Star.
London, England, 1827-06-18 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF CHANCERY, Joie 14.
IN MR MATTER OP SLINGSBY.
Mr. SUDDEN, at the sitting of the Court, complained
that Messrs. Hurd and Johnson, Solicitors of that Court,
felt themselves aggrieved in conseqnence of an expres-
sion which had been dropped concerning them by Mr.
Montagu, a lew days ago.
Mr. Montt/ton said, he meant no disrespect to those
Gentlemen, by saying that they viers sharp practitioners.
It was rather a matter of praise than of blame that they
were so ; and although he admitted he did not mean to
praise them for what they had done on the occasion
which drew from him that observation, yet, if he were
to be in the situation of a suitor, by some unfortunate
circumstance (which, however, he hoped to avoid), be
would rather avail himself of their services than of any
other persons.
The LORD CHANCELLOR had always understood the
firm to be a respectable one.
in a subsequent part of the day, Mr. MONTAGU
moved for an injunction to stay the sale of the bank-
rupt's effects.
Mr. SUDDEN said, he was obliged to oppose this ap-
plication, for be held in his hand a letter from Man-
chester, stating that the sale had actually taken place.
Mr. MONTAGU then would shape his motion so that
the removalvf the goods might be prevented by the
order of the Court.
After some discussion between the Counsel, the Loan
Cuarsic neon refused the application.
MARSH AND IAUNTLIROY'S BANKRUPTCY.
Mr. HORNE was induced to mention this case to the
Court on account of the great sum which depended on
its decision—not less than 250,000 L—and because 18
other cases would be determined by it. The Bank of
England was willing to act, but could not do so without
the authority of the Court.
The LORD CHANCELLOR directed it to be heard on
Saturday next.
Vaasa& CORPUS.
Mr. SPXIICE applied for the discharge of a Bankrupt,
Thomas Reed, who bad been sent to prison by the Com-
mistioners. The ground on which he moved was, be-
cause the answers which the bankrupt had given, were,
he contended, perfectly satisfactory, and did not justify
his commitment. He had been examined five several
times, and the Learned Counsel read the whole of his
examinations and answers as they appeared on the re-
turn. The Bankrupt had several shops in different
places near London. Among others be had one at
Chatham. Two months before the act of bankruptcy
bad been committed, he made an assignment of this
shop and the effects in it to his brother, Howell Reed,
who had lent him various sums of money. ' The main
object oldie examination was to' ascertain whether the
bankrupt or his brother knew, at the time of this assign-
ment, that be was about to become insolvent ? It ap-
peared that the bankrupt had in one of his letters said
be would 64 floor the concern." On his examination he
denied that this meant to ruin the concern. For this
answer, and for previous ones, which were alleged to be
prevaricating, he was committed. The Learned Coun-1
sel argued that, from the vagueness of the slang cepa:-
Won he had used, it was not so apparent that be had any
improper intention as to justify his being committed:
Mr. Ross was on the other side, ind expressed great
surprise that this case should be brought forward, and
still greater surprise that his Learned Frimsd(nra feyness)
should have laboured the point respecting the Bank-
rupt's expression. It was imposdblo to give anrothet
interpretation to that expression than had been pelt on
it by the Commissioners. Everybody knew tehal:it
meant ; and after his late experience In electioneering,
he was quite astonished that his Learned Friend should
affect ignorance of what 6, being • floored" was. The
Learned Counsel sieved that the commitment was per-
fectly justifiable.
Mr. KNIGHT was on the same side, but did MK
think it necessary to add any thing.
Mr. Statics replied, and said it seemed that the
Commissioners bad sent this Bankrupt to prison, not
because he had given them unsatisfactory answers,
but because they thought his conduct deserved pu-
nishment. This, he contended, was an excess of au-
thority, and that upon the face of the commitment
the Bankrupt was entitled to his discharge.
The LORD CIiANCILLOR said it did not appear that
tl,e Commissioners had done any more than their duty.
They had put no question they were not authorised to
put, and he thought Mr. Sience had no right to im-
pute to them that they had exceeded their authority. •
Mr. Suttee submitted he had a right to ttate the
case as best suited his client's interest.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said, he had, so far as the
evidence supported him, hut not by circumstances
which were purely imaginary.
Mr. SPENCR urged the hat dship which the Bankrupt
laboured under 'by means of this commitment. He bad
already been in prison three months, and might be
there much longer, if the Court did not interfere.
The LOAD CHANCELLOR said, it was in his power
to procure his liberation at any time by giving a true
account of his affairs. His Lordship saw no reason at
present [or granting his discharge.
COURT OF ICING'S BENCH, Jima 16.

THY LING AGAINST THE LORD SIATOiI AND ALDER.
MEN OF LONDON. _

The rule calling—upon the defendants to shew cause
why a mandamus should not bir issued directing them
to swear in Mr. Sheriff Winchester, was enlarged,
upon the motion of Mr. J. Parke.
CRIMINAL IYPORMATION.
The ATTORN6Y-GCNERAL moved for a criminal in-
formation against Rigby Wason, Esq. at the instance
of Mr. Charles Dawson, an Attorney of the Court. Mr.
Wason made proposals of marriage to the daughter of
a Gentleman who consulted Mr. Dawson upon the oc-
casion, and instructed him to make inquiries respecting
Mr. Wason's property. Mr. Dawson accordingly waited
upon Mr. Wason, who mentioned amongst other pro-
perty., a piece of ground at Liverpool wheteun Imam
might, be thought, be built to produce a rental of /at
per annum. The next day Mr. Dawson vcrote-a letter
to Mr. Wason, that he conld,nis heletelistrusting this
calculation. Mr. Wescott.. in reply, 'riche' that it Mr,
Dawson doubted his word. ht might see the documents,
which would shew his statement to be correct. Mr.
• Dawson answered, that Mr. Wason must hot mistalien
The meaning of his letter ; that be did not ate all dolltit
his word, but had the highest opinion of hit hon. r.
However, Mr. Wason, in reply, thought fit tetylite
letter complained of, which Mr. Dawson received .on
the last day of lAA tei ip. It wus to, the following effect:
-••••=1." On referting to the. letter I wrote in auswer io yeur
first, you will perceive lre.itvesi to myself the liberty
of answering it again in a very different manner. The

a •
reason I so long abstain'd from so doing was the fear'
of giving another excuse toohe father of the Lede feu
not consenting to our marriage. You are a liar and a
villain; and as there are circumstances that prevent our
meeting in this country, I now inform you that I shall
be in Calais in Whitson week; and if yogt cowardice
is not equal to your 'litany, you will be there to give
me satisfaction.'—Rule to shew cause granted.
• THE KING O. RAMSDIN AND OTHRR.S.
• The Comoros SERGEANT applied (or a rule to shew
cause why there should not •be-a new trial in this mat-
ter, which was an indictment for a conspiracy, and wit
tried at Guildhall before Lord Tenterden at the le*
sitting. The indictment consisted of two counts: first.
that the parties bad conspired to cheat divers creditors
of Ramsden, and in pursuance of the conspiracy had
sued out a commission of bankrupt against him ; second,
that the patties had falsely and fraudulently conspired
to sue out the commission. The ground on which he,
the Common Sergeant, moved was, that improper evi-
dence had been admitted. A commission of bankrupt
had been produced, which, as it was not enrolled, could
not be received in evidence ; but an assignment under
it had been received.
Lord TENDIRDIN—III my charge to the Jury I stu-
diously avoided taking any notice of the assignment. 1
The Coniston SERGEANT—The Attorney-General,
for the prosecution, endeavoured to give secondary
evidence of the commission. William Smallwood was
an important witness, who was himself indicted and
acquitted.
Lord TIINTERDIIII—The parties might be guilty of
conspiring to sue out a commission, though no em-
eticwas issued.
COMMON SERGEANT—The assignment, without
a commission, was nothing, because it does not appear
that those who am in the assignment styled Commis.
sioners are really Commissioners. Several of the pro-
ceedings, such as proofs of debts and other matters,
were brought forward; but if there were no commission,
there could have been no proceedings. The conclusion
of the Jury was through the medium of that which
ought not to be admitted; and although the assign-
ment wasnot stated in the charge to the Jury, still the
impression which its admission may have made upon
them cannot be calculated.
Lord TENTERDENIt is impossible for my brothers
to understand this case without bearing all the report of
the trial read. That this May not be done twice, the
Court will neither grant zor refuse your rule, but the
objection shall be open to you when the parties are
brought up for judgment.
THE ZINO V. JOHN HANGER.
This defendant, who was arrested on the Lord Chief
Justice's warrant upon an indictment for blasphemy,
found against him at the Old Bailey yesterday, was
brought up to plead to the indictment. He complained
that he was taken up early in the morning as he was
•going to his employment; if he had been aware of it,
he would have been provided with bail, and he thought
it hard he should be kept in confinement until the ex-
piration of the time for notice of bail.*
Mr. Justice BATLEY asked him if he could now give
notice? but he was not prepared with the names of his
bail ; and Lord TENTERSEN said it was not in their-power
to do any thing ; so, after pleading Not Guilty, he was
taken away in custody.
COURT OF COMMON ?LEAS, .7662 16.
, Mr. Justice PARK sat for a short time in this Court
this morning, in the absence of the other Judges, to take
justifications of bail, and to dispose of such motions as
might be unimportant.
HIGH COURT OF 15FILRGATBIS, Jon ti.
IRMO AGAINAT BRISCO.
The argument in this case, which was part heard last
term, closed this day. The details have been repeatedly
before the public nape ad nauseam. The original snit
was instituted by Lady Brisco in the Consistory Court,
Canteibury, for a divorce by reason of adultery cons-
trained by her husband, Sir Wastel Brisco, who, in turn,
sued his Lady on a similar ground, to which she replied
by an allegation of cruelty. The sentence pronounced
by the Judge in the Court below, in an interlocutory
proceeding, was appealed to this Court, where the case
has been long depending, partly on account of the non-
payment of costs and alimony decreed against Sir Was-
te!. whereby he was in contempt.
• After hearing Mr. Kowa; with whom were Dr.
JENNER and Dr. Pioneers, on behalf of Lady Brisco,
and Dr. PHILLIMoRE in reply, the Court was cleared,
and the Judges remained in consultation nearly two
hours. On the admission of Counsel and strangers,
Lord Chief Justice BEST, • who presided, stated that
although their Lordships had not drawn out the sen-
tence in form, he had to announce that they were of
opinion that Lady Brisco was batied from a divorce on
the pound of adultery on the part of Sir Wastel. On
,the other point, relative to cruelty, the Corot had a
tirong opinion, and it was for Counsel to say whether
hey wished to proceed.
After sonic discussion, the argument was renewed
upon the whole case. Dr. JENNER, Dr. PICKARD, and
Mr. KNIGHT were heard on behalf of Lady Bribe°, and
Dr. Patuonione for Sir Waste!.
The Court was again cleared, and on beings...
the Registrar read the sentence, namely that their Ila
ships were of opinion that Dame Sarah Brisco had failed
in establishing her case, and that Sir Wastel had failed
also in his; and that they dismissed both parties (on
payment of alimony by S r Waste)); the subject of costs
to be considered at the next Court.
The common Law Judges in the commission were the
Lord Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, Mr. Justice
Burrough, Mr. Justice Littledale, Mr. Justice Gaselee,
Mr. 114ron.Garrow, and Mr. Baron Hullock.
Dr. Lee sat as or,e of the delegates, but the topics
upon which the Learned Advocate has lately dissented
la the Court of Condelegates were not touched upon
nvhilst the Court was open.
LORD MAYOR'S COURT, JoAt 16.

TROSIIIMTION OF THU CIIILORIO Or CHILLS/WI COSTIMLTS /ROM
JUDAISM TO WORT 00 TOADS 10 TOR CITTe—THR LORD MAYOR
♦ND CORIVRAItOII OF TOO CITY OF 1000011 11. RAUL AND OROTIIIa.
Mr. HOLLAND Appeared as Counsel for the City of
London in four different actions, instituted against the
defendants, S. Saul and his brother, who are respectable
butchers in Whitechapel market, to recover four dif.
ferent penalties of s'. each from the defendants, for hsv-
ingaarzied on trade in the City without being freemen.
The-public were some time ago made acquainted
with the particulars of this case, and, from its not har-
ing been heard of recently, it has been generally pre-
sumed, that an application made to the Coust ot Al-
des men in their behalf bad been successful, and that
they were admitted to their freedom. It will be ne-
c'essary to restate that the father of the defendants,
%bp resided in Old Gravetlane, was born and educated
a Jew. Although in ♦ery indigent circumstances, !lie
was considered a man ot much learning And fesearth,
which citcumstatice may account in sonic mouse

for his dissent from the religion of his ancestors.--
fie expressed that dissent in the • most open and
public manner. He carried on business with his
sins during the Jewish Sabbath ; he observed none
f their fasts, paid nothing to tile High Priest,
and bought and sold pork. He did so far yield to the
,weakness and superstition of his wife, as to permit his
two sons to undergo the ceremony of circusncision.—
Eriwever, after her death. he brought them up as Chris-
tians ; they served their apprenticeships to Christian
masters, married Christian wives, and had their chil-
dren baptiz d and in every respect educated in the most
exemplary manner as Christians. Whilst they were
poor, little notice was taken of the defendants ; but when
their industry made diem respectable. and brought
them trade as butchers in.Whitechapel market, others
of the Whitechapel butchers began to entertain con-
scientious scruples, whether persons whom they chose
to stigmatize as not being such prim Christians as them-
selves should be permitted to remain amongst them?-
-Informations were lodged against the defendants, aid
they were sued in the Lord Mayor's Court. They ap-
pealed from a grievous prosecution upon twenty-four
penal actions to the Court of Common Council. That
body referred the case to the Court of Aldermen, re-
commending them to admit the defendants to take up
their freedoms on their complying with the proper forms.
The case was argued recently in the latter Court with
closed doors. Sir Peter Laurie spoke with great zeal
in their favour, but the following standing order of the
Court, dated slay 3, 1783, was advanced against him :
" Resolved unsohnously, That it is the opinion of this Court it
is neither politic nor advisable in this Corporation to admit baptized
Jews into the freedom of this City, and that it he observed as a
standing order."
Sir Perna LAUltfn, without entering into a discus-
sion of the metits of the above order, contended, that
however applicable it might have been to the father of
the defendants, it was preposterous to apply it to the
defendants themselves ; 'bey having, from their infancy,
received the light of Christianity, not being therefore
baptized Jews. The Court, however, thought otherwise,
and resolved to let the prosecutions take their course,
and enforce the standing order. Under these circum-
stances, four of the actions brought against the too de-
fendants came on for trial in this Court, when
Mr. Carter, their attorney, handed in a writ of habeas
to remove the trial of the cause to the Court above.
Mr. Bot.Laton objected to the validity of this process,
and read the following clause of the 21 Jac. 1. cap. 23.
sec. 4. which declares, that if the sum sought to be re-
covered in any inferior Court of Record " do nut amount'
to or exceed the sum of five pounds, then such crease
shall not be stayed or removed by any writ or writs
whatever, other than writs of error or attaint. And if
any writ or .writs shall be granted or sued forth con-
Amy to the intent and meaning of this Act, the Judges
of the inferior Court may disallow and refuse the same."
The Learned Gentleman called upon his Lordship to
refuse the writ.
11 Mr. Carter said they were now taken by surprise, by
means of this very unusual objection.
The Recoapsa said he should proceed to tryst e-
causes notwithstanding the habeas. After the recent;
very full discussion of the case in the Court of Alder.
men, be could not have imagined that the parties could
be taken by surprise. However, that they might mate
every preparation in their power for their defence, be
would put off the trials until the next Court day.
The cases were adjourned accordingly.

GUILDHALL.
Saturday, at Guildhall, a journeyman tailor, was charged with
detaining a quantity of cloth, which had been entrusted to him to
work up, for a master sweep and his two apprentices. It seems the
tailor had deeply taken to hurt the elopement of his wife, and had
acquired a habit of lotting, and when he took the cloth home. be
first cut off a quantity as his cabbage, to make a pair of trousers foe
himself, although cautioned by a brother snip that such a step would
leave an insuficient quantity to complete the boys' suits, which, in
fact, proved too little, and the master's cost, when nearly finished,
he left with his landlord, as security upon a loan of I!. The poor
sweep, therefore, was completely disappointed. but eves now he
hoped the prisoner might net be &ale severely ,with, on account of
his domestic calamity. The rinser thought the Magistrate had no
jurisdiction in such matters, and refused to come to any terms until
he was liberated. Mr. Alderman Awns, however, on the lidt '
section of the Pawnbrokers' Act, condemned him to pay the value
of the cloth and trimmings not restored by hint to the owner, and
pay a fine of Ws. (together .C 2 10s. ad.) and in default of imme-
diate payment to be committed to hard labour for two months; and
if within three days of the expiration of that term the forfeitures
were not paid., then to be well whipped in public. The prisoner
could not pay the money, and was committed.

BOW-STREET.
Saturday --- lasses, of Round-court, in the Strand appeared to
sheer cause, why be was not liable to pay the premium to which the
Fireusen,who bring the first engine to a plate where a fire breaks out,
are entitled under the Act of Parliament. It was established that a
chimney in the house In which the defendant, had been on
fire. Defendant claimed to be excused, first,round that the
fire had been extinguished long before any engine appeared ; and
secondly, that he was only a lodger ; and as such, he was not within
the operation of the Act. The Act expressly mentioning " The
Owner of the Dwelling-house." And as it could not be eon-
traded that a lodger we. an owner,it followed that he was not liable.
The Magistrate, however, thought it quite sufficient that the person
sought to be made chargeable, was ahewn to reside in the house,
and to be the accepter of the particular pan of It, in which the fire
begun • and accordingly ordered the defendant to pay half the sum
specified in the Act. As a notion obtains among uninformed per-
sona, perhaps,the giving publicity to this decision, may induce greater
circumspection on the part of lodgers, and prevent many of those
evils which but too frequently flow from carelessness.

It appears by recent accounts that the Wesleyan Mis-
sionaries to New Zealand have been roughly handled by
the natives. In consequence of some misunderstanding
in January last, the Chiefs of the Island made an attack
upon them; they Bed, leaving their property behind
Ahern, and arrived with their families at the Bay Islands,
ha►ing nothing but the clothes in which they were
dressed. When they arrived at the Bay, their wants
were supplied by the Church of England Missionaries.
These unfortunate persons purposed sailing in a few
days for New South Wales.
Mr. William Gardner, farmer, in the parish of
Saiatbury, Gloucestershire, who, whilst in the act of
tying up a fleece of wool, was suddenly seised with a
giddiness in his head, and expired almost immediately.,,
Monday evening, Mrs. Harryman, the wife of Mr.
Thomas Harryman, of East Mailing, had walked to
Wateringbuty, to visit a friend at that place, and had
just entered her friend's house, when she complained of
feeling an acute Fain near her heart, and falling back-
wards, instantly ezpited.
.Yesterday se'nnight as Mrs. Llogben, of Chalkwell,
near Sitcingbourne, w.. 1 going to the evening service at
Sittingbourne Church, she felt herself unwell, and called
at a neighbouring home at the top of the street, where,
in a few minute•, she became worse. and in less than
ball an hour expired. Her friends Who so shortly before
had seen her in the enjoy metil f perfect health, to their
iitespieiatble isioui:.hrner.t and gild,- beheld htr con-
veyed home a lilekss cut p.e.