The Statesman.
London, England, 1820-03-02 00:00:00

CIVIL Ml`lt.

On the civil side is are entered for trial, a much
smaller number than WAS expected ; 1'.1111.11 of int-
-I.,irtanee having been postponed, in ail probability,
loom the expectation of a contest for the collide, of
o hick there a little doubt. Four of the causes only Are
Special Jnrirs.

wArm O. Lou Fie ANL) ANOTHER.

This Teas au NOIOII for as assault ; anti the eirroot-
At rare.' ate shortly direct—The defendants are merchants
carrying on business at Southampton, and the plaintiff
was formerly a contrart-baker at Winchester, hut had
tailed. The defendants are father and son, and are re-
!airtl to the plaintiff by the father !wing married his
sister, the sun being by a former marriage. Ihi the
plaintiff's failure, he was taken into the service of the
slehmilant, as their clerk ; and ssion after the death of
Mrs. Lower, the sister, in consequence of some supposed
representations by a fellow-clerk of the name of !biro,
I r was dismisseti. thirst hying dismissed aloolt the
..ame tioir, explanations took place, the result of which
11'.1% the assertion of Mast that he hail twirl- to.ttle any
sash representations. Hurst and the 111.634'4 therefore
-swerilett, on the I th of October last. to the counting-
„mit. of Messrs. Lotner, to demand satisfartiutt, 'snt were
r,t etieressful. Warm words ensued; •• scoundrel,"
r'el'y," and other abtosice terms were, as was sworn by
tile witnesses, used by the defendants ; and the rape's-
,•ioni returned were, " I ion no more a scoundrel or
rogite than yourself" Passion, it seems, cut the Iwtter
to reason, and Mr. limier the elder pushed 3lr. Wade'
tivat the mantle-piece ; awl his son, taking up the
t onily quarrel, fairly banged the plaintiff out of the
I ..tinting-lionse; and, not contented with that, thumped
Lim (unresisting) across the yard to the open street.
Air. !hint, the witness, swore that he was ...sent the
whole of the time, and that the father gave but the one
solitary push against the mantle-piece; hut 11r. Sturges.
a passer-ay, declared that both fattier and sots bela-
boured ase plaintiff across the yard with all their might
Anti mails; and that plaintiff, who was six feet two
i 'cites high, and proportionably stout, slid nut so mach
a• hold lip his linger.
A surgeon was likewise called, who gave an arrinant
o' the various contusions, and of his hill of 'Terre pounds
udd for ten days medicine.
Mr. I.iseuts. for the defendants, admitted, that a !rep.
dirt must go against his clients if the Jury lo•lieve,l the
itnesses; hut he remarked with considerable inge-
ruity upon the variation in their testimony
to the father ; leaving it to them to say, it !tether. 'miler
nit the riffeltllltateres, the probability was slut that the

I..l.tintitf was the aggressor.
dlr. Baron Wouo snasusesi up, and the Jury returned
a verdict fur the plaintilf—Daut.tges lint guin,..ts.

1..1W INrELLIGENCR.

COURT OF CHANCERY, SIARCII 1.

H %SEAS CORPUS.
IN TIIE MATTER UV LT ILL!. MIRATSON.

This case, which is one of no ordinary importance to
the parents and gnardians of children, came I ,on Mon-
day. before his Lordship. The motion was, that a Writ
of Habeas Corpus should issue, to bring the children
from the care of their maternal aunt to that of the fa-
ther. From the arguments of Counsel this slay (the
motion being merely made out Monday without any ob-
servation), it appears, that the mother of these children
d:s ing, left them to the care of the graadusothe r. who,
in her will, left them an ample fortune, on condition of
their maternal aunt being the guardian. On behalf of
the father it was argued, that the children aught to he
restored to him, because the will of their grand then
merely went to place diens under the care of this aunt,
so long as she remained a widow, but that she had now
married a grocer, and therefore had no right to keep
C,eni longer, as it was uhrions they could not be ad-
mitted to such society as their fortunes merited ; that,
lwsides, by the law of the realm, no person had a right
keep eisililmn out of the custody of a father, he being
t! ear only proper natural guardian. In reply, it was
erged, that the father had married a second wife, with
whom he did not live on amicable terms ; that one of
the daughters, aged 19, had felt this to be the case
ditring her residence there; that he bad repeatedly
c!. inked his principles in religion—having first been a
Methodist Prearlwr, then a Calvinist, then a Baptist,
and now an Unitarian—and, of course, it was unsafe to
put those young Ladies unikr his charge. Resides, he
Lail wasted his paternal estate of V/. a-year, and had no
means of support except by preaching fur Dissenting
Clereyneen.
'1 he Loam ('H INCELLOR went Into all the facts of the
MOP; midi observed, that he bed mega( be a with the
religion* tenets of the party, except so far as the law
authorised him. Ile thought ibis a case of no onlinary
importance, and therefore would suggest the propriety
of a short Petition being presented to him on the sub-
ject, specifying what was the amount of these children's
fortune, and the means which the father had to support
himself. Hu wieked this to be Jose. because there was
no appeal from *Lat he did on a writ of Habeas Corps's,
whereas he firmly thought there ought to be an oppor-
tunity of reviewing his jnsignient given to the parties
by appealing elsewhere. He would not require Counsel
to go any further into details, as when the Petition was
presented he would know what he ought tb du with it.
COURT Or KIND'S BENCH, OVILDiALL, MARCS I.