Star.
London, England, 1817-01-14 00:00:00

ilw INTELLIGENCE.

COURT dr CHANCERY.
Yesterday ;hernia* the LORD CHANCELLOR resu-
med his Sittings, in Lincoln's Inn for the first
rime after the short Christmas Recess. The Pap,-
was whAly fii'ad with cases or Bankruptcy. One case,'
respecting t!ie Superseding of Assignees, occup;ed
the Omrt nearly six hours.—Sir SAsiusl. Ro
Mr. HART, aud Mr. DUCKINWORTII were herd as
Crionsel for the petitioners ; Messrs. LE/Cue BE;.L, I
and WIJIGIMILD for the defendants; and Sir SANitaL
Reistruh replied. The case was not of the least pub
lie interest. His L•irdship said he should take h inie
the papers: The Court adjourned at fun: o'cl .ck.

IDDI.E3EX SESSIONS-
Yesterday George Stotler, a yiatin„; man of respect-
avie nnexinns; was indicted for assaultin-, Maria
•
1.
' Forbin, with intent of violating her person.
The pitisecutris stated, that site lived servant with
the defendant's mother. On the night rnentionOd in
the indictment, she went to bed, as she generally
did, before her mistress, who always came round and
took away the candles previous to going to bed her-
self : for this purpose, the candles were always ex-
tinguished, and. put outside the bed-room door.---1
Having undressed herself, she put her candle out,
and opened her door to place it en the outside, when
she wat suddenly seized by the wrirt and ancle, aid
thrown forcibly on the bed by the prisoner; she
called out, and the noise she made obliged the de-
fendant to quit her apartment. Sian after, her mis-
tress came up, and locked her into the room, where
she remained till next morning, when she was sent to
her father. 'riles was the prosecutrix's statement.
On the part of the defendant, his sister was exami-
ned, who stated, that on the night in questicn the de-
fendant went up to bed, leaving his account-book be-
hind him. The witness, by her mother's desire,
took it up to his room to give it to him, but he was
not there. She called him, and heard the prosecu-
trix say, •4 George, they are calling you." This in-
duced the witness to go to the prosecutrix's room,
when she found the door was locked, and the prose-
cutrix refused to open it, saying there was no one
in her room but herself. The witness then went
down and told her mother, who next visited the pro-
secutrix, and insisted on entering her room. The
door was accordingly unlocked, and a search took
place; George, however, hid effected his eic4pe,
and the prosecutrix was now alone; she declated no
one bad been in her room, but, on searching, the
coat and waistcoat, and some other ankles of dress
belonging to George, were found.
Here the Jury interposed. and declared themselves
satisfieJ, and immediately found the defendant—
Not Guilty.

J. Sadi as was indicted for assaulting Margaret
Julia Hatch, a child eight years cld, with intent to
violate her person.
The child is the daughter of the Steward of the
Penitentiary at Westminster--the defendant was em-
ployed in the Establishment. The child stated, that
the defendant had enticed her into a private part tit
the building, .trader pretence of giving her time bar-
ley sugar, and then proceeded to commit the offence
imputed to him. The child got away from him,
aad in the course of the evening told one of the mis-
tresses of the Establis'iment, but did not tell either
her own samba or her own servant, although she
passed the afternoon-with them.

The Jury not giving any creJit to the story, found
the defendant—Nut Guilty.
SCOTCH COURT OF JUDICATURE.
• The High Court of Justiciary for Scotland met
at Edinburgh on the 6th inst. The only case before
it of any note, was one of a George Brock, carrier be-
twixt Edinburgh and Linton, charged with theft and
reset of theft, and which is remarkable solely on ac-
count of the legal exceptions to which the prisoner
was indebted for his acquittal.
The prisoner pleaded Nor Guilty, saying he found
the parcel twat he was accused of having stolen.
Mr. GRANT, as Counsel for the prisoner, objected
to the prosecutor being entitled to prove any article
but the thread lace mentioned in the libel, in so far
as it charges the prisoner with stealing "a quantity
of thread lace mod pal. agreeably to all inven-
tory or invoice thaein, herein alter mentioned"--
and Mr. Hume, in his treatise on criminal law, laid
down that no proof could be led upon the words
" other goods." The inventory and invoice men-
tioned in the libel ought also to have formed part of
the record ; and a copy ought to have been served
upon the prisoner along with the indictment.
The SoLturrott GINURAL replied for the Crown ;
and the Court having considered the objection, their
Lordships gave their opinions at length, in which they
all held, that every prisoner is entitled to have served
upon him a particular list of articles charged against
him as coless, aad that he is not bound to go to the
Clerk of Court to see what is charged against him.
The objection was accordingly sustained, and the
public prosecutor restrained from proving any thing
but the stealing and resetting the thread lace, men-
tioneJ in'the indictment.-

Sir William Rae, Sheriff Depute of Edinburgh,
having been called, identified a number ot parcels of
lace, ;es produced before him upon the rumination
of the prisoner, all labelled and signed by the witness.
Cross-examined—Witness cannot swear to the lace
itself, but merely so she labels upon the panel:.
Walter Tuinbull being •called, Mr. GRANT ObjeC-
ted to this witness, in respect Neither bis profession nor
place of abode were dated is the Gee of witnesses served apes
the prisoner.
Tit, SOLICITOR GENERAL answered for the Crown,
and argued that the designation was perils'', expls-
cit, since he was designed-4, Walter Turnbull, bro.
theref the said John Turnbull !"

Mr. GRANT replied, and the Court unanimously
sustained the objection.
Mr. IVonv, juni..r Coonsel for the prisoner, stated•
an objection to the production ut the invoice or in-
ventory upon the table, on various grounds, and in
particular, that it was only a afty sent afterwards
irom GlasgoW, and aorilremer dacriberf in elm libel.
The aOLlCiTOßGeNastALattswered, and Mr. GRANT
having teplied at some length, the Court unani-
mously held that there was no evidence that the in-
voice prciddced was an accurate lop, from the origi-,
nil. Tine evillence.ot Walter Turnbull bad beets set
aside, inks war 14e wily &ma who todd prove Mt pa.
In this stage of the trial, Mr. GRANT submitted tt•
the Counsel for the Crown the impropriety of taking
up die time of the Court longer in this case, but the

SOLICITOR COMA h having insisted on going oe, the
next witness called was
George Mather, one of the proprietors of the daily
post waggon between Edinburgh and Glasisostra-..
This witness proved, by A Hotel,- int his book, that
on Monday, the 27:b of awe/sober, IBIS, a parcel
I cams from Glasgow, addressed. .‘. H. • fkacoek,
Fisher-row." by the defeats: y bui.k it appears that it
was cdried to Hay at the hack of Carringate.
I Mr. GRANT objected agiin to such evid-vca., and
the Court held t':at it ara M b e t•rr..,d,,, elbtti al' the Itstlttte
I prcrecte.;•r to have peolticod those book, in Court, and
they, therefore, would allow no farther examination
of this witness.
The Soucaron Gav ER A ',here give up the case.
The Limn Jos•rter Ct.eitst lia viiig v‘ry .11 rely
addressed the .111 r, they, without teariii? ti e box,
found a vet dict tit not It ITI•r1 I .
George .I..n!frld, ninkeeger, at Beltonfi rd, was
charged with rape, or assault, with intent to commit
rapt'.
The L"nn JCSTICE CISME, in his charge to the
Jury, gave it ;:s his cptninn the only the minor
()Grier WAS made out ; but the Jury, by a plurality
of v: ice;, tnliad him guilty of the tape, recommei,
ding him, at al:. Sallie titre, by a great majurity, to
mercy.—He was orthred IH. execut:..n on the 1&h
of Fewuary neat.