Star.
London, England, 1811-02-15 00:00:00

, -

-

LA ,
LENT .ASSIZES.—WESIERN CIRCUIT
The lit;n. Mr. 3 uitice CRAM,, z, and the Hon. Mr. Justice
• BAV IoZT.
Thirs tad Places appointed for bolding the Lent Assizes, 1811:
Hants—Monday, Match 4, at the Castle et Winchester.
Wilts—Saturday, March 9, at Salisbury.
Dorset—Wednesday, March 13, Dorchester.
Devon.--Saturday, March 16, at the Castle et gutter.
City of Paete•t—Same day, at the Goad.- all, niter.
• Cornwall—Saturday, laseti 23, a° LaenceNtott. •
,hemerset—Thur.dayt March 26,41 the Cassie of Taunton.
OXFORD CIRCUIT—DAys AND PLACDS.
sifferkshire—Monday, March 4, Reading.
pafordshire—Wedne.day, March 6, Oxford.
Gloucestershire—Saturday, March 9, Gloucester.
Monniouthalilre—'l'hursday,.Maras 14, hioumoetb.
• Herefordahlre—Monday, March 18, Hereford.
Shropshire—Saturday, March 9.3, Shrewsbury.
Staffordshire—l burs.lay, March 23, Stafford.
Wertestershire--Tuesday, April it, Worcester.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, FZIL IS.
VOLE V. PENNY.
This was an action to recover XI I. 175., 6d. for
board and for money lent by the plaintiff to the de-
fendant. It appear: d, front the evidence, that at the
time the debt in cplestion was contracted, the parties
were both prisoners fur debt in the King's Bench Fi-
tton, where the defendant resided in the character of
a genileman independent •of any profession; whilst
the plaintiff, less assuming and ambitious, was con.
tent to gain an honest shilling by exercising his take*
as a maitre d'hotel, at which there was an ordinary
for gentlemen daily, at a shilling per head. The de.
fondant, it appeared,, between the periods of the Ist
• of July and the latter end.af December last, had fre-
quently taken his seat at the plaintiff's (to him) hes-
picable board—net only to dinner, but to breakfast
and tea ; and on those occasions the plaintiff had
given him credit in the chalk score behind the door
of the eating room, for the moderate sum 3s. per
diem. The defendant not being very flush of cash,
and the plaintiff's stock of faith in him being con-
siderable, these items had increased, during the pe-
riod stated, to 79 in number, which, together with
sixpence lent, amounted to the sum the plaintiff now
sought to recover.
Several witnesses were called, who proved, that
the defendant had been at the plaintiff's shop oftener
than what he had charged for. The butcher also,
who served the plaintiff with beef and mutton, was
also called, who spoke to the excellent qualities of the
iiands, which daily smoked on the plaintiff's table.—
The defence set tip was, that the plaintiff's apartment
was not only appropriated to the purposes of an ordi-
nary, but that it was also a whistling shop, a denomi-
nation by which gaming houses in the King's Bench
and its purlieus are distinguished, and that the defen-
dant had lost his money there.
The defence, however, failed, and the Jury found
a verdict for the plaintiff, for the full amount of his.
demand.
DORMER D. ANNIS.
The plaintiff' in this case is a baker, who formerly
resided at Somer's Town, and the defendant an emi.
rent flour-factor. It appeared that at the time the,
eaintiff commenced business, he engaged with the
defendant to serve him with flour, which was to be
of the best quality, and for which he was to be paid
the best price. The present action was brought to re-
cover a compensation in damages for a breach of that
agreement on the part of the defendant ; who in May
and June last had sent in ten sacks of flour of a qua-
lity so bad (as described by the plaintiff's witnesses),
that it had not life enough in it to make any thing of
a loaf but two crusts, top and bottom ; and, indeed,
that it had not one good property in it ; the bread
made of this flour was so bad that when sent out to
the customers it was returned as unfit to eat, and the
consequence was, that the plaintiff lost his business„
became embarrassed, and was obliged to quit his
*hop. The bad quality of the flour was fully proved;
but the plaintiff failed, in proving the precise time at
which the flour was in' his shop, and therefore could
not connect it with any delivery of flour to him by
the defendant. To supply this defect, the sack col-
lector of the defendant was called, who however prov-
ed a most unwilling and reluctant witness, and gave
his evidence in a manner so highly improper and in-
decorous, that after several cautions being given him
by his Lordship, without effect, his Lordship's pa-
. &nee being exhausted, he threatened, unless he paid
more attention to truth and his oath, to commit
him. The plaintiff, however, failing to prove his case,
actording to the strict rules of law, agreed to a prop°.
sition made by the defendant to withdraw a Juror.
PARISH OF ST. PAUL, SHADWELL.
-The ATTORNEY-GENERAL, on Friday last, obtai..
a Rule of Court, calling upon the Commissioners 01
the Land Tax, acting in and for the Tower division,
in the County of Middlesex, or their Clerks, to shew
cause why a writ of Mandamus should not issue, di-
• rected to them, commanding them to permit Mr.
Joseph Fletcher, and other inhabitants of the parish
of St, Paul, Shadwell, to inspect and take copies, at
their own .expence, of the several accounts of sums
Collected tinder the Land Tax Assessments for the
said parish, a of the expenditure of such sums, and
or alloetanceseout, fa; the year 1806. and the se-
veral subsequent years, to the present time, or of any
part thereof ; which Rule was, on Tuesday last, made
absolute, upon the motion of Mr. Gurney.
LEE V. ADKINS.
This was an action brought against the Bow-street
officer, by Mrs. Catharine Lee, to recover a sum of
051 17s. which he had taken into his custody, upon
Mlle discharge of the plaintiff from being examined at
31anchester, on suspicion of the money's being part of
the booty robbed from theWhitehaven bank ; for which
robbery Stockton and Edwards had been executed,
and Spooner and Wright had fled.
It was proved by one of the defendant's witnesses
that sbe had passed as the wife of Spooner ; and by
another, that she had appeared much afflicted on ac-
count of the robbery of the bank, for which, she said,.
she feared her husband would be hung ; but that she
then said her husband's name was Phillips. She said
she did not much care, however, as she had money
enough to educate her children, a part of her dress,
which she chewed the Witness, being filled with gold,
and her petticoat being bound, as she said, with betterl
than that.
Mr. TOPPING, for the deferi, int, acknowledged that
be had not identified the plaintiff ; and
Lord Eaarassonouou was of opinion, that as one of
the defendant's whoppers represented the'plaintiff to
*are said she washed in Manchester, the registers

~

/

_