Star.
London, England, 1816-08-12 00:00:00

DERBY ASSIZES.

A cause catne on betore Sir Roucur GRAHAM, and
* special Jury;whicli had excited considerable interest
in the neighbourboo.d of Derby. Miss Ana Matcltiff
(sister to Alr. Matc!iiff, grocer, at Derby) w.ss plain-
tiff.-and S:r W:lloughby Dixie, of Market 13o:worth,
Bart. was de!endart. The action was Welt& to

secover comrensation in damages for a breach of a
promise of marriage made some years ago: when,
after a hearing which lasted about five hours, the
Jury returned% verdict for the PlAiutiff, with £1.300
damages. The verdict gave great satisfaction to a
very crowded Colin.

CHELMSFORD.
stnucTior.z.-AYTON V. wALKItn.
This was an action brought by Mr. John Ayton,
against the defendant, for the loss of services, &c. of.
his daughter, occasioned by seduction.
Mr. MAKRYAf, on the part of the plaintiff, ad.
dressed the Jury. lie stated, that the plaintsrf was
the eldest unmarried of five clatitliiers of a rcsvect-
abre farmer, residing at Tollesbury flail, iu this
county : the defendant was the only son of a farmer
Jiving. in :he neighbourhood of the same place. In
Vie course of the year 1815. the defendant was intro.
duct,' to the plaintiff's daughter, and in a short time
tk.ey evinced a partiality tow wits each other, which
WAS succeeded on the part of the defendant, bad.
dresses of the. warmest nature, and offering to mike
her his wile. The daughter of the plaintiff coati-
'urea to receive the constant visits of the defendant.
She li•itened to his protestations; and after some time,
in au unguarded morsel t, ):elded to his sulicizations,
and became. pregnant, and was delivered of a child
on the 23d of March last. The aggravation of this
case was rendered still more remarkable from the
cir-
cum.tance of Miss Ayton having been deprived of
the care of a mother, and the defendant as it were
taking advantage of her in her unprotected moments,
and under the mask of affection robbing her of her
character, most deur to herself and to her family.—
The simple question, thereVre, which the Jury had
to decide was, to) what damages the plaintiff was en-
titled, for the violation of hi. daughter's c'hastity, for
destroying her own peace of mind, and of rendering
het in the eyes of her relatives and friends at; elAra•
ple of shame and disgrace ?
Mr. Joseph 'Brewster deposed to attending Miss
Ayton in her lying in ; the child is still living. Knows
the father of Miss Ayton to be a gentleman of much
credit and respectability, and never knew or heard
any thing del og atory to the character of his daughter.
The mother of Miss Ayton has been dead for some

years.
Wm. Carriogdon deposed to the respectability of
the plaintiff; and that his daughter was much re-
spected, and always conducted herself with propriety.
She was not twenty-two years of age, and was one
of five children.
Elizabeth Ayton deposed, that she was 19 years
Of age, and resided at Toilesbut y, where she had
the management of her litho's lii)ocehold affairs.
In the mouth of November. 18.14, she became ac-
(painted with the defendant, Walker, who caotinued
his visits to her family, and paid his addresses in the
warmest manner. The idea of marriage between
her and the defendant being entertained, she obtained
her father's consent. In the month of December
following, the defendant urged his solicitations in the
most pressing manner ; said, ,‘ as soon 4$ the mar:,
riage was completed, they would retire And live in
the lower farm ;" and making various other promi-
ses, gained complete ascendancy over her feelings.
The witness for some time resisted defendant's ad-
vances, stating she would am suffer any liberties to
be taken with her, without the most solemn protesta-4
Lions of sincerity. These the defendant strongly as
netted, and in an unguarded moment succeeded in
his designs. and in consequence she-became preg-
nant, and was delivered of a child in the month of
Match last. For about four months after her prep.
nancy, the defendant continued his visits, sheering
every mark of attention, but 'after that time sud-
denly withdrew. The offspring of her connexion with
the defendant is still alive, and, together with her.'
self, has beeh suppprted by her father, the plaintiff.
The latter was perfectly well acqeainvd with the in-
-timacy that subsisted between her and the defendant,
as far as it regarded their intended marriage. Witness
did not know that the father of the defendant was
aware of the transaction. .
Cross examined by Mr. GenNEY.—Witness was in
the habit of receiVing the visits of the defendant at
night for some months, but was never left up alone
fn his company. Her father usually wed to bed at
an early hour; but on the occasion of the defendant's
her two brothers, vise 15 and the other 19,
were generally in company. Witness became ac-
quainted with the defendabt only in November, and
submitted to his solicitations in the month follopring.
Examined by Mr. Justice BC/BROOM' —Witness was
two mtinths pregnant before her Wur had discovered
the circdmnance. Her father, in consequence, had
a meeting, at which witness, the defendant, and his
father, were present. At this interview the father of
the defendant asked witness whether his son had of.
fered her marriage f to which she replied in the
lirmative. Mr. Walker then said to his son, the de-
-1:4414i 44 John, yeu have much deceived me, and I

.
know not What ibe eousequente trity belLafterttltt
plaintiff's case irks' closed.
Mr. Guam now rose to reply on the part oldie de-
fendant.• Invasei alibis kind be scarcely eirer knew
the facts to be Otherwise than illinodu promise of
marriage; but the Jury would rec. -that in the.
present instance, the defendant was but a youth of
I'9 years of age, introduced suddenly into a family
where liberties and latoiliaTities were allowed him,
eliding in circumstances for which the plaintiff had
entirely to thank himself. l'ilhat could be expected
to have resulted from two young persons being per-
mitted to sit up at a late hour at nightl—a practice
from which, it any mischief did arise, it was the in-
cumbent duty of the plaintiff to have prevented ; and
ilk having so preventeJ, he was himself answerable
for the consequences. It was the duty of the plain-
tiff also. when he observed the intimacy which was
described to have existed between his daughter and
the defendant, to inquire whether their attachment
was sanctioned by the father of the defendant. This
license at least was necessary, and if upon prudential
inqeiry it was found not to have been granted, then
it became his imperative duty to forbid the inter-
course. Instead of this, a young man of 18 and a
girl of 19, inflamed no doubt by passion, are-suffered
to sit up together, until midnight; and for this con
duct, and its consequence, the plaintiff is wholly re-
sponsible. The plaintiff, therefore, should have en-
deavoured to come into Court with a better claim,
and not seek a reparation at least upon such grounds,
for an injury occailoked by his own imprudence.
The mischief complained of was effected iu one month,
and this would at I;:ast shew bow supch lie ae of
conduct and faini;i:irits.had been afforded twelve de-
feedant by the plaintiff, in the manner in which his
daughter's conduct had been regulated. As to the
child, the offspring of the connexion in question, that ,
was a consideration not involved in the present in.'
.quiry. The fact to be considered was, what injury
tiad the plaintiff sustahked in the loss of his daughter's.
service, and how that loss should be estimated by
his own imprudence ? The defendant, though the
only son of a respectable farmer, was nevertheless
himself wholly dependent ; but he felt convinced
that the Jury would agree with him, under all the
cirmumstances, that she plaintiff was undeserving of
any considerable reparation, and that they would ap-
portion to him a very small measure of damages.
Mr. Justice Bennouou told. the Jury, that the
plaintiff eras certainly entitled to a verdict, hot the
amount rested solely with them. He did not think
that, on the present occasion, Mr. Ayton had b; ea
so reprehensible with tegard to the defendant's being
in company with Miss Ayton at night; for it would
be recollected, that when the plaintiff had gone to bed
at an early hour, he usually left his two sons in Mini,
pant with the parties. It should also be recollected,
that in the sphere of life in whidi the pinks sutived„
it WAS not uncommon to indulge in the conduct end
familiarities which had led to the consequences aping
which the present action. was founded. Theta did
not appear, however, that previous to the acquaint.
ance of Miss Ayton. with the defendant, any circum-
stance had manifested kalif prejudicial to her Charac-
ter.—The Jury having consulted lot about ten usinutes,
returned a verdict for the plaintiff-.. Damages selk:

•\

MAIDSTONE, AUGUST a.
Jan &Ake, proprietor of a paper-mill near Canter.
Wry, WAS indictird for forging and utteriug the ramp
used by the direction of the Commissioners of Escibe
to denote the payment of duties on the paper.
. Mr. SerjeAnt Ons Low, having also stated the cir- I
cumstances of this cAse, called the witnesses as foliow

Stride, an Officer of Excise, who surveyed the
mill of the prisoner, stated, that in consequence of
information he bad received from a man of the name
of Chilton, foreman to the prisoner, lie searched the
mill of the prisoner, in order to ascertain whether
there were any forged stamps on the wrappers : he
also went to several places which he learned had been
supplied by the prisoner with paper, particularly to
a Mr. Cobb, at Faversham, and other persons at
Canterbury. The papa being produced, he said the
stamp was not genuine, and, his signature on the'
wrappers, which purported that the paper had been
charged by him, was not his hand writing, nor had
hit ever charged it. The persons who had bought
the paper were then called, and proved thin they had
bought it of the prisoner.
Thomas Chilton, the swim of the poisoner, who
was also in custody, said, that he had made the
forged stamp; that getting possession of the officer's.
stamp, he had made a model of it in clay, and then
cast three leaden ones, with which he ;narked the
paper ; and his master had also frequently stamped
the wrappers with the forged mark.
He was cross•examined by Mr. KNowt.es to sub-
stantiate that he alone was the guilty person ; but he
persisted that his master had also frepsently used the
stamp ; and Stride proved, that on some of the
forged wrappers there was also the prisoner's band
writing.
The Jury found him guilty, and he was seaweed
to seven •years transportation.
Matthew Cower, JAN Bream, tad Jekx Carly.
were indicted for stealing 28 bags of dollars, rivin
on board a vessel called the Curomanbel boy, ea this
nprigable river Thames.
The general circumstances •of this case have been
frequently bare the pablic, so as to render a minute
detail unnecessary.
It is known that, as the Coromandel hoy was going'
down the River, laden with dollars for the East India
Company, she was boardal in the night by ten or
twelve men from a boat, and seven chests of dollars
carried off, some of whiCh were afterwards found
,above low water mark, and the three prisoners were
found possessed of a quantity of dollars which they
could opt account for, except, as they said, that they
bad found them is the River.

The strong circumstances to fix them with the at-
twit' robbery were upop the evidence of a man of the
name of Martin, and a woman of the name of
hairatlanar. The former said, that he was waked
early in the morning bf the robbery by a noise in the
street at Deptfiad. Looking out of his window, be
taw three owe carrying, or rather dragging, a heavy
chest alnag. He asked Who's there ?" A void
said, 48 It is only old Mariin," and he thought k was
Connor's voice; and be beard one of ths men call
another Mgt, which is Cannor's Christian name.—
'The wom4n, hitrarlane, stated, that she kept a pub-
lic-house at Deptford, and Connor had %edged with
tier. Early on the morning of the robbery she heard
a knocking st her door. She had been up Lk ;rah-

7w'frflT-'V".';

. . .
in', era was *Pit goittg to bed. She asked Who's
there ?" A voice answered, 4‘ It is only me, open:
the door." Ste thought it was Connor's voice, and
she opened the door, wben three men cube in, briog-
frig a very heavy chest ; their faces were blackelt, and
being then friglate!,ed the dO nest know 'whether it
was Connor or i.ot. She exclaimed, 4, what have you
brought here; tak: it ont of my house." They t'..en
went out the back way, and took the chest with them.
The next day she -feitnA some pieces of wood in the
yard, which she burnt ; and afterwards some &Mars
were found concealed in a passage near that place.
On the following evening he came to her house in
company w;th two men; be asked it he conld
down till the tide served to go to London ; she told
him he might have his old bed. He and the two
men went up stairs. Shortly afterwards there was a
great noise in the street ; the constables, as she un-
derstood, were sqarching after persons who had stole
the dollars. She went upto Connor, and told him
she did not like the strange men with him, and de-
-sired him to leave her house. He said the men were
as good as himself, and he would never come into
her house again; nod they all went away.
In addition to this, other witnesses proved the three
prisoners being near the spat of the robbery as early
as five in the morning, and they all had a large goon
tity of dollars. Connor also, in a conversation with
the Officer about the robbery, offered a bet that there;
WAS not a twelfth man in the boat, the Officer having
said there were twenty.
The defence of the prisoners was, that they had
found a chest of dollars in the Kiver, just above high•
water mark, early in the morning, and' that they
meant to appropriate it to their oven use.
They-were ail found guilty, and immediately sen-
tenced to death ; the Learned Judge informing them
that the law would take its course, and stating his
opinion that they found the dollars where they them-
selves bad thrown them overboard.

A yawn. 9.—Joha Chapman was indicted for stealing
and carrying away, on the 9th of June last, two begs,
containing a quantity of dollars, the property of
William Fairlie and others. Ink was a case :wising
out of the former trials ; and the clecumstanc.ts were
briefly as fonows :—lt appeared, that on the day
stated in the indictment, the prisoner, in company
With other persons to the number of twelve, happen.
ed to discover three boxes on the river sole, which
they hoisted into their boats, and proceeded to a re•
mote part of the river, where, having opened them,
they found them to contain specie. The party after-
wards pirkeeded to divide the contents, when they
separated; bet the Thames Police Officers, coining
up with s ime of the bats, recovered part of the pro.
petty. The ',rapport tearing pursuit, as also the con-
sequences of being found with property which was
not his own, contrived to throw his part overboard s
but being apprehended, he voluntarily pointed out to
the (f lcct.. the spot where he bad thrown the dollars.
The Learned Judge suggested the impossibility of
maintaining the prolccution) as the witnesses were as
much involved.in guilt as the prisoner at the bar.—
The prosecution was consequently withdrawn, and
the prisoner was, with a suitable admonition from
the Bench, forthwith disch urged.
William and Margard Webb were indicted (or bur-
gloriously breaking and entering the dwelling-house
of Elizabeth Remmell, spinster, of Entry, on the
night of the Val of Marclidast, and feloniously steal-
ing therein, guineas, half-guineas, broad pieces l.t
gold, and Bank notes, to the amount of Aft2oo and
upwards. The prosecutrix is a maiden Lady of 73
years of age. and possessed of considerable property.
The prisoners had teaided for some time at Sandwich.
being a shun distance horn Eestry. On the night of
the day stated in the indictment, the prosecutrix was
disturbed by the :rase of firearms, and shortly after
by the breaking in of her house ; when two men pre-1
santed themselves, and demanded her guineas, which
she told them they should have, and proceeded with
them to those parts of the house where her money
was kept. The men were 4,sguied in crape and
smock.frocks ; and on going up stairs along with
them, another figure presented t.) her glapce a man
dressed, as she thought, in women's clothes. They
continued to rifle every part which they expected to
contain money, and in their hurl y to possess them-
selves of valuables, they carried off gold weights,
some of which being afterwards seen, helped to serve
in the discovery of the man who was the prisoner at
the bar. The rubbers collected and tied up the plate,
but returned the latter imasediately, saying, they
had what they wanted, and instantly departed. It
appears that the party came prov ded with horses, as
the tracks of horses' hoofs Were discovered next
morning leading towards a pond near the house,
wherein Will found floating a portmanteau, which, on
examination, was found to contain two smock-hocks,
a crepe, an iron bar, and other articles, among which
was the apron of a woman, all which it was evident
the robbers had made usWift on the preceding night.
Ate alarm being given, and large rewards having
been offered to the apprehension of the thieves, the
Police Officers set on foot the most active search, and
in consequence of a remarkable large hoof of one of
the horses, and the peculiar form of shoe on the foot
of the other, the robbers were traced through all that
mazes,. from Miss Rammell's house at Lamy, by a
circuitous bye.road, through Canterbury, and so an
to London. The person was also discovered who
hakliired out the horses for the expedition. One of
the principals, however, contrived to elude all put.
suit for the present. The trial lasted eight hours,
and alter ao able charge from Mr.Jasticellustanoco,
the prisoner, William Webb, was fausut Guihy.—
Margaret Webb was acquitted.
These Assizes., heavy beyond example; terminated
at keen-o'clock en Friday evening, when the follow-
ing persons, capitally convicted, were put the bar to
receive sentence of death, viz..:-Francis Simmonds,
for burglary ; John Fountain, for stealing is a dwell
ing.house ; Richard Seal, for sheep stealing s Thos.
Bryant, for stealing in a dwelling-house; and Mari-
anna Schmidt., for privately stealing in a shop;—
James Pettitt, for sheep-stealing ; John Crowes, for
a highway robbery; Richard Davison Glaringhould,
for forgery; Henry Vowyer, for cutting and stab-
bing ; Wm. Webb, for burglary ; and J. Morris, alias
,Roberts, for. forgery.
Mr. Justice BUKRIWCH then addressed the several
culprits, ',observing, that although he was bound to
pass upon all the dreadful sentence of the law, yet he
trusted that in many of the cases he would, by his
representation to the Crown, succeed in sparing their
lives. As objects of this Mercy, he thought he could

....,....
•

with*Conkdenee *balite pritoner • Siminnnds,
"tAin, S.:al, Bryant, and Schmidt:. Of the three Id.
namely, Pettitt, Crowhurst, and Glarar;.
hould, he could not presume to Tea!: with so miuil
contjdence. He would certainly use his endeasoini
with a higher pwrc in their behalf; but he would
larnent that they should calculate with certainty
upon the success of that application. * Thecases irf
Vowyer, ‘Vebb, awl Morris, his Lardsbip said, %ere
hopeless ; and ho implored them not 19 hi* One inn.
ment of the very limited time they had to employ in
prayer and penitence, and in preparing thenistive:
tor another world. His Lordship tly.:11 passed U"
the whole the awful scnterce of the law in the usual
form. The three list mentioned criminals, together
with Brown. Connor, and Curby, for river piracy ;
and James Kemp, alias Clubb, for forgery, :thusly
sentenced, were left for execution.

CIVIL FIDE V. COPELAND.

This v. as an action for an outrage corno.itte4
the plaintiff, and for the recovery of st3s taken
his person by the defendant, under 413 X.'cetion upo4
property. The defendant, it appeared, had gone to
the house of the plaintiff for the purpose of making
levy upon some goods. The manner, howevtr, in
which the defendant proceeded, occasioned some al-
tercation ; acid in the most vident manner the latter
advanced towards an armed chair, in which the plain.
tiff, an old man, was sitting, and s,:ized from hia
person 113.5 in Bank notes.—This, howeter, on the
part of the defendant, WAS attempted to he proved to
have been given in part pAyniera 01 u.. ext.cuLi,rn S
leVied.

Lord Ettewannovott was of syin;rln, that even if
the delence set up WAS true, the sung in question coal
not be received in payment of the exectuii.o, "„ pt
by courtesy. In the present case, he tlioeglit the
utter most serious. An officer shourd not violate
his duty ; and it WAS the duty of the Jury to give
such damages on the present occasion as they would
themselves expect, if placed under similar circum-
stances. In giving their verdict, therefore, he trusted
that they would consider, thati although his Majesty's
subjects were bound to submit to law process and
otter proceedings, no officer had the slightest pretence
or !reuse for violating or outstepping the duty with
which he was charged.—Verdict for the plaintiff,
Damages ALAI