Star.
London, England, 1810-04-05 00:00:00

ASSIZES.

KINGSTON, MARCH so.
William Vincent was indicted for the wilful mnrder
of William Iley, at Chertsey, by giving him several
blows, of which he died.

The prisoner at the bar was a butcher, residing at
Chertsey, and the deceased a chaise-driver to an inn
in the same place.
Mr. GURNEY, as Counsel fOr the prosecution, stated
the facts as follows :—That the deceased, on the 9th
,of August last, went out with some friends, for the
parpose of being married to a young woman, but
owing to an informality in publishing the banns the
marriage did not take place. The party came hack
to Chertsey, and were spending their evening toge-
ther, when they were interrupted by a brick being
thrown against the door of the house where they were
sitting ; on going Out to see the occasion of this in-
terruption, they saw the prisoner, and it was supposed
lie had done it. An altercation took place, which,
however, subsided, and it was supposed there was an
end to it. But he should call evidence to shew that
the prisoner nourished a dhposition of revenge ; for
on the deceased going to his work the next morning,
he found the prisoner on the road, who declared he
had been waiting for two hours for him, and chal-
lenged him to fight. 'De deceased replied, he should
have no altercation with him, and attempted to pass
on, but the prisoner first gave him asslight blow on
the face, no doubt with a view of provoking him to
floht ; bat finding the dece:a- would not enter into
personal contest with him, he followed it up by giv-
ing him anetLer violeta blow on the head, and ano-
ther en the ribs, wh;ch almost bent him double. He
languished for three days and then died ; and on ex-
amination of his body it was found that one of his
ribs was broken. He must, however, admit, that the
medical man had &cl:ued, that this alone was not
sufficient cause of his death. He should also shew, that
after the prisoner had done this violence to the de-
ceased, he went about boasting of what he had done,
saying he had tucked it into Mr. Quiddy, meaning
the deceased, who generally had a quid of tobacco in
his mouth.
The deceased's brother was called to prove the al-
tercation which ensued previous to the morning when
the prisoner assaulted the deceased.
On cross-examination, he denied that the priso-
ner had been beat by his brother and ethers ; but re-
fusing to answer some other questions, be was com-
mitted by the Judge for a contempt.
A witness of the name of Lee was called to prove
the assault on the morning of the 9th ; but he also
proved that the prisoner was at work in some neigh-
bouring fields, and did not wait for the design of in-
tercepting the deceased. When the prisoner first ac-
costed the deceased, alluding to what had passed the
night before, he asked him if he would then do what
Lc had threatened last night ? The deceased declined
fighting, and the prisoner gave him the blows above
described.
The surgeon deposed, that the blows were not suf-
ficient to have caused the death ; but the deceased
Was also very intemperate, and debilitated, in conse-
quence of such intemperance.—Not Guilty.
John Clarke was indicted for the wilful murder of
William Colville, by striking him on the head with
a brick.
The prisoner was a young lad,living in Wathen's-
court, Stoney-street, in the Borough, where the de-
ceased also lived, who was a cooper. On the 27th of
September, the children of the deceased were getting
some water at the pump, and the prisoner wantonly
dirtied it. The deceased came out and threw some
water out of the pail upon the prisoner, Who imme-
diately snatched up a piece of brick and threw it at the
deceased ; it hit him on the back of the head, and the
wound bled very much ; it however got well, and the
dece ised went to his business.
The surgeon said, on the Ist of October following
he observed the deceased to be-worse in his mind,
which continued to increase until the 17th of Decem-
ber, when he went to Guy's Horpital, where he died.
On opening the head, there was a compression on the
brain, but whether it arose from a recent injury or
not the surgeon said he was incapable of pronoun-
e ng,.—Not Guilty.
George Orchard was indicted for uttering a forged
checque on the house of Harman and Co. bankers, at
Croydon, purporting to be drawn by Minett, of
Westerham, in the county of Kent. The prisoner
at the bar presented the checque in question at Messrs.
Barman and Co.'s, at Croydon, and received cash
for it. He said his name was Waters, and upon its
being observed to him by Mr. Harman that it did not
look like the hand-writing of Mr. Minett, he said it
was not, but that it was written by his son. He had
not left the shop many minutes before he was pursued
and taken into custody.
Upon the instrument being compared with the in-
dictment, it was found not to be correctly set out,
and upon that ground the prisoner was acquitted.
MARCH 31.—John Moore, a lad of thirteen, was
capitally convicted of setting fire to a rick of barley,
the property of Mr. Harris, at Ewell, in this county.
The prisoner confessed that he took a candle from
the lanthorn and set fire to the straw surrounding the
barley stack, and the only reason he assigned for this
conduct was,because his master kept him late at work.
CIVIL SIDE.—One special Jury cause occupied the
whole day, which was the case of
• FENTIMAN V• THE SOUTH LAMBETH WATER-WORKS.
The action WAS brought for a compensation for the
damage done to the plaintiff's brick-fields, in conse-
quence of their having been flooded by the water be-
ing penned back by the defendant's works.
-A great many witnesses were examined on both
sides, as to whether the damage was done by the
water being penned back, which was sworn to by the
plaintiff's witnesses; or whether it was in consequence
of the extraordinary flood which ensued the sudden
thaw in March last year, as was stated by the defen-
dant's witnesses.
It was admitted that the defendants had laid down
culverts, or cylinders, in the old water-course, which
upon ordinary occasions were sufficient to carry off the
water. It was also proved by the witnesses on both
sides, that there was at the time of the damage done
a most extraordinary flood ; and it also appeared,
that by some negligence, one of the sluices was down,
which stopped one of the cylinders. And the plain-
tiff's witnesses stated, that although the flood was
great, and might of itself have done some mischief,

brain, but wl
not the surge
en:To—Not G
George Ord
checque on th,
Croydon, pur
Westerham, i
at the bar pre!
Barman and
for it. He s
being observe
look like the :
was not, but
not left the sh
• and taken int(
Upon the
dictment, it
and upon thil
MA lICII 31,
capitally cow
the property
The prison
the lanthorn
barley stack,
conduct was,l
CIVIL SIDE
whole day. v
• FENTIMAN
The action
damage doiu
quence of the
ing penned
-A great IT
as to
water being
plaintiff's wii
of the ext ran
thaw in Mat
dant's witne
It was adi
culverts, or
upon ordinal
water. It v
sides, that t
a most extr
that by some
which stopp
tiff's witness
great, and