Star.
London, England, 1810-08-16 00:00:00

ASSIZES.

CHELMSFORD, TUESDAY, AUGUST 14.
Last night Lord ELLRNROIMUGH and Lord Chief
Baron M‘DoNatn, came to this town to hold the
Assizes. This morning after Divine service, they
proceeded to their respective Courts. The Lord
Chief Baron-sat at Nisi Prins, and Lord Era.Exao-
novou on the Crown side.
NISI PRIUS NIDE.
TILE KING V. RALPII DOTID.
This was an indictment against Mr. It. Dodd, the
engineer, for an assault upon Mr. Paul Law, a clerk
to the Colchester Water-work Company.
Mr. Serjeant BEST, for the prosecution, stated that
the defendant, Mr. It. Dodd, was formerly employed
as engineer to the Colchester Water-work Company,
but had been dismissed.
The prosecutor, Mr. Paul Law, was clerk to the
Company, and he received directions from the Com-
mittee of the Company not to let Mr. Dodd have the .
key of the Works. Accordingly, when Mr. Dodd
came to Colchester and applied- to the clerk for the
key of the works, the prosecutor informed him that
he had received directions not to let him have it.—
Ikon this Mr. Dodd immediately seized him by the
collar, dragged him about the house, and with many
menaces, beat and mal-treated him in the most shame-
ful manner.
Mr. Paul Law, the prosecutor, was called, who
gave evidence of the facts nearly as they had been
stated by the Counsel for the prosecution. On cross-
examination by Mr. GARROW, he said he had lived
in various places, but he could not remember the
times when, &c. and he admitted that Mr. Dodd had
introduced him to the place which he held.
Mr. GARROW, for the defendant, admitted that a
verdict must go against his client, but insisted that he
was provoked, being an irritable man, to shake the
46 impertinent puppy," whom they had witnessed giv-
ing his evidence.
The Lord enter BARON told the Jury, that all
that he and they had to do was to say, whether the
• defendant had committed an assault ? the Court of
Xing's Bench would weigh the merits of the case
when they came to pronounce their judginsint.
The Jury found the defendant guilty.
THE KING V. T. DODD.
This was also an indictment for an assault against
Mr. T. Dodd, the son of the above defendant, upon
the same prosecutor, Mr. Paul
Mr. Gattaow was for the prosecutor in this cause,
and stated to the Jury, that it was nothing like the
last, except in the surname of the defendant. In this
case, a young man, without any provocation, in the
most gross manner insulted the prosecutor, who was
merely in tha discharge of his duty.
Mr. Paul Law was then called, who stated that
Mr. T. Dodd having been in the employ of the Col-
chester Waterwork Company, came home late one
evening, but was refused admittance by the prosecu-
tor on account of the lateness of the hour. The next
day he came there, and was cutting some leather on
the dresser ; the prosecutor told him to desist, or he
would turn him out of doors. Dodd replied, he would
stab him if he attempted it, and flourished the knife
so near his face that it would have cut him, if he had
not drawn back. The witness then got behind him,
pinioned his arms, and thrust him out of doors.
Mr. MARRYATT, fiir the defendant, said, that, in
his apprehension, this cause was pretty much like the
last. The prosecutor here seemed to be just the same
de impertinent puppy" as-before, and all the assault
he sustained was in defence of Mr. Dodd's right of
possession, which certainly he was as well entitled to ,
held as the prosecutor, the Company having given'
them both apartments in the same house.
The Learned Judge said both cases seemed to him
to be exactly alike, and the Jury would say whether
there was an assault or not Verdict—Guilty.
CUMMING V. DUFF.
This was an action against the defendant for not
suffering the plaintiff to carry off some hay which he
had left on the defendant's premises. It appeared
that the 'defendant had taken a house of the plaintiff,
at Padnells, in this county, upon which he had left
a rick of hay, which he sold to a Mr. Yull ; and, as
lie alledged, the plaintiff refused to let Mr. Yull carry
it away. It appeared, however, that Mr. Duff had
never refused his permis..ion : and Mr. Yull, who was
called for the plaintiff, said, that Mr. Duff was al-
ways willing to let him have iz, but he did not fetch
it away sooner, because it was not convenient for
himself.
Mr. GAIIROW said, as the plaintiff had proved no
case, he was entitled to have him nonsuited ; but lie
must say a few words on behalf of Mr. Duff, who
was an Attorney of the Court. The plaintiff, Mr.
Cumming, was a rich Nabob, and formerly employed
Mr. Duff as .his Attorney ; but because he had of-
fended him, he gratified his malignity by the present
action, He had brought another action against Mr.
Duff, in the Court of -King's Bench, in London, and
having directed his Counsel to utter many calumnies
against him, he then agreed to refer it to arbitration.
Mr. Garrow said he had known Mr. Duffconductinf
. _ _

committed; andihot while his wife. was but. for adapt
two hours in the middle of the day, the prisoner broke
into the house, by making a hole through the wall.
which wits only of lath and plaister, and carried 9ff
the articles in question. The Jury found him guiliy,
ander a very humane charge from Lord ELLENto-
ROUGIi, it appearing that the prisoner was driven to
the commission of the offence by the extrehre of hun-
ger. In order to relieve, as much as possible, the
agony of the prisoner's mind, who was in tears during
the whole of the trial, his Lordship immediately
passed sentence of death on him, but with an intima-
tion that mercy would be extended to him.
Jame: Carter was indicted for stealing 15 wether
sheep, the property of the Rev. Francis Stanley, of
Eastwick. In this case the prisoner had driven the
sheep stolen across the country to Romford market,
where he had sold them, professing himself to wish to
get rid of them, as he was going to Brentwood fair.
The sheep being missed in the morning after they
were stolen, and Romford market being the only one
held on that day, inquiry was made there, the sheep
were found, and pursuit was made after the prisoner
to Brentwood fair, whither he said he was going.—
Being taken into custody at Brentwood, he confessed
the robbery, and restored the money he had received
for the sheep to the man who had bought them.
The Jury found him guilty—Death.

patty causes for the same Mr. Cumming, and he had
always known him to have been diligent and honour-
Able in the conduct of them, though Mr.' Cumming
was. now his enemy ; and be thought the present ac-
tion would afford a sufficient specimen of the temper
of his mind.
The Lord Ca= ZARON obeerved, that this was a

. .
lege, ta assist wlth.thelr horses in working the s.
lands ; therefore, that the largest holder of land
the right to turn ont the largest number of cattle, a,
WI proportion.
The Court deCided that the Jury should give a ver-
dict for the defendant, admitting a right to the house-
holders generally as they had proved it, and an extra
right to the farmers, agreeably to the usual custom of
levancy and couchancy.
Two other causes of the like nature, in which the
same person was named as plaintiff, were entered for
trial ; but were settled on the principle of the above,
without being brought beforodeCourt —a right being
reserved to question the evidence arising from the
parchment agreement, on the presumption that the
custom of the common is more ancient.
DOle ON Till DENISE OF JOH:: PAULDING V. BRISTOW.
This was an action of ejectment, to recover pos-
session of an estate in the parish of Goxhill in this
county, consisting of 154 acres of land, free and
:copyhold.
The case was tried at the last Lent Assizes last
year, when the plaintiff lost his suit in consequence of
not being able to shew a clear line of ancestry. In
this, however, be now completely succeeded, by pro-
ducing a genealogical tree of great clearness, not-
withstanding its amazing dimensions.
Mr. Justice Gnome, on observing this document
spread on the table of the Court, said, he as as very
happy it had not been put in his hands, when the case
was stated to him on the evening before.
Serjeant VAUGHAN replied, it had been carefully
kept out of his Lordship's sight, for fear it might
have deprived him of rest I The plaintiff, Mr. Ro-
be' t Faulding, was shewn by this genealogy to be
lineally descended, through eight generations, from
Robert and Margaret, the common ancestors of
the claimant, and of John Faulding, the person
last in possession of the estate in question. In
order to establish the direct descent, it was found ne-
cessary to produce, in Court, registers of births, mar-
riages, and deaths, out of number, and several wills
from the Ecclesiastic Registry, all which were sworn
to and read. A moro tedious process can hardly be
imagined ; but it was relieved beyond expectation by
the humour of the Councel engaged in the action—
Serjeant Vaughan and Mt. Copley on the one side,
.and Mr. Clarke and Mr. Reader on the other, beguiled
the tediousness of the case. In tracing the genealogy,
the word riepor had been translated nephew ; and in
the will this nrpo: appeared to be " John, the son of my
son John ;" this matter was set right by the Serjeant's
observing, that he was an Irish nephew—for the ori-
ginal stock had been moved from Ireland dining the
prosecution of the Protestants, and had been settled
in this country, where they had breached out very
extensively, and had acquired considerable property.
The plaintiff having thus set up his claim, which
was admitted to be perfectly correct, the Defers'.
dant's Counsel stated, that his client was also
descended from the same stock, and through four
or five generations in the same line ; but that his
claim. was prior, because more nearly related to the
person - from whom they had both shot out. Proof
of this was to be given by copies and extracts, as in
the case of the plaintiff; but in this genealogy much
greater confusion appeared than in the longer one,
for want of some registers, which could not be found.
The principal difficulty rested in one woman (Eliza
beth), she having been married twice, and no register
or memorandum of her first marriage being pro-
duced ; of course in the register of her second mar-
riage, her name was different from her maiden name ;
but several collateral circumstances were adduced,
which went to shew her to be the identical person the
defendant wished her to appear to be. It consisted
chiefly in the testimony of a number of very old peo-
ple, who deposed that their grandmother's maiden
name was Faulding, and that the families of the Wor-
rells, the Robinsrins, and the Fauldings, were always
esteemed to be related—were cousins : a will was also
produced to shew that two women, whose relation.
ship could no otherwise be proved, were sisters. In
this way a strong presumptive ground was established
that the defendant was descended as stated by the
Serjeant.
To this ground Mr. CLARICE totally objected, on
the principle that it was no better than hear-say evi-
dence, and could not be received in a Court of Law.
Here a great question-arose between the Counsel.
Serjeant VAUGHAN maintained, that the report of
old people, of who their ancestors were, and whether
any relationship subsisted between their families and
others, was evidence perfectly admissible; and that if
persons will swear that they beard their father or me-
ther say they were descended from any particular
CHAPMAN V. CONLAM. person, it was right in law to presume they were so
The question involved in this cause was one ofcon- descended, en whit was termed " reputation in the
siderable interest. The nature of the action will be col- family.,,
lected from the following sketch :—ln the reign of
Charles I. a grant was made to a Dutchman of 1-3 d Mr. CLARKE objected, thA by this kind of evidence
of a certain piece of land,. situated near Crowle, and any man was liable at any time to be dispossessed of
usually under water, on condition of his effecting an his property, by a combination of persons who would
embankment, and a perfect drainage of the whole— swear up to the mark.
the property so acquired has descended to Lord Man. On the validity of such testimony, so hnportant in.
vers, the present Lord of the Manor, under whom the the present cause, Mr. Justice Goose declared that he
Defendant and others hold farms. There are in must always admit as evidence whatever was convey-
Crowle it seems 300 houses, 270 of which are ancient ed in this way from father to son, and sworn to in Court.
houses, and have a right of common over a large track Serjeant VAUGHAN then gave proof of his client
of neighbouring grass-land. It was the object of the being descended from the sister of the grandfather of
Plaintiff in this action to prove that a stint of six the person last in possession.
cows, six horses, four kit caves, and three yearling The Judge, in his charge to the Jury, clearly lean-
colts, was the limitation, beyond which those who ed t.) the side of the Plaintiff, giving it as his opinion
rented large farms had no more right to stock the com-
that his descent was clearly made out ; but that on.
mon than householders of any other description. The
pre-
Defendant has usually put on more than this stinted the face of the other descent was much doubt and
sumption : that the nearest in descent from the com-
allowance of stock; and he defended his so doing on mon stock would certainly have the preference, but
the ground of right to the common arising from le-
vancythat good proof ought to be given of a real descent,
and couchancy, and of his extensive farm giv-
which proof he could not discern in the defendant's
ing him a claun to pasturage superior to that of the case.
smaller householders. The case involved some intri-
Serjeant VAUGHAN here interposed, to refer his
cafe questions of law. At the close of an inquiry of
five hours, two old parchment deeds were introduced Lordship again to the will of Briggs ; but he would
which sheered, to the satisfaction of the Judge, that not hear him.
the custom of the stint had been established in t The Jury, after consulting a short time, requested
consequence of an agreement entered into by the to retire ; but afterwards returned to Court to put this
common-right holders, which could not be binding question to the Judge—Whether evidence from term-
:on their posterity ; and it was proved that the farmers tation was admissible, where a register could not be
had for many years enjoyed an undisturbed privilege procured? The Judge asking to how far back the
of turning to on the common over and above the stinted question related, and the foreman replying to a mar-
proportion. It was observed that the origin of these' rage which wok place a hundred years back ;he re-
common rights was this : The common was the pri- plied " yes, certainly." The Jury then requested to
vote property of the Lord of the Manor, who ranted see the will of Nicholas Briggs, which identified the
'the land to his tenants to feed their horsefrand.cows two sisters; and, after having retired again for a short
sod thinboy.wesooquired, in return for ibis privi. time, returae4 with a verdict for the defendant.

.
Thy the 14th Nw at her fatlaer's house, ilertforlstree
the I.afly 41floioatemont-Colouel.biorris, of she 73d Regiment,
a son. • _

Monday, at Poihstona, Jaime CoNaimoli, Esq. only son
Patrick Co:qtthoun, F.aq. I.L.D. to Katharine Deacon, yogurt,
daughter of James D. aeon, Esq. of hates -street, West:Waiter.
Thursday, at Link Chart, Captain George Cooper, of th
Bengal Establishment. to Jane, accoud daughter of the late 111 t,
Lewis Munn, of that place
At &hum, '!'pumas Monett, Esq. W. S. 17,1Inburgh, to Mw
Jane Bell Murray. daughter of the late Rev. Mr. Murray, Mk
ulster of Channellt irk.

IIIl),

Sunday last, Mrs. Jennings-, many years a most reyectat.le in.
habitant at Caine, Kilt..
On the 4th inst. at Cupar of Angus, on hi• way from Ritcaim„,
to Aberdeen, Dripidier-Grneral Henry David Fra-tr, 4th
the late William Fraser, E..q. of Fraserfteld. .
On the sib iubt. at fixbriCgo, In her 30th year, Mn,, faults
the wife of Mr. James, ,urge4o.

s.
On the 41h inst. at his apartments in the I.ambe h
Samuel Collings, Esq.
Sunday last, at Leeds, Yorkshire, Robert Davison, M.D. maw
years Senior Physician to the General lEfirmary of that town,

Sus rises, Sun set., Mean rises,
45 minutes after 4 15 minutes after ler 7 22 minmes i'lei $

HIUH WATER AT LONDON BR ID3E
Mornlag ...... 44 minutes after 3
Afteru•vm 0 yOnsters a r 4

DR. FREEM.%N'S GU 1-1-A SA 1.0 I Atli
value of this Infallible Medicine ihis been so
long proved, that nothing of the present day can bear
$
oompetition with it in all the different stages of a certain Disease,
which it effectually cures and eradicates from the habit, w;iliosd
etch ing the painful feelinrs and exposure that attends sahraton,
without debilitating the constitution In any dezree, or even r;qui.
ring confinement from late.iness, or restriction in diet. 'lle radical
virtues of these inestimabl! Drops have proved their claim to publis
approbation for more than SO years. In all the debility of hod
sexes, they prove a never tailiug restorative, whether the debility
isproduced by too free use of mercury, illicit pleasutes, or timed-
fe cts of a warm climate to travellers, and those going ,h o
T bey cannot be recommended too strongly to those who will re-
ceive a safe. speedy, and complete cure in all old stubhurn Carets,
andevery weakness that affects the bladdLr3Vid organs of urine. By
its efficacy many women have become mothers who for years had
been deprived of that happiness.
Sold wholesale and retail at Mr. Butler's, No. 4, Cheapsi,le,cor.
ner of Paternoster-row ; Baxter and Smith, Edinburgh and Glas-
gow ; Bolatn, Portsmouth; Newbury and Son, Dublin ; Pack
and Turner, Hull; Howland and Haydon, Plymouth; aad by
most Books; tiers and Medielue Venders in every Town, in boxes
at 2.5.91. and 1 1 s. each,

FOR FE.VERS, INFLUENZAS, MEASLES; kc.
DR. JAMES'S POWDER.

---
THIS Medicine, after an unparalleled success for
near seventy years, has gained a proud pre-eminence over
every other Febrifuge. An Imitation, called the Antimonial
Powder, was adopted in the Pharmacopoeia of the College of
Physicians in 1785; and in 1781 a mutt elaborate Analysis
of the two Medicines was published in the Philosophical I ran,-
actions; front which it was coofidently assenei,, that they
were the same In a sutsequent Edition, however, the College
fairly and frankly confessed, that this Powder " was lavisher so
mild, nor so czrtain to its operation as Dr. James's, anti that
It could not be administered with safety in similar doses."
—Thus ended their identity. But the Antimossial Puiderl
now altered la the 'blew Pharmaeapalai not pretending indeed
to be Dr. James's ; but " snore nearly assimilating to it in doses.*
lite truth is, however, that this Preparation is as remote as the
former from the real Fever Powder ; and when Health and Life
are at stake, no one surely will sacrifice, to the equivocal tut:tits
. cf any Substitute, the long approved efficacy, safety and certainty
o(tbe Original Medicine. _

It is sold only by F. Newbery and Sons, at their Warehouses,
No. 4.5, St. Paul's Church-yard, Loudon ; or N 0.19, Dame-street,
Dublin; as also at Dr. James's late house in Bruton-street, price
4s. 9d. a Packet; or a dozen in a Pottle (as made up for the
Army and Nary) for 445. But none .re genuine vales* the weeds
4° 6. Nowbery, 'elm 4S, St. Paola," are engraved in the Sumps.

.most infamous action ; and was proceeding to recom-
mend a verdict for the defendant, when the plaintiff's
,Counsel, said he would be nonsuited.
CROWN SWE.
Thong limbos, a chimney-meeper, was indicted
or breaking and entering the dwelling-house of John
Leve, a labouring man, m the daytime, no person be-
tOt,thpivin, and stealing various articles of wearing
rel. 4 appeared that John Lowe was absent from
the wait Part of sbe4lay the robbery w*
.; •