Star.
London, England, 1817-08-13 00:00:00

NAI'AL INZWLLIGENCE.

The Ocean, HAIL, frum Petersburgh, siisung a
leak and sunk, about sixty miles from the Naze of
Norway; crew saved, and arrived at Scarborough.

FALMOUII-1, AUGUST 10. •
Assivad she calm.les, Wong. tram Havre, wish her
sails dsmiged ; and his Majesty's ship NOM?. Ircns
a cruise.—Sailed the `St atire, Tnostax, for Haviannah.

PORTSMOUTH, AUGUST IL _
Sailed iiis M jesty% ship tor Prighton.
DEAL, AUGUST u.

Arrived and sailed for the River the Preston, }hit.
imrrott. and Old Maid, Mtuen, horn Jamaica;
Vine, from Trieste; Charles Henry. Putu.:ps, from
Cadiz; and Lady Campbell, fr,•m Bengal.—Came
down from the River the Brixton, for the Cape ; and
Julius Cwsar, fur Demerara.—Wind S.W.

HARWICH, AUGUST it.
Arrived the Eclipse picket, from Cuxhaven ; and
the Lady Nepeao packet, from Holland, both with

HULL, AUGUST to.
1, Arrived the Cyrus, BRARLING, from Greenland,
Stith 6 fish, 210 butts, 80 seals ; alsdAhe Dunconah,
Di,xwc, frnm ditto, with 7 fish, 2.... id butts '26 seals.
.. t• • . •
The following acc,,unt of the unstermentiened ships
.. _i. . e A_ .
it brought by the Cyrus :—Aurora,
,pAD/15,05, . mu i
and IN:siker, HARRISON, 5 fish. , ''''' •' '
GRAVESEND, AUGUST it.
Arrived the lane, Whytoek, fries Berbiee ; Elisabeth, licr.,
Len, front Charente; Duke of Wellington, Martin, from 04tt'rd ;
William and Henry. Greenwell, from Hamburgts ; Vencrabk,
bawls from Dublin ; Point:els Charlotte, Beatty, from /emaica ;
f :mend Washington, Savage, trout Norfolk; John, Elimore.
from Calais; Sinters, Oldham, from Demarara. Sailed the Name,
Masson, tor Malta, Arc. i Mediterranean, Martin, for Trieste ;
Pursuit, Rutherford, for Havannah ; Deuz San, Smith, for Ca •
Isis; Nelly, GAM, and Louisa, Artie, fur Hamburgh ; Hester,
Silvers, for Rotterdam.
CUSTOM•HOTJSE, AUGUST IS.
Snaps EMTgRIED IN was os.—The Barksvorth. •-i•—•••••,, from
China; Andrei:ll74a, .•ughrne,froat Jamaica; Scipio, Hender.oti,
front rince Edward's bland; Industry. Evans, from Cork ; Nu •
raa, Temereeg, from Havre; Duke of York, Fryer, from Ratter-
earn : Neptune. Stratiaek, from Ostend; Fortitude, Poad, from
Petenibu rib; Ocean. Pike, from Lisboa ; Msrgaret, Maim., :mil
Maria Eliz.beth, Newman, from Dentate ; aides, Album, front
• Sr. John's (N. 11.); and Henry Clay, Thomas, from New yea.
Otrmea afil.• Les Trois Fehcites, St. Martin, for St. Valery
and I.e Crotoy; Morning Star,• Ord, for Hainbergh ; Prince of
hate-Cobourg, l.add, for Kir tad.= ; Princess of Wales, Steuart,
for Calais • Spectator, Richardson, for Demerara; and Sprightly,
kudger, far Lisbon.

The Case e, with Lord Amman and suite on
board, arrived safe.at the Cape, and sailed 18th June,
in company with his Majesty's ship Coriguanoa, for
St. Helena.
Yesterday Mitcham Fair commenced, according
to custom, on the Common, in front of the Back',-
Head TaTein. 'A number of genteel families in the
vicinity enjoyed a pleasing promenade among the ave.,.
rues, formed by double rows of stalls, for the sale of
Iyouteru mo&s and trinkets.
A tire broke out on Monday night at a• baker's in
Market-street, St. James's, which cctornitted very ex-
tensive ravages. '
On Monday night, as Mr. Elliot, of Lucas-street,
Was going along Church.lane, Commercial road, he
Lund a poor -woman lying in Om middle of the road,
hiving been run over by a Gentleman's carriage witty
tts o footmen behind it. Mr. Elliot had her conveyed
to Ms own residence. where he sent for eargieal
tante, but 4Lccirpired nest morning.

Lew INTELLIOINCIA

COURT 01, CHANCERY, AUGUST 11.

DOWN'S V.

The defendant had lent to the plaintiff, io 1814
4,200 3 per Cents. on condition that the maner be
re-invested soon after, and in the mean time, the di
•idends should be regulatly paid to the defendant.
This qu lathy of Stock was actually sold out, .nd the
amount, £4.068, given to the plaintiff. The diet.,
dends not being afterwards regularly paid, the defen-
dant obtained a letter of attorney, entitling film to
sell the plaintiff's estate for payment of stock and da.
sr-Wends, engaging at the same time that no personal
rxectsion should be recurred to till the estate was
actually brought to sale, and the deficiency ascer-
tained. The estate was brought to sale ; none be-
,came a bidder but Mr. Henry Clarke, the defen-
dant's s,:licitor, who became purchaser ; the price
was upwards of r€4ooo, and left a deficiency of
81800; for which therefore, the defendant took mea-
sures to attach the personal effects of the plaintiff.
The plaintiff now applied to the Court for an injunc-
tion to restrain the defendant from such execution.

Mr. BELL and Mr. Hanewoon represented the
conduct of the defendant as harsh and verstious,
fraudulent and oppressive. The letter of attorney
had been obtained from Miss Downes, the plaintiff,
but she was simple, and unacquainted with the power
she conferred. The estate was indeed brought to
sale, but no sale was effected : there was no bidder
but the defendant's Solicitor, who was, in feet, the
same as the defendant ; and as a trustee is not al-
lowed to be the purchaser of his trust estate, the yen.'
dor, under a power of attorney, could not become the
vendee. The one must be considered to be as frau-
dulent as the other. There was the, no sale, and
therefore the defendant cannot, according to his own
agreement, proceed to personal ennution.
Sir SAMUEL ItostirrY and Mr. Evan replied, that
so far was the defendant from having acted harshly,
fraudulently, or oppressively, that is was after much
solicitation, and with great reluctance, that he had
consented to lend his money to the plaintiff. He had
suffered six months to pass dier he found that the
dividends were not paid, nor any steps taken to refund
the principal, before he applied for a warrant of at
tnrncy. The sale was regularly conducted. The
plaintiff had attempted to throw a damp on the sale,
and there was no bidder but Mr. Cl trite; but the
case could not be brought within the Act for fraud,
which prohibited trestees to purchase their trust
estates. The sale having Veen bone
.fide effected, and
thiproceeds proving short of the sum due, the defen-
dant was entitled to get execution against the lady's
personal effects.
The Lono CHAECELLnII :aid, that this was a case
of so much importance that he must read over all the
papers before he gave judgment, and he would thank
Mr. Hazlewood and Mr. Beams to Make out by to-
morrow morning a statement of all the cases chat
were to be found in the books on the subject. Mr.
Grazehroek had in the power of attorney stipulated
ab ante for interest upon the dividends that should not
be duly paid. This was not blameable, but it could
not be graven effect to in a Court of equity. The
great question, however, was, whether the sale was
valid ? He did at present think that Mr. Grasrebrook
had held a trust, and could not be a bidder under that
trust without the consent of the other party. It Like-
wise seemed to him, that his solicitor could nave a
pnrelitier, because, bebidding, hr mustgiaiie re.'
strained others from bidding freely. He did tidiest
litre upon his own judgment ; there was not a plin.
epic in‘we distinctly recognix:d in Westminster-hall,
than the necessity of preventing trustees from defraud.
ing the person: for whom they held their trust. The
principle involved in this case seemed to him to have
been decided by Lord Kenyon in the case of Mr.
Blake of Essex-street. He would carefully read The
papers that evening.
Actors? 12.

THE DUKE OF QUEENSEERRI"S LEGACIES.

THrBIAS V. MONTGOMERY.

Sir ARTHUR PIGOOTT, Ccoantvl for the Levees
and Annuitants, moved, th it one-fourth of the sums
they were entitled to should be paid. He with plea-
sure stated, that a great object was obtained, that of
knowing the extent of the claims upon the estate wf
his late Grace. The first iirdar of that Court had'
been made by his Lordship in 181 2'; but it had not
the desired effect. In the year 181+, another ceder
was made, according to which the whole of the
tenants on the March estate made their claims, and
some of tie Duccleugh estate. In the month of Au-
gust 1816, another order was made, which had been
successful, as every claim against the estate was
made known by the report of the Master. The
claims amounted to £70,000, which, in addition to
what had been previrwly claimed. amounted to
£365,573.55. The Mawr, in his report, eividedi
the cl.itns into three claws. with the following oh-,
servations—that the first claimants bad made our
their claims correctly. but that the second and third
class were not correct, particularly as to their dates.
In order to pay the annuities, it would be necessary
to sell stock. but then there would still remain up-
wards of a I, illion sterling in Court. The whole of '
the legacies amounted, according to the Masterts'
repurt,'to the sum of £775,011. If the Stocks were
even to receive a reduction of 50 per cent. their
would still be in Court between six and £700,000.
The petitioners were poor Fersons, weekly pensioners,
At six or seven shillings peek week, servants, who had
been twenty or thirty years in the service of the
Noble testator, and they only asked for a fourth pan
of what they were entitled to. Under those circum-
stances he had no doubt but his Lordship would
grant the motion.
The LORD CUANORFLOR said he would read over
the Petition between then and to-morrow, and would
mention the case as soon as it was in his power.
Mr.. Anettotossuis appeared for the tenantry of
the Duke of Buccieugh,
11* LORD CHANCELLOR—u Do you appear alto
for his Grace ?"
Sir! ARTHUR.PIGOOTT mid, that the claim of the
Duke of Buccleugh was exactly the same as that of
his tenantry.
Mr. WiCTURRILL, Counsel for the tenants of the
March estate, said, that no order ought to be nude
until notice was served on his clients.
Mr. ARKRCROMBIZ said, that the two classes of
claimants came before the Court on the same grounds.
; The LORD CHANCULLOR..." Let notices bs served
lon the teuan:s of all the estates. After I hate read

the Pokiest tad the Mastersit report, I tral heir tdr,
thes inept:at of Connsel.“—Forlher consideration
postponed.

Iro'•D w. Arran.
This was an application on the part of the plain• ,1
tiff for an enjunetion to restrain the del ndant from
building on a certain piece of ground near St. James's-
street. in Brighton.
Mr. Bina. stated the caw for the plaintiff. Mrs. I
Layman had obtained from the plaintiff a lease of a
piece of ground, adjoining ground in which she had
the fee-simple. A covenant was introdu:ed by which
Mrs. Layman, her executors, and administrators,
were bound not to build upon the piece of garden-
ground in front of Craven's-buildings. and belonging
to Mrs. Layman. Mr. Attree had afterwards be-
come the occupant of this ground. In September
last he began to build on this ground. The plaintiff
in October gave him notice to desist. Notwithstand-
ing this notice the building was carried en with the
utmost rapidity, and was now roofed in. This ap-
plication was therefore made to the Court.
Mr. Hamm followed, and argued that the cove-
nant was quite explicit, and that there could not be
a doubt of the right of the plaintiff to have an
injunction.
Mr. SUODENT, on the same side, contended that h
was of much importance to the plaintiff that no
building should be erected on this ground, because
the view of St. James';-street, and of the mmy fa-
shionable passengers through it, would be cut off
from the back part of his hcatws ; the salubrious breez:
from the sea, and the refreshing air from the moun-
Nilo, would also be intercepted from brushing along
the back part of those buildings. Such a building,
contreity :o covenant, was a waste in law. It would
be contended that other buildings were allowed to be
erected wit `out interruption, and that the plaintiff
was thereloie precluded from interrupting now: but
this could never be admitted in a Court of Justice.
The only difficulty in the case was, that there was no
difficulty.

Sir S:tatuat. Rostru.v, for the defendant, argued
that the piece of ground on which those buildings
were erected was not the ground specified in the co-
venant • and if it were, that the defendant, being a
ionajd: purchaser, was not bound by at. The plain-
tiff, by neglecting to arply to the Court earlier, pre-
eluded himself now from the right to obtain an in-
junction.. In October the plaintiff gave notice to the
defendant, which clearly proved his knowledge of the
building, and his belief of its illegality; yet he did
not file his bill till the l'2th of June, and no applica-
tioa was made to the Court till the iSth of Anon ;'
in the mean time. the defendant had laid out £l4OO,
0350 on each of four houses: it could nut be said
that the notice was equivalent to an injunction. Tar
defendant was therefore right in proceeding rapidly
with abet buildings, in order that, it an injunction
were obtained. they might be in a state of ptutection
from ruin and dilapidation.
Mr. HouNs followed, and commented with great
ingenuity on the inconsistency of the several argu
ments on the other side.

Mr. &Lt. repleed.
The Lotto CIiANCIPI lOR refused the injunction.
The meaning of the terms ot demise was very doubt-
ful. In a doubtful case it was matter of much diiii-
culty to grant an injunction : but the phtintiit in this
case had delayed so long to come into Court, that he
most be lett to his remedy at 14w.

* .• A. " IKOWNES 4. PrASI EISWIM.

Mr. HaiLtwooh, agreeably to his Lordship's ap.
poiottuent yesterday, now reported the several CAM
wbich established that the auctioneer at a cile k agent
for the vendee as well as for thu vendor, and that his
signature to the sale and price is binding on both
parties.
The LOUD CIIANCELLOR..•Is there any signature
by the auctioneer at the alleged sale in this question ?
Mr. HAZLEWOOD.-I conceived myself not entitled
to go into that.

SUSSEX ASSIZES.
I.IIVEs, MONDAY, AUGUtT It.
The Summer Assizes for this county commenced
on &turdAy, when the Judges opened the commas.
soon, and Afterw.irds Attended :lime service.
morning the business commenced before Lord Et.-
LINBIROUGH in the Crown Court. and Mr. Joistice
Dai.t.as in the Civil, when the number of canoes inc..
seeded all former precedent. •
CIVIL sIDX.--PITNFY WANSBRIDOP.

This was an action of assault, the plaintiff being a
poor farmer, and the defendant the sun of a wealthy
farmer, at Westbourne, in this county, where all the
parties resided.
Mr. MAIIIIYAT and Mr. Cutwxo appeared for the
plaintiff.
It appeared that the defendant, whn is an athlet;c
young man, owed the plaintiff (an old man upwards
of 75) a grudge, ►n consequence of a dispute with
the defendant's father about the change of a 410
note ; the latter insestei; that the planitill had cheated
him, by taking a £lO instead of a 41 note, in some
transaction between diem. This dispute had been
of a vet y long standing, the plaintiff being constantly
reproached by the defendant, whenever he met him,
►vita having robbed his father. On thelth of March
last plaintiff had some altercation with thi defendant's
father upon the same subject, in a blacksmith's shop,
when the tiefeniant game in and took his father's
part. Much abusive language passed, and the plain-
tiff having called the defendant " spindle-shanked son
of a gun," the latter pushed him violently against
the wall, and forced his bead down upon the black-
•mith's anvil.

Mr. GUAM and Mr. CHITTY appeared for the
defendant, and they went to the Jory upon the evi.
dente. contending that it was a case for mere nomi-
nal damages.
Mr. Justice DALLAS, in his charge to the Jury,
said it was a circumstance very much to be deplored
that cases of this description should be brought into
Court, which tended to the utter ruin o' the unfortu-
nate personi who tell into the hands of needy attor-
nies. Not to speak in stronger terms, this at-
don was very discreditable to the person who ad-'
wised it, considering the enormous expense which it'
must entail on both parties. The witnesses had teen
brought a distance of 45 miles for the purpose of ad
jesting a quarrel which might have been settled ami
cably by a little friendly advice. In his Lordship's
opinion, th- jury would be doing a public service to
the whole kingdom, it they marked their sense of
such actions, by giving the smallest denomination of
Cialiaasts known in the currency of the United King-

tidift.,—The Jury, without hetitation, Alesa fop
plaintiff—Damages One Farthing.
. .

PLEDOIta ASn Wing e. txiafr.
This was another art*, n for 4n tasaelt entirliiitted
,by the defendant up II the plaintiff t. wit, in the
month of Septem!ler Wt, at ChoClieSltt.
It appeared that the defendant w.se respectable
tanner residing near Chichester. tied. in she harvest
time last year, the plaintiff's wile carat, w.t., VD or
SO other women. upon his lands for the puspose of
gleaning, before the corn was all cut cr carried. He
had repeatedly warned the gleaners not to con- • app
his land before the proper and lawful met 'mil an
the day in question his•-servants cautioned 11w ; We*
tiff's wife and the other Women to leave the hid ; but
finding them ohstinaie• in their determinaitiiii t.i glean&
tog -at all events;ttlie defendant was sent for, and
Apon his arrival 411 the gleaners ran off, except the
plaintiff's wife, whom he struck two or three blow*
with his horsewhip.
For this assault the present az.tion was brought,
and the Jure, tinder the Learned Judge's d*ectioes
found a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages 4us.
mites KIND D. WOOD.
The following case was of a most outrageous a 0
unit, committed E y one female upon another.
Mr. Cutworm, for the prosecution, stated the ease;
which was made.out in evidence as follows
Tamar Dalm:in stated, that she was th. wife oft
labouring nun at the perish of Chiltina ion, in this
county, and that the prisoner at the bar was also
the wife of another labouring ni.N. in the s me parish.
They wire both neighbours, and resided in the same
lace. On Easter Monday, last year, the piosteutrix
was going to the vitlage-shop, and she saw the de.
lendant sitting on a stile opposite her own door. As
sore as she approached, the defendant waved her
hand to a nesulibrir, saying, " take care of my chit.
dren. I'll do for the hitti--;" and immediately aps
proached the prosecutrix. 'Tice latter saw something
in her hand, which she believed to be the blade of a
penknife, and suspecting her mischievous intention,
tan away, crying, " murder." The defendant, how-
ever, got before her on a narrow cause,. ay, prevented
her escape, and stabbed her in the face several times,
but at length, by a violent effort, she escaped. aed
took shelter iii the house of a Mrs. Skutt. She bad
seven cuts or stabs in the face, two on the head, and
one through the gown into the shoulder. She had
not struck her before, tan had the prosecutris given
1 her any provoking language.
On cross examination by the CO/11IoN Stutimint,
it did not app:ar that there had existed any grievous
quarrel between the patties. They had had a roar-
,
rel before about some flour, which had ben bor.
towed, and said nut to have been repsid, is which
the defendant had cuffed the prosecutrix.
Mrs. Susan Skutt, the shopkeeper, corroborated
the prosecuti ix. as to her running into het house with
her face streaming with blood t and another neigh-
bour saw the assault, and counted ten cuts as described
by the prosecutrix.
The Jury having found her—Guilty,
Lord Eia.r...uoitus on observed, that this seethed I
most w mom ail cruel assault. and it was iranossihhe
1 to conceive any adequate motive for it. At ail events,
in addition to th.: punishment which he should indizt,
lie should require her to find sureties to keep the peace.
She was sentenced to twelve months' imprison.
mesa. and to find sureties to keep the peace for twin
)eitis alter the expiration o. her sentence.