The Statesman.
London, England, 1810-03-28 00:00:00

LaIVDO:N; frEDNESDOI4:.4I4RCII 28, 1810.

NEW PLAN, • I
With ADDITIONAL and Suesatna Advostages.
STATE LOTT Elli ,
To he Drawn the Bth JUN IL, 1810.
1 HE CONTRACTOR begs lease to call the
attention of the PUBLIC to the eadersmentimsed
Scheme, ova:Wing, besides its Novelty, several grand Fea-
lure% and superior Benefits, which, it is conceived, will fully
merit their approbation. and afford a Chance to Adventurers
never give:a iu any other Lottery.
SC H 1.,14 E.
4 . of —2E20,000 are .:4110,00,) •
4
12
500 1001,0 -
TO
44
36
4,85:1
And to the first drawn Prise above 151. (NM being one of de
andemnespioned Numbers) wilt by given,' to aidttioa to the
above Money Prizes, if the aititl Noisome Mealier Is of the
Letter A lOU Tickets, Comprised le No. 1451 to 1,475
Letter II WO ?Thin, comprised- is 3,101 11111 3,91!
Later C 100 Ditto, comprised se • 4.751 se Sipa
Letter I) 11)0 Ditto, entapKised In 11,501 to t.52:5
With all the Prices they nay cantnia : upon this lieu it is
4 evident that nee Ticket may gals 103,000 f.•
In withdrawing to want Tickets from the qoantitymally
on Sale (oltbough fur the:purpose of forming them bolo Four
such diatinguitdied Prize 4 possessing Chances hitherto de-
ka mit) the Contractor Ls out hasensible to the Objectioro that
may he started by those :rho could nut procure Thkeis at the
close of theiran Lotter-=he coo only anticipate Such Objoe-
tams by mmouncing that Tickets and Shares will he promptly
distributed to every Lottery Office in the United K

NEW STATE LOTTERY, all to be Drawn
flth JtJN'E, ISIO.
Five Thousand Nnnshen, Four Tickets of each Number. •
The Scheme contains
4 .. Prizes of .620,000 I 4 ...Prizes of ... £5,000
12
20
Sic, Btc. U.
Five Thousand Prizes, pomading to £200,000, and POUR
EXTRA BENEFITS, in addition to the Money Prizes,
consisting of Four Pockets, of One Handrod Tickets each;
by which improved rode of Adventure, the Parttime of a
sinele Tickrt °Maim the Chance of Raining ONE HUN-
DRED THOUSAND POUNDS; by a Half, a Quarter,
or on Eighth. in prbportion ; and a Siskensb may 1140
SIX THOUSAND rOUNDS AND UPWARDS.
Thetif It It OS and SU illt *sore oil Sale by
RIC AII DSON, GOODLUCK, and Co. •. • '
Bank Buildings, Cornbill, nod facing the Gate of the Ktidg's
Mews, Charing Craw,
Who sold and shared to tbe lartdnat Lottery, -i
Two ofthe Four Priiesaf .....,E'91.0011..•
N0..3.7:11 II .. ,
,NA
•
No. :1.114 D
Awl 499 D. £1,005-9952 B. .Sl,OOO-3.136 C. ig5W '-
' • * Person§ who with for particular KiMbnedAollllllo/
make earl) application, to prevent disappointing*: ,
„,

IMMENSE fortunes way be gained in the novel
/IL LOTTERY, which draws the Bth of JUNE.—Four
Pockets of Tickets, One Hundred in each Packet. areas he
riven by the Contractor to the fortunate Holder of the lint-
drawn Prize above 4:13. when a Ticket may gain upwards
of £lOO,OOO, and Shwe in proportino.
L. EY FON,
Late P wner wits '
SIR JAIIL•'S SR

,I~1(%UI

...

Hat the islesavvaist ontaalistaslibilyebbsoissamblins evosteo
that this Lowry gives the 'treated etrawee to the Adventover
for so small a risk. His Mee has bees truly lucky in senile'
Packets of Tickets: Nu. 7,o9l,.prodoeiag nearly ted.ooo and
No. 3,6111; producing ,C24,7b3 ; was sold la sixteen Six-
teenths, sad paid by him to the respective Holders, who re-
crived foe each Sixteenth £1,547 16s. Sd.
EXTON solicits a continuance of the public favours, at
his lucky Mire,
2,-CORN HILL, near the MANSION HOUSE.

To the EDITOR of The ST4TESM4N.
Sia;--I take the libertLef requesting the use
of your paper, for the purpose of replyinito cer-
tain observations which you published uuder the
signature of "An old frequenter of Westminster
Ball," on the Stkiastant.
It appears to me that the subject of contro-
versy is, this case arises wholly from misconcep-
tion. True it is, that the verdict of a Jury is

sacred, and not subject to any controul whatever;
that in.practice they ere responsible to no earthly
power ifor their decision of the matter West
them ; .aid that if they err, there Is no,other se-
ttst** the grievance which follows bat by send.
iog the matteragaln to it simnaritaitliettly..rT
it is' that their Verdict rite never Di monk* that
it most always be recorded, and that such their
right, which your Cotresinitident terms the suers
anchors libertatist is not to be shaken:
But, Sir, thestrmaxims of the British Comitlti.
' lion do not affect the question upon the inqeisition
pf damages, in the ease *of SIMKINS and Hun, io
which case the Jury took upon themselves to re.
turn "no damages." That return, though re-
jected, and not recorded by the Sheriff's Deputy,
at the Inquisition, was afterwards presented to the
Court of King's Bench, where it seems to hue
met with thu disapprobation of the Judges.
The return, Sir, of the Jury, opens that occa-
sion, was' not, in technical language, of the na-
ture of a verdict : a verdict is thlued, by 'Sir En.
WARD Cows to be--
Yeredictum, "Ed dictum veriiatis. ad Joachim sot quasi
" kat sicatad questionem jurisousa refilaMiaat
4, Jenkins sed Judices : sic ad questions fat* sue mess-
" Mat Judicei sed Juralares."
La this ease Use question of fact was already set-
\;tied -in the Court above by tit', default of the
rDalettdant, who was held to have admitted the
trespass complained of. The question of law
"arigug 4out of such facts was already settled
in the same Court, and it Was therefore adjudged
that the Plaintiff should have his damages. Tim
writ under *hick the Jury was impannelled, did
nut reqpire or authorise them to take cognizatice
of the facts, 9r of the law. Upon the universal
principle, ;hat where injury has been sustained,
some redress is due, it was decreed that the
Plaintiff should have some redress for the inietl

lieuid be, was all that the Jury had to determine.
It is true that it appeared in evidence, that no
'amigo whatever had been dose to the Plaintiff's
estate, by breaking down his fences, by treading
down his grass, by injuring his soil, or in any
`tither respect ; all which it was nugatory to :Is.
slat upon, as the Plaintiff's Counsel did nut assume
that such damage had beeri done ; but it sae rat..
ed to the Jury, that not only by interpretation of
law, hdt by petersl justice, an important right of
property was violated by an aggression, like
that complained of ; amd that every 'violation
.of the right of property, was necessarily eu_in-
Pay, for which they were bound to give clunpen.
sadism. The oath administered to them, was
not to enquire into the facts which a. superior
Court had already adjudged, but " diligently to on.
quire and truly to assess the damages, according to
the evidence." The evidenie hadshewii that no
damage was done to the estate of the Plaintiff, but
it had also shewn that a trespass had been eons.
.mitted, by which the Plaintiff's right of ezeitisive
property in hii estate bed been violated. That
trespass Was necessarily apersonal wrong, and fur
it they were bound to give compensation.
The Suture's DEPUTY stated to the Jury, that
-- however trivial might be the wrong complained of,
yet the law and their oath bound them to give seek
compenaation.
. Can it be made a question, Sir, whether the re-
turn of " uo damages" was a compliance with the
'writ, which stated that damages ought to he re.
covered from the Defendant, and that the Jury
were to assess them upon inquiry ? Can such a
retttre.bc detiomitiated.an assessment of ilatuage4 ?
The legels natural signification was, that nu tree.
pass bad .beewcommitted ; for can there be se trim,
pass without an injury, or an injury without de.
magus ? Ought the Sheriff to have recossded that
as an assessment of daniage (1 do not choose to
term it a verdict)
.which, in his judgment, was
contrary to established law, and to the peremp-
tory mandate of the :writ which be was there to
execute?
As the original ground of action in this case
was wimpy uninteresting to the public, its present
claim to their consideral II houltl.-be maturely
weighed, before it is wrested to impliCate the iu.
valuable rights of every • British subject, to his
trial by Jury. TbeSilnlerTlP'S DEPOTY might have
done wrung in refusing to record the• return of the
Jury, and-that return might have been wit as the
law would sanction, a judicial detcradoetion will
soon be made of those mutters. Bet indeed, Sir,
the Vial by Jury will not be the less inviolate,
though in an inquest of dainagti, the Jurors should
be bound to give compensation fur an admitted
irmipass,. and though they should lie restrained to
their legitimate province of determining contro-
verted facts, and the event of (lunatic proceed.
hog ken; civil injuries.—Without assuming any
judgment of she law, or of facts already adjudged
,by the law, 1 asn,•sir, '
Your obedient servant, -
,
I Mares to. • 4.1V4.11141RE FELESHOLDER.,
.. . .
, . •