Star.
London, England, 1826-01-27 00:00:00

ilnittLto V. ctio•engi.

Mr. SCARLETT moved for a Rule t• set aside the
nonsuit, and to obtain a new trial.
It was an action to recover a sum of money for the
keep of an illegitim rte child. The defendant. Mrjor
Crowder, had Allowed Its. a week for the keep of the
child, but stopped that ailow.nce until the mother
should go before A Magistrate, and prove in the usaal
vray that be was the father, And li able to keep the
chill It was contended that therkwas evidence to go
to the Jury to [move the d .fendant had not performed
his contract with the mother of tsle child.

The Count were of opinion there was no ground to disturb the
nensuit.

WiLLOUGIIBY V. PLETCHER.

This was an 'action against the Editor of a Chester
Paper for the publication of a Libel on the plaintiff.
The Libel was beaded the Willoughby Controversy,
and related to some Matteis of litivion. The Jury
found a vei-dictfor the plaintiff, with 3001. clamors.
.The ATToRNST-GENIMAL inlved to set asiie the
verdict, and obtain anewnial on the ground of exces-
sive damagesi but the -COuit thought the Jury hod
exercised a sound discretion, and therefore refused the
motion.—Rule refused.
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, _ANUART 26.

ITOLEN NOTES .-11NoW AND OTHERS V. PEACOCK AND

. . .„ OTHERS.
Mr. Srrj antitriitsli, in this canse, moved f4,r a Rule
to sheer cause why the verdict should not be set aside,
or a new trial slanted. -It will be recollected that the
porter of Al:ssrs. Snow and Co. was robbed of 1341 .k
notes to a large amount, and the ac inn was brought
against the defendants, who are b inkers at Bourne,
Lincolnshire, to recover from them the amount of a
live hundred pounds note, which had been passed at.
their bank. At the trial it was proved by a clerk of
Nlessrs. Snow and Co. that he had been told by the
porter, who died soon after the robbery, that
.he had
been robbed; the Learned Counsel contended that his
saying so was not evidence of the loss of the notes, for
he might have been robbed either of the notes or the
warrant, a.,ci if the litter, it could not be said that his
employers ever had any provrty in the 5001. bank note,
or hr might not have been robbed at all. These were
other points argued, as to the practice of paying noses
at the Bink of England, an] the practice of taking and
paying notes in the country. The former asked for
name and residence; the litter took Batik notes without
asking either: and therciore the defendants hid not
neglected a part of their duty, in not asking the person
wilt; presented the note for his name.—Rule granted.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, DURUM-ImM.

THE KING, AT TIIB PROSECUTION OF Slit J. MOKTLOCK,

V. THE PROPRIETORS OF THE DUBLIN ILVENINO MAIL.

Mr. DICANE GRADY applied to the Court, to appoint
Thursday next, if convenient to the Court, for the trial
of this cause. Sir John Mortlock, he said, held a high
public situation, to which there were most important
duties attached, the performance of some of which re-
quired his immediate attendance in Scotland. The
AttorneyGenecal and himself (Mr. Grady), were confi-
dent that the trial would not last any time; indeed a
proposition had been made by the defendant to give up
the author or authors of the libel to the Board of Excise;
and the matter was even that in progress, and would
probably be compleed, on; the present day (Monday);
still in case it was not, h.: was anxious, for the reasons
he had men:ioneJ, to have an early day fixed for the trial.
The Lava Cause JUSTICE said, as a compromise was pending. be
conceived it would be the better way for Mr. Grady to let his
.application stand over until neat day (Tuesday).
THE KING V. BOSWELL AND MAGRATFL

Mr. WALl4cat applied to the Can't to admit the de-
fendants, both pit mers, to bail. T,.ey bad beets
found guilty by a Colonel's Inquest of homicide—the
one of the actual honiic.i.le—the other fur being present
AS an accessary. - The homicide took place in a duel,
which it Appeared, by notes taken at the Inquest, was
occasioned by, certainly, the gross behaviour of the
deceased in spitting in the face of the defendant, Wil-
liam Boswell. The duel, it appeared, was a fair one,
as far as such combats can be considered fair. It up-
pealed by the notes aluJeJ to, that tl.e first shot wars
riven by the deceated and that by the opposite party
recur ring that shot, t e de'ceased met his death. Time
Was no intention on "the Nit of the relatives of the
Jecoased to ptosecute; he (Mr. Wallace) •therdure
trusted the Couat would not allow' the 0-waters to
remain in• custody until the' Assivs. as bail to an)
amount, no matter how large, would be given.
The Loan Clots, Jun-ca said, enteratieally. "It is quite irn-
possible for the Court to entertain the motiou.' • -