Star.
London, England, 1811-03-23 00:00:00

"f!',

WANTS a Place, a Young Man, as Footman, or
Footman and Valet to a Single Gentleman—has no ob-
jection to have the care of a Horse. H.t lived Eve years in his
last place.—Letters, post paid, directed to W. D. No„ 5, Clifford-
street, Bond-street, will be immediately attended to.

PARLI.4MENTARr PROCEEDINGS.

MOM OF LORDS, MARCH ,22.

The Royal Assent was given, by Commission, to the MutittY
Bill, the Royal Marine Mutiny, the British Population, the Silk
Weavers' Wages, and to several Bills of a private or local de-
ecriptlon.
The Lords Commissioners were the Lord Chancellor, the
Duke of Montrose, and the Earl of Aylesford.
The Sugar Drawback and Bounties, the Linen and Yarn trade,
and the Expiring Laws' Bills were read a second time, commit-
ments negatived, and ordered to be read a third time to-morrow.
The Great Snoring (int•losisre) 'Bill was read a second time,
and referred to an Out-dtaors Committee, upon Whic# 'all the
Lords present this Ses.ion were ordered to be etigibli.,
Mr. Newton, from the Post-office, presented Accounts of Ba-
lances and Arreari in the hands of the Deputy Post*Mastereg
and Mr. Peayse, from the Admiralty, an Account of the Increase
and Diminvtio'n of the Salaries and Emolument, oroffices, wish*
were ordered tilt lie en the table.'
Sonic local aisil private Bills were brought upirbin Abe
mons by Sir &Unto Folkes, Sirs. Charter Btinburyo,aper other
Members, and r tad a first time.--Aaijousned till toinoirtiti

'• -
`HOUSE or common
The SPEAKER ' the House having beeri sbmmoned by the
Usher of the Black Rod, went to the House of Peers, to bear the
Commission read, m.ben the Royal Assent was given to certain
public and private Bills, for which see the Lords
Mr. FOSTER brou gist up returns ut the several branches of
the Irish Accounts for the last year, which were ordered to be
laid on the table.

Mr. WHITBREAD postponed his motion respecting a provi-
sion in case of i recurret. :e of a similar misfortune by the King's
illness, from the 27th Ina Int to the ist of April. •
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER gave notice of a
:notion for Monday, for lam to bring in a Bill to amend the
43d of the King.
In a Committee on the Papers respecting the Advance of Money
in Ireland, the Resolutions wtre agreed to, and were ordered to
be reported on Monday.
'the Exchequer Bills Funding Bill wag read a third time and
pa. t d.
The Committee on the Militat y Commitsioncre Bdis Was post-

pined till Monday.
'the Alinual Indunnity Bill era: brought In, read a first time,

and ordered to be . sad a second time on Monday.
MILITIA PINGS.
Mr. BURRELL asked across the House. how the Mil hi*
Fines were appropriated?
Mr. GOLF)IiV RNE rtplied, that they were paid into the Ex-
ohequer, and afterwards applied to the purposes of the Consoli-
dated Fund.
Mr. GEORGE VANSITTART said, that by the Act they
ought to be applied to the purposes of the Militia. He then
moved, that there be laid before the House an account of all the
Fines received and levied in the General and Local Militia far the
yskr.s 1808-9-10, dlstiogidshing each yew', together with an Ac-
count stating how applied.—Ordered.
Mr. ASHLEY COOPER postponed his inodon respecting a
certain portion of thwMilitia Estimates, till Monday.
MARKET MARSOROUGII CANAL BILL.
On the motion "of Lord HENIKER, the Order of
the Day for the second reading of the Market Har-
borough Canal Bill was read.
The Noble Lord, after an animated and lucid de-
scription of the advantage which would be derived
koni the formation of this Canal, moved that it should
be read a second time.
Mr. CARTWRIGHT. strongly opposed the bill.
He. remarked that stich speculations were too often
undertaken without any consideration of the value of
the laud which must inevitably be sacrificed. in the
formation of the plans. He contended, that the ca-
nal% which were already established in the neigh-
bourhood of the line proposed by the bill before the
House, were fully adequate to every purpose to which
a canal could' be converted for the interest of that
district. It would, he said,. be recollected by the'
House, that many petitions had been presented against
but pone in favour of the bill. Under these circum-
stances, and with a full impression of the.ill effects
which would be experienced by the landholders, he
moved thatthe Bill should be read that day its months.
Mr. ORD disapproved of the bill,,from the Ineal-1
'culable injut y certain individuals would sustain from
'the destruction of their With and estates, for which
no adequate compensation could be made. •
Mr. VANSITTART priderstoMPlhat every pre-
:union had been taken in the formation of *chill, to
Tuard the individuals that had been alluded to bl the
ion. Gentleman who had spoken last, from any of
to evils which had been anticipated. With the con;
iction on his mind that this was• actually the case, he
Jcl give his vote in favour of the bill.
Lord A. HAMILTON urged some further argu-
tents in favour of the Lill ; when the question being
.iferously called for, strangers were ordered to;wial-
!raw, and a division took place. The numbers were
s follow
In favour of the bill 48—Against it 92—Majority
igainst.it 44.
The bill was consequently thrown out.
SUPPLY-4M NRACKS-- ESTIMATE% B&C..—NAVY •
ISTIMATES—•-ADMIRALTY.

ishou

Mr. YORKE (the House having gone into Com-
duce) rose to correct an inadvertency which had
:cured in voting the last Navy Estimates. The
ommittee would recollect his having then stated the
zw and improved form in which the Estimates was
en to be presented—the Navy Ordinaries were then
ivjded by himrin:o three heads : one of these had
.to omitted I and he had now to move, that a sum,
►t exceeding £1,157,751 for the Ordinaries of the
Judinz the half-pay, &c. The Resolution

11 in poi

justice, to the most

complained that the proceeds of the six ships taken in
the battle of Camperdown remain yet undistributed;
of these there was but one respecting which proceedings
had been had; the claimants were various, living in dif-
ferent parts of the world, and the claimshad been put in
at different times. ' In 1799 the capture took place,
and final adjudications were made on the 13th May,
1801. Upon this question there had been a strong di.
versity of opinion,,antl this diversity had been expres-

__pt
sed cn several occasions with more than ordinary
-th _ _

warmth. At length the parties made the proper re-
ference, and appealed to the Courts of Admiralty.—
The cause came on to be heard on the 12th July,
1805, when the Court delivered its opinion, but de.
ferred pronouncing its judgment. If the circumstan-
ces which formed the grounds of this postponement
were known, instead of the indulgence, he would in-
vite the severest judgment of the House. Which ever
_way the Court had decided, discontent and complaint
would have followed from one of the parties. No
formal decision was therefore made. It was certain
that this arose merely from a regard to the interests of
the claimants, since the agents no more than the
Court had any interest whatever in the delay. The
matter went up in thonatural course to the Lords
Commissioners of Appeal, where, he was sorry to say,
it remained six years. • But whatever was the cause
of this, no blame on that account could be imputable
to the Admiralty Court, which had of late years been
subjected to every species of unfounded accusation.—
Charges of the most vague description had been made
and discussed in almost all the coffee-houses and ale-
houses in London, by one Noble Lord, who was
now, he trusted, better employed in the defence of
his country, to which he had already so meritoriously
contributed. It ought to be known, however, that
the Court of Admiralty was no more answerable for
any delay, or proceedings of any kind, in the Court
of the Lords Commissioners, than the Court of King's
Bench for any thing done upon matter carried by
writ of error before she House of Lords. Having,
however, so far exonerated his own Court, he would
likewise add, that the Court of Appeal could not be
justly accused of any improper delay. Such insinua-
tions uniformly proceeded from men ignorant of the
peculiar nature of its jurisdiction, and of the princi-
ples which governed Courts of Civil Law. Within
the last few years, owing to the new And changing
relations of foreign states, more questions had arisen
for adjudication than had been decided for a century.
(Hear, hear.) The Court of Appeal was composed
of individuals high in rank, and Members of his Ma-
jesty's Privy Council—persons who received notonsi-
deration fOr their trouble—no return besides the cla-
morous censure which was so often and so unfairly
bestowed on them. The tact was, that necessary wit-
re sses were of Left at a great distance, and their exa-
minations were often taken in very remote places, at
she instance.of the agents. There was a great error
in supposing that the rules of Civil Law could be as-
similated to the principles of municipal jurisdictions.
In the.preselit extended scale of maritime warfare, It
was impossible to enforce any additional restrictions
iii point of time. Twelve months had been found the
shortest period within which the litigations could
Froceed to distribution. These were considerations
that should have been well weighed before char

.ages
were made before the Legislature, and echoed through
the country. He bad deerned.it necessary to give
this explanation of the proceedings of a Court which
bad to decide between, suitors of very opposite charac.
tern, between thole gallant men to whom every thing
was due, but whose lively passions might be roused by
uncontradicted statements, that they were unworthily
treated, and on the other hand, foreigners, to whose
claim* he need not attempt to convince the House,
were entitled, botl, ' licy and

avY, jut ..8 ..._ .titicu,
aving been put, . . I impartial hearing.
' Sir WILLIAM SCOTTtose, and, adverting to I Mr. ROSE vindicated the conduct of the Couit of
complaint which had • been made on the former; Admiralty, and thlught that the darerent parties
ight, when the Navy Estimate; were under their 1- ought to be muck obliged to the Learned Judge fur
msicleration, hi said he regretted that, as that- com- I; delaying his judgment till the decision in the Court
aint was directed against the Admiralty Court, ! of Appeals had taken place. lie did not believe that
..? hfmself had not been present., to hear and meet it,: there was any country in. the whole world where bu.
might be said, .tha; he ought to have been in his I sipess was carried on with.mare purity and more dbl.!
lace to, answer any such objections : but lie really patch than in this country, and particularly in the
ul4 not foresee that his conduct could be br6ight l Court referred to. - He here entered into the details
question in a discussion on the Navy 4stisrates,;l4,Bf.*cause which had been selected for anlmadrier,
everAeltadnoright to con, pll in of th is,he cianteliglett...filinsi:aql .dwelt upon the, .iWegritY of the Court :Dif
he had a right tQ complain of the imespectillitlqsstrlTO Appgals.. Of the proeeedinge of that coustlst
the attack, Because hts had always understAM tifti44;reralits repori :ode court 'of 44.Wrakzoiii
lin onl;age of that House, when one Hottotsiabk,J9r. tin trutho4lr .stattesttetlt•'he tabMirifeetiliir
• • . - . , • •• ....- - ' • -..,

~y

RibHonourable Frien& who sat beside him. He
confeslell he felt much anxiety in repelling any insi-
nuation thrown out against the adjudication of causes
in which the navy were interested. Gentlemen ought.
rendek to be very cautious bow they made those charges ;
the cir- because if the seaman once got it into his head, or read
Tected -any statement made to that effect, there could be no
all its possibility of persuading him to the contrary. :Fir.
The himself he could say, that he paid every attention to
rhich the claims which had been_made on him in an ()racial
- ago, 1,. _ 4 pro- capacity; and he coulefely say, that no seaman,
ceeds had not yet been disposed of, and that thibdeJ or wife, or child, or wiuow of a seaman, had ever ad-'
lay was owing to the Court of Adrniiiky. the dressed to him a letter, to which they did not receive
Honourable Baronet who had preferryl.this-eharge, an immediate answer from himself.
drew this inference merely from a cor4arison of the a Sir C. POLE observed, that he had not attached
time of the capture with the present alai, fig • mialarne to the Right Hon. Gentleman indivi-
fallen into an error. For instance, this ver Ur! on the contrary, he had given hi; warm
(Sir W.) had sat for four or five hours in the mendation to the mode in which the lee,;n2ss of
of Admiralty, upon a case which originated six years hg' Admiralty Office had been lately conducted. He
ago ; but then it had not been entered into the Court had certainly at ple same time expressed his regret
of Admiralty till a year ago • besides, there were va- and the aebrys in the Courts of Admiralty had stlil
rious causes which might produce delay : the parties enntinued without remedy or alteration. Was he to
may be more anxious to harass one another, by liti- be debarred from declaring his sentiments by the ab-
gations, than to make good their respective claims.—isence of the. Right Hon. Gentleman, or was he to he
It was to be recollected also who were the suitors in compelled to communicate to him his intention when-
that Court—they were either, on the one hand, men ever he entertained any, of making such remarks as
actively employed abroad, in the public service of hieduty as a Member of that House might induce'
their country, or, on the other baud, they were mu- him to make, because the Right Hon. Gentleman
chants living in-very remote countries; and when the might possibly conceive himself to be personallv in-
parties were thus circumstanced, summary 'dispatch terested,? He had talked of the constitution of Tunis-
could not be always expected ; the witnesses, too, and Algiers, and there was perhaps, more resemblance
were often beyond sea, and the cause was often ob- between them and the proceedings of the Admiralty
liged to be stayed till their return, and where the pct. Court than he would-be very willing to acknowledge.'
tick_ were foreign merchants, the present circumstances The Right Hon. .Gentleman had stated, that ships.
of tick_
would explain the difficulty of communica- brought in by i blockading squadron in 179 t, had
dort with them. He was aware that dispatch was to been condemned in the same year, but that they were
be wished for, but then it must be dispatch consis- afterwards tried before the Court of Appeal, where the
tent with justice. There was no complaint of want delay arose. Was he not one of the Commissioners
of dispatch at Tunis or Algiers, or in .F`rance, but the of that Court himself ? What stronger case could
Court of Admiralty in this country did not sit for the be made out to justify his former observations, than
purpose of condemning only, it sat to check spolia. the statement that 9000 cases were in the register of
tion, and controul the hostilities of war by keeping arrears, waiting for decision ? The Right Hon. Gen-
them within the rights of nations. With respect to tleman (Sir W. Scott) had gone from the noith to
the complaint of the Honourable Baronet, he had the south pole, in, order to find apologies for the gla.
_ .

ring instance of ships taken in 1799, not a sixpence
of the value of which had been received by the cap-
tors in 1811.
The Treasurer of the Navy had stated that abuses
had been committed in 9000 cases, a scene of pilfer-
ing and cheating such as he had never heard of. It
was a cruel hardship on the sailor, and a most im-
politic circumstance, that the soldier should be able
tt, say to a seaman," d—mme, I have got my prize

money, and you have not got yours." He conceived
• his di • these thi the Hi how

it his duty to state iings to , _ douse,
ever he might be opposed by the splendid talents of
the Learned Judge and his friends. It was perfectly
parliamentary to do so, he apprehended, without con-
sulting the Learned Judge or any other. At the end
of twelve years these poor men had not got their prize-
money. Indeed, many of those interested were now
no more. Lord Duncan, Sir A. Dixon, and several
more were gone. He insisted, that in this case there
had been both delay and abuse.
Mr. ROSE denied that he had mentioned' 9000
cases of abuse. He had stated that this number ON ,
cases had been registered by him—that 600 had been
carefully investigated, and that some abuses hailbeeni
discovered; but none had been attributable to .hel
Admiralty Court. It was impossible forthat Court
to drag parties forward against their will. . In the
' whole of the cases which he had examined, there was'
not an instance in which blame was attributable to'
any Officer of the Admiralty Court, much less to thel
! JUdge. The Proctor had not been in any way blame-
able. The vessels had been condemned the sacred
year they were brought before the Ciant ; and the
oniy ground of delay was, the fresh claims by Offieent
tof the Navy, which rendered it impossiMe to procure
I the decision of the Court of Appal sooner. Of all
!the Courts in the world of a similar description, the
Court of Admiralty here was the most expeditious;
I.and its decisions were not only just, but had excited
the admiration of the whole world.
Sir C. POLE said,, he had admitted that the sltipe
had been condemned in 1799, but still the fact was
undeniable, that, to this day, the seamen had not got
their money. .
1 Mr. STEPHEN said, that when he considered the
nature and tendency of the disctbsion that had taken
place, and reflected, (to use the Hon. Baronet's own.
' words) that it might produce discontent and riot, and
was calculated, as he had strongly observed, to blotii I
the world into a flame ; he could not resist the incli-
nation to !hake a few observations which came withie
his own personal knowledge. Atter his Right lion.
and Learned Friend bad expressed himself so cooly,
dispassionately, and clearly, he did expect that the
individual who made the charge would have been the
first tddisown it. The Hon. Baronet had maintained
that he did not feel himself bound in parliamentary
duty, to state his intention of bringing forward suth
a charge.; but whether, in strictparliarnentary pro-
priety be was bound to do so or not, undoubtedly the
consideration of the consequences, which he seemed
to appreciate so justly, ought to have induced him to.
inquire Into the facts before be stated them, and to
have ascertained the truth of his case before he re-
solved to make it public. What surprised him Most
however was, the hardihood with which the charge
was renewed, even after the explanation.. The Ho.

nouraMpjicember then went over the same ground
which the Hon. Baronet (Sir W. Scott) had already
stated in his defence. Having accounted for the delay
in the Court df Admiralty, he next came to that in the
Court of Appeals, to which he could speak from his
own personalexperience; and which, like that in the Ad-
miralty Court, was not the act of the Court, but of the
parties. Thecause was decided in six ruonthsafter it was
put dowt► in the list. If there were any impropriety in
dela• lor- h; the li that

_:ying so long to have it pi _ tu the list, .uak
impropriety attached to himself (Mr. Stephen) and
the late Dr. Liwrence. The reason ot. their conduct
was, that they did not think the case in a state to de.
mand a decision. This difficulty W 45 chiefly caused
by a very difficult question, which was, Whether the
vessels were in sight at the time ?. The evidence upon
this subject was necessarily of a difficult and dilatory
nature ; and the delay, though considered by the gal-
lant Admiral in so dttferent a light, was adopted for
the good of the parties to which it ultimately tended.
\stett was, * charge which this Right Honourable
lAtedLearned Ftieqd,had so vitoupbantly defeated.
liThett was iiaOtlier Tact that should not be forgotten
°RI, teqvatablir;the decision of the Superior
!hie+Wbottne4"stiettfriend gave his dcs

alon‘; r that he aveiled himself of the first optcnl
nity. He (Mr Stephen) acquitted the Ham Baronet
of any personal hostility towards the Judge of ow
Admiralty Court ; but be could net help obserrira
that he chewed a good died of prejudice in his
duet. He bad allowed the greatest praise to el..
Treasurer of the Navy for the activity he laid sham.
Pat he ought tOTave-recollected, that much was d,
to his Host. and Learned- Friend. With respect ta
the complaint of delay, the Court of Admit,
'could not act ev tf.zio ; the parties should come 4efe:a.
it if they' wanted jttstice, for they could rot be drag.
ged into Court against their will to make their J.
mands. He concluded with deprecating the raslntesg
of bringing forward such chargo. arid expressing an
opinion that the gallant Admiral inft-lit do more mi;..
chief by such proceedings than would ite counterba.
lanced by any effects which his naval taleerfa great
as they were, could produce.
Mr. FREEMANTI-E declared that the exriana.
don of the Right Honourable and Learned Jut4g..-
fippearcd to him completely satisfactory. Delay was
not always abuse. It might be necessary to justice,
as in this case. He (I...fended the 'character of the
• King's Proctor, who, he was sure, was utterly inca-
pahk of acting improperly.
• Mr. G. JOHNSTONE said that the Honourable
Admiral had do/tells duty in mentioning this su'uject.
The fact, that the money had been unpaid for twelve
years, was a strong prima facie case ; andahough the
matter had been, in this instance, explained. yet these
discussions always did good. Nut •a fain(' the int.
piovements which others had takenic-rediefor, wen:,
perhaps, the effect of the Hon'airal.ile • Admital's
statements in that House. The C•airt App_ :1
certainly requited some alteration. A: onetime there
were 200 causes lying over, many of them 'more than
three years standing. The neutrals gro tiled Uri=
this delay. Of seven millions of prize money which
were taken in 1793, three millions were found to be
wrongfully taken from America, Denmark and Swe-
den. The Court of Appeal should be canstituted like
other Courts; it should not depend upcn the creme-
nience or the engagements of the Judges, whether
they are to attend ; but the Court should be open at
all times to suitors. He admitted, however, that the
arrears were now greatly, if not wholly reduced.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
said, the Hon. Member who had just sat down, had
told them that the Court of Appeal required reform,
and yet, he also told them what certainly redounded
not a little to the honour of that Court, that in a time
of war, when additional causes were perpetually flow.
ing in, the number of arrears had been reduced. It was
proper to state what was the fact. The arrears were
so far reduced that at present not more than twenty.
five causes were in the Court, which was, properly
speaking, no arrear at all. The grievances which
he states neutrals to labour under no longer exist, and
directly the reverse was the fact. In attempting,
therefore, to reform a Court that had had the vigour
to wipe away so great an arrear, they might alter,
but could hardly amend it. It seemed rather strange
to him that the Hon. Gentleman should think tail
accusation honourable to the gallant Admiral, and
that it.was prima facie requisite.. Perhaps it siaml.l
.bavelpoked as well had the gallant Admiral Made
stand prelious inquiry before bringing such a charge ;
ho'wever, what astonished him was, that after ail the
*-explanation which was given, and certainly most sa-
tisfactory explanation to the mind of every man who
heard it, the gallant Admiral should still repeat his
charge, and complain of an abusive delay. He ex-
pected from that gallant Admiral that, after hearing
that explanation, he would express his conviction and
his regret at having made the charge, not so much
on' account of his Right Hon. Friend (Sir W. Scott)
whose character could not be affected by it, but for
the sake of 140,000 men, on whose minds the most
dangerous impressions might be produced by it, and
who ought to be the objects of all the attention and
all the consideration of the country whom they serve.

Mr. GEORGE JOHNSTONt explained.
Sir FRANCIS BURDETT said, that they had
heard from the Treasurer of the Navy of the existence
of abuses, for the detection of which that. Gentleman
very deservedly took credit.. Whatever might be doe
to the Treasurer of the Navy and to the Right Hen.
Judge for the measures of reform introduced by them,
he had no doubt that much also was due to the Gal-
lant Admiral who on former ecca.:ions hai frequently
brought these subjects before the House. It would
not be easy perhaps to persuade Gentlemen of the
learned professions, and particularly the Learned Mas-
ter of Chancery, of the evils of delay. Thought these
Gentlemen may panegyrise one another, as was quite
common on occasions like the present, though the
commendation might be deserved, this was altogether
beside the question. What was it to the gentlemen
of the navy or seamen, that the Judge cf the /Um:-
ratty was' possessed of so great ability and was tree
from blame, when they were, notwithstanding. op-
pressed with a ruinous delay. Fur the delay of 12
years perhaps nobody was to blame, and the Ho-
nourable Baronet imputed no blame to any one. The
country was, however, greatly indebted to persons
who, like the Honourable Baronet, exposed them-
selves to obloquy by bringing forward grievances.—
Whether these grievances were real or imaginary, it
was generally seen that some amelioration was the re-
sult of the inquiry, whoever might afterwards take
credit for that amelioration. The Right Honourable
Gentleman and the Treasurer of the Navy were there-
fore, in his opinion, much indebted to the Gallant
Admiral, who brought forward, from time to time,
these charges ; and its his opinion he ought not to have
been the subject of so much hostile animadversion.
Mr. CROKER said it was not singular that the
Honourable Baronet who prides and piques himself
on standing alone in his opinions, should congratu-
late the Gallant Admiral, but what was singular was,
that after hearing such satisfactory explanation as
had been given that night, he should continue to re-
peat:the charges. It was not difficult, to be sure, to
repeat at the-end of the-evening what had been said
in the beginning, but what was strange was that, at
tke end, he should continue to repeat what had been
ten times „refuted, and•should omit recry word of that
explanatitin. .
.Mr. WHITBREAD said that the Honourable
Gentleman who had just sat down had told than
that it was easy to-yeptat at the end or the evolsi.l*
what had bees. Said to tLe beginning ; • but be kid
woe strewn thenk,tbut it .was difficult for lint to re-
peat justly what had been said itt the itd. He
• • . • r _

•
• .
. .
. •
•
•
t
ql"."*"'"••••••••••''''''""'"'"""" i Gentleman preferred a complaint against apathy, to I
, . CITY DISPENSARY, ! givethatotherpreviousnoticeofsuch hisintention. If,in c
f
GROCER'S-HALL-COURT, POULTRY. i general, such notice was necessary, it waspartictilarly n
AVACANCY having takes place in the Office of Iso lii this case, on account of the number and variety ii
PIVSICIAN to this institution in consequence of the Re. lof the causes tried in--his Court, which would rendet t
signation of Dr. lIERDMAN, any Gentleman desirous of he. it impossible for him to earry in his head all the cir- l
coming a Candidate, is requested to produce his Tertimonahl cumstances of each case, so as upon an unexpected -a
r .re the Monthly Committee on Wednesday, the 3d of AprilI reference to any one, to he able to recollect all its c
next, at Six o'clock in the evening, precisely.
Further particulars may be karst en application to the Seem_ trearings and distinguishing circumstances. The I
tary, Mr. A. E. Tv RNBVI.L,Bolt.Court, Fret-Street; or at . the coMplaint he alluded to was that of six captures which t
Dispensary, in Grocer's-Hall-Court. had been made several years ago, in 1799,—the pro- c