Star.
London, England, 1817-12-03 00:00:00

THAT TRADE.

This important question upon the natural rights
and liberties of man, came on to be argued in an
Appeal Irons sentence of condemnation passed by
the Judge of the Admiralty Court of Sierra Leone,
whereby the vessel. containing SOO slaves, was con-
fiscated to our Government, with one-half to the
slaves on board, whose liberation, besides, took place
finder the 17th of Gen. 111. On a former day the
King's Advocate had been heard in support of the
condemnation.

Dr. DODSON was heard this day in answer. He laid
much stress on the principle, which is founded on the
law of nations, with respect to the ships of one nation
being subject to be visited or searched by those of
another upon the high seas in time of peace. The
only authority which could be legally set up was an
authority from the Governors of Colleges, and their
authority must be derived under an Act of Paella.
spent. Here the parties resisted the search, and
much blood was shed on both sides. The Act of the
47th Gco. 111. could only apply to British subjects
carrying on the Slave Trade, and could not apply to
the commission of this offence in any other nation
upon which the right of search could be maintained.
and much less of condemnation.. It the right of
search existed in British cruisers towards neutral ves-
sels, the same right existed in other nations to visit
and search British ships. What was the foundation
of this right ? Only to see if there were contraband
goods on board. The empire of the seas was said to
be in the British nation ; but this was erroneous.—
The Ott was the property of 'all nations; and they
had a right to navigate without any molestation
whatsoever. Then, with respect to•resistance on the
part of this vessel, that resistance was justified by
self-de fence. Numerous authentic: were cited upuu
this subject. Where 'he right of search between na-
tions commenced was between the English East India
Company and the Portuguese and Dutch in the East
Indies Lbut then they were looked upon to br at'
war. Vattel, book page 130, says, the English
Company sere for excluding all other nations. In
the ye..r 1580 (Camden's Elizabeth), a war broke
out with Spain, because the Spaniards claimed the
right of search towards British ships in the Bay of
Honduras; which was strenuously resisted, not only
by the Ministers and by thc-.Throne, but by the na-
tion at large; and it was expressly stipulated in,con-
vention between us and iipain, as the condition of
peace, to make good the loss sustained by Biiiish
subjects; and in which it was deterrnintd that Spain
had no tight, or any other nation (as contended by
this country), towards neutrals, to•iiialte this visita-
non or search in tilt time of peace. Another seizure,
in which that &alone was maintained, was in Nootka
Sound, in solicit t e Spanish Government al;reed to
make restitu.ion. A like tight was claimed by Swe-
den to be exenipt tii.m s.-arch, but was refused by
Great Britain. niter authorities were so far in op-
position. The next autiawity cited by the Learned
Advocate was the Coiresiiiindence between Lord
Castlereagh, die Duke of Wellington, and Louis
XVIII. by which it appeased that Monarch refused
to abolish the Sim Trade rill live years atterwitids.
Bonaparte, immediately after this returning from
Elba, tamed liikDecret abolishing it from the Fienchl
Colonies, and for ever after *that date ; but Louis
being restored after the battle of Waterloo, declared
this Edict of the Usurper as null and void. Louis,
however, afterwards consented to the entire abolition
for ever, from and after the issuing of that Edict.—
Then this Edict was not effective, as related to this
vessel, until the French •abolitioa of Slave Trade bad
reached Martini:lns ; for no law was made to apply
41 rpm:fade to the offences it meant to punish. The
Learned Advocate contended, under various other
authorities and precedents eked with analogy to the
law of nations, that the Court below bad acted with-
out jurisdiction, and therefore prayed in behalf of the
captured, that this sentence of condemnation should
be set aside with costs, and the property restored.
Sir ClintiliTOPHlA Kostums. (King's Advocate)
replied to Drs. Dodson and Lushington. He knew
of no property in the captired legally constituted
which the Court could Wedge to restore, much less
to award costs of condemnationnSagaiust the captors.
If there were no legal property in these slaves, the
owners or crew of the captured vessel could not come
into a Court of Justice with their hands stained with
oppression and with blood, .and demand those rights
which they bad violated. His Friend (Dr. Dodson)
had argued upon general principles with analOgy to
the law of nations, which had no application to the
present case. 'The mere purpose for which this vessel
set out on her voyage, by the implements of slavery
found on board, was sotticient to •warrant her con-
demnation. The Court had threncourses—it might
either not chum to interfere with the transaction,
.on
the score of illegality in the trade; it might atiiim
the condemnation and jurisdiction of the Court below;
or, upon the merits of it, might say there was no legal,
property in the vessel which the Court was called'
upon to restore, and that the captors had acted is
conformity to the law of nations as at present esta-
blished
for the 'Mal abolition of this traffic, upon the
principles of natural justice and humanity, and upon
the broad basis of morality ; it was the duty of ah
and every nation to.put a awl) to such au inhuman
And unjust practice—the same as every one, upon
the principle of our municipal laws, would nut only
be justified, but is strictly commanded W arrest era-
annals, and to assist in the appsehend.ng and scent-
ing of persons in the act of conimitting assaults or,
, other crimes.—De. Atiasta was heard ea the sane

vie. Sii ttLAM Scair ippoiatid. kb ere
mint In as early star.

_
kous °met, ?Summit& 11 • •
CLIAVER v. TOLL
Sir &mutt. RolgiLLY stated, that ifiis wis.a bdl
filed for the *prise of conqielling the defendant Ikk
make *specific pertbrannee of an agreement which
had been specially eilttlied lOW with Jacob Favii4ll,
under the following circumstance. i=rdhn AtiTittus.
Tulk was tenant fur life of some property in Bear-
s:reet, parish of St: Martins, Welansinater, and agreed
in December, 1844, to grant a least of a house there
to Jacob Furnell, at the stipulated rent ot IZSg, and
he further agreed on the 19th of that month to renew
tile said lease for a further term of years, in case
Furnell made application for him to do se, Fatten
agreeing to expend IMO on the house within ttie first
three years of his lease. The plaintiff, Mr: Cleaver.
agreed to give Furnell the sum of AIM fit his right
to the lease, which Furnell accepted, but deed before
he could execute the necessary assignment. After
his death, his executors thought the Offer so go )d
hat they accepted it, anJ thereby Furn Al's property
in the lease was transferred regularly to the plaintiff.
Meanwhile John Augustus Talk transferred-
claims to the property to Charles Talk, to whom the
plaintiff applied, for a renewal of the lease, accord.
ing to the original agreement, but was told that it
could wit be done, for at the drawing up ot that
agreement the intention of the parties was that no
renewal should take place, unless at tie personal in.
stance of Jacob Furnell. Tne present question there-
fore arose respecting the true and legal construction
of the deed drawn up on the 19th ot 'December :but
surely his honour would see, that though the As-
signees were not n +used, still they were bound to see
the covenant fulfilled in every part. It A. entered
into an agreement with B. on certain stipulations,
surely the tultilment of these stipulations was binding
on the representatives of buth. This had been deci-
ded by the Lord Cnancellor Macclesfield, in the case
of Hyde v. Skinner, where a similar dispu.e arose
about the renewal iit a lease,. and his Lordship had
decided that the executors were implicated in what
the origin par, had done, and though not specifi-
c oily named, were bound by what -he agreed to. It
cent sinly was in every view reasonable that this should
be the Cihe, and he had therefcre no doubt- but his
Honour would grant the application.
Mr. Waity followed on the same side, and men-
tioned a case in the Court of Common Picas, Haynes
v. Hare, reported in Ist vul. of Henry Blackstone's
Reports, in which case he considered the opinion 01
the Court decisive.

Mr. DeLL, on the other hand, argued, that it never
was the intention of the lessor to give any poser re.
specting the renewal of the lease, except to Furnell
himself, and the lease had been prepared at the ex-
pense of rumen, and with the assistance of hie Soli-
citor. Suppose the ,parties had gone to law-for a
bleach of the covenant, it unquestionably remained
with toe other side to prove that they had acted' by
orders of F melt, for surely his Assignee could not
stand $t his situation. The case cited by Sir S. Ito-
molly, viz. Hyde r. Skinner, had no bearing here,
as in that case the Ex7cliturs claimed the renewal of
a•lease, while here it was claimed only by the As-
signee. Fuxnell was to expend £3OO on the prerni-
sea before any renewal the lease, and by assign-
ing away the property, be certainly gave up his.so,
itehant, fur the lessor had no poster over the As-
signee. Tne case of Raussbottom and Goiden, in 1
Vesey, 97, was decisive against the present claim.
The Solicitor appointed by the present parties had
expressly stated, that if the construction of the agree.
men' war such as was now contended fur, the agree-
ment had been so drawn up by mistaioe.
Sir S. ROWLEY objected to such evidence being
received, as et had never been doer in any former ease.
The MASTER of the Rotas said, it might be read
w ithout 'prejudice.
Mr. WILSON followed ; Mr. BELL and Sir S. Ro-
SULLY
The blarrta of the RoLLs—This case merits con-
sidtiable attention, on account of the nature of the
deed. I resetve my judgment till Tnursday morn-
ing, but shall give it then.

COUR r OF KING'S BFNCH, DECEMBER .2.
PARKER O. CHANDOS LEIf, Q.

This was an action of assunipsit by the indorsee of
a bill of exchange at three months date, from the
17th of January, 1317. for £3OO, drawn by a Major
Williams, and accepted by the defendant.
Ti., hand writing of the acceptor and drawer was i
regularly proved. the plaintiff going to the Jury upon,
his printafacie case.
Mt. Daxteers appeared for the Defendant, and
stated, that is client was a very improvident young
maw, • libelee', the plaintiff, a pawnbroker, was enu-
tied from his age, as well as his pursuit in life, to the
reputation of being a very provident man. He cer-
tainly Could not deny his client's band-writing, but
he Vats prepared to slim that the plaintiff was nu.t
entitled to recover upon this bill of exchange, because,
in fact, the defendant was4elieved from his liability,
in consequence of the plaintiff having taken two
other species..uf security for rhe.amount of the sum
cloned—namely, a warrant of attorney from the
delindent fur the debt, and the guaranty of the
drawer and an Irish Baronet.
The Learned Counsel accordingly called evidence
in support of this case, but it appeared that although
the plaintiff had taken the security mentioned, yet he
expressed his doubt at the time ot its efficacy. He
had admitted, however, that the whole sum due up-
on the bill of eschange,was only slll6O, and therefore.
the question was, whether, after this ad mission, he
was entitled to go for the whole sum mentioned in
the deenvation?

Lord ELLSNBUOVOII WAS of opinion that he was
not entitled to the whole demand i aad therefore the
Jury found a verdict for the plaintiff for Jet 50.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS. DEC. a.
TACZY V. SIR HUNRY WILSON.

The plaintiff, who keeps the .King's Head public.
hose in St. Paul's Churchlard, brought his action
against Sir Hemy Wilson, to recover J 67. 7s. ffd. for
meat and drink supplied to several persons who had
votesfor the Bortugh of Barnstaple. It occurred to de-
fendant that a vacancy_n►ight happen. in the repre-
sentation ..f the Borough of IA
and that a
new Member might be elected in' lieu of Sir Eyre
Conte. It was consequ.n.ly his intention to stand
a contest fur the said bonie, and be. authorised a
person named Stanbary, to act as his agent, and do
all that was moray to advance his ►nterest, Etan;

•
Cu.*. 'tin cr.= y, se ted plafna's .te;
aaj a prop puce thafteeptiod of Potters.. On the
'3d Of January a kipper was gieen at theitliintit's
house, td seirenti.ee eighty pelsons. and ST Heatt
Wilson was the Pielident. The bill attiotiniillg
,1830;svit imesediatily discharged. Mt. State, went
'9llralt.iriding • the miters.wifft refreshmen... WWI the
dellsand accturid• which this Wien was A1,411t td
Mr. berjeane past described nts. etieivt; Sir hones
Wilson, to be a man oillarge property, hut he .sddedj
if is hit fottur.c. was equal to the National D •bi; and
he_yeAre.to leave the Barnstaple voters; who fra.•
quested the plaintiff's house, to drink at his expenslti
they would swallow it •ali. They ought to be called
voters of the B:)roUgh oflieszk down. ' Il *4 true;
he said, th.it Sir Henry W1..91111 intended to Hier
himself as a candidate t. r tic borough of Barnstaple;
but he was desirous bt c itnalg'in by the as,istance of
respectable persons, and no by men who did no-
thing without hard drinking. Folding no bottom to
the throats of the men wig, met at Stacey'; house; hi
was obliged to put an end to it. He therefore suit
Captain Clarke, an officer in the navy, to auroras the
plaintiff that he revoked the order given, lot sup.
plying the voters with meat and :;rink, and that be
would pay for no more in future.
Captain Clarke being called, stated that he called
on Stacey, and told him Sir Henry Wilson *Mal/
not be answerable for :My More refreshments he might
afford to voters. He did this at the desire 01 8:r H,
Wilson. long before the plaintiff supplied the articles
which constituted his demand..;—The Jury, under all
the circumstances, friend a verdict tor the defendant:
• MIDDLESEX SESSIONS, DEG S.

LONG v. comes.
The defendant, Ram Geerim, late si dealer in oil;
residing at the west end of the town, was put to the
bar, on an indictment charging him with frauslui
'lently obtaining a check for ASO, from Mr. John
Long,. the proprietor of Long's Hotel, Bond-street,
under the followinp, circumstances:—ln the month
of Jane, 1816, the prisoner called upon the prose*
tutor, and informed him that hit, (the prosecutor's)
nephew was arrested and confined iu a lock-up house;
in Carey-street, Lincoln's Inn Fields, and that he
had requested him to rail and. inform the prosecutor
of it ; at the same time observing; he could obtain
his d;scharge for £5O. The prosecutor accordingly.
gave him a check for that sons on his banker. In
about two hours after the prisoner returned, and said
the ,ti O v:ottid not be enough, and that be must have
a hundred. The prosecutor accordingly wrote ano-
ther check for that turn. anctrequested.to be put in
poisession of the previous cheek for £5O, but was
informea by the. pritpner that he had torn. it to pieces,
and thrown. it away. From circumstances that trans-
pired, theprosecutur obtained possession of the check
tot 8100, but was assured in the most positive man-.
ner,that the first check had been destroyed. The
prisoner afterwards took the benefit ot.the Insolvent
Debtr,r's Act, and.was opposed by the tiephew on
account of some transactions between (tient, but dis-
charged. On the day
.t. elvemonth alter the bill was
drawl:, it was presented to the haulm', and cash re-
ceived fur it. A veatzant was ininhdiately issued;
and the defendant taken into custody. *ton he as'
knowledged having got the money for Inc bolt
Mr. Ault', on the part of the prisoiser, took act
objection to the indictment, on the ground, that the
cheek not having been paid to a third person, was of
no more value than a blank piece of paper, but thi
Court over-ruled at.

Messrs. John and Joseph Long were then called;
who proved the facts above stated; the latter Gen.
Urinals declaring that he bad never authorised the
priso •er to apply to his uncle in his behalf, nor had
he, the prisoner, b.:en in any manner accessary to
his discharge.
Mr. Au.t.v, at great length, cross-examined the
witnessiss' and addicssed the July in the ptitontr's .
behalf. He called two persons to give him a cha-
racter, one of whom had known him two years and •
a half, and consideted him to have been a strictly
honest chat acter.—The July, after consulting a Levi
minutes, worried a verdict of—Guilty.

Mr. 1V Arsos, the Chairman, atter taking the opi-
nion of the Bench, addressed the prisoner as iullqlss:
Yuri, Robert Cousins; have been indicted fur a
fraud, and by. I am sure, as attentive a Jury as ever
sat in that box, who have found* their duty tp• re-
turn a verdict of guilty against yOu.• It is there6re •
the imperative duty of this: Cuutt, on behalf *him
public, however pamiutit Mat be, Irons the variety
of the circumstances developed, and the great ileiett
with winch you have acted, yorilave harUeueed is
your mind for a twelvemonth thilirithe bf which you
have been convicted, to pass an exemplary tencence
on you. The sentence.of the Ctunttherefdre on
is, that you be transported beyond the. seas for the
term of seven years."

Monday evening ,a numerous .aod respettab!O
company met at the house of Mr. ICIAK. White Swan,
Little.S% Andrew'i-street, Seven Dials, to celebrate
St. Andrew's Day; after drinking to the pious me.;
mory of the titular Saint, several national and con-
stitutional toasts were given, aad the evening was
spent with great convivralhy and haiinonj, •
St..Andr.w's Day was, as usuiel, celebrated by a
°macrons and. respectable putt in-Mr. Castanets's,
the Thistle and Crown, •Cliatisloststriet, on Monday
The dinner was good; -many appropriate toasts
and sentiments were given ; several' excellent- Scads
and Englilh ;songs :nog; and-the•ahrriSon% Vett
With that.convoiality and hilarity which geatuilly
6rt!ail among,Caledottians on shaoalay.••....
Friday ntorning, as Mr.-Customs, of *Bot.l-itnEet,
was driving past Chatincamiss ib a oachosse•Chaise,
accompanied, by his servant,: ltrs 'Vehicle was drivel;
violently against by x. Mail cart, which was proceed-
ing along theatrect at A. furious rate The: shoct"was
violent, that the .chalso of Mr. C. wasvonipletely •
on its side, anjl ?4r. C. and his maopreciphiss.
eJ into the,inad. Mr. Q. was conveyed home in a
s ate 9: jasensibility,_ and the. servant, whose thigh'is
b. oke in two places, was carried. to an Hospital.
Cora LZCHANGP, MANN. LAN Dec. S.—There
w.:s but little tine wheat at market this Morning; f‘r
which there was ready sale at rather better prizes.
Char. on Monday. Fine heir), is also ls. per quarter
Dearer ; In t of that description there is but little on.
ha .d ; but the interior quality are very heavy sale.
lu bears, peas, 4nd oats, there is no alteration is
pricts, but I.4.C..WCFC more readily cgcotcd 'on •
Mood I.

INDIGENT FAMILY 01.% SIIAK.SPEARE.
It is new above two, centuries since the death of
William Shakspeare, the greatest genius of any age
or nation ; and, during the greater panel that period,
it has been the unerasi.ig boas& and glory of the peo-
• ple of England, that the unrivalled Poet of Nature
WWI an Englishman. England therefore has profited
by his renown, and his was the harmless glory of
literary genius, by which he illustrated virtue, ex-
posed vice, and taught man his domestic and social
duties Is there, therefore, no debt of gratitude due
from his country to this great man, or to his family ?
Ought the family of Sliakspeare to be suffered to be
, servants, hirelings, and paupers ? Do not the et:linen.
cal deeds of aar performed by a Churchill, a Byng,
a Nelson. or a ‘VelleOey, ennoble and enrich their
female,. its every branch anll ;el,;:r.ttien ; and is co
thing doe to the name and farniiy that man, that
unparalleled Shakspeare, w' use works not only ho-
nour his own country, but our common nature in all
countries? To such a q'st stion there can he but one
answer, followed by an eager curiosity to learn who.
ther there now live any heirs-at-law, or reps esenta-
lives in blood, of the Shakspeare family. It is known
that the line of Shakspeare's own body, terminated
in his grand-daughter, Lady Barnard, of Abington,
near Northampton ; but Shakspeare had a bitter,
Joan, who married William Harte, of Stratford ; and
this branch, partly under the n•me of Ham', and
•spartly under that of Smith, may be regarded as the
last remains of that family, which, as long as trans.
cendent genius merits distinction, ought not to he
suffered to pide in want, or to struggle against the
miseries which beset poverty, however industrious.
In passing lately through Tewkesbury, the Editor of
the Monthly Alarming was led, by a reported in-
scription on the tomb-stone ot a John Bane, buried
there in 1800—which inscription described him as
s' a sixth descendant of the poet Shakspeare,"—to
enquire whether there lived in that town any survi-
vors of the family. After much search, he discovered
a son of this Harte, who had been christened by the
name of William Shakspeare. I:Ms poor man is a
hair-maker by trade, and works as journeyman to a
Mr. Richardson : the'contour of his countenance
strikingly resembled the portrait in the first folio edi-
tion, a circumstance of itself sufficient to excite an
interest in his favour. In one room of the ground-
fioor of a wretched hovel, lived this man, his wife,
and five children. In a corner stood a stocking-
frame, in which the mother said she worked after her
children were in bed at night, and before they awoke
in the morning, adding thereby Ss. or 4s. per week
to her husband's 15s. In answer to enquiries about
the great Bard, Harte said his lather and grandfather
often talked on . the subject, and buoyed themselves
with hopes that the family might some time be re-
membered ; bat, for his part, the name had hitherto
proved of no other use to him than as furnishing
jokes among his companions, by whom he was often
annoyed on this account. On the writer presenting
him with a guinea, he declared it was the first benefit
which had arisen from his being a Shakspeare. It
appeared that his lather held the property in Shak-
speare's two houses at Stratford, bat they had long
been under mottgige ; and his mother, a few years
ago, sold them by auction, deriving a balance, after
paying the mortgage and expenses, of only £3O.
The family pedigree he had preserved ;e but he had
no other relic of d.c great Poet, save a long walking-
stick, winch was given to him by his father as one
which bad belonged to Shakspearr. It appeared also
that his father. had given a Mr. Kingsbury, of
Tewkesbury. a jug, or beaker, with Shakspeare's
trit on it, and a sort of pencil-case, with a cypher
.:- upon it—both of which he asserted had been
the property of the Poet. On enquiring after other
breaches of the family, he referred the writer to the
Smiths, of Stratford, who were his cousins, and chil-
dren of his lather's sister; and also to an aunt, whom
besupposed still to reside at Stratford. The Editor
of • the M *Ws ile:asine afterwards proceeded to
tteatford. and, on applying to Mrs. ifferruby, as
atposing gossip, who now resides in the home in which
Shakspeare was born, he was readily istroduced to
the Smith.. but the cunt had removed to Leaming-
ton. Of the Smiths, there are two brothers and a
ester a one is a bricklayer, and the other had kept a
grocer's shop, but had recently failed. The sister is
married t-a a bricklayer, who• works under his brother-
in-law. It was no fancy to trace in the faces of the
two Sniiths the same family resemblance which had
been observed in-Hafte dr Tewkesbury. The frame-
work of their faces was all over the Bard of Avon.
Tbey were characterised by the same modesty as
poor Harte. • Having as yet profited nothing by
their lantilywonown, they expected nothing; but they
acknowledged they &Wit hard that Stratford should
profit so much by the name of their kinsman, and the
country boast so much of his works, while his family
were suffering every kind of privation; the very
house of Shakspeare having fallen into the bands of
Amgen. by strewing which the family might have
been kept from want. At Stratford the Editor re-
ceived much aid an these inquiries from the polite-
mess of Mr. Wheeler, author of the History of Stun-
lord. Owing, however to a mistake in the published
pedigrees, he and the inhabitants of Stratford had to
this time lost sight of the Smiths, as connectetruith
the fatally of their illustrious townsman; aad till the
visit of the Editor, they bad supposed that every
branch of the family had left Stara d. From SUMO
ford she Editor proceeded to Leamington, where be
found Jane, the aunt of Harts, of Tewkesbury, in
the bumble situation of a washerwoman. She bad
married-a soldier of thewameof Lite, by whom she.
has two girls, the eldest of whom is kially patro-
n z -d by Mr. /listen. of the Museum, and has bees
~!cognised in her relationship to th% Bard of Avon
by many of his distinguished visitors. In the course
ot these iaqoiries, the Editor collected some novelties
connected witbShakspeare, a detail of which would
now be out of place; but not so a call to the literary
. world .to attend so the condition of the interesting,
;actuations, ma virtuous family of a man who pos-
sesses euckproweninent claims on the venerotion and
gratildthe .or his country. The surviving branches
may be classed as under t
*Mans andeekare Huts, dole maker, of Tewlishury, and
son of John Hasse, who died tannery SO NO, and treaders of
Gear Harts, sad bis five children.
iota Hene,'S theirlasker, et Cirencester, livelier of W. $.
• s
hoe Hanel at loaminess.. embus a/ Thome Harts, who
kip sew is the peseewroo of pit Editor of the And.
Iferoseit, sad is ur minor La the sus Mille.