Star.
London, England, 1803-06-16 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COCKPIT, WHI'T'EHALL, JUNE i 4.
Before sue Moll Noble and Right hon. the Lords
Commit!loners in Prize Caufes.
Dorothea, --- Ingham mailer.—This was a
further proof cafe of a Danifh veftel, alferted to be
bound on a voyage from Auz Cayes to St. Thomas,
with a return cargo of coffee, when, on the 19th of
March, t 799, the was met with and feized by his Ma-
jrny'b Chip Jamaica,' Samuel Brooking, Erg. com-
mander. and earl ird to the Auld of Jamaica, where
the ufual proc.cdings were commenced.
The quellion in this cafe was with yelled to the
real dellination of the thip. It was contended, on the
part of lthe captors, that at the time of the capture,
from the conrie the chip was (leering, it was impof
bilk that the could have been going to the ifland of
St. Thomas.
After their Lord(hips had heard the Counfel on be-
half of the clrimants,they directed the Regiitrar of the
Court to lay the further proof before the Brethren of
t: •I'l inity Bde, in order that they might give their
osinion in writing, whether, from the cootie the vef-
icl was tte.aing at that time, the could be bound to
the laid Wand
Eliza, —, Borrowdale, maser.—This was a
claim for a very valuable cargo, confining of wine,
brandy, and various other merchandize, as Ameri-
can property.
Their Lordfhips in this cafe reflored the property
as claimed.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, JUNE 13.
!AIDA AND CO. V. NOWILL AND ATTLEY.
This was a motion for a new trial. It was an ac-
tion brought on the 13th Elie. c. 5, entitled, An AR
agAititt fraudulent deeds, alienations, tse. It was
alledged in this cafe, the defendants had obtained a
fraudulent judgment to the amount of Sool. in pre-
judice of the plaintiffs. The eircumilances were very
lhortly theft. A percent of the name of Joreph Nor-
ton, owed the plaintiffs oat tos. for two years' rent,
he being a publican, and having lived in one of their
houfes. He alto owed them a book debt for porter,
to the amount of t s6l. He was not able to pay,
and they put a dißrefs into his houfe. At that time
the defendants, Mars. Howell and Attley, who are
ditlillers, and who had fupplied Norton with liquor,
tad arreßed him for their debt, amounting to 431.
When they beard of the proceedings of the Plain-
tiffs again& Norton, their Attorney, by their direc-
tions, obtained a Warrant of Attorney to the amount
of Soot.
This cafe was tried before Lord Ettitasoanuctin
at the Sittings for Weftmintier, after lag Hilary
Term, when the Jury found a verditt for Plaintiffs,
for 8031. 3s. For the Defendants Mr. Gilles had
obtained a rule to Blew caufe, why there fhould not
be N new trial ?
On the part of the plaintiff's it was infilled by Mr.
Ell AKIN!, Mr. C•ARONI, and Mr. Lewes, that this
was a fraudulent judgment. which had been obtained
by the defendants. They admitted, if the defendants
had only taken a Warrant of Attorney for their own
debt, that they would have had a right to have Rood
upon it I but they took this Warrant of Attorney not
only upon their own account, bat on account of all
the creditors of Norton ; and their objet was, to di-
vide his property equally among all his creditors, as
far as it would go : and it was 'Mined, they had no
right to do that without the privity and confent, and
behind the bads of all the creditors.
Mr. Guess and Mr. Botanic, on the part of the
defendants, infißed, not only that the ail of the de-
fendants was innocent, but meritorious. The plain-
tiffs wifhed to !Weep away all the property of Norton,
to pay their own debt. The defendanu wifhed only
to come in with Maui and Co. with all the other
Creditors.
Lord Ettsaaoaotto a faid, it was not every asu-
man or every feoffment, that diminifhed the funds
out of which a man was to pay, that was fraudulent.
—Every aromment that could be made pro mato,
would go to defeat or delay other creditors of
their fattsfatlion. Every affignment diminifbed the
funds of fatisfallion and to far defeated other cre-
ditor+. But it enuelse alto done, deviled, and eon.
Dived of malice, fraud, and eovin. Was Ms deviled
or contrived of malice, fraud, or coffin ? Was it for
the benefit of Norton ? He had not one particle of
Li's debt extinguithed in coaftquence.of it. His debt
was precifely the fame it swat before. He was debtor
to both of there parties, and it was totally indifferent
to him who had the value of his Rroperty. That mug
be accounted for to him; Was it fraudulent in the
defendants, Mars. Attley and Howell,, infteid of
taking a fatisfattiin for their own debt of 431. which
it was admitted on all hands the! might have done,
they defied that a judgment might be confeffed to
them of all the debts of the Creditors at large, that
they ibould all come in for their proportion, even in.
chiding the plaintiff.. As for the dißreti of Meffrs.
..Nleils„ that could not be defeated • that was a veiled
iivereti, Nothing had been done for the benefit of
Norton or of the defendants themfelves, who, if
they had feted fur their own debt, m4ht have been in
a better Gtu stion. There was no colour or conceal-
/non. lie falfe colours hid been hold nut and the
defendants were in• a work flotation than if they
y.10"1 proceeded only fot..lkaf: own debt. His Lord-
l''. tberefor,ASJr:siint this cafe did not come w:tit-
ea LUe's7.l of Parliament-
Mr. liißice Gaoss faid,•cm meshing at the AO of
Parliament. it appeared to him this cafe was neither
within the letter tsar the fpirit of it. The judgment
of there Gen lioness and of the others was not a Iran-
dotent judgment. It was in reality founded on rod
conftderatton, far all the creditors had a right to have
a fecurity for that which was due to them. They
lensed not to have done any thing in violation of the
Att of Parliament ; on the contrary, their cendua
feint-s 1 to have been meritorious. for they intend-
ed an equal distribution of this property *moo; all
the creditors. and a fraud bad Leen co:oinked on
nobody- The other two Learned judges were oldie
fame alsfolute.
Jogs t4.—rnowsoa V. DOW, corr.
This is a cafe that ante out of the Ruffraa Fm.
IMMO between two feu of Underwriters, the t:Outt-
witen . and the Underwrif:t. on
fvelg .„74 „hUving ntrasiirfuorfethd cihl'lPZud
"4 s
4 P' • to Us • • • • •
;II • - ••• eI. air.
- -

~•►.y* •-A
• • • • . • -

writers on the (hip, and then to the Underwriters on
the freight. The flip being at lad liberated, com-
pleted her voyage, and earned her freight ; and the
queßion was, which fet of Underwriters were enti-
tled to that freight ?
Mr. ERSKINE was Conde' for the Plaintiffs, the
Underwriters on the freight, and Mr. Gulls for the
Underwriters on the (hip, and delivered two of the
fined arguments that ever were beard in a Court of
Judice.
In the courfe of this argument, the Defendant was
confidered on both fides as a mere Rakeholder, who
had received the freight, and only wanted the deeilion
of the Court to inform him who was entitled to it—
whether the Underwriters on the fhip, or the Under-
writers on the freight ?
The Court, however, confidered Mr. Rowcroft not
as the nominal, but as the real Defendant; and held
that he, the Allred, having entered into this contra&
with thefe parties, was obliged to perform the con-
tra& with all its contequences.
1.01 d ELIANEOaOUGH obferved, that this by no
means decided the queflion between the Underwri-
ters on the one fide and the ot&r, claiming out of a
comn;,in fund.
Although the Defendant by the judgment of the
Court is obliged to return this money which has been
paid him without confideration, yet as he was totally
unconnected with the 'hip and every thing belonging
to it, fubfequent to the abandonment, he was allow.
ed the expellees of the navigation home. The charges
incurred in earning the freight ought to be paid mot
of that fund ; and the quantum was agreed to be re-
ferred to arbitration.
JOllllBOll gI".4IIrDDEN.
Mr. Gies' moved for the judgment of the Court
on the part of the Defendant.
Mr. Gsaaow faid they mutt give the other fide
no-
tice.
Mr. PARKS obferved, he was on the tame fide with
Mr. GARROW and as the Court of Common Pleas
concurred with the Court of King's Bench, he had
ad”ifed his client not to trouble the Court any further
with it.
It will be recolleeted the quellion in this cafe was
how an average lofs ought to be calculated on a po-
bey of infurance?—Judgment for Defendant.
HOWARD V. SH MAY.
In this cafe Mr. DALLAS moved for a rule to (bey
can% why there Mould not be a new trial. This
was an anion brought on the Ratute of bribery, the
2d Geo. 11. c. sit. to recover a penalty of soot.
againß the Defendant, for having received the Sum
of 51. to give his vote for Mr. Wharton, at the lad
eleCtion for the city of Durham.
The learned counfel moved this upon two grounds:
*ft on the ground that it was a verdia contrary to
evidence ; and fecondly, on the admifGort of a witnefs
who he contended ought not to have been examined.
There were other caufes that Rood nearly in the
fame fituation, and the Court granted rules ain in
them all.

ME 15,
THE SING V. THE MAYO[ OF WEYMOUTH.
This cafe was argued, with great abilities, by Mr.
DAM rotas for the profecution, and by Mr. Tam via.

wen for the Defendant.
The queflion was, whether the Mayor was elated
agreeably to the Charter? The Court on the autho-
my of the King v. Beringer, and of the King v. Mil-
ler, gave judgment for the Crown, and thereby found
the elation void.

THE ICING V. HILL DAILEY.
The Defendant, Mr. Parley, was indieed and
found guilty., of airgultieg and beating a perfon on
account of money won at play, which fubjeas the
Defend.,..t to two years imprifonment in the County
Jail where the thing takes place; and he alto forfeits
all his perfonal ellate, by the 9 Ann. c. 14. feu. 8.
Mr. Eisele', on the part of the Defendant, had
obtained a Rule to Phew why there fhould not be a
new Trial, on the ground of furprife, and that mo•
Lion failing, why the Judgment &mild not be arrefled.
To.day/Ar. ERSKINE faid he abandoned that Rule,
and on the motion of Mr. GAILROW, Counfel for the
Profecution, the Rule was difcharged with coils.

}MCNEIL v..asoitatcs.
This was an action of affault. The Plaintiff is a
hackney coachman. The Defendant proprietor and
driver of Pentonville nage. In the evening of the
.Bth of January la( their refpeelive carriages got
entangled in the narrow part of St. Martin's-le-Grand.
The evidence was extremely cgntradieory. A num.
ber of very refpeBable perfons living in the ftreet and
perfect! (hangers to both parties, dated that the
coaches might have crowed each other if the Defen-
dant would have backed a few paces to an opening
in the area, but that be refuted to do this, and on
the contrary, tried to make the Plaintiff go back by
beating hit horfes, although there was not an open-
ing that way, except at a great ditlance. There
were three ladies in the hackney coach, who were
' ten ibly frightened, and fcreamed fur help. They
were let out by a Mr. Freeman, a druggift, who took
them into his (hop. The Plaintiff then deicended
from his box; and no fooner was he upon the ground
. than the Defendant knocked him down. He was
knocked down a fccond and a third time, and vio-
lently kicked while he lay in the mud, . He is a short
decrepid man, %bile the Defendant is very tall and,
limn. All thefe witne:les (wore that be never (ruck
again, or offered the llighteft provocation. He cried
nut for mercy, and the mob at laft interfered in his
behalf. Being linable to walk, he was put into his ,
own coach, and driven to a public bottle. A Sur.
geon being called, it was found that site of his ribs
was broke. He was confined to his bed for a week.
and was not able to go through his work till a long
while after.
To anfwer this strocions cafe two of the Defen-
dant's paffenger; were called ; the one, clerk in the
India Hoeft, and the other bookkeeper to St. Barite
and Co. Seething's-lane. They (wore that tbe Plain-
tiff was drunk. and that he alone was in faults Be-
fore the coaches met, the Defendant hailed the Plai*.•
tit, who, if he had flopped at that moment. they
might have cafily paired. When they had run foul
of each other, it was impolible for the Defendant
to back. as there was a waggon immediately behind
him. Ile therefore ;welled the Plaintiff to back.
who was very near an opening, Not focceedin' g.
he
took hold of the reins of the Plaintiff's horfes, No
fooner bad be done this than the Plantkif llrnek him
fir. with the lath, and then with the butt end of his
i whip. By the advice of one of the vritneffes, be then
/ad *al the difeedive, nod knocked the Mimi,

dawn. As fuon as the Plaintiff recovered, he again'
(truck the Defentlant,fo that it was necelfary to knock
him down twice more. The publican and the con.
liable being called. reprefented the Plaintiff as in
quo,. The witneffes on the other fide were then re-
examined : they fwnre that the Plaintiff was com-
pletely fober, and firmly adhered to all their former
aatements.—Verdidt for the Plaintiff, damages 301.

On Thurfday evening a very heavy Dorm of thun-
der, lightning, and rain took place at Lewes. It
commenced about fix o'clock, and continued with
but little inteFrniffion until eight. The lightning,
which emitted a flrong fulphurous fineit, was ex-
tremely vivid, and the thunder alarmingly awful,
particularly one clap, which mull h.re bean very
low and near us, as it bull forth before the flails that
preceded it had well difappeared. The ran fell in
filch torrents, that it inundated the greets, the roads,
and loweft apartments of many
.houles ; and near
Rottingdean, it walhed the mould from the corn
fields over the cliff, in quantities that actually black-
ened the fee Tome diltance from the fkore. The light-
ning, it is faid, !buck the weather-cock upon the
cupola of the Town-hall ; which is not improbable,
as one fide of it exhibits a fmutty hues, as if difcolour-
ed by the fluid.
A letter from Airds, dated Saturday fe'nnight,
fays, " We have had this day one of the moll violent
thunder Dorms ever remembered. The lightning
Renck an old thorn in the farm of Slogarie, in the
parilh of Balmaghie, and fltive:ed it to pieces. It
then divided into four branches, and killed nine blacle
cattle, belonging to Mclfrs. Bennett., tenants of Mr.
Livingflon of Airds. One L.f the cattle had its head
buried up to the eyes in the earth ; and. the lightning
in its way tore up a Done four men could not have
moved. There was no mark on any of the cattle,
except that one of them had the hair forged on its
hind legs and belly ; pod they were an very much
fwelled. It alio killed a very fine cow, belonging to
Thomas Gourley, cotter in Drumglafs, fame parifh.
'Mr. Livingflon received a flight (hock flmilar to that
given by an Clettrical machine."