Star.
London, England, 1818-12-10 00:00:00

: -
was shewn into the cabin by witness, and he ex-
pressed his surprise at the answer which he (Welch)
had seat to the request which witness had sent with
his cortipliments, that if he was I ing to Dover he
would accompany him. Welch replied old said,
that the young gentleman must hay' suimenstrued
the answer. Witness then asked him what objecticn
he had to go with him to Dover ? The reply was,
that it would crush the object of his cruihe, and he
'added, that if he was forced to go he would prose-
cute witness. He further said, that such a proceed-
ing would produce the indignation of his owners,
and the Government to which the ship belonged.—
Welch then shewed a passport, describing himself as
a Captain in the Portuguese Navy ; and in conse-
quence of this witness recalled his orders, and released
the San Juan. Oi the 11th of July witness fell in
with the Charlotta, Captain Hoffman, under Danish
colours. He examined her ; saw her papers, which
ware satisfactory. She wits bound for Havre, and
allowed her to proceed to that destination. On the
ISth of July he saw the San Juan again, being be-
calmed. The latter sent boats towards the Char-
lotta, and she herself set all Iter sails, and came down
towards the Dane. When witness saw this he sent
an officer on board the Charlotta to inform the Cap-
tain that the ship in sight was the Spanish ship which
he had heard of; and to know if he was afraid of her,
for, if he was, he, the witness, would see her safe. as
the Charlotta's license would expire the next morn-
ing. A fine breeze had by this time sprung up, and
the San Juan's bast passed witneses vessel, for the
purpose of boarding the Chatlotta ; but witness's of-
Seer would not suffer her to do so without his (wit-
ness's) permission, as an English privateer dare not
do so. Witness sent a letter to Mr. Welch, desiring
to know why he did not proceed to Dover, in pursu-
ance of his original destination, instead of interfering
with the Dane? and received an answer that he acted
under a commission from his Most Catholic Ma-
jesty ; and having suspicion that there was enemy'
Woperty on board the Dane, he must examine her.
itness therefore withdrew his officer from the Char:
lotta, and shortly afterwards the San Juan made a
capture of her. Witness afterwards spokii with Mr.
Welch, with a trumpet, and asked him why he did
not take the Charlotta to Dover, according to his
own destination ?—and the answer was, that he
(Welch) intended to cake her to Portsmouth, as being,
more convenient, which was accordingly done.

Samuel Moody, a seaman on board the Dwarf,
when in
.possession of the San Juan on 10th'July,
heard Welch say that he was looking for a Danibh
ship, and dared witness to stop him. Welch appeared
to act as Captain of the San Juan, and gave orders.
W. Ludwick Hoffman, Mister of the Charlotta,
owned, as he understood, by Christian Anderson
Lort. When he left London, in July, 1813, for
Havre. was laden with sugar, coffee, and pepper.—
The ship, 250 tons, was quite full. After he was
captured by the San Juan, he saw Welch in the ca-
bin of the latter, w•ho asked him the name of the
ship ? He replied, the Charlotta. Welch said, "0,
I know you very well—l have got you down In my
list—l saw you in the London Docks, when you took
in part of lour cargo." Welch then said, he would
take the Charlotta into Portsmouth, and which he did
afterwards.

Cross-examined.—The Charlotte came originally
from 13ourdeaux, under witness's command—did not

remember swearing that he had commanded the
Charlotta for five years--belieied that she was a
Danish ship—did not know that she was called the
Grand Consul at Bourdeaux.

Several letters'were here put in in the hand writ-
ing of Mr. Welch, Mr. Burke, and Mr. French, shew-
ing all these gentlemen to be connected with the
San Juan, the correspondence having reference to
Mr. Welch's claim for wages, as Captain of the San
Juan, during a period of eight months,

Mr. Richard Clarke, one of the Assignees of
Messrs. Bogle French, Son, and Barton, produced
the accounts Of that Louse. He stated that by these
accounts, Mr. Burke was debited with near twenty
thousand pounds. After the bankruptcy, Mr. But ke
applied to uitness to advance money to go on with
the suit in the Admiralty. His answer was, after
mentioning the impoverished" state of the affairs of
the house, that he witness, was solicited by the credi-
tors to arrest Mr. Burke for his own debt, instead of
advancing money. Mr. Burke denied owing IVessrs.
French any thing. There was about £lO,OOO entered
in the account as for wools coming from Spain,
which never made their appearance at all. The be-,
ginning of the account, debiting Mr. Burke, had re-
ference to " adventure per Pitt," and went on to
June 30th, 1813, the ship and stores being valued at
£2300. The debt account contained various items of
sums of money paid to hlendez, Larragoiti, Loza and
others. Witness had found amass of papers in Messrs.'
French's house, consisting of Burke's letters and
drafts, &c. in a bureau locked up, by themselves.-
-After looking at them, he spoke to Augustine
Bogle French, and Mr. Barton, bankrupts, the cause
about the Charlotte -being then going on before the
Court of Admiralty, and he told them that those
papers were very different from the accounts they
had given of the San Juan in the Admiralty. Neither
of them seemed to admit that. Some time after this,
A. B. French admitted that the papers were but too
true—that he had been led into the business by that
bloody-minded villain, Burke, who did not mind
whose neck he got into the halter, so long as he
escaped himself. Mr. Barton told witness that he
-might have reason to dread Mr. Burke's vengeance
when he eame home.
C:

Witness had received £2,000
from the claimants of the Charlotta, in cor.sideration
of his trouble, after the papers were delivered up.
He had had a great deal of trouble ten months after-
wards. Could not say whether he had offered his
labour for this sum, cr any body else had offered it.
Began the labour about the end of 1815. Had not
received any money then, but was promised money
.for his labour. Neglected the greatest part of his
own business for the interest of the claimants. He
gave up the papers in question to the claimants about
the end of November, 1815. The other assignees re-
ceived no part of this money, nor did they receive
,any money. He believed that Mr. B. Shaw, oue of
the other assignees, might have heard from report,
that he had received £2,000.
Evidence was then.offered of the restitution of the
Charlotta-,to the owners by the sentence of Sir Wm..
Scott, but it was not deemed aeisnissible. The Pitt,

sus afterwards condemned in rent, but the evidence
of that fact was not admitted.
-A Gentleman named Fall was called, to prove that
',fir. Nathaniel Bogle French, the elder, died in Dee
cember" , 1816. He stated, that for the last two years
he was debilitated in mind as well as in body. Mr.
Augustine B. French was under thirty.
' Mr. Simon Cock was not included in the indict-
ment, for want of evidence against him.
After some further evidence, of a formal nature,
the case of the prosecution was closed, at half past
six o'clock, when the Jury were permitted to retire to
take some refreshment. The Jury having returned,
Mr. SCARLFTT proceeded to address the Jury on
behalf of the defendants, Mr. Augustine Bogle French
and Mr. Burke. He set out with reminding the Jury
of the important nature of the question which they
had to try, and the serious character of the offence
imputed to his clients. He next proceeded to com-
ment upon the nature of the evidence adduced to
support the indictment, dwelling particularly upon
that of Mr. Clarke, whose testimony, he conten,led,
was entitled to very little weight, considering the dis-
closnre he had made, that he had received the sum
of L:2000 from the owners of the Charlotta, for the
labour (as he called it) in managing their cause.
Mr. CAMPBELL addressed the Jury on the part of
Welch, and, following the observations for the other
defendants by Mr. Scarlett, contended that there was
nothing to shew that Mr. Welch was connected with
the original conspiracy, supposing it to have existed.
The CHIEF Justice, at a quarter past nine, pro.
-ceeded to sum up the evidence for tne prosecution
with great minuteness, and
The Jury, at half past one, found the defendants
Guilty, out recommended Mr. A. B. French to mercy
on account of his youth.

PREROGATIVE COURT, DECEMBER 9.
t.IUSTO V. strrement.
In this case, it appeared that Mr. Timothy Sut-
cliffe, of Henley-upon-Thames, about the latter end
.of 1805, intermarried with Mrs. Nancy Osborne, and
in 1804 made a will, by which he cut his wife off with
a shilling. Previous to his death, however, he gave
instructions for another will, of a very different te-
nor, in which he left the whole of his property to his
wife, and these instructions were now propounded
by Mrs. Sutcliffe as the last will and testament of the
deceased. Three witnesses hid been examined to
prove the capacity and intentions of the deceased,
and the cause now came on for sentence.

The Counsel in support of the paper of instructions
argued, that the cause of the deceased having Made'
the will of 1804, whereby he deprived his wife of all
interest in his property, had proceeded from an un-
,grounded motive of jealousy.; and the harmony in
which they subsequently lived, and their Mutual af-
fection, was fully establishe4 in the evidence. The
deceased was taken ill on theist of November, 1817;
on the sth of November, Mrs. Sutcliffe sent for Mrs.
Wigglesworth, an intimate friend and neighbour,
and requested she would come to her; on Mrs. Wig-
glesworth's arrival, she strongly recommended tjte
deceased, if he had any intention of altering his will,
to do it without delay ; and the deceased answered,
that he intended so to do. Mr. Chapthan, a school-
master, and resident in the village, was accordingly
sent for; and when the deceased was informed he was
come, he said he was very kind. Mr. Chapman pro-
ceeded to take the instructions, and having reduced
them to writing, read them over to the deceased.—
The only cause of their not being signed was the
rough and unfinished state they were in. Mr. Chap-
man went home, with the intention of putting them
lin a fair and complete manner for signature; but be-
fore his return Mr. Sutcliffe was un.ortunately taken
worse, and died. The Learned Counsel said he h.:ped,
upon considering that there was no impottunity on
the part of the wife, the suggestion first originating
in Mrs. Wigglesworth, the decided proof of the af-
fection that existed between the parties' and the en-
tire unison which this paper bore to the deceased's
intention, the Court would pronounce for the vali-
dity of such paper.
The Counsel opposing the instructions admitted
that there was an intention on the part of the de-
ceased to alter his will; but the extent of such alte-
rations, and what they were, did not appear, and
therefore had nothing to do with this paper. lie con-
tended, that the situation in which the deceased was
found, with his extremities cold, and his feet on plates
filled with hot water, his spirits very low, and his
head leaning on his breast, was a situation of an ex-
treme nature; and he hoped that the Court, taking
all the circumstances under its consideration, would
pronounce for the former will, and reject the paper
of instructions.

Sir Jotm NICHOLL, on adverting to the evidence.'
said, it was clearly proved that Mr. Chapman, who
Look these instructions, left the deceased with an in-
tention to prepare a will from them ; but before this,
was done, the deceased was taken worse, and died.
In that case, the want of a signature would he im-
material, provided the Court be satisfied that the de-
ceased had sufficient capacity at the time to make a
Will. In all tastarneatary acts done in the last stage
of life, it is incumbent on the Court to look to the
transactions with great vigilance. It is quite clear,
that when the deceased made the will of 1804, he
was actuated by a motive of unfounded jealousy ;
but that motive is proved entirely to have subsided,
and the affection which existed between the parties
subsequently is not merely proved by casual obser-
vers, but by their intimate friends and neighbours,
and by their servant girl; and it is full) established,
that they were, in every sense of the word, a happy
couple. This being the case, therefore, it raises a
probability that the deceased did not mean to abide
by the will he made in 1804, when he had doubts of
his wife's fidelity and virtue. His declaration, that
he had built a summer-house expressly for her, and
hoped that she would long live to enjoy it, was a
proof that he did not intend the will to take effect.
On his illness, before his death, he said—" I want
Nancy to write to Essex for my old will, that I may
alter my affairs." He also made a similar declara-
tion to his servant-girl. It was proved that he had
made an appointment to go to Essex• for the exoress
purpose of procuring his will, and wished his AviTe to
accompany him ; but she, owing to some domestic
circumstances, was not able to go, and it was conse-
quently postponed. These circumstances, said the
Learned satisfy me that the deceased intended
Co. make a new will, and leave an ample provision
for his wife.—The question as to the capacity of the
deceased has been clearly established. He had is:eu