Star.
London, England, 1817-05-23 00:00:00

LAW MiLLIGENCE.

DEANERY OF 51' PAUL'd, DOC I'OR'S COMMONS.
TM's• as a suit et Divorce instituted by William
An nous Dolaby it, Esq. lateCap:aiti in his Majesty's
Fifth Dragoons, g.iiiist Maria rhillippa Dobbyn his
wift, for adultery.
The i.fficlavits read were to the fallowing effect :
Mrs. Buil, at whose houae Dobbytt came to
lodse in ISIS, (after her husband :5 coiittiog her to
j i;n hie regiment in Spain), deposed, that at Nu. 11,
:it. James's-place, Hampstead.road, she hit her first
llocr, c insisting of one sitting, one bed.room. and a
room for • savant and child, to the articulate Mrs.
Dobbyn, party in the carte ; that shortly after she
came there she was visited by a' Mr. MrCielland, a
man of colour, with whom she would frequently be
for hours together so the tatting mom, the door of
which was made fast, and the witidoveshurrers closed.
She called Mr. WClell sad her 66 dear Cohn," and he
called her his e. dear Maria.'' When Mr. M•Clelland
was a prisoner for debt in the Kung's Bench, she
want to see him, and was absent for two days, c
rn-
lessing she had been with him. He was seen by de-
ponent sitting with I.er on the sopha, with his arm
round her neck, his head leaning on her shoalder, and
r arm round his neck. The deponent remonstrated
JI
" how shucking such conduct in a married woman,"
Mrs. Dobbyn made answer " ir .vias impossible she
could eve without the emptily of gentlemen, and if.
her husband did not like it he should re main with
her." An old gentleman ot the name of Twiss visited
her. she received him in her stays.and flanitel ()mi.
coat. Deponent detected them .n the b:d.room to-
gether, she lacing her stays whilst this gentleman, SO
years of age, st..oel by her bed-side. She was also
visited by the son and n= phew of Mr. Twiss, one of
whom was seen to kiss her, and used to roll upon the
sofa with her. The old gentleman desired her child
ziiight be sent out of the room, saying he 6, would
rather have twenty muukies than one child." Strange
men also visited her, and with all of whom deponent
%rally believed adulterous intercourse took plaice.—
Her husband left her £l5O per annum, in the hands
of Messrs. Coutts and Co. which was paid monthly.
Deponent's house. was threatened to be indicted on
account of Mr.. Dobbyn's conduct. She took away
the furniture, and by that means Mrs. Dobbyn quit.
ted her lodgings.
SnpSna Duhurst, daughter of Mrs. lint!, like.
wise proved certain facts, in continuation of her Ana.
thee. testimony. It. appeared, however, after the
discovery was made to the husband, that he treated
this story with contempt, and did afterwards cohabit
Inds his wife.
ik. Lostntiorim contended, that the 'adultery was
not proved, because the affidavits ot Mrs. Bull and
her daughter were totally unworthy of. credit, since.
by her .own account, she was the pander of Mrs.
Lobby ~ by suffering Such conduct in her house,
Mad. must have been, if true, no better than a bro.
thrl. It the adultery was proved, then the husband
had red himself of his remedy sitter the facts were
communicated to him, by, his afterwards visiting and
passing the night with his wile.—Judgment deferred.
COußt 07 KING'S BENCH, MAY tr.
WARM= 4. HOLSINA AND watt. _

An action fur slanders the defendants pleaded
thar they had not spoken the words charged. On
the statement of Mr. Oonsee it appeared, that the
pla ntiff is a lady, having a house in ?alace-y.rd and
is)] next dour to a public-boun kept by
deft 'Wants t she had been twice married, first to a
Mr. Windsor, by whom she bad had several daugh-
ters, who had been brought up and married most
respectably. 'The defendants bad held some land
of the plaintiff. and as long as they continued her •
tenants, they behaved with great civility. ; but alter she
hied occasion.to relieve them they pursued a systenrof
defamatory-hostility. which it was necessary to put a
toot to by the present action. The slander now c in.
Vof was the following " Where is old Mother
orletor, who misted and robbed so many girls—
Whesois old Mother Windsor. that old b••s-d
LOrd Et.monsortouoit asked, is there any lusordo
on the record I .There ought to be some words to es-
plain, how it was a slander to call a woman " Old
soother Windsor.." cis it stood at present, the words
did not appear to apply to the plaintiff I they only
stated that " Old mother Windsor" was a woman of
ascertain destriptioo, not that the plaintiff was so.
Mr. Gowan replied. that there was an iniendo on
the record. but not to the effect, required by his Lord-
ship. It w. old be very hard it this objection were
to prevail, as until the delendains had commenced
their defamations, not i syllable had been whispered
illigainc the reputation of Mrs. • B irthulet. Turn a
dog into the street, and exclaini that he was mad,
and he would be certain to meet his deaths and to
till a Lady " Old mother Windsor" was to pima
her out as an object of disgust and detestation to all
the respectable part of society.
Ey.eNsintotioli held that a farther issuracto
was necessary, and without it the record was good
for nothing.— Leave given'to amend the record.
sattsiiAU w.. o'exit.er.

This was an action by a civil engineer against Co-
lonel O'Kebey, to recover a compensation for his
trouble in making estimate's of the expense of clearing
out a well, and filing an engine for the draught of
/water item the same, on Epsom racecourse, and
also for the price of two locks. ft appeared that the
well in question, which was originally 360 feet in
depth, had been filkd up 180 feet, and Colonel
O'Kelley conceiving it a desirable object to have the
race-cow se supplied with wake foe the race horses,
applied to the Plaintiff, an en imeer of some eminence,
to calculate the expeace of c n it out, and fixing
as engine to draw the water. For this purpose Mr.
13samah went down to Epsom, took with him a well.
digger, and having surveyed the well, dm& his esti
mate, w high so far exceeded the Defendant's expects-
ticins thus he relinquished his project. A sons of seSe
16.. * h.a paid to the Plaintiff, .which not being
suffment for his trouble, the present action
was brought. .Two scientific witnesses were called,
who *men that the usual charge for an engineer per
An was ate gUineris, exclusive of travelling expenses,
whith, our eel them (who usually travelled in his gig)
would estimate at a guinea. The other witness con-
caved that dry guinea's was so tar from a :eminent-
time: that it did nut even amount to ao intictonity.
'Mr. Iit:UMW andsviiseu the Court ins the pert o.
the Dtendant, comtuding that the Plaintiff was to-
taled so no mute tbau the In .e.c of the locks charged,

'amounting to RI. 64. 6d. inasmuch is; the money
pair' nto Crow' would amply toter the remainder of
the Plaintiff's demand.
Verdict for the Plaintiff—Damages sil. IBs. 6d.
WOODS O. DENNETT.

This was an action to recover from the defendant
a sum if money upon his band. The plaintiff, it
appeared, had purchased of defendant, fn• a sum of
MOO. his business of a cheesemonger, in Carnaby
Market the defendant at the time he disposed of
his business undertaking no: to open any sln within
a mile of Caroaby Market, and giving a bond to that
effect; upon which bond the present action was
brought, the defendant having, forgetful of his con
tract, opened a shop within a mile of Carnabp Mar-
ket, namely, in High-street, Mary-la-bonne, and
thereby materially injured the business of the pl tin-
tiff, whose receipts had fallen off from £lOO a-week
to £4O or £5O ...week. A witness was called who
had measured the distance with a wheel, and stated
that it was 76 yards short of a mile ; another witnes►
%via, had measured with a chain stated, that by the
most acentate measurement the distance between the
plaintiff's and defendant's shops was 90 yards short
of a mile.-011 the part of the defeadant three per-
sons were called, who stated, that they had measured
the distance, and made it mote than a mile; under
these circumstances it was agreed to take a verdict
for the plaintiff subject to a reference to Mr. Erskine,
who is to see the distance measured.

BEhJAMIN JobV.l4l V. ATKINS, THE 83W STREET OPIPICER.

The plaintiff, a slop-seller in Drury-lane, brought
the present action of 'rover against the defendant,
Bow-street Offic, r, to recover a horse. The transac-
tions out of which this suit arose are rather curious.
A Mrs. Cutler having a horse to sell, according to
the plaintiff's evidence, entrusted it to a person of the
name of Newbank, a horse-dealer, who advertised it
in a Newspaper. Newbank placed the animal at a
tivery-stable, and the plaintiff seeing the advertise-
ment. went to look at the horse, and finally agreed
with Newbank for the price of £5. 12s. and three
watches. Joseph in consequence took the louse away,
but he had not long had it before he Oat visited by
the defendant from the Public Office, who claimed it
on the ground that Newbank had stolen it from Mrs.
Cutler. Since that time it had been in the posses-
sion of Atkins. Newbank was taken before Sir N.
Conant, on the charge of stealing the horse, and he
was committed ; but on an investigation before the
Grand Jury, the bill was thrown out:
Newbank being called un the part of the plaintiff,
swore that he had agreed with 'Mrs. Cutler for the'
horse at 18 guineas, and had sold it in consequence
'to Joseph for 45. 12s. and three watches words 12
guineas, but for which he in fact only received eleven
guineas : he had parted with them for a mare which
sold for that sum. He bad never changed horses fur
watches before, and should have made a considerable
profit of the bargain had he been out of confinement.
Another witness deposed, 'that- Atkins took the
horse, claimed it as his own, and took it to his own
stables: he said that the horse had been stolen. and
he lied the man in custody who committed the theft.
Mr. Scaittcrr, for the defendant, submitted, that,
sul.posing he could not prove a felony had been com-
mitted, the present action of (rover could not be main-
tained. By the Act 2d and 3d of Philip and Mary, a
Magistrate was empowered. in cases of horse-stealing,
as resole the animal within six months; and in this
Case the Magistrate bad ordered the tares. Atkins,
to fetch the horse tor that purpose, and it had been
.given up to Mrs. Cutler, the owner. Atkins, there-
fore, had only obeyed his superior, who had autho-
rity to direct him.
On reicri:nce to the clause of the Statute, k ap-
pealed that the Magistrate was so empowered. " if a
horse have been stolen ;" and Lord Eu.stinoaovon
held, that it was first necessary to establish the theft.
Mr. Scetturt observed, that be should be able to ,
prove the theft satisfactorily ; in fact, the Magistrate
seemed to have neglected to commit Joseph as there-
ceiver of the stolen horse, as well as Newbank, who
was charged with the felony on such evidence as war-
ranted Sir N. Conant in sending him to gaol.
Mrs. Cutler, livery.stable-keeper, denied that she
had sail the hurse to Newbank, or bad any negocia.'
lion with him about the price. He took the burst
away while she was absent; her little boy told her of
it : it wag in the day-time, about
.one o'clock. The
Magistrate sent for her to fetch the horse, and she re-
ceived it on paying the expenses. This was in June,
dad is the mean time Atkins bad had the keeping of
the horse. New bank used to bare horses at her stables.

Wm. Baker, hostler to the last witness, said. that
he was in another stable when Newbank took the horse
away : he did not discover that it was gone until halt
an hour afterwards. Mrs. Cutler's little boy. 'eleven
or twelve years old. told him.
'L'he defendant's case being closed, Lord Em.mrso.
mum! :used it there was any warrtmt to Atkins for
taking the nom?
_ _ .

gCAKLZTT allowed that no W*llllllt bad been
given for taking the horse t but if Mr. Stafford, Chief
Clerk at !lbw-street, had been resent, he could have
proved that Sir N. Conant ordered Atkins verblly
to take the horse.

Lord ELLenionovoar, in summing up, observed,
that although Newbankliad been taken up on a charge
of felony. it gave the Officer no sight to seize the horse 11
without an eapress warrant for that purpose : he had
been imprudent in not arming binned with proper au-
thority, and in claiming the animal as his own pro-
perty. In the• supposed theft these seemed no clan-
destine circumstances to induce an opinion that New-
bank meant to commit a felony s lie had token away
the horse in open day, and in the presence of a boy
12 years old, while the hostler was in another stable
of the same yard. On the whole it seemed probabl,
that something had passed between Mrs. Cutler aid
Newbank on the subject of a sale. The only question
for the Jury was, -a heiher the horse had or Ind.:mit
been stoical? Verdict for Plaintiff.—Damages, £lB.
OLD BAILEY.
_ _

Yesterday. ..etas Soisciarri was indicted for felo-
niously stopping Thomas Warn, at Bethnal Green,
on the (6th of April, and taking from his person a
ants*, chain and seal, and eighteen shillings' worth
of silver.—The prosecutor. who is a pewterer, resid-
ing in Blackfriar's-road, stated, that having beard
much talk of the handsome Widow at Bethnal glum,
his curiosity led huh thither to take some retreshment
with this said hanisome lanulady of Bacon-street.'
When opposite the door he was hustled by tour or
ovc persons, amongst whom was the prisoner. His
wistch was matched grow his fob pockets sad the

prisoner plit his arms round him, nisi to Bank
tokens to the amount of 18s. out of his pocket ; wit-
ness was sober, and he had a distinct sight of him :
he called out for assistance. but his v ice was drown-
ed by the &Immur of others. • A servant to a cow.
keeper seized the prisoner, and dragged him into the
Ship public-house,. where' urner, an officer of Wor-
ship street, searched tim, and found the silver exactly
corresponding with that which the prosecutor lost, I
upon him.—Guilty. -
/leery Burrell was indicted capitally for :teeing a
watch, three gold seals, and a chain, Irom the prison
of George Tilley, on. the King's highway.--The
prosecutor ss as walking along Tothilf-street, West-
minster, on the 21st of April, when the prisoner
pushed violently against him, and snatched his watch
from him.—Guilty.—Death.
Simon: Collin: was put to the bar, ch irged with I
having stolen two mares, the property of Francis
Yarrow. The prosecutor was a farmer is the Isle of
Ely ; on tie '29th of April last, he lost two
from his stables ; the next day, the prisoner offered
the same to It person at Cherrytree, lcnty.s,it miles
distance, fer sale. The buyer zsked him if be came
honestly by them? and the prisoner answered, that
they belonged to his brother at Cambridge, who was
distressed for rent : the prison he offered them to,
named Whitbread, asked ben if he blew the names
of several publicans at Clint:nage? which the priso-
ner was Ignorant of, and gave such answers as in-
duced lVhitbread to suspect him ()Shaving stolen the
horses : he was ultimately secured, and the prosecu-
tor swore to his horses. The prisoner's deteuce was
so improbable, as left no doubt of his having stolen
therie—Guilty-o Death.
J. Mei, for stealing two mares, the property of
R. Hatn'n idge, was also capitally convicted.
J. Shepherd was indicted for breaking and entering
the dwelling-house of J. Dyter, and stealing therein
a watch and cotton shawl ; and Elizabeth Reid was
indicted for receiving the shawl, knowing it to have
been stolen. On the '29th of April, a person, named
Turner, came to the prosecutor's house with Stiess-
herd. When they were gone, the prosecutor's wife
missed two CI motes, which she had put into a tea-
caddy ; but she did not then miss her watch. t:he
I went out the same afternoon, and on her return the
found her watch had been stolen. 'Ole prisoner
pledged the watch, which was identified by the pro•
sccuttr as being his property. Verdict—Sheplierd
Gie Icy of Stealing.o. Reid Not Guilty.
Solomen Baak was indicted for a burglaiy, in•the
dwelling-house of Mr. Gonston, and stealing a cash-
box. containing se9. 6s. ad. a Custom-house ticket,
and other articles, the property of Messrs. Grinston,
Lucas, and Co. The prosecutors are wharthigers,
and the counting-house from whence the property
was stolen, was left properly fastened on the night of
the 10th of April; but the next morning it was dis-
covered to have been broken open, and the property
stolen. The nett morning the prisoner was stopped,
in company with two others (who escaped). in Mark.
lane, with the property in his possession. On search-
ing him, the officers found in one pocket seventeen
pick-lock keys, and in the other a dark lantern. In
defence, the prisoner said two teen had given him the
property. The capital part of the charge was dog c
away, the indictment stating that it was the dwelling]
house of Mr. Grit. ,zon, when in fact it was part his
son's.—Guilty of sink felony.
Ocerge Maim was indicted foe sobbinp, Mr. Flint,l
Silk Meyer, in Spital.fields, of his watch, on the 28th
of April. The prosecutor was walking with his wife
in his own neighbourhood, when the prisoner affect
ing to be drunk, reeled against him, and snatched his
watch from his pocket. After this he became sober
in a moment, and ran off at lull speed, but the
prosecutor followed and secured him. The watch
lease was found in the track in which the prisoner
ran.—Guilty.
HIGH COURT OF JUSTICIARY, EDINBURGH, MAY if.
This day came on before the Court the trial of
William Edgar, prisoner in the Castle of Edinburgh,
indicted and accused under the Act of the 52d of his
present Majesty, for administering unlawful oaths,—
It will be in the recollection of our Readers, that 'upon
the 9th ult. Edgar was put to the bar, on an indict-
ment ler this crime, when, after long arguments
upon the relevancy of the indictment, by the Some-
vox GESERAL and Mr. H. H. Diana/some on the
pan of the Crown, and Messrs. CLERK and CRAN-
nowt for the prisoner, the. Court ordered informations
in writing to be given in. His Majesty's Advocate,
however, thought proper to withdraw the indict tneut,
and charge the prisoner upon another.
Mr. CRANSTOLS, before allowing his client to
plead to the indictment, objected to the competency.
He pleaded Not Guilty to a former indictment on
the same statute. Objections were then made to the
televaincy—informations were ordered, and that case
was not taken regularly out of Court. Now, during
the dependence of the first action (the diet never
having been deserted) it was incompetent for the
Lord Advocate to institute a new trial for the. satire I
offence. Here were two actions co-existice, for the
same crime—the relevancy of the first iiilictinera
was challenged, and, alter a debate of twelve Iwurs,
the Lord Advocate, by this mode of procetiute,
might draw another indictment out of his -pocket, and
Call upon the prisoner to plead—sad experience in the
criminal law of Scotland cught to caution the Court'
how to give way to such a mole of procedure. if
it is to be allowed, his klajeste's Advocate might this
day sbandon the present action, and cause the pro
saner to stand trial for the same crime at the Circuit
Court of Inverness or Aberdeen--the prisoner was
now in ',Jonah:sr curia, and entitled to its prouctioa.—
In this case the prisoner hid pleaded—intormations
had been ordered, end fixed to be advised tai; very
day, aad it was contrary to every preiciple r.l equity
to say, that he was to be called to plead to another
indictment for the same crime—he his joined issue
with the prosecutor, and if the litter 'gives up the in.
dictmeat, be must consent to the total liberation of Cm
prisoner. It this was an open point, he Vid no
doubt the Court, viewing the hardships it it-vistaed
on prisoners, would decide it in the way he suggested,
as the case of Charteris was decisive.
Mr. Dateustotio, on the part of the Crown, stated,
that very few words would suffice to answer the ob-
jection ; the public prosecutor had not deserted the
first indictment, but be had passed from it ; the prat-
"" was perfectly common ; the case of Crawford,
9th Jan. 1812, was exactly similar. There the psi-
weer% Counsel had craved a delay
of writ 1111[11 flee
3d of February, and before that Uwe the indictment