The Statesman.
London, England, 1822-10-19 00:00:00

_THE S*TA

LAW nanutiExcE.
COURT OF KINGS BENCH.
cools y. NELL.

Thil was a enrionsca:e: in which the plain.ilTrnnzhi
rreover 1.7011. heing money had and reeriv.d by the
orfendant, sad paid to him neon his oinfl,rrakiner to re•
orrr an ramie, which the plainlitradmed to be entitled
In .I,ller his ende's will.

- -
r. SCARLET? stated the case to the dory. He said.
the plaintiff was a respectable encr.iver. rrat4tog in St.
Martin's-lane, who cunt-eked entitled to some
estates in the county of Norfolk, as drri-ee of his nai
will. Mr. Henry Cooke, who died in 17112. By some 1111-
swltif ions cirennistances, the plaintiff became ltlM•linted
i h the defendant, Henry Nugent Bell, residing in the
Royal Terrace, Adelphi, who represented himself as a
Barrister, parlienlorlv skilful in recovering lost estarce,
titles &c. and of Bred his prtfessional services to Sirs.
Cooke. A meeting was appointed between the parties.
Mr. Cooke, with the most sanguine bops, m "le the
best of his way to No. 4, Royal T , Adelphi; the
door was opened by a huge Irish porter, who suggested,
that a fee most be paid,and a written accouut of the ease
delivered, before the defendant could enter upon his task.
Mr. C. agreed, and a statement was sent to the. Learned
thatlentax.. detailing the whole partirnlars of Mr. C.'s
Bate. He resiveti a letter from Sir. Henry Nugent Bell,
which he (Mr. Scarlett) would re;ul to them. It was
dated Thnisilav evening, October 26, !SD ; the defend-
ant cnnoneneed by informing Mr. Cooke, that no suit
rotaid he mahrained by Barristers for their fees, and that
as he had suffered considerably from his inability to do
so, he most be excused In soliciting an ailrance of 511/.
before lie could turn his attention to Sir. C.'s claim ; he
said lie most read the uncle's will, and take abstracts
trout it; "after which." said Mr Bell, "a pedigree
must be compiled to shew your title, according to the
her of descents and genealogy." Yes, 511. was neces-
sary to make a pedigree to prove a mm nephew to Lis
own uncle 1 lint this was not the whole of Mr. Bell's
lilanailde promise; he undertook to du more, a great
deal more, fur his fifty pounds, not, indeed to assume to
himself the exercise of the high prerogative of creating
Mr. Cooke a Peer of the realm, but he informed his
'biped cheat, that he hail inning reasons to believe
he should be able to replace Mr. Cooke in the ho-
honrs of a Peerage, to which he tell Lint, the fa-
mily had formerly belonged, though they had nut
lately taken on themselves to int6t on their title. lie
(Mr. Scarlett) did not know, hilt if he had had such a
letter sent him, he might have sent lti.m his 501. and
have tried for • Peerage. Inconsequence of the receipt
of this letter. the plaintiff went %tide a Mr. Woodbourne
to the eliainhers or house of Mr. Bell ; they were ad-
mitted by the porter, and introduced to the defendant,
oho, like some mighty magician, sat " ontiphering the
spirit of Plato," or as if holding communion n ith the
witches in Macbeth. Nothing materi.d occurred at this
interview, except the advanee of the 5111. for which fir.
Cooke received all the promises of properity and rood
fortune Mr. Bell could bestow. The lustre of a Peer-
age, and the possession of vast estates, were predicted
is the eertain fruits of BelTs Tesler, h. A fascinating
and fairy scene was suspended before the eyes of Sir.
Cooke. Mr. C. and his friend departed, and shortly
ofterwards Mr. Hell sent another letter to the plaiatiff,
directed "—Cooke, Esq." rod commencing " My dear
Sir;" in this letter he inclosed the pedigree of Sir H.
Cooke, of— Hall, together with the pedigree of another
family, which, he said, had been Liken from the College
of Army and accompasied these with drawings of the
arms of ;hose Lrtrifles, highly coloured and emblazaaeil.
He total his the statement of Ida case was utmost
iiitished, and 1111.141 soon be sent to souse eminent lien-
Heinen at the Bar for their :Alice. Ile observed, that
lie had hest endeavouring, but without mem., since
October, to bas an interview with Sir (leorge Nay-
lor; requested to have ISt pounds, advanced to him.
to etable Lim to proceed with the busittese, and gave
Cooke every asenrance of his assidoons exertions
to attain a inteeessfed result. Mr. Cooke and Mr.
Woodbourne again waited RIO hint, anti gave him a
draft far 1(1111. oeCoutts and Co. Afterwirds, hearing no
more from Mr. Bell, they called at hie house, where
they were informed be had gone to Ireland, and would
not return for seine weeks. The It:Attila world now
willingly have exchanged the pedigree, and the enibln-
eared arms fir the 15111. and felt, no donlit, that be had
been duped. The defendant, how ever, returned to Lon-
don, when Mr. Cooke waited on hint. and exp eeeee d his
IM 'prise that no Lore progress had been made in the
transaction. The defendant replied, fist lie had been
with a Mr. SPLean, s pervert residing in the metropolis,
o ho kept a register of hattkrupteies, deaths, marriage.,
&c. aid that he found one Mr. Price had bora a
lankrupt, whom- property was *bout to be sold by the
ass,gneee, which er.ia not done, because part of it be-
longed to the heir of Mr. Henry Cooke. He stated he
it;.d been with the assignee, but could make nothing of
it, and concluded, by saying, he found it so dihicult to
go on with, and the result was so doubtful, that it was
rot worth it bile to pursue it any fertlior. The plaintiff
rerrestril to have his money returned, which tic. Bell
refused, and gave him an account consisting of a great
'many sheet'', which, lie said, wonlit show how the mo-
r,y hail been applied. Amongst other items, wus the
fallowing:—" Attending Sir lieorge Nnylor, who
shined me the pedigrees of several persons of the nano'
of Cooke," Ike. &c. Por this he charred three euineas.
Another item was for searching the Gentlemen's .Adage-1
zi te, and there were a great number of similar charges
eqadly ridiculous.
Eriaeoce was given in support of the above state-
inent.

o Counsel appeared for the defendant.
The LORD CHIRP JUSTICE observed to the Jury, that
it appeared to him this hail been a ihs'ienie retried o.)
fn.!!! beginning to end, to entrap and to deceive the
I.Lintiff, who had applied to him under the expectation
of receiving assistance. Still, he thought, the deism-
nmst have been at some expence, and have given
i.inselt sone trouble, for which, perhaps, be ongbt to be
►..toonerated ; therefore, it would be for them to say, it
t!•.v thought or not, 100 f. would be as much as air
10.1intilf was entitled to.
NI:. SCARLET? assented to this; and
The Jury found a Verdict for lOW.
PRICR, GENT. D. PRICE, GENT.

This WRO an action brought to recover damages for a I
Mod. The plaintiff was a solicitor living at alberga- '
Teeny. in Wales; the defendant was also a solicitor, re-
siding at the same place, but was also a surveyor and
inslector of a d taxes. The plaintiff had been as.
a:vied attorney fur a person of the name of Meyer. who
sued in forma pauperis, in au action for Islse imprison.'
Inert atiainst the defendant. The plaintiff hail occasion
t • bl cena a cler:sman of the motto of Powell, at
v tc.oi toe defendant look offoce, and directed his
tie r% to write the libel in question, n hick he signed,
ee.l sent to the plaintiff.
The libel was put in awl iesd ; it insinuated that the
sluinidf had suhlicesed witnefises to etihanee costs, and
Cis: lie or Lis rlerk intuit speak'ntore than the truth, if
he succeeded egaimit the defend:aft
{iv the oral evidence, and indeed by the admission of
the cefendant's counsel, it appeared that nii- one had
s -en the contents, before Mr. C. Price, the plaintiff, or
crier the signature of the tlefes•-lant,•althotigh the letter
tra• sent folded op. without seal or wafer.
The Loao Cuter JUATICE intimated his opinion, that
Clete was nut sufficient evidence publication to sop.
poet the action; on an iodic mint no doubt it would do,
Lot to support an action on the case. there must be a
puldication of the libel after it is written.

- -
Mr. SCARLIITT contended, fiat, ehe defendant
having put•his name to the paper, was prima facie evi-
dence that he had originally composed it, end then di-
rected hicelerk to copy It, after which he had signed it
secondly, that the conveyance of it In an open state was
good evidence of publicatinn.
The I.nan CHIEF JUSTICE said be thought the parties
should toning)* to withdraw a jnror.
The SOLICITOR UINIRAL said his client had certainly
written it in a moment of irritation, and Le could not
defend his conduct.

It was agreed to withdraw a juror.
OREENVIELD a DURUM
Mr. GURNEY stated this to be an action brought by a
respectable Solicitor, against the defendant, who was
•one of the proprietors of the Hastings stage coach, to re-
cover 50/, the alleged value of a portmanteau, lost in
the journey from London to Hastings. It appeared
that the plaintiff was dasigous of passing a short time,
during the summer, at lasting; and he applied at the
Belle Saevage Inn, to go ly the coach. He was toll the
coach would take him upevith his !wage at the Hold-
en Cross. Charing-cross. The plaintiff consequently
took The coach as an outride passenger at Charin,,,cross,
and hie portinfinteau was stowed on the root The
coachman was of opinion that the luggage was not well
secured, and the plaintiff's portmanteau was again re-
moved, to be placed in the boot. When they reached
Hastings the pormantrau was missing. The plaintiff
applied to Mr, Breeds, who was concerned In the coach,
and he premised to pay the value of the luggage, bet
failing to keep his promise the present &mien was
brought.
Mr. Brookbank, a gentleman who was with Mr.
, Greenfield on the stage, proved the package of the port-
manteau on the top of the coach. lie also described
the loss, and added that Mr. Oreenfietd was mach incon-
venienced by the loss of his linen. The plaintiff had not
a shirt to wear at Hastings.
Mr. SCARLETT. for the defendant, much to the 11111tIlls
ment atilt Court, prodeced the declaration in th•eanse,
engrossed upon parchment, near fire yards inieogth.
It contained 26 special counts. He extended it !ernes
the table, and the Lord Chief Justice jocosely observed,
that it was long enough fora staircase carpet. This cu-
rious exhibition of legal technicality was wade M con.
%ince the Jury that the action Was brought by an attor-
ney. The defence was, that the portmanteau had not
been booked and paid for as a parcel shove the vain. of
b/, and consequently by the notice in she defendant's
coach office, be was not liable for the loss.
The LORD Corer Jessica decided that the plaiatiff
could recover because there was a promise to pay the
value.
Theinry were left to give what they considered the
fair value of the portmanteau.
They found a verdict for the plaintiff—Daaragdfili.
TIM NINO P. THOZOWGOOD.
This was an indictment which charged the defendant
with assault, committed OD the person of the prosecutor,
Thomas Feather, who bad formerly been the lamllcird of
the Guildhall Coffee-house, but lied sauce failed. The
parties had disputed in a public-house about a bet lost
at a pugilistic combat, and the Defendant struck the
Prosecutor a violent blow on the nose. After the prose-
cutor Ind proved his case,
The LORD Cater JUSTICE recommended that 'heti&
fendat should submit to a verdict of Guilty, and the
Court would hereafter determine theloantutu of punish-
ment, if the prosecutor should think it worth his while
to move (Cr judgment.
A verdict of Guilty was recorded by consent.
The prosecutor being called on to pay the Jury their
fees, its ted he had been very unfortunate, having become
a bankrup., and professed his inability to settle with the
Jury.
The LORD CHM Jutmcs animadverted hi dlieeg
terms npou the prosecutor's imprudence in baring been
engaged In gambling speculations, to which, be said, no
doubt his misfortunes night be attributed.

WESTMINSTER SESSIONS, Om 17.
Gevrge Kelly was couratod of ia%ndeeen► tumult
upon a boy about eight or nine years old. The Ind-
saner had been a private in the 3d Ward*, from which
be was discharged, after be was in custody for this
offence, receiving, however, a good character for the
time he had din the regiment.
The Court, therefore, only sentenced him to four
months' solitary confinement.
Joseph Peans, a periodical bookseller, was put to the
Ear, charged with an amok and attempt at rape on
Elizabeth Haman& a girl nine veers old.
The mother of the child said, the prisoner lived in
her house, in Chapelidley, liorseferry-road. The child
herself detailed the circumstances of the prisoner's in-
terference. The time was about eight o clock in the
evening of the 10th inst.
The evidence of the surgeon went to prove that the
condition of the child was such as to afford a strong
presumption that violence had been offered to her.
William Isaacs, fur the prisoner, stated that he was
in his house, 37, Sutton-ground, till after nine o'clock
on the night in question, and he had been so from about
four o'clock. . _

The Jury having consulted for some time, returned a
verdict of Guilty. Sentence, four months in the /louse
of Correction, the first solitary.
James Thatcher, aged 16, and Chas. Moore, aged
only 14, the latter of whom was tried at the last Old
Bailey Sessions, convicted, and sentenced to be ins-
prisoned one month and well whipped,, were indicted
for stealing from the shop of Mr. Thomas Kelly, book-
seller, of Holywell-street, Strand, a volume of Pope and
Warburton's L)unciad, &c. his property. The prisoners
were seen to take the week from 'he window and fol-
lowed, when the property was found on the elder pri-
soner. They were both well known to the Police
Officers, and the Jury round them Guilty.
The CHAIRMAN, in passing sentence, said, the eety
course that could be pursued to save them from an ig-
nominious death, was to send them out of the country,
and ordered them to be transported for seven years.
nomas Ilatcß, a man of respectable appearance, be-
tween 50 and GO years of age, was indicted for having on
divers times, since the Ist neM May, IS2I, exposed himself
Ito three female children, named in the indictment, and
committed other acts of indecency towards them
which were stated in the indictment, but cannot be re-
peated.
This case excited great interest in the neighbourhood
where the defendant lived, and had been a shopkeeper
for 30 years; and daring the trial the Court was crowd-
ed to excess.

Mr. CHARLES PHILLIPS stated the case for the prose.
William Crook was the first witness examined. He
stated that he is a smith Living in Camomile.streey
where be has known the prisoner keeping a green:'
grocer's shop for Y 5 oars. Witness, in consequence of
something respecting the prisoner's conduct, which he
had heard frosts his (witness's) danzhter, instituted an
inquiry in the fanillies of his neighbours, which caused
the present prosecution.

0.11 his cross-examination by Mr. Carewata., the wit-
ness :id the prisoner was a Caller and a grandfather.—
Witness's wife, who is now dead, used to send their
,laughter to the prisoner's shop ; the ebild expressed an
unwillingness to go, and inquiries inAde by 1. ittletS
Into the cause, led to the discovery of the prisoner's
conduct.

Lydia F.lphick, *child of abont twelve years of age,
stated that she was often sent to the prisoner's shop by
her mother to bay vegetables. One day Ise-shot :be

shop door and triolt bet by the arm, and said he wanted
to *peek to lie► in the parlour. She caught hold of the
ens! of the COlllllll pear the parker door, and refined to
go in. The witness, in answer to the questions pet to
her, describes! the prisoner's conduct to her in a manner
that excited the horror of the whole auditory. She
turned away, and threatened to erg out, at which the
prisoner let her go. At other times he behaved in a si-
milar manner. She told her mother what the prisoner
had done, and her mother !togged her for saying such a
thing. She often went afterwards to other shops when
sent by her mother to the prisoner's.
Louisa Long and Mary Davis, children of the same
age, gave similar evidence.
Mr. eRMVELL addressed the Jnry for the pri
and called a witness, who proved that half the prisoner's
shop door was glass, and that every one could see into it
from the street; he also called witnesses, who gave the
prisoner a good character, and was proceeding to call
other witnesses, when
Mr. Primus" said, he would admit the prisoner
had an excellent character before this discovery of his
crimes.

Mr. PIIILLIFS.-then wlikewerl the Jury in reply.
The Cumutw•rs shortly charged the Jury, who in-
stantly returned a ver.liet of—tieilty.
The (48nialaN said, the Court wonld take time to
consoler of the seutence till the next day.

DIED.

On the lith instant, in her edyear, Mory Ann Ushorvir.
eldest daughter of Thomas Usborne, Esq. of Trisit)-
squ ore.
Oo Friday, the 11th lastest, Mr. William Williamson.
cloth-merchant, of Cleekheaton, near Leeds, Yorkshim in
his Seth year.
On Sunday last, at Resonate, Emily, youngest daughter
of Mr. Mitchell, of the liotemilee,Huuse s.f Comismoi.
On Friday morning, la tha iSth year of his age, at his
house lu Tyndall-place, Islington, Mr. Fran. is Riving too.
of St. Paul's Church-yard.