Star.
London, England, 1821-11-22 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF CHANCERY, NOVEMBER 21.
THE ATTORNEY•GENERAL V-THE SKINNERS COMPANY.
Mr. HORNE followed Mr. Trower in opposition to
the appeal. He said, that after all his Lordship had
beard in the cause he would confine himself to what
he considered the substantial question before the
Court, and that he would deal with as shortly as pos-
sible. He considered the substantial question to be,
whether the lands in the parish of St. Pancras, origi-
nally purchased by Sir A. Judd from Gates and Tho-
rogood, were vested in the Skinners Company exclu-
sively for the benefit ref the Tunbridge School? lie
was to contend that they were.
The Loan CHANCELLOR said, he should wish Mr.
Horne to consider, first, whether the Vice-Chancellor
was right in saying that the will of Judd had nothing
to do with the question? Suppose that, after the
passing of the 14th of Elizabeth, all the property de-
vised to the Skinners' Company ultra that purchased
from Gates and Thorogood had been swallowed up
by an earthquake, and the rents of the Pancras estate
had increased beyond £3O, might not the then At-
torney-General have filed an information on behalf
of the almsmen, and contended, that notwithstanding
the private act, which declared the estate to belong
to the school exclusively, yet the will of Judd ought
to be considered as a declaration of trust, and, there-
fore, they were entitled to their ES a-year out of the
rents, after they exceeded £3O? •
Mr. HORNE replied, that he had to contend that the
will ought to be wholly put out of consideration in
the cause, but if the Court should not be of that opi-
nion, he would maintain that the Company ought
still to be considered only as ti ustees for the benefit of
the school. There were instruments in existence which
would enable his Lordship to decide the question, and
he would submit, that when a title was mad.• evident
by documents, usage could not prevail to ()vertu: n it.
The LORD CHANCELLOR asked how Mr. Horne
came to the conclusion that the Legislature knew of
the will? In cases of private bills the Legislature
knew nothing of any instruments but those produced
to it, and there was no evidence to prove the pro-
duction of the will at the passing of the Act of the
14th Elizabeth.
Mr. HonNE said, that at the time of the passing
of the Act, all parties must have been acquainted
with the existence of the will, and it was therefore
impossible to conclude that the Company would not
have produced air instrument so important to their
interest. He ousted, therefore, that his Lordship
would be of opinion that he had given a right con-
struction to the two Acts of Parliament, and would
accordingly confirm the decree of the Vice-Chancellor.
Mr. PEMBERTON followed on the same side.
Mr. HEALD then rose to reply. The question at
issue was very simple. His Learned Friends on the'
other side contended, that the trusts in the two Acts
of Parliament overthrew the trusts declared in the
will of Judd. This he denied, and without making
any further observations he would leave the ques-
tion for the decision of the Court.
Mr. SHADWELL said, that he appeared for the
master of the school, who prayed, that in the event
of his Lordship confirming the decree of the Vice-.
Chancellor, he might be permitted to send propo-
sals before the Master of the Court for an increase
of salary.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said, that he had already
bestowed so much attention on the cause, that he
thought he should be able to give judgment on
coming into Court to-morrow.
VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT, NOVEMBER 21.
Eli: PARTE SHAW 11V RE HOWARD AND wens.
Mr. HORNE applied to his Honour in this case in
the following circumstances :—There were affidavits
filed in this case from another petition of Grinstead
and Carroll. That petition the Lord Chancellor
agreed to hear to-morrow. He (Mr. 1 lonic) meant
to apply to the Lord Chancellor to hear the petitions
of his clients (Shaw and others) before their petition.
This he felt it necessary to mention to his Honour,
as he was to be applied to on Friday to fix a day for
hearing the case.
Mr. HART had no objection; and his HONOUR
assented.
COURT OF KING'S BENCH, NOVEMBER 21.
THE KING v. JACKSON AND OTHERS.
This was an indictment against George Jackson,
jun. George Jackson, sen. and Thomas Jervis, for
conspiring to procure a commission of bankruptcy
against George Jackson, jun. and fraudulently to
prove certain debts under that commission, in order
to defeat the execution of George Fox.
The.circumstances of the case were these—Mr.Fox,
the prosecutor, was a surgeon and apthecary in
Bishopsgate-street, and in the year 1813 sold his busi-
ness to the defendant, George Jackson, jun. The

guilty against all the defendants.
The SOLICITOR -GENERA L now moved for a Rule
to spew• cause why the verdict should not be set aside
and a new trial granted. Fresh evidence, the Learned
Counsel said, had been discovered, which would shew
the justice of the debts proved by Mr. George Jackson
under his son's commission. The claim of Mr. Jack-

son, sen. being bona gde, he was justified in procuring,
by a commission of bankruptcy, an equal distribution
of his son's effects. _

The COURT, upon intimation of the evidence in-
tended to be produced, granted a Rule to spew cause.
Atone o'clock the LORD CIIIEF JUSTICE left the
Court, and went to sit at A'isi I'rius in Guildhall.

CRIMINAL INFORMATION.
Mr. PRARSON said, he had now to apply to their
Lordships for a Rule to shew cause, why a Criminal
Information should not be filed against five persons,
whose names were mentioned in his affidavits, but,
for reasons which would be obvious to the Court,
he would forbear mentioning, for a conspiracy and
the false imprisonment of two females, named Ann
Hester Carrey and Mary Ann Evans. In making
the application, he should confine himself within
the narrowest compass which the circumstances of
the case would permit. The first of the five perso: s•
in question was a Gentleman of fortune: the second
his Valet; the third a Magistrate fcr the county of
Stafford ; the fourth a Constable; and the fifth, the
individual into whose custody the two complainants
had been delivered. Mrs. Caney, the first appli-
cant, was a widow of manners accomplished, and
interesting, a native of Cork. On the death of her
husband, in 1816, she•came to London, where she
had friends, to endeavour to obtain a livelihood by
her industry. She took up her residence at the
house of a person named Smith, and supported her-
self by taking in needle-work. Here she lived in the
most retired state, conducting herself with the ut-
most prudence. Oa one occasion, when taking home
some work she had been doing, she was addressed in
the street by the Gentleman first mentioned in this
application, who forced his conversation upon her,
and was most pressing to be informed of her name
and residence, both of which she withheld. He
watched her repeatedly ; but she always eluded him,
until, at a subsequent period, she was t rken ill, and
under the necessity of applying to a Physician for
advice, who, one day, to her extreme surprise, intro•
duced the Gentleman at one of his visits as his ?eh...
tion. The Gentleman repeatedly afterwards sought
opportunities of being in her society, and made her
offers, which she stedfastly rejected ; and soon after
Mrs. Smith, in whose house she resided, going to
America, she agreed to accompany her to Philadel-
phia, where she settled with her friends. After she
had been a short time there, she met the Captain of
a vessel from England, who informed her a Gentle-
man had come from England in search of her; and
a letter was soon after delivered to her from the
Gentleman who had followed her so closely in Eng-
land, couched in the warmest and most affectionate
terms, and soliciting her to accept his offers, and
comply with the wishes which had induced him to
follow her from England to America. Mrs. Carrey,
unfortunately for herself, was induced to accept these
offers; she joined the Gentleman, and they remained
in the United States from that time, the autumn
of 1818, till the beginning of 1820, passing in every
place which they visited, as man and wife. In 1820,
they returned to England ; he took an elegant house
for her, and she still continued to live with him un-
der the same character as in America. Part of his
time he spent with her, and part at his estate in Staf-
fordshire. Many letters passed between them of the
'most affectionate kind, which was set forth in his
affidavits. Here Mr. Pearson read some extracts
from letters, beginning—" My dearest wife," and
couched in the most affectionate terms. In one of
them, he laments she is not with him in the country;
but at the same time observes, that her state of health
but ill-suited her to he a companion in his robust
exercises; adding, that whenever they sung the dint
of " Together h: us range thefields," he believed, for
her accommodation, if they did it in the fields, it must
be in Spa folds, or Mom fields !—Now, he (Mr. Pear-
son) would shew, that at the time the Magistrate com-
mitted Mrs. Carrey as a vagrant, he was acquainted
with her real situation, having seen these letters.—
Letters of this affectionate description, passing as late
as November, 1820, were set forth in the affidavits;
and soon after ha returned to London; and continued
to reside with her on the same terms as before, until
February of the present year. One morning, e fitly
in February, he scent out, she expecting him to re-
turn at night, as usual ; but night came and•she saw
him not. Day after day followed, still he did not
return. At length she received a visit from his
younger brother, who told her it was become desi-
rable the conae4ioa should be broken off, and no

better opportunity than the present could occur, and .
therefore she could see his brother no more. He
(Mr. Pearson) should have observed, that this Gen-
tleman, when in America, bad promised Mrs. Caney
a settlement of £IOO a-year for life, but had after-
wards totally forgotten to carry that promise into
effect. His brother now gave her £IOO, directing her
to break up her establishment, and pay any demands,
against her out of it : by the time she had done this,
but little was left for her own use. Thus deserted,
she again retired to humble lodgings, and endeavoured
to obtain a subsistence by needle-work. Sickness,
brought on by anxiety, soon followed, and all which
remained of her little stock of cash was consumed.—
At this period, having friends in Dublin, she deter-
mined to get, if possible, to that city, and implore
their aid ; and a female friend, Mary Ann Evans,
unwilling to desert her in her distress, offered to ac-
company her. The offer was accepted, and they pro-
ceeded to Liverpool. Here indisposition increased
upon her; she was obliged to stop, and the expenses
of sickness soon exhausted all her resources, and left
her destitute. In this situation no course was left for
her adoption, but to endeavour to get back to Lon-
don ; and in her progress on that journey she arrived,
accompanied by her friend, on the 9th of August
last, at a village in the neighbourhood of the resi-
dence of that individual who had caused all her dis-
tress. She stopt at a small Inn in the village. He
(Mr. Pearson) did notlear having it now charged
against him, that he was the advocate of immorality
and guilt ; he did considet thai.lliis unfortunate wo-
man, who, for three years and upwards, had resided
with this opulent individual as his wife—who had
been followed by him to America, and there tempted
from her friends and a comfortable asylum, was en-.
titled to some consideration at his hands, and to such
aid as would keep her from starving. On her arrival
at the Inn in question, having no means of support
left, she determined to write to him ; but in doing
this, she acted with the greatest delicacy and caution..
The letter having been written, she gave it to Miss
Evans, to be by her delivered into the hands of the
individual in question. Miss Evans undertook so to
deliver it ; but on its being tendered to him, he said
he knew who it came from, and would not receive it.
Oa this refusal, Mrs. Carrey determined to try per-
sonally to get it delivered into his hands; she went
within a short distance of the house, and then sent a
little girl with the letter t it was tendered to the ser-
vant, but rejected, and brought back to the unfortu-
nate, deserted woman, who, with her friend Miss
Evans, thus repulsed, were retiring, when the valet
of the Gentleman came to them, and inquired if it
was either of them who had sent the letter ? On
being answered in the affirmative, he said his master
did not know them, and if they did nut quit the place
he would send some one to remove them. They re-.
tired to a Church-yard hard by, but were soon driven
from thence by a second messenger, and returned to
their Inn. This was on Saturday. They remained
there du, ing the night, and next day (Sunday) Mrs.
Carrey determined to renew her application in person.
She accordingly, accompanied by her friend, set out
on Sunday morning on her way to his house. They
were met by him on horseback; he saw them, but
pusLel furiously by without noticing, though he
afterwards looked back at them several times. They
watched his return, and followed him to the house,
but could not obtain any interview with him ; and
were told by his valet that his master knew nothing
of them, but olyerved, that he (the valet) would take
care of theirs ; and, to be as good as his word, he
went to the constable of the village, a butcher, who
came to the place where these two unprotected fe-
males were, and apprehended them as vagrants; at
the same time telling them they bad better make no
resistance or he should handcuff them ; at the same
time producing the handcuffs. Alter they had been
in custody of this man for a short time, they were
delivered by him over to another man, and taken, by
the constable's direction, to Baker's Cottage, a miser-
able hovel, in which it was usual to lodge vagrants
previously to taking them before a Magistrate. Here
they remained sitting up in their cloaths through the
whole of Sunday night. The circumstance having
become a subject of conversation in the neighbour-
hood, a farmer humanely went on the Monday morn-
ing to Baker's Co:tage, and exerted himself to obtain
permission that these unfortunate young women (one
in a state of extreme ill health) might go again to
their Inn, till the question as to their detention was
decided. He succeeded, and they went to the Inn ;
but the valet again appeared, and inquired how it
was that his master's prisoners were at liberty ? de-
siring they should be taken back again to Baker's
Cottage, which was accordingly done. They were
kept there that night also, and next morning (Tues-
day) were informed they would be takeu before a
Magistrate. At four o'clock in the afternoon the Ma-
gistrate first made his appearance; but his first ad-
dress proved that was not the first knowledge lie had
of the case. He asked, are you both prisoners? and
was told only Mrs. Carrey was a prisoner, though the
other was detained. Mrs. Carrey was taken apart, and
examined. Mrs. Carrey declared that she had not been
begging, and was no vagrant, and told the Magistrate
all the circumstances of the case. The Magistrate
answered, that he kad had an interview with the
Gentleman, who declared them to be impostors.—
It was, therefore, clear, Mr. Pearson observed, that
the Magistrate had held some previous communica-
tion with the Gentleman on the subject. Mrs. Carrey
then produced the letters set forth in the affidavits,
and desired he would read them to the Gentleman,
and see if he would deny them to be his handwriting.
The Magistrate said he would, and left her to go to
the Gentleman, as she supposed, for that purpose;
but before he left the room, she observed that he had
a conference with the constable, and after he was
gone, the latter said to her she had better consent to
go away, and he would give her £2; that she ought
to be much obliged to him, as £1 of the money
would come out of his pocket. She declined ac-
ceding to this proposition, and the Magistrate soon
after returned. He asked Mrs. Carrey if she would
accept the offer made by the countable? and on her
declaring she would not, he said he could riot stop
then to finish the examination, as the Gentleman's
dinner hour had arrived, and that she and her com-
panion must be taken again next day over to the Ma.
gistrate's house, a distance of eight miles. They were
accordingly kept a third night at Baker's Cottage,
and next day taken in an open cart, over rough and
rugged roads, to the Magistrate's home. Mrs. Car.

rey, owing to her ill state of health, suffering vai
.severely, and her person being much bruised by the
shaking of the cart. On arriving at the Magistrate's
the examination was resumed, and they were asked
whether they would be committed to prison for hard
labour or for trial? They immediately desired to be
committed for trial ; but the Magistrate then declared
they should be committed for hard labour, and if
they did not labour, be flogged, as they persisted in
refusing the constable's offer. The warrant was ac-
cordingly made out, committing them as vagrants to
the House of Correction for two months. This com-
mitment took place on the 15th of August, and they
continued in prison till the Gth of October. Oa that
day, upwards of a week before the two months had
expired, the Magistrate who committed them came,
and ordered that they should be released, and they
were released accordingly. It was not for him (Mr.
Pearson) to say what motives operated in the mind
of the Magistrate to induce him to act thus; but one
circumstance he must mention—that was, that the

Grand Jury were then about to assemble at. the
county town, and that might have some influence
with these parties to shorten the imprisonment of
these unfortunate women. On the whole, he could
not but consider the circumstances attending this
case as immoral, cruel, and illegal in the highest de-
gree. He had stated them, without comment, as de•
tailed in their affidavits to their Lordships, and upon
them he founded his present application.
The Coon' said, there was sufficient in the affida-
vits to reach four of the individuals, namely, the
master, the valet, the Magistrate, and the constable.
The fifth person, who they supposed, was the indivi-
dual to whom the constable delivered the women to
have them conveyed to Baker's Cottage, did not ap-
pear to have such knowledge as implicated him suf-
ficiently in the transaction to render him liable to the
Rule. It would be necessary also, that the Magis-
trate should have notice, and under these regulations
the Rule to shew cause was granted.