Star.
London, England, 1828-11-04 00:00:00

HUNTING.

The Doke of Bueelenchliotifounds meet on Thursday, at
Leistun and Saturday. at Lauder.
The Marquis of Cl?veland's Fox Hounds to morrow, at Slen.
ingford Park; Friday, at York Gate; and Saturday, at Leming.
Lord Yarborough's Fox Hounds to morrow, at Tho►ntui
College; Friday, at Manton Village; and Saturday, at Fox Dales.
Sir Tatton Sykes's Fox 111,unds to-morrow, at Knapton Planta•
don ; and Friday. at Langton.
The York and Ain't), Fox Hounds on Thursday, at Red House;
and Saturday, at Iluby.
The Lansliton Fox Hounds on Thursday, at Holdforth Bridge;
and Saturday, at Rnibleton.

The Huideinrss Fox Hounds on Thursday, at Rise-; and Satur-
day, at North Dalton.
The Cleveland Fox Hounds on Thursday, at Kilton.
The Hurworth Fax Hounds on Friday, at Entercumnion.
The Northumberland Fox Hounds tomorrow, at Black
Cal er-
too ; and Saturday, at Netberwittuti.
The York City Harriers on FridaT. at Knapton.
The Boroughbridge Harriers on Friday, un the York Road.
The Elton and Cleveland Harrier. on Thursday, at Barwick.
The Morpeth Harriers on Thursday. at Newton.
THR CRAVEN HOUNDS.
_

_
This fine pack commenced ngular hunting- on Tuesday bat.
They threw off at Barton place (Mr. Dundas's), and after drawing
the several coven, found a toe, but could not succeed in ge ling
him away. The fineness of the weather brought out a large field ;
the " Scarlet." mustered largely, and were of course disappointed
in not having a run ; the cattle in the held were of supeiine mettle,
and as mamas as their riders for a *bunter.'

SOUTHAMPTON, Nov. I.bout a fortnight ago,
she London Papers cohtsined an accoost of 4 young
Lady having eloped from her home, with a person in
the situation of a menial servant of a performer at the
Opera. The parties were subsequently traced-to this
town, and on Thursday a Gentleman came down in
pursuit. and with the assistance of Owen, first traced
them to a lodging •house in Butcher-row, and from
thence to another on the Castle-hill, where they were,
on Friday morning, discovered. The young Lady, who
is ander age, was taken from her soi algid husband,
and conveyed to London, by the Times coach, leaving
the sellikruau, who is a Spaniard, to bear his bereave-
mem as well as he could.

Friday last. the stonemasons employed in repairing the
Holy Trinity Church, Hull. when cutting down one of
the jambs of the stone work, belonging to an old wits.
dow, found a bee within au aperture, in the ceistre of a
stone, where it is supposed to have been confined for at
least 500 years. The insect was quite lively ; indeed,
attention was attracted to the stone by its humming, on
a chissel being withdrawn. which had been driven into
the jamb; and it would have taken flight had not one
of the workmen enclosed it in a glass. Alter t .at pi rind
it gradually became more and mute torpid, until S
day eveaibg, when apparently it ceased to exist. The
bee, writhe fragment of the stone in which it was dis-
covered, ire inihe possession of the workmen, by shoal
they have been exhibited to a great number of persons.
The wank in size and shape, would cuntain a small
pear, and there was not the least seam or outlet in the
stone by which air could be admitted.--Hill Advertiser.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
VICE-CIIANCP.I.I.OR'S COURT, Novinisits 3.

3IiGREOOII V. THE EAST INDIA C •SIPANY AND OTHERS

M. HORNS stated, that this was a demurrer to the
plaintiff's bill. That hill was filled for a discovery of
certain documents in the possession of the Ea,t India
Company, in support of his claim in an acti n of law
which he had commenced against the Company, t fr•
cover a large sum of money. under the following cir-
cumstances: In the year 1783. Sir John W'Yhers n, at
that time Governor-General of India, thought it neces-1
slaty, on account of the political intrigues of some of
the Chiefs of the Native Powers, to send confidential
persons to ascertain, if possible, the actual state of feel-
ing towards the Bluish Government; to one of the
most distant of these States the plaintiff's father hod
been sent, and it was the expenses incurred on that em-
bassy that formed the ground of the pretent action.—
Now to this action the defendants had put in a plea of
the general issue, and also that they were not liable, as
the plaintiff was debarred of his claim by the Statute
of Limitations, there having been no application for
more than six years previous to the commencement of
the action. The Learned Counsel contended that this
was a good plea, and as such, an effectual bar to the
action, therefore the granting the prayer of the bill
could not be of any service to the plaintiff.
Mr. Sounas, in support of the bill, complained in
strong language of the manner in which the plaintiff's
claim was always met. The action was commenced in
the year 1823, and had been from time to time put off
by the East India Company putting in different pleas.
He believed this one made a round dozen of them, and
if the Court allowed it, it would amount to a total de-
nial of justice. It was absolutely necessary for the plain•
tiff to obtain an inspection of certain correspondence
between the Governor General and the Court of Direc-
tors, at the tine this claim originated; he could not
sate.y go to trial without, and the only means he had
csi getting that information was by a bill of dittovery.
He therefore tt listed the Court would not think the plea
put in a siifficieht reason to dismiss the bill.
Mr. HORNi replied—The claim had lain dormant for,
near iy forty years, and therefore the Directors, as guar-
dians of a great Company, had only done their duty in
meeting it in the way they had done.
The VICE CHANCELLOR was of opinion that the plea
was good. The bill must therefore be dismissed.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, Nov. 3.
TRIM/Xi Of ROIIIURGH'S WILL.

DODD V. THE EARL Or WINCHILSRA AND OTHERS.

This was an issue directed from the MASTER of the
ROLLS, to ascertain whether John, the late Duke of
Roxburgh, by his will, have a freehold house in St.
James's•square to the plaintiff? The question was—
whether a small portion of the estate of the Duke cf
Roxburgh, consisting of his house in S. Jame:s•squate,
would pass under his will to the plaintiff? It was pre.
• sumed the will was not made 'according to law, and
the question depended upon the Statute of Frauds,
which requires that every will devising real property
shall be signed by the person so devising; it must also
be attested, and subscribed in the presence of the devi-
sor, by three witnesses. There was no doubt the will
was signed by the Duke of Roxburgh, neither was there
any doubt that three persons, namely, Sir Courts Trot-
ter, William Winter, and John Batiste, signed their
names to it as attesting witnesses; but the question
was, whether it was attested in the Presence of the
testator ?

The evidence to prove the facts consisted of deposi-
tions taken on a former occasion, and the evidence of
Sir Coutts Trotter, who was examined in the wit.
nessee box.

J. Tate, the Duke's upholsterer, stated that the late
Duke of Roxburgh died in a room communicating with
another apartment, called the writing room. There
was in the writing room a Pembroke table and a pier
table placed under a large glass, and the latter was in
such a situation that the Duke lying in bed could set
what was done upon it.
The deposition of William Winter, taken in 1807. in
a suit in the Ecclesiastical Court, stated that deponent
saw the Duke write his nanie-to the will, after which
deponent, Sir Coutts Trotter, and Batiste, the Duke s
seri-ant, signed it, upon a table near the bed. The de-
ponent therefore roved that the will was attested in,
the Duke's bed-room.

Batiste's deposition did not speak of the place where
the will was atte►ted, but only said it was in the room
where the Duke died.

Sir Coutis Trotter, one of the attesting witnesses, was
examined. He stated that he remained with the Duke
in the bed-room, whilst Mr. Dundas, Writer to the
Signet in Edinburgh, prepared.the will. The door of
the adjoining room was open, and Mr. Dundas was
writing in that snow. The witness remained two hours,
and Mr. Dundas told him the Duke was ready to exe-
Pte the will. Winter was in the room with him. The
Puke was in bed, and signed his name. The witness
and Winter signed it, but be could nut say whether he,
signed in the bed-room or in the adjoining room. The
impression on his mind was that it was in the adjoining
room. Mr. Dundas was a Writer to the signet, and a
most respectable man.
Mr. Alexander spoke to the long practice of Mr.
Dundas, and his great knowledge of the law.
The &Limon GENERAL (with whom were Mr.
Deouctutss and Sir JOHN STUART), as Coon,el for the
defendants, who are the heirs at law, drew me attention
sof the Jury to the absence of Mr. Dundas, who was
still living. and might have been called to prove whe-
ther the will was attested in a pat titular place. It was
impouible, he said, that the July crud petunie
it was attested in the presence of the testator, ut, ess
the man who prepared the will was called to
Mr. DundaF, who came from Scotland to make toe will,
had dtav:n it up according to the law of Scotland ra-
ther than that of England, and it was evident upon the
face of the instrument, that he was not aware that the
Statute of Frauds required attestation in the presence
of the testator. If the will was attested. as he should
contend it was, in a room where the Duke could nut
see the ceti. mnny, it was null and void.

The SOLICITO-S-GENERAL called no witnesses.

Lind *fEVI.ENDEN left the Jae y to say. taking the
whole uf the evidence into their consideration, whether
it was proved that the witnesses did sign in the Duke's
bed loom, or in such part of the adjoining room that the
Duke might have seen them ? If that was made out to
their satisfaction, the sal was good, and they ought to
find a verdict for the plaintiff.
The Jury retired from the box. and on their return
delivered a verdict fo: the plaintiff, by which they found
. that the will was duly attested. - '
TRH LING V. RALPH PAWL...,
This was an indictment charging the drip:Want with
perjury, in making an affidavit respectingebis transac-
tions with the late John Lambert Beddal4 of Essex, by
whom he was employed as Bailiff, on a ham /ailed the
Justices, near Fiacheafield.

Alteia long invegigitiON the Jury'lound the de-
ifeadant.-A'et Gaily

TH KiNo e.
This was an ind.c,n►ent agaiiivs Wm. Small, a Qnar•
tern►astrr in the Preventive Service, for wdllul and cor•
rupt perjury. The defendant, it appeased, had pre.
fired in information against William Snow, William
Heatherington, and W. Wood, for receiving smuggled
goods. They sacred judgment to go by default, and
...hen called up to receive judgment, they put in several
affidavits in mitigation of punishment, alleging that the
informer Small had incited tl:eni to run goods,hy bribing
them, at the same time assuring them that he would
hold them harmless. This gave rise to a postponement
of the judgment, in order to ailow Small to answer the
allegations of the defendants. He did so, denied baying
ever incited the defendants or any other persons to run
goods, and all the material allegations. The defendant
now by his Counsel raised a point of law which was held
by Lord Ttariausa to be fatal to the indictment, and
the defendant was acquitted.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Nov. 5.
CAZZNOvE AND 07'111111 V. Dk TIIURAY.

The plaintiffs in this case are the agents of Monsieur
De Londre, for the sale of sulphate of quinine in this
country. Defendant had acted as agent to D: Londre
until the latter end of November, 1827, when De
Londre consigned a quantity of sulphate of quinine to
the defendant, of the value of 1,3431. for which he
drew two bills, accepted by the defendant. It was al-
leged on the part of the latter, that he was only to pay
for these acceptances money to the amount of the qui-
nine he held in bis hand. There was not any proof
that the quinine was sold; but the defence was, that
there was no consideration for the acceptances.
The LORD Con., Anima held that an acceptance
could not be set aside by any parel agreement made
at the time of acceptance. It was for the defendant to
prove the sale of the quinine, but he considered him
liable even if he had not converted it into cash.

Verdict for the plaintiff—ainsages, 1,345 i.
ARCHES COURT. Nov. 5.

This being the first day of Michaelmas Term in the
Ecclesiastical Court, Sir J. Nictiot.L. the Judge of the
Amlies C. urt, with the Advocate►, Proctors, and other
()dicers of the C.urt, assembled at ten o'cltick in the
ditto gto ,m, where prajets were lead by the Rev. Mr.
HALL. The Court was then opened with the usual
formalities.

THE COUNTESS OP PORTSMOUTH V. THE EARL OP PORTS•

MOUTH, WED IN THE NAME OF HIS COMMITTEE.

The Proctor for the Earl of Portsmouth stated, that
the Appeal entered in this cue in the Digit Court of
Delegates had been AbrnJoned, and the prohibition we.
related. He the:elute prayed the Court to pr eceed
with the cause according t) the tenor of its former acts.
The Coma otdeied the can e to proceed.
BROWN V. BROWN.

This was a suit tOr a divot ce, by reason of adultery
and cruelty, instituted by the 'if:. The h istnimi put
in a negative allegation, wiring that the mart cage was
invalid, as it had never been con utninared. The Court
decided that this allegation was unfounded, and or-
deli d that the suit sioruid proceed, bui at the same time
earnistly recommended a reconciliat on between the
parties.
Dr. LUSHINGTON now moved the Court to extend the
term fur proving the cruelty and adultery. In coin•
pliance with tt,e wishes of the Court, a negociation was
carried on, with a view to a reconcili tion, and it had
only broken off within a few weeks, by Mr. Brown's
declaring that he would enter into no compromise. The
Learned Counsel also moved that a sum should be
allotted on a:count of alimony.
Sir J. NICHOLL extended the time for proving to the
first day of next Term, and intimated his intention of
allotting a sum for alimony next Court Diy, if some
allegation was not put in by Mr. Brown, to contradict
the statement made on the other side relative to his cir-
cumstances.

SURREY SESSIONS, Nov. S.
—...--
The Adjourned Sessions commenced this morning
before RANDALL JACKSON, Esq. A great many Ma
gistrates and Gentlemen were present, among whom
we observed C. N. Pallmer, Esq. M.P. Robert Hedger,
Esq. Chairman of the Quarter Sessions, -- Barnard,
Esq. Rev. Mr. Onslow, kc.