Star.
London, England, 1819-02-18 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

IMPORTANT LAW POINT.
In the Court of Exchequer on Tuesday, in the case
of. The King against Fontaine, it was ruled by the
LORD CHIEF BARON, that the name of a Special Ju--
ryman being mis-spelt In the Sheriff's Return, is
fatal to the cause : the facts as far as they appeared
in Court, were as follow :—The cause having been
called on, the names of several Jurymen were read
and called by the proper Officers, several of whom
answered, and took their scats in the Jury-box, and
when the Officer came to the name of " John Faires,
of Howland-street," a Gentleman from amongst the
crowd answered, " John Farey is here ;" and advanc-
ing towards the Jury-box, mentioned, that his name
ended with ey, a circumstance which hp had men-
tioned to the summoning Officer, chewing him at the
same time his door-plate, and refusing to receive the
summons : but the Officer oame again, and insisted
on leaving the summons, adding, that Mr. F. must
attend, at his peril, notwithstanding-the mis-spelling
of the name, as the Christian name, and street and
number, were admitted to be right. The ATTORNEY
GENERAL then apologized to the Gentlemen who had
taken their seats in the Jury-box, for the trouble,
which through the inaccuracy of the Sheriff's Lists,
had been given to them ; and added, that although
the cause could not go on, they and the other Gen-
tlemen who had been summoned and attended, and
were then in Court, would be paid for their atten-
dance, both on that and the preceding day.
COURT OF KING'S BENCH, FEBRUARY is.
WIIITESIDES V. COOPER.

This was an action brought by the Plaintiff, a young
man of fortune, against the Defendant, a coach-
maker, in Bond-street, to recover £25 money had and
received for the use of the Defendant. The Plaintiff
had ordered a gig, which was to be sent home, com-
plete in every respect for 65 guineas; the Plaintiff
paid £25 in part payment, and whett the gig wasl
sent home, it had more the appearance of an old ve-
hicle than a uew one. It was sent back, and the
Defendant undertook to remove all objections by al-
teration; that was never done.; and, under all the
circumstances, this action was brought to recover the
money paid on account.
The Jury found a verdict for the Plaintiff—Da-
mages, £25.
FEBRUARY 17.
BATHURST V. ADAM.

This action was brought by Captain Bathurst to
recover £2lO, for a years rent of a house in Water-
loo-place. The house had formerly belonged to a
Mr. Burton, whose tenant the Defendant had been;
but on its becoming the property of Captain Ba-
thurst, notice of the fact was given to the Defendant;
and at the same time, he was informed that Mr.
Dance, the Plaintiff's Attorney, would call for the
rent. Mr. Dance accordingly called on a quarter
becoming due, and the Defendant apologized for rli4
being prepared with the cash. He however fixed Fri-
day or Saturday next ensuing for payment, and ap-
pointed Mr. Dance to call again. Mr. Dance could
not see the Defendant, and twelve months rent
growing due, the present action was commenced.
It was contended, on the part of the Defendant,
that his original agreement with Burton, his first
Lessor, had not been duly observed, and, on that
ground he could not be called upon to pay rent.
Having failed in proving his case, the Jury found a
verdict for the Plaintiff—Damages £2lO, Costs 40s.

COURT 6F COMMON PLEAS, FEBRUARY is
GAMBLING.-CHRISTIP O. JONES.

This was an an action brought by Mr. Chiistie,
the Auctioneer, to recover from the Defendant £509,
which he alleged being money belonging to him, was
won by the Defendant at games of cards of his clerk
at different times and places.
Mr. Serjeant COPLEY stated this curious case,
which was more regularly detailed in the following
evdence :
William Rickards said, he had been servant to
Mr. Christie seven years. He was discharged at the
end of July last. In his situation as clerk, he was in
the habit of receiving money coming to Mr. Christie
as an auctioneer, to a considerable amount. The va-
rious sums were paid on account of jewels, pictures,
and property, sold in Pall Mall. The witness had
known the Defendant between one and two years.
The Defendant lived in Pall Mall, and kept a billiard
table. The witness had played with him on many
occasions at cards. He played with him for money
about the 22d of April last. The Defendant knew
he was a clerk, but did not know he received his
master's money. The first time he played with him
at cards, they played at the Star and Garter,' in Pall
Mall. They played at cribbage, and the witness lost
£5O, the money of his employer, 'Mr. James Christie.
He met him again About the 50th of April, and play-
ing again with Mr. Christie's money, lost £7O. On
that occasion they began with £5 a game, and in-
creased it to £lO and £l5. He met the Defendant
also at Bedford's ROoms, in Pall Mall, and played
with him to a late hour. Two of the Defendant's
brothers were present, and he believed Mr. Bedford
was there, but could not speak positively. The wit-
ness also played with a friend of Jones's, who was
introduced to him. This friend pretended ignorance
of the game, and it was understood that he was from
the country. The Defendant proposed his friend'
should play for him, and the witness should give him
two holes at cribbage, leaving him at the ,same time
at liberty to instruct him in his play. The witness
was a winner on that occasson to the amount of
£6O, part of which remained unpaid, but Jones paid
it next day. On the Ist of June he played with the
Defendant's friend on the same principle he had play-
ed before. The stakes were made good by the De-
fendant ; he lost E 125, which was Mr. Christie's money.
He was unable to pay £l5 of the lost money that
night, but next day he met the Defendant, and paid
him £l5 out of Mr. Christie's money. He, upon
another occasion; played with the Defendant's friend,
at the sign of the Haunch of :Venison, in Brook-
street, for £l5O. The Defendant pit down the
stakes. The witness lost £BO, which was Mr. Chris-
tie's money. He remembered going with a £lOO
Bank note, which he had taken at Ranson and Mor.
land's, in payment of a cheque given by Mr. Wood-
burn, of St. Martin's-laic, for property bought of
Mr. Christie. He lest the now in question to the
Defendant.

Cross-examined by Mr.Sejeant VAUGUAIT.—He
, could not speak to an precise days on which he lost

the money; but was positive to the dates of three
gambling transactions, namely, the Bth of May, the
Ise of June, and the Sd of June. He did not know
the name.pf the Defendant's friend. He found the
Enowledte of the friend improve,and the loss of his
money was the consequence. He had never been
threatened with a proseLttion by Mr. Christie. He
confessed his xnisconduct to Mr. Christie, being un-
able to make up his accounts. He was 25 years of
age at the time of the transaction. He had lost mo-
ney since, by playing with a man named Kirky.
He was a married man, and hat property to the
amount of £3OO, just before he lost Mr. Chr;..,tie's
money. He had no property when he lost Mr.
Christie's.
John Langdon, another clerk to Mr. Christie, v.-as
at the haunch of Venison, in Brbok-street ; he went
by invitation of RickardS, and met him there, play-
ing with the Defendant. A Mr. Davidson was also
present. Davidson was the friend of the Defendant.
About twelve o'clock Rickards went out for money,
and came back with a Fipply, which he lost.
Mr. William Woodburn, a printseller in St. Mar-
tin's-lane, proved that he paid £lOO to Mr. Christie
by cheque, which Rickards received on the Ist of
June.

A clerk, from Morland and Co. proved that the
above cheque was paid to Rickards in a`£loo Bank-
note, No. 18024..
The note was then traced to the hands of the De-
fendant, by Mr. D. Williams, a stock-broker, who
received it from M. Jones, on the 9th of June, to
purchase stock for him.
This was the Plaintiff's case.
Mr. Serjeant VAUGHAN addressed the Jury for
the Defendant, and contended that no credit ought
to be given to such a person as Rickards, who came
into Court as a Witness,, to avoid a prosecution for
felony. He called no witnesses.
The CHIEF Jusrics drew the attention of the
(Jury to the main features of the case; namely, the
' credit due to the principal witness. It would be
dangerous, he said, to the public interest to hold that
a person who had been decoyed into a gaming-house
and led to commit crime, was not to be received as a
witness. Transactions similar to that before them in
general took place at 'midnight, and persons who be-
came dupes of the designing' gamester were, per-
haps, the best witnesses to bring offenders to justice.
Independently of all other considerations, the Jury
would find the witness, Rickards, confirmed by other
witnesses. If the Jury had a .doubt, they would I
give the Defendant the benefit—if they hid not,
they ought to find a verdict for the Plaintiff If
they did find for the Plaintiff, they might rest on
their pillows with the consolation that they had ten- I
deredl service to the public.
The Jury, without hesitation, found a Verdict for
the Plaintiff—Damages £509.
This cause attracted much attention, and a numer-
ous attendance of sporting characters.

OLD BAILEY SESSIONS.
Yesterday these Sessions commenced in the Justice
Hall, Old Bailey, before the LORI) MAYOR, Mr. Baron
GRAHAM, Mr. Justice BEST, and Mr. Justice RI-
CHARDSON.

Joseph Wick and John Barefoot were capitally in-
dicted for burglariously breaking and entering the
dwelling-house of William Wray, on the 31st of Ja-
nuary, and stealing therein a pair of boots, a pair of
shoes, a pair of silver knee buckles, a silver salt-
spoon, and a variety of other articles, his property.
Mr. Justice RIOHARDSOW summed up the evidence,
and the Jury, after a short consultation, pronounced
them guilty of stealing, but not of the burglary.

Isaac Cook stood indicted capitally for assaulting
John Franklin on .the King's highway, and forcibly
taking from him a watch and Is. 6d. in money, his
property.—The prosecutor is a journeyman colour-
man. On the night of the 3d February, between ten
and eleven o'clock, he was returning home across the
fields from Somers Town to Camden Town, where
he was met by the prisoner and another manl the
prisoner put one hand to his mouth, and the other
hand to the back of his head, to prevent his calling
out, while the other man took from under his arm
his umbrella, drew his watch &Om his foS, rifled his
pockets, and both of them ran away.—Guilty, Death.
Daniel Mac Vey, who was acquitted last Sessions
in consequence of Mr. Parkins's name having been
misdescribed in the indictment, was again placed at
the bar, upon an indictment, which charged him
with a burglary in the dwelling-house of Joseph
Wilfred Parkins, Esq. and stealing therein a diamond
rug, value 150 guineas, .a great quantity of Louis
d'ors, Napoleons, Portugal coins, pagodas, a hunting
ljacket, and plush pair of breeches, together with a
great number of other articles, amounting in the
whole to nearly £lOOO, the pr6perty of J. W. Pae-
kins, Esq. The Jury, without hesitasion, found him
Guilty of stealing in the dwelling-house above the
value of 39s.—Death.

Charles Skinner was found Guilty of stealing 281bs.
of soap, the property of Alexander M'Kay and Co.

WiWam Sampsox, a young lad, aged 15, was found
guilty of stealing some sheet lead off the dwelling-
house of John Langston, in Buckingluag-place, on
the night of the 29th of December.

•
BOW-STE/MT.—Yesterday William Fox fuss fully
committed for trial, charged with robbing Chelsea
College of bed linen and wearing apparel.—Several
well known characters were committed for robbing
and 'others for attempting so rob Gentlemen at the
front of the Hustings, in Covent-Garden.
DoEL.—An affair of honour took place on Tues-
day morning on Wimbledon Common, between F. A.
R—N, Esq. of the Kent-road, and Mr. F—a,
belonging to the Staff, when the latter was wounded,
it was feared dangerously, by the ball entering his
right side. The dispute originated at the Opera on
Saturday night.
The mania fur duelling spreads its ravages morel,
and more in the German Universities; in that of Hanel
alone, no fewer than 80 of these pri'vate combats
having taken place during the last month, and occa-
sioned the loss of nay young Students, whose rising
worth had constituted the dearest hopes of their rela-
tions and friends. . •
There is .a cause depending in Chancery, wherein
the extraordinary name of kiitkvervaarotsdoryra-
kingatchdent appears as a party in the suit! the pro.
nunciation of which seems to be no small annoyance
to the Gentlemen of the Long Robe.