Star.
London, England, 1803-05-30 00:00:00

G 1\ 'T.'I.I.IGLNCE.

r

1,

1

1

en..-t;!.t... .1 (.1 tvsenry
fty , ;.- .k .\
aft:l‘ •.!1 I • IW.• \• tv.ire, 0'; 1-1,11::1,,,b,"1:r.,
v.! 'cr.) xv..n by M.. J,Aw',.
*ll,l p.-1.: ill
Ts, c!,t y p •r, i NVer,' liettcd agaio'l the
match. N:r. Tr' s tnkrl
I+a,

.•
. i i!1 Jr:i•lr.; th.: rontr:l..,na we 1-:.1711 t'...lr b.,:h dir no
bi,• a!:11:1I• f icin...ced hy :in exertion Iwy,,r,el tilt ii
I fir.ntrii, die,l the next moii.i;ig at Afhfold, and the
QC :r .t[ Cant,: bury.
EPSOM I.',CFs, M. :7.-o.tk Sweepftakes for
t Fillits Six li...rtcd.
s;r Thoma. C;;lirn:gt;r's b. G
Mr.ll.irt..'s c 1. - . I
. .
I)iti, of (44:'!0,...... t,. f. ...- -3

f•tr t 4,11, cry% f. tt. 4
1,4-,1 !t.f. 5

I _..r.1 Si iw::',. :I. f. - - - - 6
(lids betted before (lartint;:.-5 to 2 agninrl the 1).
of Grafton't, ; 3 to ore Ag;iinit Sir Thomas Gal
c,.ignc's ; 7 to 1 again:} M:-.1-larris'b; and 1ii2,11 odds
azdinft the rel.

LAW lATELLIGEACE.

COURT OF COM MON PI .EAS, 11741 Y :6.
TURNER V. EYLFS, 1.5 Q...
This was an action ,-I debt brought by the plain.
, •
tiff, Mr. Turner, againa Mr. Eyles, the Warden of
' the Fleet, for the elcape of Thomas Jolinfon, a fmug-
' Fier, wit, was in ereeution for a large Turn of money.
1" F aiatitYnoniuited.
dt
COURT OF ICING'S BENCH, MAY :3. ' I
~I VIE RING V. THE MAVr`A el' FOATSMOUTti. i
Mr. GARROW reqnelled the indulgence of the Court
' to permit him ,to Rate fome citcumitances, which he
was aware he could not regularly now introduce to
!1" the notice of the Court, but trailed he thould be ex-
, cured, as his objeft was to relieve the anxiety of a
very refpedahle and valuable man :—The perfon of
whom he fpoke was the Rev. Mr. Bingham, at, whole
inaance Mr. GAR RoW had early in the Term made
4 kan application for leave to file an information againfl
N the M..yor of Portfmouth. This Rule had fince been
dilchaiged ;—of this neither he nor his client made
any complaint—upon the cafe laid before the Court,
i that proceeding was of courfe ; but he was extremely
f an lions that Mr. Bingham fhould (Land acquitted ofany
i
~ ioten:ion to impore upon the Court, or of wilfully con-
cealing any part of the tranfaftion. The truth was,
', that it had been confidered as a matter of importance
iil to afeertain, by the higheil authority, whether a Ma-
gillrate,ading for one diarid, was juflified in refuting
• to give eired to the warrant of a Magiilrate of ano-
l:r then (Nada ? In order to have this quellion decided,
Mr. Bingham had liated all the fads which had °e-
ll virted, with the moll fcrupulous minutenefs, to a
1 toleilional Gentleman of reputation, who had ad-
•ifed that, as the objed of Mr. Bingham was merely
r to procure a clecifin. op. n the queitinn, as lie had no
. , with to punifb the Gcntieman againft whom the ap-
, plication was made, that it would fie fufficient to Rate
l'e circumflance of the demand to indorfe the war.'
rant, and the refufal fo to do, without introducing
any other eircumflances. That the proceedings had
been condufted under this advice. Mr. GARROW af-
fured the Court that his reprefentation of the cafe did
slot depend alone upon the affurance of his client ;
upon which, however, he could have moll implicitly
iclied, as he was a man of honour and veracity; but
he held in his hand the affidavit of the profeffional
1 Gentleman to whom he had alluded, who had very
' candidly Rated the matter as he had now reprefented
i:, and lamented that his erroneous advice Mould
' have occafioned any uneafineft to his client. Mr.
GARROW added, that Mr. Bingham was moil refpec.
i '- tably conneded ; that he was nearly allied to fume
perfons who ranked high in his Majefty's naval fer-
vice ; and was one of the lag men who would do any
' thins to impede it; that he had no manner of enmity
agatna Mr. Gatilee, and had not acted from any per-
, tonal conliderations, but mete/y with a view to af.
certain the limits of the diferetion of the Magiflrate
upon an important point of jurifdilipn.

.

f:1, i'

lOLD BAILEY.
Friday twelve priloners were tried, one of whom
• was capitally eonvified, viz.
William Welk, alias Harvey, for ffealing five fheep,
the property of Richard Field. The evidence was
merely circumflantial. The profecutor could not
(wear to hit Iheep, as they had been killed, and the
Aim and horns were not found, to which the profe-
cutor could fwear pofitively. However, there had
been a drove of Iheep which flopped before the pito-
ner's hurtle in Turnmill•ftreet for half an hour before
the carcases were found in the prifoner',:houfe. The
fame nirrolir were fouvd,frefb killed, at three o'clock
i r the morning. in a back inclofed place; and, horn
the teeth, the bulk, and weight of the fheep, and Air,
from what a pctf‘al acenit“mcd to deal in Cheep, ac
the profecat, r wac, difcern of their vifage, hey
were es.4.!".iy t thife which he had loit. The
et ()vet li..d able, nd d, an..l prifoner's defence was
it .Bencral c,. t i .ad bnugLt dam. A doubt
the retire v.ll.7thcr the ',ironer was guilty of
receiving, or of charg indi&m..nt ?
The Jury deliberated ah:-at half an hour, and return-
ed a verdia—Coilty—D-atk
rive v•ere cont-,;:led cai felony, viz.
J;, 'ph , trot lieaiimti fever-al filyer fpoons !n the
dwe!irr.; !. cite vt. jo!iit ;kinky, butcher, at M.:: y-la-
i!rc prr!..-cator lwoie that the property was
th 31. .1 he J ((mud the prli-o.a;:r
Ertilty, hut under the vahre of 4cs.
T. Wade, for cable e1.r..11, the property.
of W. Roth well; J. fleabag a fad.ile
other articles, the -,,i;Ter..y of j. Fitr•
Acad. for Ding five hens ant lowls. the
prec tyof E Lil;ty. ; au! Ar.n Cr......•:itrd, for fteal-
fag a japanned property of C. lqarthall.
And fit were ac(.iiii;.ee!, ar.-:org wh nn
John Davis ir,diaTJ for 0!2 ri;og from the per
fon of Mr. Stebbins not ..s, at; I
prow:Ml"' notes, to the' vAL:c nt t% m. liundt nil
pounds fierling, the poverty of 11. c *t!.):iirts.
The profectitor dep. ie..% that hr ;r tl:. p iG
liege leading to Covent Garden r•:, ti, • .1/41,ty
- and boon After roiti.ed his poeLLt 1. iii( cc
-LUIS', e each ; three macs,
taotiLi.rs value ;

t.
1i

# 4401 AL

1.0
i 4,

vAile each ; with three proiliffory notes, one of,
id. and two milers of 7;1. e ich, and other bills;
a rinniwing in all to ahont 41°1. Having ordered the
indorirrs of the bilis to flop them when prefented for
i,arin.nitollcy were by.theci: me Ins traced to the pri•
loner at ax bar. .

This being ail that conla be made out againft the
prifotier, Mr. J rliice GROSS fetid to the Jury, that
though from feveral circunidances, both he and they
might lirve drong fillpicions of the priloner's guilt,
)-et the evidence did not bear upon him faticiently to
c.onvia lint. The Jury accordingly returned their
verdict—Not Guilty. _ _

S.rnrday twenty-three prifoners WeTe tried, 18 of
whr:m were conviaed Cr. te,ony, Ariz:

. . "
f..r coining and dining faife money.
A peri.tn oldie name or Ells, the principal witners.
frid, that he knew the prifoner for lime time, and
folpeviled that he was employed in coining and cir-
culating bafe money. In confequence of this fufpi-
cicn, he went on the Id of May lad to Ilt.w.flreet,
and gave informatino to two officers, who immedi-
ate!y accompanied him to public hoult, whore he
expelled to mete the prfoner. One of the officers
gave the Nvi:nels fix fhill:ng,, with particular marks
upon them, to pay to the prifoner, for hate money.
They went into the public houfe, which the prifoner
entered In t aft-r. The witnefs edited him for a
dozen. Tie p: if ner laid, that he had not lo many,
hut he would give him ten for five. The witncfs
agreed. and paid him five of the marked
The officer, Lewis, then came up and feized
Upon fearching him, the officer found a great quan-
tity of hale money, not pepared for circulation, in
his pocket, along with a great deal of good money.
Ike ail found the five marked [killings which the pri-
loner had received from Ellis. . .

The officers, Lewis and Pafmore, expreffed to the
Lame circa.
The prifoner fad in his defence, that the five !bil-
lings were given him by Ellis, not for bad money,
but for limit clothes, for which they had formerly
agreed.—Guilty.
Davis, for healing in April lark, in the pa-
rink ot St. Leonard's, Shoreditch, feveral articles, (Lich
as (hilts, lheets,and table cloths, the propertyof John
Lewis.—Guilty.
!I'i/Pam Billinger, for healing one half guinea, two
(even (billing pieces, and three Millings in Myer, be.
longing to Jr-hr Whitley.
The prif)nct f. lid, that the profecutorhad agreed to
make it up for three guineas, but that he knowing his
innocence had itfufed to comply with this propofi.
Lion.—Guilty.
gefiph Edward:, for Reuling a brats candleffick, the
property of Mrs. Burchell.
The prifoner, a foldier in the Guards, laid that he
was lo much in liquor that he did not recollect what
he was doing. The conitahle and Mrs. Burchell be-
ing called, laid that at the time he did not appear to
be the leaf in liquor.—Goilty.
Thomas Jones, for !leafing a copper, the property
of Richard Hohdell ; Ann Hughes, for healing feve-
ral attichrs of wearing apparel, the property of Ara-
bella Roberts ;—Mary Johnfon, for healing a gold
ring and other articles, the property of William
Mobbs ; John Conner, for healing a coat, the pro-
prerty of Edward Minter; William Cleugh, for heal-
ing a child's. frock and other articles, the property
of James Gibfon ; Thomas Cox, for healing a box
great coat, the property of the Earl of Limerick ;
William Bolton, for healin a copper, the property
gf James Black ; Thomas White, for, healing a loaf
of fugar, the property of Edward Murrils ; John
White, for (kaling a coat, the property of Simon
Solomons ; Mary Briggs, for healing a cotton gown
and other articles, the property of Wright ;
Richard Johnfon, for healing a fhirt and other arti-
cles, the property of William Williams; Daniel
Murphy, for healing feveral Smiths' tools, the pro-
perty of Jeremiah Sinderbury ; Robert Lyon, for
healing 3s. and other monies, the property of Mary
Jones; John Green, for healin a cotton jacket and
other articles, the property of John Smith.
And five were accquitted.