Star.
London, England, 1821-08-29 00:00:00

ASSIZES.

CROYDON, AUGUST rt.
Trigdule, J.ohn Casey (aged 15), and Job
Ouington, were severally found Guilty—Death, fur
tittertug forged noses, purporting to be of the Go-
vernor and Company of the Bank of England.
FATAL PUUlLlsll.—Cooper, the gipsy, who killed
O'Leary in combat, surrendered before Nit. Justice
BURROIIGII, to take his trial. After the evidence
produced before the Coroner's Inquisition had been
gone through, the Jury pronounced the prisor.er
Guilty of Manslaughter.
The Judge immediately sentenced him to six
nionthi impraionraer.t in liorsemonger-laae jail.

AUGUST 23.—stuamm.
At eght o'clock this morning Mr. Justice Bun.
aoucAt came into Court, and shortly after

David Thomas v.as put to the bar. The indict.
men: charged him with having, on the 21st of July,
at Lambeth, in the county of Surrey, he .being in-
stigated by malice aforethought, inflicted upon the
belly of ot.e John Mathews a wound with a certain
sliarp instrprneia, by which he languished for thirty-
three hours i.i Guy's Hosiital, and then died.
Mr. Law appeared in behalf of the prosecution,
and called the following evidence:
The first witness examined was Mr. Mengay, a
sargeon belonging to Gay's Hospital ; he deposed that
deceased was brought into the Hospital about six
o'Llock in'the evening. Witness then examined the
wound, and it was about an inch in depth, and in-
flicted on the lower pai t. of the abdomen; the intes-
tines had been injured, and part of them protruded
through the body. The wound, in his opinion, had
been given with a knife, and was what is termed a
ripping wound. Witness was of opinion, that had
skilful and immediate assistance been given, the dan-
ger a the deceased would have been very materially
diminished. At the time he examined the %errand he
considered it dangerous, but did not communicate
his opinion to the patient.
Jeremiah Bryant stated, he was a fellow-workman
with the prisoner and deceased, at Mr. Rutter's mus-
tard-manufactory. Lambeth-butts; recollects the day
named in the indictment ; precisely as the six o'clock
bell was ringing, observed the deceased come from
the manufactory and go towards his own house; hel
was stooping, with his hands placed on the bottom of
his stomach, and aepeared in great agony—(The
further examination of this witness was postponed to
a more advanced stage of the trial).
John Jones was a foreman in the employ of Mr.l
Rutter; on the day of the unfortunate occurrence,
lie saw the prisoner and deceased standing together
in the mill ; they appeared to be talking ; saw a pot of
porter standing, but did not see either of them drink ;11
they were talking across a pair of mill stones situated'
there; should suppose the stones to be about five
feet in diameter ; did not perceive any quarrelling,
nor notice any noise, until he heard Mathews call
via Murder! murder!" On going up stairs into
the finishing-room, the prisoner ran by him ; upon
which witness laid hold of him by the arm, and asked
him what he had done? Prisoner exclaimed—" I.
want my knife; where is my knife?" Another work-
man, named Chappell, at this period, came up stairs,
and laid hold of the prisoner's other arm. Shortly
after, Smith, a constable arrived, when lie was deli-
vered into his custody.
Cross examined on bchayqft he prisoner by Mr. Ax-
insWs—llad known the prisoner for twelve years;.
Was the same countryman as witness (a ‘Velshman);
knew him to be a most kind-hearted humane man ;
hz took a delight in doing acts of kindness. The
mill being at work, occasioned a considerable noise;
that would have prevented his hearing any quarrel-
ling, had there been any taking place; if any push
hard been given to any one, so as to occasion his fall-
ing on the stones, he would run great risk of being
crushed to atoms.
Ile-examined by Mr. Law.—Did not observe any
scuffling; or any other appearance of quarrelling.
John Chappell, the workman above alluded to,
corroborated the statement of Jones; he also bore
testimony to the kind-hearted and humane disposi-
tion, of the prisoner.
William Mathews, a youth about fifteen, son of
the deceased, was at the manufactory on the day of,

the unfortunate occurrence. The prisoner, in the
afternoon, came to me twice, and asked " Where my
father was? he wanted to have some beer." Soon
after, my father came io; when I told him that David
Thomas wanted him. He went down into the mill.
I had occasion to go to see what it was dclock ; my
father was then talking to Mr. Jones. The prisoner
shortly after came in ; he had a pot of porter in his
hand; He asked my father what he had been talking
to Jones about? My father replied, that Mr. Jones
had been talking about cutting throats—(This was
explained to be a bye-term used• amongst those em-
ployed in the manufactory for back-biting).—" Has
he?" replied the prisoner; 66 I understand you have
been cutting my throat for me; Mr. Rutter told me
so yesterday, at dinner time."-0 Did he?" said my
father ; " he is out now, but when he comes in we will
see about it." I then left the prisoner and my father
togethei. At a few-minutes_before six I saw my fa-
ther again ; his hands were placed on the lower part
of hivbelly, and there was the appearance of blood.
Catherine Mathews, the wife of the deceased,
stated her husband to have come to his house, which

is about fifty yards from the manufactory ; he was
wounded in the lower part of his stomach. Mr.
Young, a surgeon, was sent for, who recommended
that her husband should be taken to the hospital,
and he was conveyed there on a shutter ; she had se-
veral conversations with him about what had happened.
Here Mr. ANDREWS took an objection to what the
deceased had stated being given in evidence, as it
was not, the Learned Counsel said, proved at the
time the unfortunate man considered himself dying.

..... _ _
The Learned JUDGE overruled the objection, and
The witness resumed. She believed her husband
to be impressed with the idea that he should not sur-
vive; about two hoUrs before he expired she asked
him if he had quarrelled with David Thomas ? he re-
plied no, unless it was by drinking the King's health
in the morning, when they went to have a pint of
beer before they began work ; the prisoner was in a
great passion at it, and swore Until he foamed at the
mouth. The toast was, " Prosperity to King George
the Fourth, and may he contented be, whether he is
bound or free." He expii el at four o'clock on the
Sunday morning, having a short time previous ex-
pressed his fears he should never see his children again.
The examination of Jeremiah Bryant was now re-
sumed.—lle assisted in conveying the deceased to
the Ilc.spital ; he expressed great reluctance in going,
and said if I,e went to the Hospital he should never
see his wife and children again ; he appeared in great
pain, and frequently ejaculated*“ !oh!" a con-
siderable quantity of blood was on the clothes of the
deceased.

This witness was cross•examincd by Mr. ANDREWS,
and gave similar testimony to that already given as
to the humane disposition of the prisoner.
John Chappell was again called.—He was present
in the public-house ; it was the Coach and Horses,
at Lambeth•bvtts ; he remained with the deceased
and prisoner from sic till eight o'clock ; did not hear
any toast giien,• nor observe the prisoner to be in a
passion ; thinks if the toast had taken place he must
have noticed it. _ _ _

Here the case for the prosecution dosed.
Mr. Justice BURROUGH then addressed the pri-
soner, and told him the. period had now arrived
when, if he had anything to say, lie ,must submit
it to the Jury. tt
Prisoner.—l will leave it entirely to my Counsel.
Mr. ANDREWS then called Mr. Marchant, Mr.
Smith, Mrs. Jeffreys, and several other respectable
inhabitants residing at Lambeth-butts and its neigh-
bourhood, who gave the prisoner a most unexcep-
tionable character for kindness and humanity of dis-
positict ; many of them had known him for twelve,
none less than seven years.
Mr. Justice Buancorm then proceeded to explain
the law as-applicable to the case, stating that a mur-
der
had been committed, and it was for them to ray
if it had been done by the pis-oiler; he considered
himself bound to state to them that the offence could
not be manslaughter, as the evidence had negatived
in the most complete manner the ide.t that had been'
suggested of the parties having had any quarrel at
the intermediate time the unfortunate occurrence
took place; he then recapitulated the evidence, and
The Jury, after about five minutes' consultation,
returned a verdict of—fjuilly of Wilfut Murder,
but recommended him to mercy on account of good
character.
Here the prisoner, whose demeanour during the t rial
had been very calm and collected, became dreadfully
agitated. On Mr. Knape, the Clerk of Arraigns,
putting the usual questions to him, as to anything
he might have to say in the bar of judgmeat, he
exclaimed---,, My Lord, I am innocent as a child
born to-day ; that woman has sworn falsities against
me ; I know nothing about the toast or the accident
at the time it happened." Ilene his utterance failed
him, and he appeared absorbed in the greatest grief.
Mr.Jnstice BURROUGH proceeded to pass the awful
sentence of death, and lamented that in this last
stage of the proceeding the prisoner should manifest
the temper of mind visible in his conduct. No man
could doubt that his was the hand which inflicted the
fatal wound; to deny it, therefore, was preposterous.
llis Lordship never saw a case more clearly made
out. The prisoner must prepare for a speedy death;
and his Lordship conjured him to make the best use
of the few hours left him in this life. The sentence
of the law was then pronounced, and the unhappy
prisoner was ordered fur execution on Thursday.
The prisoner, in a paroxysm of grief exclaimed—
" I am innocent ! innocent !" and was removed from
the Bar. Ile was a well-looking young roan, and
was considerably affected during his trial.
DURHAM, AUGUST 21.
GREGSON AND GREGORY versus ROBSON.

Mr. SCARLETT stated, that the plaintiffs were sur-
geons and apotheciries in Monk-Wearmouth. A
pauper, while employed in conveying an anchor to
a boat, had been thrown into the sea, and most dan-
gerously bruised and hurt. It had been thought
=possible to save his life, but one of the plaintiffs,
who happened to be passing, gave him surgical at- I
tention, and the recovery of the man formed an ex-1
traordinary proof of his humanity and skill. Though I
Mr. Gregory was not surgeon for the parish, yet his I,
attendance in this case was adopted by the Overseer.
The pauper was, after his recovery, sent to his own
parish, which was in Durham. But he had previ-
ously received relief from the defendant, Overseer of
I#olopii-Wearmouth, who had also sent to the plaiatiffs

for their bIU. The bill sent amounted to £27 17s. 611
The defence, he understood, would be, that Mr. Gre-
goryl
was not the _parish doctor. This was admitted.
But the parish doctor had been so far away, that the
man's life would have been lost if the plaintiff had
not attended. Lord Ellenborough had held, in Lamb
and Budd, that if the Overseer see the surgeon at-
tending, and does not say that he will not pay, he is
liable and bound to pay. But Robson, the defendant,
had actually sent in this case for the bill.—Several
witnesses were called on the part of the plaintiffs.
John Crowders, a surgeon, spoke to the reasonable-
ness of the charges.

By Mr. TINDALL—For operations the charge's were
the same to a man of fortune and to a pauper. Al-
lowances were often made, but they rested always in
the breasts of the surgeons. He heard Gregory state
this case to the profession as important, and ask as-
sistance to conduct it, but he did not succeed. He
heard that Gregory had been parish doctor three
years ago.
Mr. BROUGHAM now appealed to his Lordship
upon the law in this case. In the case cited by his
Learned Friend there was this trifling differencethat
the parish doctor had been the person who attended.
Here another person had attended : ir•. him it might
possibly have been an act of charity, and an act of
moral duty ; and probably he might have looked to
Freeman or to Lumsden for remuneration. •

.....
Mr. Justice 110LROYD referred to several cases in.
which a moral obligation to pay had been held to
arise from the knowledge of the Overseers.
Mr. BuouonAm said, that as he had no wish to
waste the time of the Court, he would state what he
was prepared to prove. Ile could prove that Dap-
per was the regular parish doctor, that Gregory knew
this, and that in the case of another panel-, Cire3oty,
when applied to, referred to Mapper as the parish
doctor. Korn these facts, which could be fully pi urea,
he submitted that the inference was, that Gregory in
this instance had expected payment elsewhete, arid
not from the parish.
Mr. Justice HOLROYD.—That would have been a
good defence if Mr. ltob-;on had not adopted the at-
tendance of Mr. Gregory. If there had been no adop-
tion on his part, he would not be liable. But it was
in evidence that he had inquired who attended—that
he had known it was Mr. Gregory—and that he had
desired the bill to be sent to him. This shew•ed that
the Overseer had adopted the act of Mr. Gregory; and
it might be, too, that he had had conversations with
Mr. Gregory on the subject.
Verdict for the plaintiff—Damages £27 I7s. 6d.

CORNWALL, AUGUST 21.

DOE, ON &ENI ISE OF SHERWOOD, QUILT SYMONS, AND

OTHERS, V. PARKER ANT) OTHERS.

A more extraordinary case than this has seldom
occurred. To make it intelligible it is necessary to
travel backwards. In the year 1763 the head of a
most respectable family in this county, of the name
or Symons, whose residence was at Hatt-court, near
Calington, made his will, leaving his estates to his
eldest son William, with remainder to his second son
Nicholas—remainder to his two daughters, Elizabeth
and Mary Anne, (the two defendants in possession),
with renfainsler over to the right heirsof the testator.
The testator died in 1766, when his son ‘Villiam suc-
ceeded him. The second son, Nicholas, was about
this time articled to Mr. Charles RashJeigh, a most
respectable attorney, residing at St. Austle, and had,
during his clerkship, conducted himself with such
propriety, that at the expiration of it arrangements
were forming for a partnership between him and • his
master. Nicholas Symons, however, had unfortu-
nately become attached to a young woman of St. :
Austle, in humble circumstances, and had intended to
marry her; but this being violently opposechby his
family, as well as by Mr. Itashleigh, h.: was induced
to promise he would not so commit himself. In the
latter end of the year 1789., Nicholas Symons went to
London to be admitted an attorney of the Court of
King's Bench, and a solicitor of the Court of Chan-
cery. He was there received with every attention by,
Mr. Rashleigh's brother, and corresponded from time
to time with Mr. Hashleigh himself. But his un-
happy passion still keeping possession of his mind,
and the then supposed melancholy circumstances of
his untimely end, led Mr. ltashleigh to destroy all
his letters except the following :

" December, 1782.

" DrAR Sta—Your favour of the 19th ult. I received in due
time, for which I return you my most, sincere thanks. The
contents I perused with very great attention, and was, as you
may suppose, amazingly hurt on finding that the matter you
alluded to was not settled ; and, my dear Sir, what is still worse,
you will be astonished to hear, is that I cannot by any means
compose myself or get rid of that love or passion, as you may
please to terns it, I professed for the abject, notwithstanding the
interval of time, the distance I am removed from her, and the
advice of my friends and relations. The latter are in possession
of all the facts, and their astonishment and displeasure they have
expressed to me. My situation I cannot expect you or any of
my friends to pity. I have been my own enemy, and have
brought all my misery on myself, and my conduct I am sensible
every person must condemn. My reflections are almost too
great to bear, and grieve me beyond expression, whets I com-
pare my present situation with that of three months since. Then
I anticipated the greatest pleasure, and had nothing in view but
happiness now I have nothing but misery, having already for-
feited the little respect my acquaintance had for me, made the
world entertain the meanest opinion of one, and gained the dis-
pleasure of my friends and relations, all which, 1 am satisfied
from the hints I have received, I have incurred. From these
assertions you will probably suppose that I mean to break the pro-
mises I made you before I quitted St. Austle; but you may rest
assured that I will not, and all I have to hope for is, that satis-
faction may be made to the party injured ; if that is done, it will
in a great degree make my mind more easy, though 1 am con-
vinced-I shall never experience happiness more; but out of re-
spect and gratitude to my relations, I am in duty bound to fulfil
my promise, whatever may be the event.
Now, my dear Sir, believe me when I assert that I am one
of the must miserable beings: what to do, where to go (for
am determined to quit town in a day or two), or what will
become of me I know not. To return to St. Austle, or even
to Cornwall again, I am much afraid I never shall have resolu-
tion to do; and, after what passed, I don't think myself worthy,
nor will itbcpossible, for me to embrace the offer made by
you, and to form that most desirable and honourable connexion
which I flattered myself woultiehave made me happy ; indeed,
every person, from this declaration, will certainly think nag
insane, not to forget all that has passed, and to pursue the path
pointed out to me, but sorry am 'I to say, that I cannot prevail
on myself so to do, and that I should make such an ungrateful
return fur the many favours conferred upon me, and the very
I great friendship I have ever experienced from you which, with
I the many other obligations I am under to you, I shall never
j forget, bur always
.Tytain with a due sense of esteem. All I
have to add e desiring you and Mrs. Rashleigh to
accept my Asia I • ilks 'for the many-favours so undeservedly.
I conferred otni,itie:. . ygood wishes and sincere regard to you
j and your% an. to lasembered to all that think it avort:rs.
their while tif Oter me. Ina week or ten days you may
expect arbegil • 'go tiepune of, dear Sir, your much obliged
" NICLIOLAS SYMONS.'
• and vepilwbfi seilhet,
I From thi recess of this letter, Nicholas Symons

was never heard of more; and h was supposed thin
he had been his own destroyer. But in the early put
of the year 1783, a stranrer appeared in Liverpool,
calling himself Nathaniel Sherwood, who purchased
a chariot and horses, had established'the first public
conveyance in that city. Sherwood succeeded so well
by his attention and civility, that he enlarged his
concern, and set up a diligence from Liverpool to the
Duke of Bridgewater's Canal, near Warrington, and
was getting rapidly forward in life when be was un-
fortunately drowned in the ferry-boat from Liverpool
to Runcorn-gap, in the month of July, 1802. He had
married a servant of the inn where his diligence put
up, and bad several children, the eldest of whom was
the lessor of the plaintiff. In 1805 his widow ntaP
ried a person of the name of More; and about that
time a chest of Sherwood's was looked over, but no
notice was taken of its contents. The lessor of the
had not been so fortunate as his father, but
had become bankrupt under circumstances not very
creditable to him ; and his assignees also laid a a,..;
mise, and now contested Isis rights. In 1817
chest was again examined .by the son and his si,ter,
and among other things were discovered, the adn:i,-
sion of Nicholas Symons, as an Attorney, and his ad-
mission as a Solicitor ; an account between him and
his mother during his minority, and other papers,
which ultimately led to an inquiry, which terminat:ed
in the belief of the identity of Nicholas Symons at..l
Nathaniel Sher.wood ; and in 1819 the present eject-
ment was brought against the defendants, who lrld
been in possession of the property ever • since the
month of May, 1502, when William Symons
Nathaniel Sherwood having been drowned tire
months, subsequently.
To connect Nicholas Symons, who disappeared is
178'2, with Nathaniel Sherwos,d, who die,' in ENO?,
.was apparently no very easy task ; but Mr. itashleigh
and others, who had known Nicholas Symons is
Cornwall, described him as a gentlemanly youag
man, five feet five inches high, dad,: compleziosi,
light hair, with dark thick eye-brows, which gave
him a remarkable appearance: they alsosaoke to his
habit of biting his nails. Several witnesses were tla:a
called, who knew Nathaniel Siserwoot! at Liverpool,
and they gave the same description of him. Bathe
most important piece of evidence was the hand.
writing ; the Cornish witnesses deposing that the
papers produced from Liverpool, as the writing cf
Sherwood, was in fact the writing of Symons, and
the Liverpool witnesses declaring the letter before
given, and other things, to be in the hand-writing cif
Sherwood. One of the witnesses also spoke to the
fondness of Symons for horses.
Mr. Scrjeant YELL, for the defendants, called no
witness, but rested his case upon the improbability of
a man of so delicate a turn of mind as Symons, so
degrading himself as to become a hackney-coach-
man, and to suit himself to that mode of life. lid
also Urged the improbability of the papers in the
chest having so long remained untouched, when they
had been examined in 1805, and Contended that it
was a conspiracy on the part of Sherwood's family,
animadverting
.very strongly-upon the evidence of
Boore, the second.husband.of.Sherw.oad's wife, who.
had successively been 'a-Nlidshiprria76-4 +et:Navy, at .
the head of a press-lang, an upliblgererat
pool, a publican at Bang:Ly, in SuLlk, a fishmon-
ger in Liana:Ude, *Senitiikerds
_again • a ptiblican
Queeta:streess Lincolris aad now residing
'at Ityderisi.the4sle ef- Wight, under the name of
Short -This tatter Circumitiltee Bow accounted for,
Ile had becoiiae security for the aps
rail* of his-son-in-law, who atas indicted with
others for a conspiracy to effect. 'a fraudulent bank-
ruptcy,Thsd that-he was afraid.of the consequences.
Jnstice*Mst irimnied up very strongly in fa*.
your of 'the claims of the plaintiff, in whose favour
the Jury, after a careful examination, of-the several,
writings, returned a verdict. • • ••••
The property thus recovered is. of 'the value 'of
'we've hundred ponufs a-year.

Major-General Sit-Jamr.s LYON, arrived on •
Saturday morning at the •Lieutenant•Governmetit
House,. Portsmouth, to assume-the command.
The naval command .at Cork is, it is said, to be
reduced on .the expiration of •the time for which Ad-
miral Sir Jostas llowr.Ey was appointed, and a
fri-
gate instead of a line-of-battle ship to bear the flag of
the Commander-in-Chief. ;Admiral Lord Cotvittx,
it is added, will be the successor of Sir J. Itowter.
The naval commands at Jamaica and the Leeward'
Islands are to be consolidated, and given to Admiral
Sir CHARLES ItowLEv, at present employed at the
former place; and Admiral FatrtE, at the lacer place,
will be removed to the command at Halifax.
A handsome Monument is to be immediately erected
in Hammersmith Church, to the memory of her late
MAJESTY.