronounced the de-

V. lIILLIAId IBRIVOILS.
ther indictment for the like offend
7endante who was another witnescOsi
Crowe, in the Court of ExchectuerV
I pritsec-ators:as in the last.case, with
se same transaction. He positivelt
occasion, that the two Goys and
sent and assisting on Sunday evening,
other, 1817, at Mill Tide Bridge, the.
they were in their own houses at the
iltt defendan; himself could not have,
the transaction (if it really took place),'
from the scene of action many miles,
his WWII bed with sickness, at the very
hush he described the affair to have

ier of witnesses were'examined to sup-
unents of perjury, and thty proved 'co
that this witness for the Crown had
angle word of truth, but had acted;
foul and wicked motives.
who addressed the Jury for the defen-
isence of the Attorney-General, whose
ns called hiin elsewhere, followed the

ursued by his learned colleaue, and
elendant to the verdict of the Jury, ac-
:hat his ciier.t was without defence
tmediatcly found the defendant Guilty.
hat both these miscreants are now in
urges of felony, committed since the ,
;ethics, imputed to thgm by their in',
I tNeeefore they were eentitr.ded to their

former custody, instead of being committed to the
custody of the Marshal, as at first prayed by-the
Counsel for the prosecution.

Tug KIWI V. WILLIAM 801:7TIES.
This was also an indictment against another per-
son of the same class and character, for foul and
wicked perjury, in falsely swearing in the Court of
Exchequer, on the 14th of May last, upon an infor-
mation filed by the Attorney-General against George
Henty, Esq. for concealing certain smuggled spirits
at a place called Ferrinrianesend, in the parish of
Hingston, in the county of Sussex ; that the said
[George Henty, Esq. was personally concerned in
Joe king up the said spirits in one of his barns.
Mr. DaNalAtl, with whom was Mr. ADOLPMUS,
for the prosecution, stated the case in a powerful and
eloquent address to the Jury.
It appeared that Mr. Henty is a gentleman of cha-
racter and fortune, residing at Ferrinrlane-end, in
the county of Sussex, and is partner in a banking-
house at Arundel, and had been subjected to.the pro-
ceedings in question in the Court of Exchequer,
through the malice and w:ckedness of the defendant,
and another man named Slater, who was the sub-
ject of the indictment which follows s—ln the Court
of Exchequer these persons positively swore, that on
the morning of 4th April, Good Friday, between ire
and six o'clock, they saw Mr Henty lock up in one of
his barns a great number of half ankers of foreign
Ispirits, which had been landed the night before on
the beech, by a party of smugglers. The perjury
was assigned upon this statement, which the indict-
ment charged to be founded in wilful and corropt
falsehood.
- Mr. G. V. DowttNo, who took down the defer=
dent's evidence in short-hand in the Court of Ere.
•
chequer, read his•notes.
7 The evidence of no less than 'hineteen persons was
then given to support the assignments of perjury,
from which it appeared that on the morning of the
4th of April, 1817, Mr. Henty rose at five ()clock,
for the purpose of going to one of his farms, • •
four miles distance from his honM, at Ferring-lane=
end, to give WOW instructions togs farming people,
as he was going into Nortitamptonstite upon some
business, which would require his absence from honk
several days ; that he accordingly set off with his son,
in a glg, about half-past five, direct' from his house—
dispatched his business at Offullhaaoltili, the farm in
question--took his place in a coach—came
to town, and went mm Northamptonsliins, whence k.
did not return for a week : that, in point of fict, not
smuggling transaction whatever took place at Fess
ring-lane-end on the morning of the .4th of Apnl
but that in the evening of that day some smuggling'
transactions did take place sex miles distance front
'his house, on the coast of Sussex, at which, however,
he was not present; and could not be, as he was at
that time in London. That informations had been
Sled against a number of persona spppOsed to be con:,
cerned in.tbis last menacing& affair,. many of whom
had compromised for mitigated penalties; although;
in fact, they were innocent of any share in the trans.
action. In short, the whole of the evidence went to
'establish the perfect innocence of Mr. Ilenty, and to
Show that the proceedings instituted against him in
the Exchequer were founded in the foulest perjury.
' . Mr. RAINS did not even attempt to address the
Jury on the part of the defendant, confessing that the
evidence en the part of the prosecution was irresistible.
itbe Jury instantly found, the defendant Guilty,•,,,
Tag KING 1:1110R01 SLATER.
'This was an indictment against another of the per-
lured witnesses examined in support of the inform*.
tibn against Mr. Henty. The same evidence was
examined as in the• last case, to which-was super-
added the fact, that the defendant had given theta's&
[information against Mr. Henty front motives of but
*td malignant revenge.
H Mr. RAIN/ also resigned' this defendant to the
bands of the Jury, who immediately found the de,
Pendant Guilty.
Both defendants were ordered to be committed to
the custody of the Marshal.
The Court sat till a very late hourin the evening.
COURT OP COMMON PLEAS, NOVEMBER M.
Before Chief Justice Dast.ss.
&RAY v. MAINZ. _ _ _

The Plaintiff, a hmse-dealer, brought this action
against the Defendant. a Student of Law in the
Temple, to recover the sum of £55 as the price of a
horse sold to the defendant, and 00 as the expenses'
of farriery and feeding of the horse for several months
after it had been returned by the defendant. There
.were five other counts in the declaration, one for the
recovery of a spm of £lO as a compensation for the
use of the horse on returning him in good order and
condition, or otherwise would keep the said horse,
paying the sum of £53 for same ; 2d, for not work-
ing the said gelding in a careful, reasonable, and
proper manner ; Sd, for horses sold and delivered
4th, for horses bargained and sold ; and sth, for the
keep and stabling of said horses. The circumstances
of the case were these :—The defendant had been
recommended by a Gentleman of the name of Hol-
.•
royd,. to Hodgkinson, a stable• keeper in the neigh:
bourhood of Bloomsbury-square, as a person likely
to kirnish him with a good horse, and on application
to Hodgkinson, he replied, that a friend of his, the
plaintiff in this action, had such a one as he thought
would suit,' and he would have it brought to his
, stables for defendant's approbation, who, accomcia.
by Hodgkinson, drove it in a gig as far as Wel
Veterinary College, to be examined by the Professor
there, who pronounced it to be a sound horse. On
returning from the College, Mr. Mayne called on his
friend, Mr.Valpy, to obtain his opinion of the horse ;
and Hodgkinson being asked whether the horse
would bear to be driven to Worthing (a distance of
about 53 miles)? answered, 1, Yes. that he would do
St in a single day easily ;" and in every other respect
strongly recommended the horse to defendant, inso-
much that Mr. Valpy wok him to be the proprietor
of the horse ; this, however, Hodgkinson denied.—
Plaintiff afterwards called on defendant, when the
latter refused to purchase the horse unless a fair trial
was allowed, which plaintiff at first refused, but
.afterwards stated, "that if defendant disi not like the
horse, be would take him again, and deal with bile
upon liberal terms." Defendant at the time expressly
stated that he wished to drive the horse toWorthing!'
and plaintiff said that he would perform the journey
very well in one day. The day after this conversa
tion, defendant, accompanied-by his groom, went to
plaintig's stables for the horse. Mr. Brown, the
foremaa, at.first effused. to let the horse go without'

portent, which Meade= refused until he had tried
film the journey to Worthing. .It was then demand- I
ed by the foreman, thatdefendant should pay £IQ if
'he returned the horse on the Tuesday following on.
the score of not liking him. This the defendant ob.!
jetted to as too much, and the foreman replied—
' " Then I shall keye that for ory master and you to
settle between you." Upon this defendant. took the
hot se, and early next morning put him into.his gig,
accompanied by Mr. Valpy, and his groom on an- ,
other horse, and drove down to Epsom to breakfast,
the horse was well taken care of in the stable of a
friend, and in the evening driven on to Dorking, a
distance of seven miles farther. The next morning
by day-break, defendant drove towards Worthing,
dividing the distance into three stages, breakfasting
himself and feeding die horse on the road. Defen-
dant remained two days at Worthing, during which
the horse was in stables and well taken care of.. He
then drove homeward as far as Horsham, a distance of
20 miles, where he stopped for the night. The next
morning he drove to Ewell, 20 miles farther, to
breakfast, giving the horse hay and water on the
road ; the horse had not shewn himself at all distresssed
at that time; but at Ewell the horse was found to •
off his feed, and a swelling was discovered in his
throat. Defendant then consulted with Mr. Valpy,
his groom, and the ostler of the Inn (who had been
twelve years a farrier and veterinary surgeon in the
Artily, and constantly accustomed to horses), as to
dye propriety of driving him farther that day, who
gave at astheir opinion that the horse would perform
dile rose of the journey quite well. At first he ran as
usual, but soon became so overpowered that he was
More than two-hours doing the last seven miles..-1
Defendant,- finding the horse not to answer the de-
sctiption he had received of him as a workinf horse,
returned him to plaintiff, offering to submit it to in-
So , different •ns to say what compensation ought to
be made plaintiff. The latter, however, brought
thins . to recover the value of the animal and his

keep.—The defence set up was, that a deceit had
been practised by plaintiff, the horse not being fit to'
undertake a journey at the time he was stated so by
plaintiff, and therefore defendant was riot liable.
The defendant's groom was first called for the
defence, but having serionsty injured his ancle by.,
the upsetting of a carriage a few days since, was pre-
vented, by excessive pain occasioned by walking into
Court, from giving his evidence with any degree of
precision ; he, however, proved the nature of the
contract between plaintiff and defendant, and con-
tosdicted the plaintiff's witness,. Brown. .
:Dir. Valpy, who accompanied defendant in his
I"stated, that the day they left town the horse was
to travel hifownpace, about eight miles per
hour, to Epsom, but that during the rest. of the jour-
ney he had not been driven more than. six or seven
milei per hour;' that he was regularly taken care of
diiring the whole of the journey. At Ewell he was
fdand to be ill, but the ostler and defendant's groom
said he might be driven on to town without injury.
On leaving Ewell, the horse did six miles easily in
the first hour, and then knocked up ; he seemed so
much distressed that it took them two hours to gothe
rest of the journey, about seven miles. A small-horse
which the servant rode, performed the whole of this
journey very easily, and was quite fresh. •He heard
fiodgkiqson recommend the horse strongly to defen-
dant. and say that it was capable of performing the
1510ney in a single day. Dist had Said to him
*Worthing that the horse bad Lot a cold upon him.
Mr. Coleman, the Veterinary Surgeon, was called
for the plaintiff in the early part of the case: He had'
Seen the horse • previous tb the journey; it was a'
made-up horse, viz. a fat horse, and incapable of any
active exertion ; that it was
.not capable of perform-
ire* journey to Worthing, 0., indeed, of being
driten at all ; a horse in such high condition could
&it be worked hard Without producing inflammation.
A. horse taken from thehands of a dealer was not fit
,for work ; these persons, when they have horses for
stale, • keep them quiet and fatten them up ; by this
means the animal lost its strength from want of ex-
ercise, and when it came at once to be put to what
in other instances might be called ordinary work,
the unusual action caused an increase of circulation.
by which means there was a greater determination
of blood to the lungs than they would receive, and
this caused inflammation in the neck, by which the
animals frequently died in a few days. A horse so '
'taken from a dealer should be plrysicked and gradu-
ally brought down before he was put to regular
work. It was the custom in the Artillery to walk
horses so bought for more than a week before they
were allowed to trot, and so bring them on gently.
This Gentleman being again called after the de-
fendant's evidence had been gone through, said that
the horse was sound at the time the defendant shewed
him at the College, but, he was in the above-men-
tioned state, and the exercise he received was fully
adequate to produce the- diseased state in which he
was. It was evidently occasioned by excessive driving.
The horse ought not to have been driven on to town
after the discovery of his illness at Ewell.
. : pins? Jusrica.—There cannot be a doubt that the
horse was injured by excessive driving. No horse in
thi hCondition could bear tube driven seven or eight
4:Pti.hrr under a burning sun ; .besides, from
well it was manifest violence to the poor animal to
iire him in the state in which he was ; accordingly
' yeti find he only craided along a great part of the way.
His Lordship did not Sum up, but-a verdict was re-
tforded for the plaintiff—:-Damages £75.
i DUBAI/MR 10.31UCILLAND O. !BARON.
This was an action to recover £B9, funeralex-
penses. It appeared, that Charles Chinner, a coal-
merchant, well known in the Coal-market, had passed
thrOugh life with reputation, and falling into poverty
in.his old age, the coal-merchants generously made
'a subscription, for the purpose of buying an annuity.,
mid making him comfortable .so long a% life should
law. There was no provision made for his funeral.
Under these circumstances, be did not live until the
gland so raised was expended; but when he diedthere
was in the hands of the plaintiff £l4, and I:68 in the
bands of the defenillit. Bath were liable to render
an account of the balance to the subscribers. Strick-
iland, who had been.aetive in procuring support for.
Chinner, undertook to see him buried. He was
anions to see him decently interred. With this hu-
mane intention, he applied to Fearon, at his house
ROST Hornsey, and Fearon appeased to consent to the,
proposal of a decent funeral, by saying, " there is
mousey enmesh be bury hi4like a gentlemabosad
. plat a stone over his grave. 'he plaintiff accord

paid for the interment, and erected a tahletleith the
rollOwitiginietiptfon: -i - •
. .. sacred to tbl.l44inorr bCMt. CIO; Chl6he' 11.8.4111;1
Parish, Coal-merchant, who departed this life the 4th of Aprilt-,
ISIS, aged 79. His latter dits.dere wade' erawfortab3g by the.
liberality of the Geo:lamas f the Coal-market." I . • • _
The expense thus incurred the plaintiff sought NI.
recover out of the fund in the possession of defendant.
The defence was; . that the subscribers *.were not
willing to apply the money to the funeral, and tkat
the defendant was not personally liable to pay
part of the charge.
. The. Jury found a verdict for the plaintiff.—ta-
Oages OS, in addition to the £l4 in his hands,
sisking in all 4:59.

• Dec Emma 11.—GRANT v. carrels.
Tins was an action for die recovery of £59, being
the alleged value of a mooriog-aachor and chainiold
by the defendant.
From the statement of Counsel, it appeared, that
the plaintiff. who was the owner of the ship Sarah,
had that ship with . its furniture sold by auction at
Lloyd's Coffee-house, in the month of May last,•.and.
to the defendant, who was present at this auttioN
the . mooring-anchor and chain alluded to were
knocked ;down, 'because he we. the highest bidder,.
'those articles being sold at the rate of 717s..per cwt..
Ibis evidence was supported by the evidence of
Woolcomb, the auctioneer, who deposed, that no Jpa:
captions whatever wee:practised at the tile, war
,seits fairly, conducted 'according to legal and regular
utism. On cross-eiamination, the witniss stated,
`'* the defendant had nansmitte4leiB ohi m,-whick
was deClared by Mt: auks!, at whose wharf tLe.
*several ankles belonging to the Sarah were placid
'after the sail, to be fully equivalent to the mooring-
isichor and chain:under consideration: •
• On the part of the defendant, it was stated by
Counsel that the defendant had, previous to the auc-
tion,'gone on board the Sarah; order tb examine
the mooring-anchor and chain, bin that he could not
see' them, because-they were covered by the ballast..
• Two ship-breakers deposed, that the mooring-
Inchor and chain were not worth more than the sum
.Which Mr. Christal had stated, these articles beint
,covered with rust, and not at ail trust worthy, if not
'totally unserviceable. In support of this testimony,
it link from the chain was adduced in Court, which
appeared fUlly to justify the evidence.
The Counsel for the plaintiff endeavoured to make
:out, that as the sale by auction was regularly con-
ducted, and as there had been no warranty whatever
0f the articles-alluded to, his client was entitled
recover that sum, which, if the defendant was not
impelled to pay, an action would, in his opinion, lie
against the auctioneer.
The Ca= JUSTICE in summing up, observed that
there were many cases in which it would not be
equitable. to allow all that the- law would give, and
the present appeared to him a ease of this nature.
It would not Surely be fair that the defendant should
lie obliged to pay three times more than the articles
in question were worth, while k appeared that he was
not afforded an opportunity, as he required, of else
mining those articles previous to their sale. To the
Jury, however, it belonged to decide, whether the de-
fendant should pay the whole of the plaintiff's de-
'wed or whether the sum in the hands of the aux-
, was suffieient remuneration for such 'articles
*bs.forosed the ground of the plaintiff's demand..
The Jury,• after a few imernesits deliberaticra, re-
terfred a verdict for the 'defendant, and the Chief
Justice declared it to be a very proper decision.

' An important Constitutional question recently oc-
'curred' at Chatham, by an attempt to subject Ser.
jearit Xing, or the East India Company's recniiting
service, 'to a Military Cann-Martial: ` The opinion
or Counsel has been taken on it, which is, that, by

every maxim of law, and on every constitutional
ground, King is not amenable to Martjal Law.

LORD RANELAGH AND Mn. Anot.rstus.—We
authorized to inform the Public, that the statement
given in our Paper of Thursday last, of the ciettnn-
stances attending an interview between his Lordshi
and Mr. Ana:trims on the 2a instant, at the latter'
Chambers, in the Temple, is, in a very important
particular, a misrepresentation of what passed; it
was, as our Readers must haze seen, entirely founded
on the information given before the Grand Jury,
is, of course, open to explanation or contradiction
en the other side. The Public will therefore suspene
their decision till the time of trial.

Friday being the Anniversary of the Institnl
of the Royal Academy, the annual distribution of

minms took place.
The venerable PReSIDRST being unable to attend
through indisposition, Mr. Sues took the chair, •
delivered the following medals in the presence of
General Assembly of Academicians, and of the

dents, viz.—
To Mr. &evens, for the best copy ht the painting school,
ase_portak otSir J. Reynolds Sy Lineorif—the Silver Dfeciil.
To the same Gentleman, for the but drawing from life—the
Silver Maid.'
ltit Mr. Smith, for the best model of a figure from life—the
ofe4d.
H6-Seasini. for the best drawing of a statue, (the '
Muor), accompanied by drawings u large al na, of a
ryd haedi, and feet, dome after models to the A --my—.dte .
srialgr4.
o . Mont, for the best model of a statue—Silver 11E41
To Mr: sty, Mr. Shea in the name dam President, expnro.
add the high approbation of the Academicians of his copy from
110Vissis CenTimugh this Gentletnan was, by the rules of
the Academy, incapable of receiving Medal for efsepieture,
yet the Academicians wished this publit teddsnowy of chair
prowl Of his industry and abilities so bettotuideeedlit tattivie
to that honour.
Mr, SRI& at the commencement, "clinked
the lamented absence of the venerable PeestrreNt
and at the ccmclusimS, desired a short, e 10,,;
and appropriate addagetto.the Sttidents, particular'
impressing upon titpjll seiessii- ever to keep in
the noblest and most aim and end t fart.
extension of virtue and isimality.
Ter Jaws.--The.frce Government of Neufchatel
has just issued an Ordinance, by which all Jews
prohibited from settling in that City. Such as alet.
niched with good passports may travel through iti;
but without making any stay in it ; but with respect
to the Jews actually established there • their. axe
dered to leave the State before the Isrsl day of.
next. Every Jew who transgresses this Ordinance,
to be arrested, delivered over to the Pa(
demned to pay the expense incurred by his arms%
and escorted beyond the frontiers, with a proisibimea
I ioscarto tutus to Nouhissookooiier join of awrift -

wr~'