Star.
London, England, 1803-10-25 00:00:00

3IIDDLE3A

Yellerday the Sections for the county commenced
(Pekoe Wurtam Matasvanikc, Efq. and a bench of
Justices, at Hicks's Hall. Clerkenwell Green.
aara/.. Klan was tried on a charge exhibited againfl
her by Jane Reynolds, for aa'aultung her CH the sth
of June laft. The prolecutrir dr ..ribed her felt' :44 a
laundrels in the Temple; the defendant was a waffler-
woman, resident in Water-flreet. On the morning
of the day mentioned in the indiament, the prolecun
ttix met the defendant in Arundel-Ifreet, in the
strand. The defendant instantly attacked her, and
knaLked her down. The profecutrix was uncottleious
of ha ing offended the defendant at that moment ;
The found that flue had enraged her the•evening be•
teat, although the did tot know what the had Anne.
The profecutrix alto fail that fLe had lint feveral
gni-
was, being obliged to flop at bc-me lime time till Ilse
recoveres. from the injury the had funained. The
naault was fully proved, nn defence was made, and
the defendant was found Guilty. The Court ordered
her to pay a fine of 81. The defendant laid (he had
not ein.lit (billings in the would.
El:ittieth Bungled was next charged with affiliat-
ing Ann Smith. The profecutrix Hated, that on the
s9th of Augull tall, about feren in the evening,
while (he was (landing at the door of Mrs. Miller,
her miltrefs, the was attacked by the defendant, who
beat her mull violently.' 'She prolectuttix being ark.
ed whether the could afaigu any realm; for the de.
fendant's behaving in fuch a manner. replied that the
defendant wasjea'...nr, and Infpeaed that her hutband
seas p7etierdar with the winter.. The withers added,
that the had been offered zo guineas next day, by
the husband of the defendant, to fay nothing about
the but-awls.
Mr ALLEY, Counfel fur the defendant. Dated to
the Jury, that the had been moll abominably ufed by
the profecutrix and Mrs. Miller. The defendant had
too gond reafon to fufpea the fidelity of her'hufband,
and the accordingly watched him to the houfe of
Mrs. Miller. When the approached that notation,
which might be termed a face confecrated to the
double rites of Venus and Bacchus, the difcovered
the unworthy partner of her bed (landing at the door.
The learned Counfel proceeded to late, that the
called out, I, Oh, ab, you rogue, have I caught
you ?" and inliantly endeavoured to get into the
houfe, in which (he was oppofed by the prefecutrix.
• The confequence was, that a fcuffie enfued, which
'the immactdateprofecutrix withed to terminate by the
ruin of the injured woman. Mr. ALLEY concluded
by fifyinji he aould call no witneffes, he was fo well
convinced the Jury would not find the defendant
guilty on the evidence which had been adduced.
• The Jury found the defendant Not Guilty.
Peter NW was iudiaed for an affault on George
I3arnett, a publican, who keeps the Northumberland
Arms, the corner of Charlotte-ftreet, Fitzroylquare,
one evening in September laD.
Mr. ALLEY, Counfel for the profccution, Rated the
fads be meant to prove before the Jury. The pro.
leentor was a decent man, landlord of the above
houfe; the defendant seas a lawyer, who certainly
ought to have known well the confequence of the
condua he adopted : this he thould not detail, the
profecutor would (peak for himfelf. The profecutor
Accordingly Rated, that between one and two in the
morning, as he was letting out his hail company, the
defendant, far from fober, came to his houfe, and
eked for fomething to drink. The profecutor bad
two reafons for not complying with his requeft ; the
firfl was, the latenefs of the hour ; and the fecond,
that the defendant evidently had imbibed a fufficient
quantity before he came. He told him thefe were
the reafons why he thould decline (crying him ; be-
fides, the bar was (hut up, and he could not accom-
modate him even were he inclined. The defendant
'then moved towards the door, when be turned hid.
denly round and (truck the profecutor a violent blow
in the face. The profecutor then called the watch.
man, to whom he gave him in charge. On his mils
examination, he Paid, that he was kill letting out the
laft of his cuftomers ; he denied that there was any
riot or tumult at the door, occafinned by his getting
low, profligate people out of his honk. He was
letting out a gentleman and his wife, and two ladies,
who had come to take him home ; he denied that
the ladies had been drinking gin, or any thing cite.
He likewife denied that be 'truck the defendant ;
neither did be fee him ftruck.

?tr. Att...av availed himfelf of the critirtefy or the
Com t to make a few remarks on this raft evidence.
faid, that the caufe of his client did not require
that lie Mould animadvert on the bearings °lbis
~y, but he fdt the honour and dignity of the pro-
f•titon to which he belonged to be ♦ilifed :and de-
atradeal by what had fill-n from him. He had laid
he had been in company with the defendant, and with
whom he was going, at the molt unfeafonable hour,
to a common pu'olic-houre. The gentlemen of the
pt rafcfli,aa to which 1w (Mr. Alley) had the honour
to belong, were not in the habit of frequenting fuch
honks; this might be Hill's tint offence; he was a
young man, and the Jnry would do well to,check his
irregnlaa hies in their infancy. Mr. Alley here recited
the fable of the boy who had (role a horn-book, in
which he was comforaed by. is mother. His villainies
iocreafed till he came to the. gallows ; his mother
approached him, and he begged leave to kits Her and
bid her adieu ; inflead of doing fo he bit off her ear,
telling her to remember, that if the had punifbed him
for his &ft error, he fhould probably never have come
to that untimely end..---The Jury would make the
proper application to that fable by the verdid they
would give. The Jury found the defendant Guilty.
The Court ordered him to pay a fine of ten pounds.
Kilbie was indicted I.e an affault upon Tho-
mas Hancock.

Thomas Hancock Paid, that he was an Officer of
the Thames Police. As he and fome other Officers
were returning from having fent a pread man on
board the tender, they went for a few minutes into
a public-houfe, near the river. When they came out,
the defendant, a Waterman, :liked him whether they
wanted a boal? he Paid, No ; upon which he imme-
diately knocked him down. His companions having
come up, they took him, and another Waterman,
who fupported him, into cuatady. The other man
had fince been fent by the Magiltrates of the Thames
Police on board a man of war.

The other Officers corroborated the teilioloo7 of
the Ltft witnefs.

Mr. ALLLY, Counfel for the defendant, infilled
lirongly upon the abufe which the Thames Police
OMeeri made of their authotity, and the improbable
Myles they always told in favour of one another.—
Tbe only witnefs he could have called had been car-
ried off, but he put it to the Jury, whether it was
probable that a (tripling like the defendant could have
thought of afraulting a party of flout men, unlefs he
had been afraulted firft ? This, he Paid, was actually
the cafe ; for, when he Aced the profecutor whether
he wanted a boat, the anfwer he received was, " No,
you dirty blackguard, we have a better boat than
your's." The defendant Paid, he thought they had
been Dutchmen, but that their manners would diG
grace any nation. The profecutor (aid, g, I will
Thew lou that I am an Englifhman ; and (ruck him
a blow on the face, when the defendant naturally de-
fended hindelf.