Star.
London, England, 1818-07-02 00:00:00

Oftw4.s3s.r.—Goe;le Hori, :.Ivry, for Antwerp; acd
Harren, fur Rotterdam.

Sr JAMES SHAW his arrived in Town from Cork.
It must be gratifying to all his late Constitnetttst.
who have stid to re,,ret in the retirement of the
worthy Waronet, the foss of as able and upright*
Member as ever represented the interests of the My'
in Parliament, as well as to the Public at large; So,
learn, that he his returned fromlis excursion ttralik
best liellth and spirits. * •
It'seems after all, that the mti arriage. e
of CLARENCE with the Pr.incesS of s.axat the
is .to take place. Viscount Kenn, it
.is said, the
Treasurer and Comptioller of his Royal Highness's'
Household, has set off for Dover,, there to receive lan-
Serene Highness, who will be conveyed, with hPr
ladies and attendants, from Calais, in the Royal So-
vcrcign and their artival, it is even added,
nay be expected on Snnday or Monday,
The Surplus of the Revenue of ale present gunner,
computed with the 'corresponding ,quarter of last
I year, will be nearly .01,400,000, It arises chiefly
from the Excise and Assessed 'fazes, the latter hay.
ing been mostly paid up in order to qualify persons
to give their votes at the present Election.
Among the last arrivals at Philadelphia it a ship
from Newfoundland, which she left on the 201 of
May; at which time the ground was covered with
snow, and several vessels were locked in the ice. •

In the American Papers of the 18th May, the
speech of Mr. WOLCOTT, President of Connecticu; is
inserted, wherein be treats withextraordinary'resc.--
ence the Charter of King CHARLLS 11. which e-ta.-
blished the provincial Constitution of Co:meet:eta in
its existing form.
The Members for Tomes, Mr. T. COWITENAT 27::1
Mr. Holmes; on being elected fur that- Borough
without opposition, and of course free 6f experts;
subscribed each 501.. towards the completicn of tha
dangerous bridge over the Dart, on entering the town:
A few days ago a considerable party of farmers
and ethers, went oat in two boats upon the rives
Wyre, to fish ; they agreed to sail a rte, when u::-
fortunately the men is one of the boats, not orly'
crowded too much scat., (it also is order to liLllten
the vessel, threw out a good deal of ballast, wEen a
squall upset her in a deep place, with a strong ebLing
tide, and she suddenly went down with every one on
board. Thus perished, through their own impr,-.-
deuce, six respectable men, several of whom have lr!t
'families to deplore their loss. The names of the sof-
ferers were ILAWNSON, Bit4DLCY, eROfT,
Dice EN sox, Loan (of 'Pilling), aid LA Now
tier, of Garstang. Only two of the bodies
picked up on Sunday. • "
Yesterday Jane A?hury, who is one of
girls who carry fruit from Hammersmith
garken Market, was "'turning It ,me, and
as Knightsbridge, where she endiavodred I
hinda Gentlernan's carriage, which was g•
brisk pace, when her fciot slipped, an sit
tween the 'wheels; and wa.s dragged nearly
on the road before the coachman st6pped.
I creature had her lsicheadrulle fractured. •
torn, and will Ot.WV;kO il.ellre:di :ac was
to St. liecngeTH,.",ritat.

T,
WORT, Lx.
bcca*
I ,;
those. r
3•
tO COTC).to.:
got alt::'
:u zit iv,.
g4iog x a.
Ile tell he-
Fy.5C tar:is
The poi?
l'ar-cloi het
convii4l
/

LiftW 17,1TELLIGENCE.

COURT O 1 CHANCERY, JULY 1.

Upon the motion of Sir A. PIGGOTT, it was ordered,
as 'usual, that the Accountant-General's Office should
be shut from the 19th of August to the day of the
First Seal before the next Michaelmas Term, in order
to give him time to make up his accounts.
A few Bankrupt Petitions were decided.
In the course-of the'day several calls having been
made of suits, the Counsels in which were absent, the
LORD CHANCELLOR EX:HTSSECI great displeasure at
the circumstance. He had intimated before, and he
should then repeat it, once for all, that in future if
the Advocates in the cause presented should not be
ready, he should immediately proceed to the next
cause on the paper. •
VI Mix DA NC R LLOR'S COURT,. JULY
OPERA-HOUSE.

WAT=S Q. TAYLOR.

Sir SAllust RositnnY stated, that this was it re-
newed _motion, calling on Mr. Waters to pay into
Court the sum of 54,162/..being the balance of the
-perchaselnoney of the Opera-House. .
• Atter a short conversation between the Vree-Citaw-
cas.nok and Sir Long., the consideration of the
motion was ordered to stansllover.

TILE SAMR v. TILE SAME.
Sir SAMUEL P.ostru.st moved that 'zr. Waters
mightle compelled, by an order of that Court, to
insure the Opera-House for a proper amount. Mr.
Taylor on making inquiry at the Insurance Offices,
found it was only insured for 20,000/. although he
(Mr. Taylor),.iby the lease of 1792, was bound to in-
sure it for 24,0001.
• Mr. HAP.T, Counsel for Mr. Waters, 'laid, that he
. understOod his client had insured it for 23,0001.
Sir SAMUEL R0?:1LLT....." 1 hat is not the case."
The VICE-CHANCELLOR—" Yon had better ascer-
tain the exact sum it is insured for, and bring this
station on with the preceding one to-morrow morning.
.IMPROVEMENT IN PRACTICE.

the course of some observations Which the Vice-
Chancellor made, in reference to a report of the
Muster, in which the Master gave his opinion against
the validity of a title to an estate, His Honour said,
that he thought it would be a great improvement in
practice, if the Master, in his Report, should always
state the grounds of his opinion—the Court might
then effectually judge of those grounds for itself. He
accordingly desired the Registrar to make a memo-
randum on this subject,' that he might suggest it to
the Lord Chancellor.—The Gentlemen of the Aar
s.-ho were then present concurred in the utility of Lis
ilonoOr's suggestion.

COURT OF KINQ'S BENCH, JULY 1.
xoc:Eits t. POFKIN, Gtgr._

'Phis was an action against the defendant, an At-
torney of this Court, for assaulting and falsely int-
riveting the defendant.
Mr. gIiRNEY, for the plaintiff, stated the case.
—The plaintiff was a respectable silrersmith and
eetiellef, residing in Pall-mall, and the defendant.
Ira: an attorney, residing in Dean-street, Soho: • For
eeveral years the pertics had been on the most friendly
teems, the defendant acting as the plaintiff's attorney
on teeny occasion!. In the raendi of March, 1317,
the plaintiff had given the defendant a warrant of
attoniey to confess judgment for 150:125.e1d. being
composed of a sum of 19&. supposed to .have been
teat ley the latter to the former, and the remainder
for law expenses. This security, howeeer, had been
satisfied before the end of the Jeer ; but notevith-
s:anding this circumstance, the defendant took out
eeecution against the plaintiff on the 28th of Fe-
bruary last, and on the 1 eth of March following he
wa* arrested on a . Ca sa for this very debt, which
had been previously satisfied, and carried to a lock-
eel house. It was then vecation time, and the plain-
tiff being taken in execution, of course could not
give bail, but he sent a message to the defendant,
t equestiug that he would eve his consent to his being
discharged on paying the money levied into the'
hands of the Sheriff, to abide the event of an appli-
cation to the Court to set aside the warrant of attor-1
r.cy and execution. This was refused by the defpn-'
dant, upon which a summons etas taken out to attend
before, Lord Ellenborough (the only Judge then in,
town), to shew cause why the plaintiff should not be
discharged out of custody upon lodging the money
in the Sheriffs hands; but this summons was not at-
untied to. A second summons, fur the like purpose,
was also unattended to ; but upon a third summons,
the defendant did attend, and, after resisting the ap-
plication as much as possible, the Noble ana Learn-
ed Judge ordered the plaintiff to be discharged upon
the money being deposited with the Sheriff. In
Easter Term, an application being made to the Court
by the plaintiff to set aside the warrant of attorney-
sad execution, the matter was referred to the arbi-
tration of Mr. Reader, the Bari isters who, after
hearing all the parties, decided that-there was no;
debt due from the plaintiff to the defendant, and con-'
sequently ordered that the warrant of atterney and
execution should be set aside, and that the money
deposited with thrSheriff shoUld be fristareclaci the
plaintiff, with costs, which was accordingly Joie.--
Under these circumstances the present action was
brought, and the Learned Counsel cemmented with
considerable warmth upon the eonduct of the defen-
dant; who, he contended, acted on this occasion from
the most malignant and improper motives. To prove
the plaintiff's ease the following witnesses were called :
. Mr. Alexander Keltie, a jeweller, residing at N 0.5,
Pall-mall, stated that he had known the plaintiff; who',
was his next door neighbour, for many years,. The
defendant was an attorney, residing in Deanettreet,
.oho. lie had never teen him but once in his life,'
and that was on the 11th or 12th of March last, when'
he went to his office to pay two bills of exchange, for
ieee. of which, he; witness, was acceptor, the plaintiff
the drawer, and a person named Merland, the payee.'
Witness told the defendant he had expected that the
plaintiff would have paid one of the bills, to which
the defendant replied, that he had not; and supposed'
would n. 'Witness said to Mr. Popkin' •. are you;
on friendly terms with Mireßegers The defendant
replied, "-no—quite 'the reverse. To convince von
of that, see what I am going. to do." He pulled 'out,
from amongst his papers, a piece of parchment, which
was a writ, and said to witness, " perhaps Tots don't
nuderstand what this is—it is an execution ; but I
mention this its- confidence. I don't expect you tc.•
oimeit again," The defendant then said, that Mr.
rgerS had used Mr. Morland very ill, for he, had

served him with a copy of a writ fur 9t.—that Mr.
Morland had been a great friend to Mr. Rogers; and
that, therefore, he thought such very unhandsome
conduct. Upon the subject of the bills, he said to.
witness, " kwould recommend you-to pay them both,
for if you do not do so, there will be four actions
brought upon them, and in the of Mr. Rogeri
failing (a circumstance which pry will be soon'',
the whole expense will fall upon you, as acceptor.'
Cross-examined by Mr. TOPpiNG.—He did not con-
sider himself as a tenant to Mr. Rogers. He had
purchased the lease of his house from him, but paid
the rent to the lan rd. The improved rent, about
4)
£25 per annsrn, he 2 aid to Mr. Rogers ; but the prim,
cipal rent, about 90, lie paid ro the owner of the
louse. He had at tett conceived Mr. Popkin to be
the holder of the bills, which he had tilled to pay ;
but he afterwards understood that they had been dis.
,punted by Mr. Morland for. Mr. Rogersi and that
they had been pet into Mr. Popkin's hands to be sued
upon. Witness 'had obtained no time; as acceptor,
to pay the bills, beyond the time at which they were
dpe, except, one day, as to one of them.
George. Duke, from the Sheriff's Office, produced
the writ of Ca sa upon which the plaintiff had been
'arrested. It was sued outan.tbe oth of February,
but was not executed until the *gift of March.
Gear Wilson, the Sheriff's Officer, proved thatle
the plaintiff in his own house on the 13th or
March, at the suit of the defendant, and he remained
lacked up at witness's bro'ker's house, No. I, War.
wick-oourt, Holborn, until the 20th of March.

Mr. Henry Hilditch, Cl frk to plaintiff's Attorney,)
proved the fact of three summonses having been
taken out before Lord Eilenborough ; two of which
were unattended to by the defendant, although a
polite message had beet sent to him, requesting .his
consent to the plaintiff's being discharged, on lodgrng
the money in the Sheriff's hands.
Mr. Searle, plaintiff's attorney, preyed the subie-,
quent proceedings in the King's Bznch, and the re-
ference of the case .to, Mr. Reader. Witness's own

costs, paid him by the plaintiit amounted to £44.
Dlr. Edward Roe, Clcrk to Mr. Reader, proved
the ex,:ution of the award of the latter, by which he
.directed the warrant of attorney and execution to be
laid aside, and the sum of £l7l. 4s 6d: the money
depcisited, and Sheriff's poundage, to be restored to'
the plaintiff.
This was the case as prove 1 for the plaintiff.
' Mr. TOPPING and Mr. Esr.NASSE submitted& that
this, which was an action of trespass, would not
inasmuch as the act complai ied of was done in purr
suance of the Sheriff's warr

Mr. Justice ABBOTT overt-,led the objection, saying
that the writ should have ben specially pleaded, for
the defendant could not avail himself of it under the
general issue, in justification. Trespass would lie
under tlle circumstances of the case, unless the justi-
fication was pleaded.
Mr. TerriNo then went to the Jury with such ob-
servations as the case could afford in favour cc the
defendant, conjuring them to watch the evidence with
jealousy, and above all not to suffer, any .vindktive
feeling to enter their ntiads in considering the quest
Lion of damages.
Mr. Justice ABBOTT summed up the ense with
suitable observations, and cautioned thelurf against
giving an intemperate verdict.
The Jury found kr the plaintiff—Damages CM;
cowit V. DAUN, • •

_ . .
Dry. SCARLET? stated this todae an action OA aIDI
of exchange, drawn by the defendant, and accepted
by Richard Gurney. The bill *as dated the 25th of,
October, 1817, for £375 payasle six months after
date. It was accepted by Gurney to take up other
bills in the bands of Wilkinson and Co. of Liverpool.
The plaintiff, who had transactions with Wilkinson,
received the bill in question. He should prove the
hand-writing, lie said, and the presentr.ert of the
bill, and then be enftled to their verdict.--The hand-
writing of the parties having been proved,
Mr, Gunizr, ft,r the defendant, objected to the
plaintiff's right tl recover. His objection was this;
the bill was bzunmed in gambling. Dann, Gurney,
and another pers:m engaged in gaming, gave certain
bills, the result of that transaction, to Daum to get
discounted.. hie deposited the same in the hands of
Sandmark and Minton, of London, who paid them to
Wilkinson in discharge of a debt. Not being paid
when due, an action was brought on one of the bills.
The defence then was, that the bill was vitiated by
the gambling transaction, but the parties eventually
agreed to take up all the objectioaablebills by giving
the bill, which was the subject of action. It was ac-
cordingly Livca and endorsed to the plaintiff. Mr.
Gurr.e:. contended, that the bill was no more than a
renewal cf the gambling bills, and being without
legal consideration the plaintiff could not make it
available.

Mr. Juvice ABBOTT was of opinton, the plaintiff
could tecover, When the parties gave the bill to,
Wilkinson, they had a knowledge that Wilkinson had
a claim on them, and no legal decision had eves
made a bill thus concocted invalid in the hands .of an
innocent holder.

.:Flee Jury found for the plaintiff--Damagor £s7s.
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS AMIN.
BORODALE AND OTHERS E. BEANDON AND QTHRIND
This was an action to recover from the defendaats
the sum of £lOO, being the value of an iron cable,
and an anchor, which had bmir lost. The particu-
lars of the case were as follows s—The &tend:ruts
had obtained a patent for making iron cables for
ships, and had sold one to the plaintiffs, who were
owners of the Indus East Indianian ;at the same time
'they warranted that it would possess the strength
' and durability of a 16-inch cable. The ship sided
from London, and arrived at the mouth of the Oan-
ges in the month of June, 1816. The anchor was
then thrown out, in order that the ship might wait
for the return of the tide. It was then discovered,
as the witnesses stated, that one of the links of the
cable was broke, and it was fotiod necessary to aban-
don both cable and anchor, for the security of the
ship and cargo, eszirnaerd at 040,000.
Captain Oldham, who was Captain of the Indus,
said, that in lute, 18!6, while he was at dinner, the
boatswain came and informed him that one of the
links of the iron cable was btoke4 he immediately
went and saw it. The pilot who had the care of the
ship told. him, that if he did not go out directly to
sea, he would not be answerable for the safety•felje
ship,. but would give it up whim. He *inlet wit
the pilot, that Who delayed.a moment the ship And.
cargo must be iut dears of Wog lest. it _woo jigs

an ebb tide, which had only two lours to run. A
16-inch rope cable would have lasted two years.—
If there had been a rope cable at the time, it would
sot have broke. He might have used the cable three
or four times before, but not in very stormy weather.
He did not himself like i,on cables.
W. Nicholl said he was bcatswain of the Indus.
At the time she was at anchor in the Houly river, he
saw one of the links broken, and immediately reported
it to the Captain. They were not in sight of land ;
they were between two reefs, the wind -blowing ini
and the tide was running out ; It had but about two
hours to ebb. The pilot would not allow the ship to
wait for the return of the tide, but insisted on the
ship's going out immediately to sea. There was a
'heavy swell, and a fresh breeze at the time. If they
,had

a rope cable, there would have been no danger.
The broken link was on the deck, but the pressure
an it was equally great there, as in any other part.
They tried to raise up the cable and anchor ; but in
trying to do so the hawser broke, and the chain-bolt
was torn away. The cable was then abandoned.

' The Carpenter, the Foremast-man, and Steward
of the ship, swore that the chain was broke right
athwart.

Mr. Serjeant LENS, on behalf of the defendants,
toW the Jury, he should be able to contradict the
evidence of thore who stated that the chain was
broken athwart ; there was only a split or slight se-
paration in that part whore pieces of the chain had •
been welded togedier; and that was nut a thing at-
tended with any danger, and could not have justified
the alarm which occurred, and which caused the peo-
ple on board to abandon the cable and anchor, which
they might have raised' up most easily, if they had
not been so unnecessarily alarmed. He then called
Mr. Fuller, an engineer, who said he was em-
ployed in the manufactory of the defendants. He
saw the chain cable in question proved ; every link.
was proved ; and the average strength of a 16-inch
mile cable was 41. tons, and he never saw a link of
the size belonging to this iron cable broke, under
100 tons: If one of the links had been unwelded,
it would bear more than 44 tons ; he had known onel
bear about 60 tons. If one link had been broken in the
manner described by the plaintiffs' witnesses,
weight of eight tons would thaw it straight out. The
weight of the chain altogether was nearly six tons, five
tons of it were out; and-with that weight, and the
pressure of the ship upon it, he did nut think the
chain could have held a moment, if it had been bro-
;ken.in the way described.
The Jr.ofvrt—" Are you prepared to say that fire
witnesses who have sworn to a positive fact, are all
perjured ii""
His Lordship then told the Jury, there was no
imputation brought against the defendants ; but they
had warranted the cable; and when it did not an-
swer the warrant-1-y, it was 'of no use to be setting np
theory- aguinst practice. Verdict for plaintiff—Da-
mages 44)0/.

i
..
I
i 1
• ;
II !
I •
, i 1
• ! • I
1 1
i
•
•
I. •
1
1 PI
' 1
. 1
I 1
ii
1 . -
'S
Iv
1 •
! 1
~
i
..,
, .
! , .
, .
i
i
IF
ii
i
le 1
I.
t ,
t •
( i\ 1
)
i :. ,4
-,. ;, i
A