Star.
London, England, 1816-08-31 00:00:00

PROTHOROg v. 311111103.

Mr. Serjeant Pau. said this cause was of consider.
able importance to the public as well as to the par-
ties. The plaintiff. Sir H. Protheroe, was a Gen-
tleman well known in this neighbourhood; the de-
fendant was a stranger, residing a levy miles off. No
min could lie more disposed than the plaintiff to :hew
justice to his tenant., but these had been a very
wholesome statute enacted to protect landlords, which
visited with severe penalties the fraudulent conveying
away of the goods of a farm. The plaintiff had a
tenant of the name of Wilkins, who became unable
in 1816 to pay his rent : just previous to the termina-
tion of another quarter, and when he might expect to
be called upon, he colleagued with the defendant to
remove property off the farM in the middle of the
night. It wou!d be pleaded, he understood, that the
tenant was indebted to the defendant to a considerable
amount, and that he took his property as part of pay-
ment : but let it be remembered that the transaction
was of a suspicioUs nature, because he had chosen to
remove the goods, not in the day time, which he
might have done if the demand was fair and legal,
but under cover of the night, feeling concealment to
be necessary. Under these circumstances, the Learned
Scijeint anticipated a verdict for plaintiff of penalties
to double the amount of the goods removed.
John Taylor was bailiff to Sir Henry Protheroe :
Wilkins was a tenant of plaintiff's, at a rent of iii24s,
it was payable quarterly; but there was due in June
0472. 15s. 6d. The, land was situated in ~North
Weston. •
William Tuck knows Wilkins, and Beget; -the de-
leadant; the latter lived ten miles from Wilkins's
farm; was employed by Wilkins on the.22d of Sep-
last to haul a load of goods to Bristol, form-

' tare of the home : Wilkie: au:ited in packintop.
and was to meet within on the Back s there the-goods
were unl•iaded, and put on a, drays he was ordered
to go home and haul more pods t.' Wilkins',
the defendant; when he get home, fowl.; Brakes saa
the farm ; said, I 'ni going t.' haul snmc 004 to
Sour house ; he said, do as your master ,irdeked you ;
nut several things into a waggon, chairi, tubs, press,
Sm. Deakes left between three and tone o'clock,
witness between eight and nine, got to hii !untie be.

tween twelve and one at night, put the goods in the
barn ; defendant was up, waning ; Wilkins's hotel
drew the waggon, left them there, turned out into
Brakes' orchard, witress slept theft, and went home
next morning, left horses and waggon behirid him—
five horses worth about 9or 810 eat!). Sir Henry's
people fetched part of the things back.—Cross-ett.
mined—Horses were got back, goods were put in
the waggon openly and publicly ; called at Durban's
going down, and waggon remained in pubbc road.
H. Bober, jun. went to distrain for Sir Henry%
rent '26th September, took all he found on the pre.
mists ; went on the following day to Beakes's, be
was standing at the gate, said he expected me ; told
him I came tor the goods from Wilkins's farm ; be
would not suer me to take them till he conAilted

his Attorney ; I allowed hirt an hour ; he placed A
chain round the gate; did aficewards get possession
of the things, three mares, cart, &e. Beekes pointed
out the things, there were two horses besides in the.
lane, making up the five. The whole wes sold for
forty-four pounds.
Mr. CASDERD, (or the defendant, perfectly coincid-
ed with Mr. Serjeant Pell upon the importance of the
cause—he could not say to the plaintiff, but—to the
defendant ; tot the result of a verdict against birth
would be, not only to take a sum of money front
him, but to rob him if his feir character, which.
hitherto had beers unimpeached. The action 'Was not
brought to recover a tompensa:ion tor injury, but to
inflict double penalty for misconduct; ►he question
ultimately to be submitted was a mixed question of
law and 12E4 the due interpretation of which he could
not conceive would bring the defendant within the
province of an Act introduced for the benefit a
landlords. What is the situation of Sir Henry Pro=
theree—has he or has he not received rent ? Does
the defendant owe him any Or has he not got back
all the things, and sold them for his benefit ?
Where, then, the importance of this action ? Why, to
get out of the pocket at the defendant double the
value of the goofs. To deal with this case as be-
t wren man and man—for though he had great respect
for Sir H. Protheroe, it was his duty to watch over the
interest of the ckientlant; he thought no one could look
at the case, and not see cleatly and distinctly the
following objections :—I st, Were the goods frauds.
lastly conveyed away ? 2dly, Was the defendant with
guilty inowledge assisting e &fly, Was it in order to
d. teat the dist, ss of Sir H. Protheroe Unless these
objections were got over, it was impossible the Verdict
could be for the plaintiff.
John Kid.leil proved cite signature of Wilkins to a
bond for ,E(H► due to defendant.

Mr. S..rjeaint PELL uhnrtly replied.
The learned Jruait, in his charge, observed, that
from what he had heard in eulogy of H. Pro-

there* on cne siJe, and the contrary on the other, and
from some observation the short time he had been in
Bristol, he felt the greater necessi; y of cautioning. the
Jury to decide upon matters of fact ; if ever they
forgot this, the Constitution would be un,:ermined.
With respect to the action, it was founded upon a
wholesome law, to prevent tenants from plundering
their estates to the injury of their landlords ; and be
should content himself with this remark upon the-
present case—that it was the duty of those wird insti.
toted this suit to have applied at once to a Justice of
Peace, who had power to inflict the penalty, and not
to have had recourse to so expensive a process : how.
ever, as it was now before them, equal justice must
be administered ; and the question f er tb:: Jury was,
whether there existed a knowledge of the intended
distress and coocealnient of the goods on the part of
the defendant ?—Verdict for Defendant..
NEwcAsr ASEIZES.

Jame:O'Neil was charged with making an assault
on George Aegis, on the 30th of October, and
taking from him a canvass purse containing three
promissory notes for ale payment of £1 each, and
18s. or 19s. on the King's higheety.
Mr. Coolcsow opened the proceedings, by stating
the (acts detailed in the following evidence:
George Angers deposed, that he was a carrier, and
lived at Mickley. He attended the Cow-bilk fair.
held on the Town Moor of Newcastle, on the SOth
of October last, arid was returning home about
eight o'clock in the evening, when II: was attacked
lby some villains: He was on horseback, jogging
slowly on, as be expected some fliends to overtake
him. When he had reached the end of Galiotvgate.
and was so near the town as to derive a little betiefi:
from the lamps, he discvered three or tour men OR
the road. They went behind his horse, when one of
them struck him on the arm, and another on his
head, with what he imagined to be a short stick.--
They soon brought hint down, and he fell Ott his
back. At %his tame he had in t.is possession a canvass
purse. containing three 20s. notes, and 18s. or 19s.
in silver. 'they then got on his body, some with
their knees and others with thkir arms. They
searched all his pockets, and took out b;s purse. He
was then as sober as he was now. After they had
done this, he became almost silly, and kaki to them
YOU may take my money, but spare my life."
One of them answered—., D—n him, kill the fel.
low." By this time he had called Murder I" two
or three times. He was almost killed, and could not
tell when they left him, for he was quite insensible.--
The prisoner at the bar was very like one of the
men, but he could not swear he was one. It was
dark that night, but fair weather. He was very
much hurt : his shoulder was put out of joint, and
his collar bone broken. The coestable having pro-
duced the parse in Court, witness identified it, and
added, that be knew it from its having a hem on the
wrong side.
John Amgas, no relation to the prosecutor, recot.
lected on rue night of the 90th of October hearing
the cry of s• Murder !" He was standing at his
door, with one Winter and his brother, about half
past eight o'clock. He heard the cry repeated tette
- several times I but did not go the first time, because
he thought it was an idle call. Atter the third ety,
be went with Winter to the spot whence it proceeded,
and the &it thing :Ivy am was a ems with hi
•
'

• .

tr :aim
. .
knees Art the body of-Gentile Angas. There was only
one man there then: Whet. 'they got within two
yaris of him, the man sprang up from the body of
the prosecuttir, who was lying in the middle of the
road. The prisoner ran towards a toot path on the
side of .the road, and- tile witness called out, 64 Seize
him f" Winter seized him, and the prisoner strug-
gled bard, but witness went to assist Winter, when
the prisoner desisted. The prisoner was about six.
yards' from George Angas when he was taken.
Thomas Winter lived in Gallowgate :—he heard
the. cry of t‘ Murder I" on the night in question,
and went with the last witness to the place whence
the cry proceeded. In his way he met two men. and
heard somebody say—.. 0 dear, don't kill me !"
He then went forward, mud stooped down to see
better, when he saw one man junip up from the body
of another. Soon after this some person shouted-
-4. Click him 1" The prisoner ran towards the
Leazt SR and witness caught him in his arms about the
waist.. He struck witness in the face, struggled
hard, and kicked him very sore. Witness called for
assistance ; his brother and John Angas came up,
when the prisoner did not struggle any more. The,
prisoner threw something out of his hand.
Richard Atkin heard the cry of 44 Murder !" on
the 80th of October, and he went to see what was
the matter. Within five or six yards of the place, be
observed one man jump up from off another, and
tun towards the toot path on the other side of the
road, One person shouted —"Click him 1" another
—" Catch him." In about a minute after he saw
him throw something out of his hand, which ap-
peared to go over the wall. He immediately went
in search of it, and found a canvass purse lying in
the gutter just below the wall. He gave it to Jame-
son, and can swear that the prisoner at the bar was
the person who threw something away.
Richard Chicken, a constable, wns applied to to
take the prisoner into custody on the 30th October.
He did not. make any resistance till he came near
the Magistrate's. He swore mist horribly. When
they arrived near the House of Correction, the priso-
Der said it was three weeks since he got out of prison ;
but when he got out again, he would give them
something to talk about.
The Jury, after a short deliberation, returned a
verdict of Guilty.
No sooner was the verdict pronounced, than his
Lordship remarked, that the circumstances of the
ease appeared so aggravating, that he could not re-
frain ftom advising :he prisoner to entertain no hopes
of mercy.
On Monday Mr. Justice BAYLEY, in conformity
with what he had said on a preceding day, passed
sentence in due form and solemnity, and remarked,
that he would not be doing the duty he owed his
country, or satisfying his own conscience, if he did
cot inform James O'Neil that his days on this side
of eternity were numbered, and that his sentence was
•
irretrievable.

•

• ;

UNION HALL.—Mr. Cook, the master of a trading
vessel, brought his wife and daughter, an interesting
girl about 19, before W. Set.t.on, on a charge of fe-
lony. H stated that a few days ago his wife had
charged him with assaulting and beating her, and on
that occasion he was ordered by Mr. Chambers to
find bail. When his bail appeared his wife obje:te.d
to one of them, and he was in consequence confined
hours in Horsemonger.lane. During this time
his wife and daughter quitted his house, previous to
which they robbed him of 815, and a quantity of
plate. He had lull proof of the robbery. Hall, the
officer, having found the property in their possession.
Hall said, he went to the house where Mn. Cook and
her daughter were, who, on his stating who he was,
itarriesliately gave him the property, saying, they had
no desire to retain it it they were not entitled to it.—
Mrs Cook now stated, that she had not taken the'
property clandestinely. Previous to her taking out a
warrant against Mr. Cook, he had treated her so ill
she had determined to leave him • a &vision of pro-
perty then took place between them, and amongst
her share was the notes and spoons in question ; before
the separation took place, however, his conduct be-
came so violent she had been obliged to apply to the
Magistrate for protection, and she had certainly ob-
jected to his bail, because one of them was a woman
with whom he had cohabited for years, and whose
extravagance had involved him in embarrassments.
Mr. Chambers, the Magistrate, upon this statement,
*ejected her, and he was committed till other bail
was procured. During this interval she quitted Mr.
Cook's house and took with her part of the property
she considered as her own. She had since been living
together with her daughter, on the bounty of a friend-
Mr. Saucer observed, the property certainly was the
husband's, and must be returned to him. The charge
of felony, however, was unfounded, a wife could not
in the eye of the law, rob her husband, but Mr. Cook
'Rust also'understand, that he was bound to maintain
his wife and child.—Mr. Cook submitted, that if the
charge of felony would not lie against his wife, it
would against his daughter, and he must insist on
that charge being gone into. Mr. SaLLow and Mr.
Fun, the other Magistrate, both argued with him,
and urged the unnatural line of conduct he was
adopting, but he still persisted in his charge.—Mr.
Swaim then'observed, he had nothing more to do
with it. Proof had already been given that he
(Cook) had treated his wife with cruelty, and it now
appeared that he had left both her and her daughter
without support. Mrs. Cook had taken some of his
property, this the law would give him back; her
daughter had, perhaps, aided and assisted her,. but
what she had done was done under the influence of
her mother, and GOD forbid, sunk a circumstance
should he tortured into a felony to gratify the feeling:
of a failwr. He would not be the person so to construe
it. He should therefore discharge both mother and
daughter. One word of advice he had to give, and
that was that he (Cook) should now hand ovor to his
wife and daughter part of the £l5 he had just re-
ceived from Hall for their present support, as he
must recollect he was bound to maintain his wife and
child. . 'Tie complainant appeared greatly dissatis.
fed with this decision, and declared they should not
have a farthing from . him at present.—Mr.
then advised them to. apply ~to the parish to which
they bel-nged for relief, and again advised Cook to
preveut their doing so, for should they be chargeable
only tor.a *OA supper, and the parish officers apply
for a-.wiriant'akainstshien next 'Horning, for desert-
itsg his wife Api fondly oue would be panted, and
•