Star.
London, England, 1819-07-08 00:00:00

WISHART V. SIR F. DUNDWIT, DART. AND PLAde.

This action was in-ought reader circumstances Si.
to those detailed in the former case. Mr. Wish-
art, who is well known as having taken an active
part in the Elections for Westminster, for several
years past, had, it appeared, become obnoxious to
the Apple, in conseqtience of the part he took at the
last Election, and the populace proceeded to his
house, in Coventry-street, on the night of the 3d of
,March, and broke his windows. Proof having been
given'of the damage sustained,
Mr. BLACKBURNa addressed the Jury on behalf of
the defendants. He observed, that they were evi-
dently singled out; both of them being very well
known, as defendants in this action, for the purpose
of impressing the Public with a belief that they en-
couraged the riots which took place in Westminster
in Marcia last. The Learned Counsel stated, that he
would- trove, by incontestable evidence, that the
mob who did all tie mischief complained of, was
hired by Mr. Lamb's Committee, to which the plain-
tiff' belonged—and,, if he brought this fact home to
the plaintiff, the Jury mint find' a-verdict for the de-
fendants, since lie who employed a mob' could not
recover any, compensation from the Hundred, it the
persons he had caused to assemble together, commit-
ted depredations on his own property. He then called
Cy; W. Waller, who deposed that he had been em-
ployed in the late Election; by a person of the name
of. Bond, who belonged to the Bow-street.Establishp
meat, to standot the south end of the Hustings, for
the purpose of cheering Mr: Lamb when he addressed
the people. lie was also directed, when Mr. Hob-
'house spoke, to make the most discordant noise pm,
sible. Witness went with- Bond to a public house,
called the Ship, in James-street, Covent-garden, where
he saw a great number of persons, %Oro were em-
,ployed by Bond to attend at the Hustings, for the'
purpose of supporting Mr. Lamb. Witness, however,
did not like the company, amongst whom were
Dolly Smith, Cropley, Randall, Tom Jones, West
Country -Dick, and several other fighting men
'Dolly Smith had a party of men under his orders.
A Man named Birmitaple had thirty-six watermen.
Witness became disgusted with his employment ; in
corsequance,. Bond told him, as he wrote a good
hstielLHO wouliibe usefulin-einaking out lists of the
men employed. Witness did so, and speak to
about 122 men who were employed by Bond. He
was present whet money was paid to the different
leaders. Some had 12 men Tinder their command,
othel's double that ;lumber. On Tuesday; lie 2d of
March, witness went with Bond to Mr ;Lamb's Com-
mittee Room, in Henrietta-street. Bond went there
for the purpose of getting money „to pay the men.—
They saw Captain Prescott, one of the Committee, to
whom Bond said, tlyt as he had engaged the,men
for three days, he could not discharge them at a mo-
crent's notice. Captain Prescott said he would not
give him any more- money, that he had already re-
ceived £24, and his men were worth nothing, for half
a dozen stoat fellows, would beat them aV. Witness'
made out an account of the money paid by Bond to
the men,'Which he saw'delivered to Mr. Holmes.
Oa kis cross-examination, witness said he was em-
ployea at .present to make out tradesmen's accounts.
William Bond, a Bow-street patrole, deposed that
he was unacquainted with Mr. Wishart, and did not
believe he would know him if he Saab him. Was not
present when the Candidates were proposed at the
'last Election. During the Election lie was frequently
at Mr. Lamb's Committee Rom, Henrietta-street.:—
The principal person he taw' *Bretz it Managing,
person, was Mr. Holmes. He was At the Committee
Room on the Saturday of the second week of the
Election. He saw Mr. Holmes and Captain Preitcott
there, but did not laio* any other person. He re-
ceived instructions up stairs, as to what was to be
done on the Monday, by a person who, he was in-
formed, was Mr. Macdonald.

Mr. SCA RLLTT objected to this evidence. The de-
fendant's Counsel ought to connect Mr. Wisbart with
these transactions'. At present two individuals were
introdtietd, who, it "did. not appear, had any -con.
nezion with the present plaintiff.
The Cita? Aroma said, it was very difficult to
prescribe the course a Counsel was to pursue. Muich
must Ise.left to his discretion. This was byt the se-
cond Witness—and he was of opinion that the exami-
nation should be.proceeded
Mr. Scant.arr was convinced that hisloearned
Friend could not, by this witness, corinectMr.Wishart
with the transaction of hiring the mob.
Mr. BLACKBURNE then called Mr. Holmes, who
deposed that he was Secretary to Mr. Longs's central
Committee. He knew •Mr. Wishart: Be very sel-
,dom appeared at the Committee-room, and took no
part in any discussion. Plaintiff was not at the Com-
mittee on the Saturday of the second week of the
election. He was then out of town. Plaintiff mimed
on the Monday, and called on him for the state of
the •poll. He never came there for any purpose, but
to ask the state of the poll. Witness could not say.,
whether he was a Member of the COmmittee urn= .
Mr. Macdonald, M.P. stated, that there wm
Commi;tee appointed to conthict• Mr. Lamb's Elei-
tion ; but that a number °flits friends;cesine forward
to promote his election; that.Mr"• VrishMTNitiyith him-
self, was one of those friends, but tool no put in the
business) merely calling now and then to see thestate
of the poll ; that in consequence of the interruptions
which electors desirous of voting for Mr. Lamb ex-
.perienced in their way to the hustings, from a tumul-
tuous mob, it was thought expedient to employ a

number of s, tt e tr ions ola Consta•
iidet eet •
ble named Cr to keep a passage dear from the
COnyn4tee•room to the.hnstsngs ; that those persons
ware positivelrenjoined to conduct themselves pence-
ably. and not strike any body, unless struck by others,
and that Mr. Wisharr was wholly ignorant of the
fact of such persons having been employed.
Mr. BLACKBURNE said he had no other evidence to
connect the plaintiff with the transactions in question.
Mr. ScaeLerr, in reply, disclaimed, on the part
of the plaintiff, any intention of putting Sir Francis
Burdett An 4 Mr. Place on the record as defendants,
from any improper -motive, or with a vievrto excite
prejudicrb They happened to be selected as respect-
able inlinlitants tt the Hundred. In the course cl
his observations, the Learned Counsel, in alluding to 11
the known anxiety of Sir Francis Burdett, as an ad- I
vocate for Parliamentary Reform, said, he would say
this of the Honourable Baronet, that, in his opinion,
from the mode he had adopted to attain that object,
he was the greatest enemy of Parliamentary Reform.
With respect to the other defendant, he was a tailor
by trade, but he believed him to be also a most re-
spectable matt, and also, he was informed, had :Arai-
' ties and character which would adorn any station of
life. As to the merits of the case, there was not the
slightest evidence to connect the plaintiff with the
nature of the defence set up.
, The Cuter Justice charged the Jury, that the de-
'fence set up, if it had been proved, would have been
a satisfactory answer to this action, but iaasnuic.ll as
it had totally failed, the plaintiff was entitled to a
verdict.—The Jury seemed to be in doubt, and de-
sired to withdraw. _ _

The Curer Justice then entered into more detailed
observations upon the case.
Mr. SCARLETT was heard in continuation of his
previous reply, and at length the Jury interposed,
and said-they were satisfied. Verdict for the plain-
tiff—Damages, £l7 3s. '2d.
Several subsequent actives against the same de-
fendants, all 'founded on the riotous outrages of the
same night, were tried. The same Counsel attended
respectively on each side, and verdicts were found by
.the'Jury for the several plaintiffs, as follow:
Mr. (Y `rill, Mince Regent's Coffee-house, £l3. Ss. 2d.

Mr. Saury, ikitish Coffee-house,Cockspur-street, £9. 13s
Dr. Thomas Harvey Farquhar, Park-street, St. James's-
place, 4'34. 4s. 2d. '
Mr. Davis' St. Atine's Coffee-house, Dean-street, Soho,
£45. Os. ; and
'The Itarl of Safton, Arlington-street, £24. 16s. 2d.
Lord SEFTON and the Hon. Mr. MACDONALD were
in the Court during the whole of the day.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, JULY 7.
LEVY O. TEM SHERIFF, OF j.ONDON.

This was an action against the present Sheriffs for
an illegal entry and trespass. The plaintiff, David
Levy, was the faller of Lewis Levy, one of the parties
concerned with Nioseley Woolfe, and Kinnear, and with
them convicted of the conspiracy, and sentenced to pay
a fine of £5OOO. The Sheriffs obtained a writ of Levari
Facias, and with it proceeded to Lewis Levy's house,
to levy on his goods for the amount of the fine.—
Here they found the plaintiff inspossession, under a
warrant of attorney, which, he sa►d, he had held in
his hands since 1811, at which time it was executed
lby Ins son. He at that time advanced to Lewis Levy
Idle sum of £5OO, to set him going in business, and
took the warrant of attorney as a security, but did
not put it in force till the.late prosecution was insti-
tuted against his son, when he entered into possession
to secure hiniself. The Sheriffs, however, notwith-
standing this representation, proceeded to levy, and
the plaintiff brought the present action. The only
question now was, as to the legality of the warrant,'
and, whether it was a bona fide transaction?.
The Jnry, after retiring for some time, found a
verdict for the defendants.
OLI) BAILEY SESSIONS, *JULY 7.

John Butler was capitally indicted for stealing in
the dwelling-house of the Right Hon. Lord Castle-
reagh, a silver plate, value £4, his property.—Guilty.)
James Roberts, a private in the Coldstream (3d)
Regiment of Guards, was capitally indicted for steal-
ing, in the dwelling-house of .Catherine Henderson
and Elizabeth Alcock, of,llover-street, 1;50, on the
12th of May last, daring an alarm of fire.—The pri-
soner's defence was, that numerous other persons,
private individuals as well as soldiers, were engaged
at the fire, and in removing the property of Mrs. Al-
cock and Mrs. Henderson from the bed-room ; that
the property found upon him was his own, and that
the handkerchief was picked up by him on the foot-
way in Doier-street ; and that having wiped his face
with it, he inadvertently put it into his cap.—Two of
the Serjeants of the Guards gave him a good charac-
ter as to his former honesty, but said he was addicted
to drinking and to using foul.aud unsoldierly lan-
guage.—Mr. Justice BUEROUGH summed up the evi-
dence at great. length, and the Jury found the pri-
soner,--Not