Star.
London, England, 1827-08-10 00:00:00

moil TREASON-COINING.

Samuel Wilson, alias Stank, De Courcey Ireland, was
indicted for feloniously and traitorously forging and
counterfeiting two pieces of base metal, to the likeness
and similitude of a shilling and a sixpence respectively,
of the current coin of the realm.

The material circumstances of the case were fully de-
tailed in the police reports, at the time the prisoner was
brought up before the committing Magistrates. The
prisoner, who appeared to be about forty-three years
of age, was a person of respectable appearance, and
understood to be well connected in the sister king.
dom. His conduct prier to the transaction in question,
it will be recollected, had been the subject of much
public observation. The facts proved against him in
support of the charge on which he was now brought to
trial, were shortly these. At Lady-day last he hired of
a single woman, named Catherine Good, of question.
able reputation, apartments in a house occupied by her
at No. 6, Isabella-street, near the Coburg Theatre.—
He did not sleep there, and the lodging was jointly
occupied with him by a person named Hinton, who
slept in the kitchen. The prisoner brought with him
apparatus for coining by the process of moulding. He
and Hinton worked at the business of coining almost
daily, until the 12th of April, when their proceedings•
were brought to light. The prisoner was the most active
in manufacturing, whilst Hinton became the hand to
dispose and put off the base coin counterfeited. In the
afternoon of the 12th of April, in consequence of pre-
vious information, Mr. E. J. Powell, Assistant Solicitor
to the Mint, accompanied by Limbrick, Kirby, Ed-
wards, and Lloyd, active police officers, went to the
house of Catherine Good, and the door being knocked
at, the patty was admitted. On entering the front room,
on the first floor, the prisoner was found at work at a
table in the very process of coining; his coat was off,
his shirt sleeves were tucked up, he had an apron upon
him, his hands had whiting on them, and his lace was
alike smeared with the same material. On the table
before him were two sheets of brown paper covered with
whiting, two moulds, one for casting shillings, and the
other for casting sixpences. One of the moulds, which
was much larger than the other, was still warm; on
the fire was a crucible containing some metal in a fused
state. In the drawer of the table at which he was at
work, were found 47 counterfeit shillings in an imper-
fect state of manufacture. On the mantelpiece were
found 48 counterfeit sixpences in a like state of manu-
facture; in other parts of the room were found some
alum, cream of tartar, borax, arsenic, spelter solder,
'fine whiting, a file, on the teeth of which was some
metal, the remains of some broken spoons made of Ont.
tannia metal, and other materials. On the table wasfound
a good half•crown,which had been used in perfecting the
edges of the counterfeit money. In the breeches pocket of
the prisoner was found one counterfeit shilling,which was
in a fit state for circulation. All the other coins found
were imperfect. The whole of the coins appeared to
have been made of Britannia metal, which the prisoner,
was in the habit of procuring in the form of spoons,
purchased ft om time to time, at his request by Cathe.
rine Good. Whilst the officers were securing the pri-
soner, Hinton, who was in the kitchen at the time they
entered, made his escape at the front door, and has not'
since been apprehended. In support of the indictment
he witnesses were, Mr. Powell, jun. the police officers,
and Mary Good. The latter witness underwent a strict
cross•examination, and she stated that she had first be-
come acquainted with the prisoner in the rules of the
King's Bench prison, where she was confined for debt.
She had two natural children living.
Mr. Field and Mr. Jasper Atkinson, of the Mint,
~.roved that the counterfeit shilling found upon the pal.

toner had been made, to the best of that j+►dgment,
from one of the moulds found in the prisoner's apart-
ment; but they could not state when, or under wha;
circtim,tances, it was made. No account was given of
the pence which the prisoner was charged with having
counterfeited ; the shilling appeared to them to have
been comed some considerable time.

The prisoner's counsel, upon this evidence, submitted
that t,,ere was no case to go to the Jury, inasmuch as
there was no proof that the prisones had counterfeited
the shilling found in his possession; for to that charge
must the case he confined.

Mr. Justice GASELZE thought the case was certainly
very slight, and put it to the Counsel for the Crown
whether they should press the Indictment for coining.
Mr. Sergeant ONSLOW, yielding to the intimation from
the Court, said he certainly should not press the case.
The Jury, therefore, under the directions of the
Learned Judge, returned a verdict of Not Guilty, with-
out calling upon the prisoner for bis defence.
The prisoner had been arraigned upon a second in-
dictment, charging him with a capital offence, in having
in his possession implements of coining. To this indict-
ment he had pleaded not guilty ; but now, after com-
municating with his Counsel, who had spoken with the
Counsel for the Crown, he desired permission to retract
that plea, and plead guilty, upon a distinct understand-
ing that the extremity of the law would not be carried
into effect. The Learned Judge yielded to this applica•
tion, and he pleaded guilty.
Sentence of death was passed upon him in the form
prescribed by law ; but he was given to understand that
he must expect to leave the country for the remainder
of his life.

STAFFORD, Mean S.
MALICIOUS PROS[CUTION.—CADDY Sl. BARLOW*

This was an action brought by the next of kin of
Julia Caddy, a child aged eight years, to recover com-
pensation in damages from the defendant, for having
maliciously caused her to be imprisoned in the county
jail, and brought to trial, on a charge of stealing certain
ducks belonging to him.
Mr. CAMPBELL stated the case, and dwelt with great
force and eloquence on the cruelty of subjecting so
young a child to the degradation and debasement of a
prison, even if she were guilty ; but when, as he should
shew, the commitment was from malice, and without
probable cause, how much greater would that cruelty
appear ! The child, at the time of her being sent toj ail
on a charge of felony, was only seven years old—an
age at which it could scarcely be supposed, in most in-
stances, to have attained to that degree of moral per-
ception which it was indispensably necessary it should
be possessed of, in order to give to any act of which it
might be guilty, the deep dye of felony. The Learned
Counsel, after some further remarks, proceeded to
state the case, as afterwards proved by the following
witr.esses:

Mr. Keene, the Deputy Clerk of the Peace, produced
the information sworn by the defendant before the Rev.
Mr. Broughton.
John Caddy, brother to Julia, the plaintiff; said e
was eleven years old ; in October, 1826, his mothe
went out after dinner, leaving him and Julia at home;
they inhabit a cottage near the defendant's farm ; after
dinner he went with his sister and operfed the defend.
ant's pig-stye, and let out the pig upon the common ;
he had been desired to do so by the defendant; his
sister and him then went to the pond on the common,
to catch a duck belonging to their mother, which was
swimming there; he pulled off his clothes, and his sis-
ter pulled off her shoes and stockings, and they then
went into the water ; he caught two ducks, and his sister
caught one; the one his sister caught was their own
one ; they were going to make them fight when the de-
fendant came up, and shouted out; there was another
man with him; the man caught hold of his sister, but
the defendant called out, " Let her go, and catch the
boy, and I'll give you a dinner and a jug of ale." Wit-
ness was alarmed, and expecting to be beat, ran off as
fast as be could, and got home and crept under the
stairs, and hid himself ; the man arrived soon after, and
told witness's mother (who was then at home) that he
wanted witness for catching the ducks ; witness's mother
said she would bring him before Mr. Barlow, and the
man went away ; his mother fetched his clothes and
took him before Mr. Barlow ; Mr. Barlow said, " well,
shall we beat him or roast him ? By " roasting" he
meant fastening witness with a cord to the grate; he
had served him so before ; witness's mother said 44 no,
beat him ;" Mr. Barlow paused a " big while," and then
said " no, take him before a Magistrate. He shall
go before Mr. Broughton." They then went to Mr.
Broughton's, which is a distance •of about two miles;
Mr. Barlow told Mr. Broughton he had caught witness
and a girl stealing his ducks; Mr. Broughton asked
where the girl was? and being told she was not there,
said to Mr. Barlow, " Then ycn must bring her in the
morning, and I'll then examine into the case." Mr. Bar-
low asked for a warrant to break open the house and
take witness's sister, but witness's mother replied, '4 No,
I brought the boy voluntarily, and I'll bring the girl
without a warrant.* No warrant was granted. They
then left the Justice's, and witness was taken by Mr.
Barlow and put to sleep in a barn along with a man
named Gregg; about midnight Mr. Barlow came into the
barn with a lanthorn and a rope, and awoke witnes-, an t
threatened to hang him if he did not confess that his
father set him on to steal the ducks. He teplied,
" We were not going to steal them ; we were going to
fight them." He poked the cord in witness's face, and
witness poked it back; he then left him; the next morn-
ing, witness, his sister, and his mother, and Mr. Barlow,
went before Mr. Broughton; Mr. Barlow and his witness
went in before the Magistrate, leaving him and his
mother and sister in the passage. After a time they
were called in, and Mr. Broughton asked witness what
he had to say ? and he told him they were fighting the
ducks; the Magistrate would not believe him, but said
he should send him and his sister to prison; witness's
mother cried very much; they were sent to prison, and
remained there ten days, when they were brought to
trial and acquitted.
Cross-examined—My fuller's duck was a dark one;
it was not a white duck my sister had got ; when I got
home, our duck was in the garden; it had time to get
home, because I was obliged to go round by the lane;
I never told Peke I did not care a curse what they did
to me.

Mr. J. Peake was in the presence of the Magistrate
when the charge was made. Mr. Barlow said the boy,
assisted by a girl, had been stealing his ducks, and Mr.
Brouglitcn said the case must stand over till the girl was
produced. Mr. Bar low asked for a warrant, but the
boy's mother said it was not necessary, she had brought
the boy forward voluntarily, and she would bring
the girl.
Mr. Flint—ls attorney f ir this prosecution. After
thc action was brought he nut the defendant, and told

bin that he had be.ter give the poor people some com-
pensation, and that if he would bring any te•pectable
friend of his down to witness's house, he would under-
take for the phintiff that the sum that fiend should
'think a fair compensatioft should be accepted, and the
action discontinued. Tf e defendant said he would do
so, and the following Saturday was 61. d. but the de-
fendant did not come, and in consequence witness
wrote to him, but he took no notice of the letter. [Wit-
ness produced a copy of the record of the plaintiff'',
acquittal.]
Cross-examined—The affidavit produced, which states
that the copy of the record was necessat y for the setting
forth the proceedings under a criminal information then
pending against Mr. Broughton and Mr. Bat low, its the
King's Bunch, was written with his knowledge and con.
sent. The proceedings upon that information have been
since abandoned.

Mary Caddy, sister of the plaintiff, deposed. that
when the man came to take her brother prisoner for
catching their ducks, her mother said he had been sent
to fetch the ducks, but that if he had done wrong she
would bring him down to Mr. Barlow's.
John Warner deposed, that a short time previonsly a
goose, belonging to the plaintiff, was killed by the de-
fendant, b: cause it trespassed in his garden, and taken
and flung into the plaintiff's back yard.
James Nicholls proved. that another time the plain-
tiff's boy was charged with theft, because he picked up
some pears that fell from a tree cf the defendant's into
the road.

Mr. TALVOURD, for the defenda-t, said, the proceed-
ings adopted in this case were intended to harass and
ruin his unfortunate client, who had been first dragged
into the King's Bench by a criminal information, and
put to enormous expence, and was now brought hereon
a civil action. His client bad acted from a sincere be-
lief that a felony was intended, and not from any mali.
cious motive, as he should prove by the witnesses he-
should call before them. If, however, he should unfor.
tunately not succeed in making out his defence so clearly
as he expected to do, he trusted the Jury would take
into consideration the cruel manner in which he had
been already harassed, and give to the plaintiff one
farthing only for damages.
Mr. Weaver, clerk to Mr. Seekerson. Attorney for
thedefence, said, that after the order had been obtained
from the Magistrates, permitting the plaintiff to have a
copy of the record of acquittal (he applied to have that
order rescinded), on the ground that it was intended to
be used is this cause, and not for sustaining the crimi-
nal information, but the Magistrates refused; but at the
same time said, that if it were so used, they should con.
sider it as a fraud upon them.
John Barlow, son of the def.tndant, said he was pre-
sent at the examination before the Magistrate ; the boy
was asked what he was going to do with the ducks?
and he was about saying something, when his mother
checked him, and whispered—" say you were going to
fight them e' the boy then said so ; the Magistrate threa-
tened to commit the mother.

Cross-examined—The Magistrate said he wished he
could commit both the father and mother I witness's
father behaved very well to the Caddys, according as
they behaved to him.
Mr. Ward was also present at the examination, and
gave similar evidence.
The Rev. Mr. Broughton remembers the boy being
brought before him; Mr. Barlow said the boy and a
girl hid been stealing his ducks, and he therefore de.
sired the girl might be brought before him also ; Mr.
Barlow applied for a warrant, but the mother said she
would bring her without; the next day they appeared
before him ; the boy was about to tell what he was
going to do with the ducks, but was stopped by his
mother, who said say you were going to fight them;"
witness threatened to commit her, and told her she had
first taught her child to steal, and was now teaching
him to lie ; he did not know the girl was so young when
he desired her to be brought before him.
Cross-examined—Mr. Barlow brought his charge
against both, and persisted in it ; he hid no set uple in
committing them, and should do so again notwithstand-
ing what the King's Bench said about their tender age ;
he never had any of the plaintiff's family brought be-
fore him previously ; he generally takes the evidence in
the presence of the accused, but in this instance the
children were left in the passage; he does not like to
have dirty people come into his room.
Mr. Cnatrazu. replied, and animadverted strongly
on the conduct of the Magistrate.
Mr. Baron VAUGHAN said that great allowances were
to be made for Magistrates, as they performed the very
arduous and important duties without any fee or reward.
He had no doubt Mr. Broughton acted under the im-
pression produced by Mr. Barlow's statement. The
Learned Judge then proceeded to point out the various
prominent parts of the evidence, and expressed an opi-
nion favourable to the plaintiff.
The Jury, after ten minutes consultation, found for
the plaintiff—Damages One Hundred Pciunds.
DENTON D. BAKEWELL.

This was an action by the plaintiff, a maiden Lady
of some fortune, to recover from the defendant, the
keeper of a lunatic asylum. a compensation in damages
fur having assaulted and imprisoned her therein with.
out cause.

After evidence to a considerable length had been
adduced on the part of the plaintiff, all tending to chew
that she was subject to great irritability of mind, the
Medical Gentleman who attended her stated that he
could not positively say she was sane, as her mind was
in such a high degree of excitement and delusion.
Mr. Baron VAUGHAN—Don't you consider those de-
lusions a test of insanity ?
Witaess—l do, my Lord.
Mr. Baron VAUGHAN—It is impossible, after this,
the cause can go on.

Mr. CAMPS LL consented to withdraw the record.
A Magistrate on the Bench, who had performed the
office of visiting Magistrate to the defendant's house for
nine years, spoke in the highest terms of his treatment
of the patients entrusted to his care.

NORWICH, Auu. t
CROWN COURT. TINE LATE RIOTR•

David Sacker, aged 25, and JAM Rix, were charged
upon the oath of William Cook and others, with un-
lawfully, riotously, and tumultuously assembling to-
gether, to the disturbance of the public pee on the
18th of June last, in the parias of Timberhilii Norwich.
Tue prisoners, who are persons of respectability,
pleaded Not Guilty.
The Counsel for the prosecution was proceeding to
state the case, when

, Mr. Sergeant STORKS stated, that an arrangement
might be made, which would save the time of the
Court, and fully satisfy the ends of justice.
A consultation then took place between-the Learned
Counsel and Mr. Baron GARROW ; and at length, by

1

I t

_....iggiddliti 11, soy
' I -

1

.'*.

the advice of their Advocate, Mr. Sergeant Storks, the
prisoners withdrew their former plea, and pleaded,
Guilty.
Mrs Baron Gaanow here addressed the prisoners,
observing, the Learned Counsel had done well in the
course he had adopted for the interests of his clients,
who, by their misconduct, lead been placed ins situa-
tion of great inconvenience. lits Lordship then adverttd
to tie 1 rte disturbance;, and stated that the peace of the
city must be preserved. He trusted that the prisoners
would, on their discharge, faithfully report what had
occurred that day, and that they would, in future, lend
their aid to the pre.ervation of the public peace. The
Learned Judge, after some other remarks to the same
effect, adjudged the prisoners to enter into their own
recognizances in the sum of 1004 each, to appear to
receive judgment when called upon, and to keep the
peace towards all his Majesty's subjects, and upon en
tering into such sureties to be discharged.
U Horns, aged 47, was charged upon the oath of
Edw4rd Wenn, weaver, with haring, on the Bth of June
last, riotously and tumultuously assembled, with other
persons, in the parish of St. Stephen, and assaulting
and beating the same Edward Wenn.
Mr. PaisroN stated to the Jury the facts of the case,
as proved by the evidence of the following witnesses,
Edward Wenn, the prosecutor, stated, that be was a
weaver, residing at Laken Lang, and that on the Sth
of June last, he was standing on the Castle Meadow,
when some persons came up to him, and said he was
the greatest rogue on the face of the earth, and other-
wise abused him. Witness, in consequence, ran off
through Sr. Stephen's-Areet, followed by the mob, from,
whom he took refuge in a shop. Tile mob, however,
followed, tore his coat, waistcoat, shirt, and braces from
Lis person, and stripped him to his waist. They then'
forced him through the streets, beating and kicking
bim to a pump, the prisoner, with another man, hold-
ing him by each arm. When the prisoner arrived at
the pumpi he addressed the mob, saying, " You all know
me ; I am a friend to the weavers, and what punish-
ment shall we inflict upon him r meaning the witness.
Several voices cried out, " Pump upon him," and wit-
ness was immediately pumped upon. He was much
bruised, but not severely hurt ; he afterwards escaped
from them.

Wm. Page deposed to being on the Castle Meadow
on the day in question, when vie assault upon the pro.
secutor was committed. The prisoner took a hand
beam, a roll of wood used in the weaving business,
from witness.

Mr. Richard Cooks corroborated the above testimony.
Mr. COOPER addressed the Jury for the defendant,
who, he said, had been wounded in his Majesty's ser-
vice, and confined in a French prison. He should call
witnesses to prove that the prisoner had endeavoured to
protect the prosecutor.
John Honeygold, James Mann, and Samuel Wine,
weave's, stated, that they saw the prisoner with his arm
extended, addressing the mob, saying, " For Gon's sake
hear what the man has to say," and imploring their
mercy towards the prosecutor, who was then hurried
away by the populace.
Mr. Baron Gnaaow summed up, observing, that it
was for t••e Jury to determine between the two sets of
witness-s, and to which they would give credence.
The Jury, after some consultation, returned a verdict
of Guilty.

YORK, MGM 7.—Before Mr. Baron HOLZACI.
AB3AULT..--PATTISON V. CRAVEN.

Mr. HARDY opened the pleadings—Mr. BROUGHAM
stated the case.

It was an action to recover compensation in da-
mages for a violent assault committed by the defend-
ant, who was Bailiff, under the Duke of Leeds, of the
Manor Court of Conningshury, and the plaintiff was,
on the 11th of May, the day on which the assault was
committed, " bye law" man. The plaintiff was a
weakly man ; the defendant was rot only B.iliff of the
Court, but was also a Sheriff's Officer—an extremely
powerful man, very strong, of 16 stone weight, and
was not unused to the exercise of those weapons which
nature had provided him with. 'file defendant was
standing near the house where a Manor Court had been
held, talking to another person ; the plaintiff approached
them, when the defendant said, " We can do without
thee—get thee about thy business, or I'll kick thee."—
Plaintiff replied, " Thou badst better pay me the six
guineas thou owest me for Burgley's rent." This was
the only provocation. The defendant instantly said,
so I owe thee nought, if I do I'll pay thee ;" he instantly
knocked his pipe out of his mouth, and then knocked
Lim down os a seat : not then content, he struck him
several blows on the face, and cut his cheek. The
plaintiff said, when he got up, " I am no fighter, but 1
will have such satisfaction as the law will give me."
One of the witness's called then came up and told the
defendant it was not fair play to a man as he had done.
The defendant replied, that he would be d—d if he
would not serve him in the same way ; the witness
challenged him, to put his courage to the test, but this
he declined.

Mr. J. WILLIAMS, for the defendant, called two per-
sons, one of them a miller, to prove that the offensive
words were spoken before the pipe was knocked out of
the plaintiff's mouth.
Mr. B ROUGH Asr severely cross-examined the miller,
and drew from him that he had a few words with the
plaintiff, who had not told him that he took much toll,
but he had told him in company that his toll dish was
big enough." The plaintiff was an old friend of his of
sixteen years standing : but while he had been at York,
he had been 1.vin,..; with the defendant.
Mr. Bftoo‘ it A M made a most sarcastic reply, in which
le described the miller as a coxcomb, priggish, canting
creature, who would have said much more if the Court
had.time to hear sermons upon oath.
The Jury consulted for a few minutes, and returned
a verdict for the plaintiff—damages 301.
William Baynes, who was found guilty at the Guild-
hal of the City, for stealing religious books front a per-
toa in York, against whom there were no less than
twelve other indictments for like offences, was sentenced
to be imprisoned fur twelee months in the gaol.
The prisoner is said to be a man of property, enough
to list indevendendy.

v ill not be a single individual left for execution
EXETER, Aims? 7..
Om Sun—Were Lord Chief Justice Bess.
HUNTER V. GREEN.
CHARGE OF COMPOUNDING A FELONY.

This was an action brought for the recovery of a sum
of 51.95. which was paid by the plaintiff to the defen-
dant under the following curious circumstances, as
stated by Mr. Sergeant W 1 LDS in his opening speech.
The plaintiff was in the habit of travelling at stated
periods through this county to sell tea. In the month
of Sep ember lasi he arrived at Axminster, to meet his
custca ets in that neighbourhood, where he had a room

at the Bell Inn. Upon hit arrival there, he inquired!
for his old apartment, and was told that it had been lent
to Mr. Green, for his cloth, who was also a traveller in
that line. The key v ae, however, given to Hunter, who,
with the assistance of a person named Allen, deposited
his tea in this apartment. On the next morning, how-
ever, Green said that Ire observed some of his cloth and
kerseymere had been cut, and it must have been done
by the plaintiff or I is assistant, against whom he took
out a warrant for felony, and had them brought before
a Magistrate, who said that they had better settle it, or
else they rriust be committed, as the defendant swore
positively to the loss of his clith. The plaintiff being
anxious, however innocent, to avoid this extremity,
yielded to the suggestion of the Magistrate, and paid
the money, which he now sought to recover back, it
having been illegally extorted from him.
The first witness w,as James Nowlin the younger,
who stated in evidence that his father kept the Bell Inn,
Axminster, to which place the defendant was in the
habit of coming from Frome to sell his cloth. The
plaintiff also had a licensed room there to sell his tea.
Last September Green came, and got Hunter's room
to deposit his cloth in; but the latter came on the fol-
lowing morning, and got the key to put Iris tea in.—
Afterwards he heard Green say that his cloth was cut
by somebody, and he charged the pljntiff with having
done so, or else his assistant Allen, who had assisted in
depositing the tea. He took out a warrant, and a mes-
senger was sent alter Hunter, who returned imme-
diately. It was thought that no cloth had been stolen.

Cross-examine.l.—Green was always in the habit of
having his cloth deposited in this room.
The constable who apprehended Hooter and Allen,
and brought them before Mr. Tucker, the Magistrate,
said, that Gteea swore nobody had been in the cloth-
room besides these two. His account of the cloth he
lost was very vague, for be could not specify the exact
quantity, and only conjectured the the:t from the cut of
the end piece. Green said nobody would steal less
than the measure of a coat or breeches, and he there-
fore presumed he had lost so much. There was no
cloth produced before the Justice, or found any where,
yet his Worship said the c,t,e was proved, and the par-
ties had better settle the matter quietly, or else he niubt
commit them. In this state they retired, and Hunter
paid Green 3/.95. It was the M tgistrate who suggested
the settlement of the business, and they retired to a
public-house, drank together, shook hands, and patted.
James Nowlan, the elder, merely proved the lending
of the rooms at his inn ; and a tailor named Squire, who
said he had seen the cloth on the day bt fore, and also
on the morning when the charge of felony was brought,
declared that fur a month there had not been, according
to his judgment, any cut off the brown or the Oxford
brown ; but, certainly, for the blue, there did appear to
be a pattern fresh cut in an awkward manner. It was
also proved that Green said, when he 'tent home, he
would compare tl:e measure s•f his cloths, and send an
account of the supposed deficiency, %filch, however,
, had never been done.

The Coutur held that there was clearly no felony
committed; therefore the defendant must repay the
money he had improperly received. if a felony had
been committed, then them ,ney could not be recovered.
Mr. ERSKINE made an ingenious defence, in which
he urged that it was not at the defendant's instance, but
on the Magistrate's suggestion, that the money had been
paid. It was quite clear that he had no intention of
compounding the matter; and thine was not the least
reason for supposing the defendant could have wished
to inflict any malicious juju? y upon the plaintiff.
The Costar said, that the ingenuity of the Learned
!Counsel, which was always exercised with so mach ad-
vantage to his client, could not get rid of the fact that
the defendant had received 3/. 9.. tor aband ming some
vague charge of felony, which did not appear to have
a shadow of foundation, according to the evidence be-
fore them, which motley he must both injustice and l tw
return. Had there been a felony the case would have
been different ; but the only pretence was, the cutting
out a pattern from one of the pieces of cloth, by whom
dose they had no proof; as it a thief would have gone
off with a mere pattern, instead of helping himself to
the whole bale.—Verdict for the plaintiff—Damages,
31.9 i.