Star.
London, England, 1811-05-25 00:00:00

LAW INTE.LLIGLIVCE.

COURT OP XING'S PINCH, MAY 24.
Mt F. DURIATT V. TUE SERJEANT AT ARMS, AND
CONSTADLL OIY THE TOWU.
Mr. -Serjeant SIIRPHfRD being informed by the
• Cpurt that they should be ready to hear any motion
of his before proceeding to pass judgment on a variety
of defendants who were iii waiting to receive the
judgment of the Court,
The Learned Serjeant said, that he attended their
Lordstrips tor the purpose of requesting that they
would have the goodness to name some day in the
'text term for the trials at Bar between Sir F. Bar-
&kr and Mr Colona% and between Sir F. Burdett
land Earl Moira. It might lr proper for him to
itare, that these two. cases stood in somewhat LW-
inrent situations. The action against Mr. Cole-
an had been posiponed only till after the argument
in the demurrer should be disposed of, while the ac-
tion against Eirl Moira had been postponed on ac-
count of the absence of a material witness. Mr. Cole-
man,
,the person whO had eileented the warrant, in
Virttie of which the defendant' Earl Moira, had re-
iiiVed the person of Sir F. Burdett into custody,
being at present serving in the. British Army in Spain
rid Portugal. 1-le had slated this, because the de-
' fend.inesgounsel might prdbably make a distinction
""between the two cases:. As to the former, he presu:
tlie're could he no cause allealfed on the other.
side why it sliGuld not come on. 7he Court had al
ready given judgment in the demurrer; the reason
,for postponing the former case, therefore, was at an
Old, and he understood that the Court had agreed to
d'ay for thii purpose in the next Term,
though that was a proceeding not exactly in course.'
Lbrd Etutanonotkt, after consulting with the
Other Judges, said the two Trials at Bar must both
. stand for •one day ; for it was utterly impossible to
devote two days in Term to the trying of them.-
- The most convenient day Would be the fifth day in
Teina, being Wednesday the I9th June, if the Attor-
neyrGeneril saw no inconvenience in that day.
The Arroxwer-GettariNo answered, that he was
not aware of kny inconven*nce in fixing that as the
day. The trials were accordingly fixed for Wednes-
day, 19th June.
THE KING v. DRAEAEH. _ _

The defendant now received the judgment of the
Coin fur the libel in the Stamford &Ws, on the sub:
ject okuilitery punishment by floggittg. Mr: Justice
GROSE, in passing it, observed, that few publications
were calculated to do 'mare mischief than that of
which the defendant had been found guilty as a libel,
by discouraging the reernitinent of our army, and ren-
doing those who had entered the service dissatisfied
with their situations. The Court had read with sur-
prise the defendant's affidavit in mitigation of punish-
ment, in which he swore th4t he was grateful to the
Constitution under Which he lived, and aware that
*son thiPreservation of it d'irpended all the blessings
he enjoyed. These feelings were wholly ;net:oxtail:tent
with the present libel. The defendant had also
thought, that by adducing to the Court an instaitie
in which he had sided against the Popular feeling,'he
should be in some degree pardoned on the present
occasion. That was not so. The Court taking all
the circumstances of the defendant's case into then
consideration, did order and adjudge, that for this
offence, he should pay to the King a fine of 4'200,
and be imprisoned in his Majesty's gaol at Lincoln
far the space of 18 calendar months, and find secu-
rity for his good behaviour for three years afterwards,
himself in £4OO, and two sureties in 4200 each.
THE KING v. 4.OLLIER.
John Collier, fcr publishing a libel reflecting on the
Commissioners of Taxes for Manchester, was senten-
ced to be imprisoned twelve calendar months in the
Castle of Lancaster.
THE KiNr; v. WFISB.
Thomas Webb, a paper-maker at Abberiille, in
Serkshire, who had been ccnv;ctcd of forgibg the
name of the of of Excise, on the Wrappers of cer-
tain reams of paper, thereby defrauding the revenue,
was sentenced to be imprisoned in the common gaol
of Reading, for 18 months.
THE KING V. ?EAMES.
Joseph Pearks, an officer of Excise, who had been
found guilty of improperly affixing the stamp of office
on the wrappers of paper which had not paid duty,
was sentenced to be imprisoned fur eighteen months,
in this gaol of Flint.
TILE KING V. WILLIAM ISJIMIONS.
The defendant, A miller, found guilty at tne last
reter Assizes of an assault upon John GilT, was fisted
qv' plods.

/

...

,