Star.
London, England, 1818-05-05 00:00:00

Brrstoo AT Tortvaaat.'s saws--Dosar-11 to 4 against
Paul ; 4 to 1 against Kr. Lies nimble; 7to 1 on Soy-
=to I on Sim; 7 to 1 on Aneffela ; 11 to 1 *NOM
• 12 to 1 agalapt Guy Atsootalsi ; 15 to 1 againac
Igessiiiei; 110 to 1 avian !Aim ; AO to 1 against Nymphina.
Oaltss *to 2 Against /Math • 5 to 1 against Aunty ; 6 to 1
WOO Loo; 10 to 1 against Lord Suwon Any; and 15 to 1
against any other.
BouNo.—Neale, the Bristol butcher, is matched
to fight Oliver, on the 16th of July, for One Hun-
dred- Guineas a side. Five and 6 to 4 on Oliver.
The Bristol man has never before fought in public.

LAW

COURT OF RING'S BENCH. MAY 4.
LANZ O. RASHLZIGEL

This was an action for words spoken of the plaintiff
by the.defendant of a very slanderous nature. The
defendant pleaded the general issue. 'the words were
alleged to have been spoken at Fowey, in Cornwall,
but the plaintiff brought his action in Middlesex, and
early in this Term, the defendant moved to change
the venue from Middlesex to CornwalL
Mr. fiCARLITT now moved to bring back the venue
to Middlesex, on the ground that the plaintiff resided
in the county of Middlesex, and was an utter stranger
to the county of Cornwall, never having been there
more than twice in his life, when he went down to
canvass the interest of a gentleman.named Lucy, in
the borough of Fowey, for which the latter was a
*candidate for a seat in Parliament, in opposition to
the defendant; a gentleman of considerable fortune
in the county of Cornwall, who was supposed to have
uttered the atrocious slander imputed to him, for the
purpose of counteracting the plaintiff's exertions in
the borough on behalf of his friend, and which had
the effect of producing a very. serious impression.—
The Learned Counsel contended that there could be
no good reason for changing the venue to Cornwall,
where the defendant was well known, and was pos.
sessed of considerable influence, and there could be
no doubt that the plaintiff had a right to bring his
action where he was best known, and where he had
an opportunity of trying his case with impartiality.
The Court having desired to see the declaration,
suggested that the better way would be to try the
case in a county where neither of the parties were
known ; and asked was there any objection to try the
case in Devonshire? •
Mr. SCARLET? said he had no instructions to ac-
cede to this proposition, but he had no objection to
allow the matter to stand over until next Term; which
was ordered accordingly, in order to give the parties
time to make their election.
HAMILTON V. THE PRINTERS Or SEVERAL NEWSPAPERS.
On a former day Mr. GURNEY, on behalf of the
defendants, obtained a Rule, calling upon the plain-
tiff to gave security for costs in certain actions brought
by her as a married woman without the kno\% ledge
of her husband, now living, against the printers of i
certain newspapers, for publishing a statement, that
she had been convicted of child-stealing at the Old
Bailey. Mr. SCA rrterrr now shewed cause, and stated
that the plaintiff was the wife of a Mr.-Hamilton, who
had some years since carried on, to considerable extent,
the business of a bookseller, in Fleet-street, and about
13 years ago bad abandoned his wife, who then went
to reside in France with her daughter, and came to
England to vindicate her character from the foul im-
putation cast upon her by the defendants. Since her
husband left her she had never seen him, and she
did not know where he was non: to be found.
On the other hand it was sworn, that Mr. Hamil-
ton was now alive, and had recently been seen in
Lordon.—The Court thought the application pro-
perly made, and ordered the plaintiff to give security
for the costs from this day forth.