Star.
London, England, 1803-05-03 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF KING's BENCH, MAY 2.
THE KING V PARLEY.
On Saturday, as we have Rated, Mr. Serjeant
Bvsr, on the part of the defendant, Mr. Hill Dar-
Icy, moved for a rule to thew caufe why the vet-
did of Guilty, which had been obtai3cd againtl
him, Ihould not be fet alide, and a new trial grant-
- ed? This cafe was permitted to Rand over till to-
day, to give the defendant an opportunity of
an affidavit, Rating the fan, that would be
proved by a witnels, of the name of Duncan. who
was at prefent, as be believed, in Scotland, and
whole evidence was material to his defence. This
was an indilment under very pen-41circumflances,
founded on the 9th Anne, c. fat 8. It wa•
very proper that the Al Ihould be carried into
execution, hut the Court would not be difpnfed to
firetch it to an undue length. They would with
it to operate en thole, who were manifally guilty:
but it could not operate on a party, who had never
had an opportunity of defending himfelf. This
was an inditment for an aflault on account of
money won at play, and if the defendant was con-
rifted, he was to forfeit all his goods, and to fuf-
fer two years imprironment in the county goal
where the affiult was committed. He fhould Rate
the fads, which Duncan would prove, which were
there :—That the profecutor purfued the defen-
dant through the greets of Brighton, calling on
him, in an abufive manner, to pay him the 501.
which lie had won from him- at play. In conk-
quence of this conduß of the profecutor, and a
number of people afl'embling, the defendant was
obliged to go into R. Duncan's lodgings, and the
evidence he was to give was, that lie was prefent,
and heard the profecutor, with three other perfons
whom he did not know, at different times after-
wards confulting together, and they agreed to go
to the defendant's apartments to demand this son.
and that if they could not perfuade him to pay it,
they would provoke him to fight, and then they
would india him as they had dope.
Mr. Easaing raid, the policy of the *mute cer-
tainly was this. The law would not authorize any
man to recover, by anion, money won at play ;
and before the palling of this Ratute, many men,
who had won money at play, b intimidestion had
procured that redrefs and fatisfaßion, winch the
law would not have given them. The winner at-
tacked the lofcr by threats and violence, and fo
compelled him to do that which the law would not
have authorized him to do. There fags would be
ftron evidence for the confideration of both Judge
and Jury on the trial. The defendant was in a
confiderable way of trade, by having married Mrs.
Pritchard, Who keeps a very confiderablewarehoufe.
Lord Ett.terioeoverit liked, if it was poffible
to get an affidavit from Duncan ?
• Mr. Dumas faid, he was afraid they could not,
as he was in Scotland, and they did not know,
where, fo that they could not write to him.
Lord EttErisoaotiori laid, he might not be in
Scotland at all ; and how did they know be would
foon return ?
Mr. EaSKIWI laid, it was (worn, they expelled
he would loon return. In a limiter cafe, the Lord
Chief Juflice of the Common Pleas raid, " The
Court would prefiime that the witnefi would return from
Scotland fpeedily." (A prodigious laugh.)
Lord ELLENBOROUGH......We will grant you a
'Rule to thew caufe.
Mr. Serjeant Berr, on the fame fide, obferved,
that if the Rule for a new trial was not made ab-
folutc, he hoped the Court would permit them to
move in arrelt of judgment.
Lord ELLENEOROUGH defired him to Rate his
grounds.
The learned Serjeant laid, his grounds were
two ; In, The affault was Rated to have taken
place in September, and the indißment was found
at the Midlummer Selfions in the fame year. The
bill was found in July for an affault, which was
Rated not to have been committed till the Septem-
ber following. The fecond ground relied on the
authority of the cafe of the King v Randal and
others. 3 Term. Rep. 98.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH.—I am all aid your mo-
tion in arreft of Judgment will not do you any
good. Thal, however, are your grounds.
PATVR RooK3.
Lord ELLENDOROPCH °Merited, that a cafe
had been entered for argument in the fpecial paper,
a term or two ago, and the paper books had only
been delivered this morning. His Lordfhip or-
dered that this cafe might be entered the lab in
the paper.
Mr. Junice GROSR raid, he thought the Rule
ought to be altered, and that paper books fhoald be
delivered at the time the caufe was entered.
The Court agreed with his Lordlhip, and Lord
ELLIMBOROLIGH defired the officer would not
draw up the Rule in future, without teeing the
Wit fettled and figned by Connie!.
BLUR O. ALEXANDER.
This was an anion for a breach of promife of
marriage. The Plaintiff, the daughter of a re-'
fpeZtable tradafman in the Weil of England, was
courted, reduced, and abandoned by the Defen-
dant. Being only nineteen, the was obliged to foe
by guardian, and a gentleman of the name of
Morgan undertook to fee her righted. When the
trial came on a reference was agreed to. The
award of the arbitrator was, that the Defendant
fhould par 10 the Plaintiff 1501. together with all
the cons of the fuit. In the affidavits on which
the prefent Rule was granted, it was (worn that
Mr. Alexander had again by his fedußive arts
prevailed upon her to leave her lather's hook;
and that after getting her into his power be made
her fign a relcare for both the rsol. and the coils,
which he thought would be valid in law, the being
then 2 5. The Attorney, therefore, applied that
the colts might be paid to him.
Cattle was now thewn. An affidavit was pro-
duced from Mils Ellis in which the fwears that the
left her father's }mule voluntarily, and that her
le motive was the cruel treatment (he had expe-
rienced. In anwher. the Defendant fwears that
he :tad paid to the Plaintiff every farthing of the
at and colts before the erleofe was executed.
However, it appeared that the ideate was dated

before the time lized by the arbitrator for the pay.l
ment of the money to the Plaintiff at her father's
bottle, and that the Defendant had received notice
not to pay over the money to her.
The 'Court fetid, that the attorney had a lien
upon the coils; which could not be defeated by
this tranfadion between th,: parties, whether it was
real or collufive.—Rule

APRIL 29.—••COPPINGER V. ruzittissmas,
Mr. ERSKINE, on the part of the Meffrs.Tbelluf-
Cons, moved for a Rule to [hew caufe why they
fhould not be difcharged out of cuftody on filing
common bail. However extraordinary and unac-
countable it might appear, Richard Coppinger,
who is now a prifoner in the King's Bench fordebt,
and who fume time ago was fued for a malicious
profecution agaitilt one of the Mars. Thelluffons,
had had the hardinefs to make an affidavit Hating
that thefegentlemen had in their hands different Po.
I;cies of Infurance, and gcois belonging to him, to
the amount 0f70,c001. On that affidavit the Meirs.
Thellufrons who were not Members of Parliament,
were arrefted. They denied having feveral Policies
of Infurance, which Coppinger Rated in his affida-
vit, and faid they had never effeded fuch Infants.
ces for him. The Policies which they had admitted
to have in their hands belonging to him, amosnted
to upwards of6oool. after dedufting the premiums
which they had paid to the Underwriters on account
of thefe Policies. And their clerks (\yore, that on a'
fair balance of the account betweenthem and Cop-
pinger, the balance due from him to them was
16331. 171. 4d.—Mr. Eastima faid, he was per-
feCtly aware, notwithftanding this moll flagrant
cafe, he could not call upon the Court to reverie al
Rule of fo long fIAII cling, though the Court exercifed
a difcretion over all its otherprocefs. This was not an
affidavit to hold a perfon to bail for a debt, whete,
if a perfon pofitively (wore that another owed him'
a fpecific fum, there could be no miftake or mil-
apprehenfion in the party taking the oath, and
therefore he mull take it at the rift' of all the eon.
fequences. But the Court would not prefume if a
perfon Rated, upon his oath, a number of Policies
of Infurance, and fet a value on them, and it turn-
ed out afterwards that he was miflaken in the
number of the policies as well as in the amount of
them, the Court would fuppole this arofe from
miftake, and was not imputable to any improper
motive. But the Court would call on fuch a
party to do this. The Court could not try the
merits of the cafe on affidavits. But while the
Court rigidly adhered to their Rule, which was
different from that of the Court of Common
Pleas, which did admit affidavits to contradift, or
at leaft to explain the- affislavir, to hold to bail,
while the rule of tie King's Bench was rigidly
adhered to, and the Court refukd to exercife any
difcretion over it, a man might be arrefted by his
own debtor, for the rum of yo,oool. and might
jolt as well, by an abufe of the procefs of the Court,
be arrefted for as many millions. It was clear
there was no man in this kingdom who was not
fubjed to imprifonment, (Members of Parliament
only excepted). Mr. Erfkine faid, his clients were
ready to bring into Court all the Policies they had
leffeeted for Coppinger, and which they had in
their poffeflion. if the Court did nut grant this
application, the Meffrs. Thellutrons would be
obliged to find bail to the amount of 140,0001.
Lord ELLINIOROUGH•••••" If men are determined
to abufe the procefs of the Court, they may (wear
to a fum for which no man in this kingdom can
find bail : I am not laying what ought to be done
in this cafe ; but by this Rule of the Court a wic.
ked perfon might fend to prifon the higheft and the
richeft perfon in the kingdom, who might be in
jail from the Nit day in Trinity Term, till the fiat
day of Michaelmas Term."
Mr. Exuma' propofed, that Coppinger fhould
he informed how the Defendants had Hated their
account with him: that the policies Which they
had in their poffeffion amounted to 60001. and that
it fhould he put to him, after apprizing him of all
the circumliances, whether he would (wear, that
all the other property of his, in the hands f the
Marrs. Thellulfons, was of the value of 60,0001.

The Court was afraid this would be trying the
merits of the Cafe on affidavits.

The Learned Ccunfel obferved, that he believed
it WAS but a very late proceeding to arreft in au
aZtion of trover, without the fiat of a Judge.
Mr. Jußice LAWISSINCI obferved, that it appear-
ed from Wilfon's Reports, that this was done fo
long ago as the year £743.
The Court Teemed extremely detrous to relieve
the defendants without breaking in upon Air rule.
Lord Ellenborough obferved, that the affidavit to
hold to bail ufualFy Rated, that the Defendant de-
tained the goods although they had been demanded
of him. There was nothing of a demand Rated
in this affidavit, but only that they detained the
goods ; and therefore the Court granted a Rule
to thew caufe on the infufficiency of the affidavit.
His Lordthip obferved, the Rule of the Court
was very convenient for general cafes, but the fine
of this cafe, and the ineenvenience that might arife
from it, really Raggered one. The rule had trill.
ed at leaft for half a centur;, if not for a whole
one. In general cafes it was extremely convenient.
But perhaps it ought to be reconfidered.
HIL Lord(hip milked, whether the Plaintiff in this
cafe was a firm pries?
One of the learned Coved Lid, he hoped he
was not.—Rak ireroted.
A number ofßules were obtained to thew caufe
why there Ihould not be new trials, and among the
reD Mr. GAAROW obtained a Rule in the cafe of,
Marfden v. Reid, which was lately tried before
Lord Est.'s sotto vet tr at Guildhall, and which was
a policy of infurance on goods from Liverpool to
Palermo, Meffina, Naples, and Leghorn, on board
the hip Franklin. In this cafe there are feveral
points of law for the confideration of the Court, and
which (ball be Rated when the cafe is decided.

LONDON MARKETS.

CORN-EXCHANGE, FRIDAY, MAY s.

RETURN of WHEAT in Muk-lane, including only from
the tBth of April to the a 3.1 of April.
Total-33x2 Quarters. Average 565. is.
or. 046 lower than loft return.
PRICE OF HOPS.
Kent 51 os to 81 co j I Kent 61 ato rot or i E
Suffez 1 01 to
71 7 x Sulks 61 or to 91 9$ 1
Xlro2 51 OS to 71 ca) Fan. 81 OS to Ell Its

SMITHFIELD, May a.
To fink the otal--per OADC of Sib.

Beef 49 4d to 59 gd r p real podto6s 4d
Mutton p od to 6s od Pork 4$ 4d to 4d
Lamb 69. c to Bs. 44.

UTAH iI CATI LE THIS OAT.
Bean, about a-00--Sheep and Lamb 8,000.
NEWGATE and LEADENNALL, May S.

Pcr none of Blb. by the carcafe.
Beef 3t 4d to 40 Ed I Vcal 4a od to 61 od
Mutton 4s 44 to ts 44 Pork 41 44 to Sa 44
to 7a. 44.