The Statesman.
London, England, 1820-07-17 00:00:00

ti'

•
L. tir ?.'irl LLIGLSCE.
COURT OP KING'S BENCH, RATVIIDAT. ivt.v 13.
• nu ROSMITT r. 111.11TI.AND,
This was an action brought by the plaintiffag4nst the
defendant, Sir Thos. Maitland, to recover dainages for the
injulty which his character had sustained, in consequence
ofa public order issued by the tiefesidain.
It appeared in es idenee.that the plaintiff is by birth a
foreigner, but has long held a conuilhision in the British ;
army, and uss fur some time an itispeetiag,fseldastheer
of militia in one of the lonian Isles. % the new
constitution of the Ipniau Islands was prowalgated, the
plaintiff was suddenly suapentled from his obey, and ,his
pay directed to he .dilicniitinued lir an. order of Sir{
Thomas 'Maitland's, expressing that his Majesty had
declared the further "(Icier of the plaintiff to be inex-
pedient." It was proved by it Henry Tureens that no
order for the suspension of the plaintiff hail been
from the War Ober in the usual manlier, lot: be admitted
that the defendant, in his caacity of "High ttttt nis-
shiner of the lonian Isles," correstion4e4 with the
Secretary of State, am! that the order might have been
transmitted through Oa At channel.
Several officers 4 bight rank stated, that the terms In
which the .order was nude were ands as to convey a
very unfavora tile impression of the military charreter of
the 'serum aho WAS the object of it. They were but
suck as are generally adopted.
On the part of the defendant, it was sbewit that he had
origigally appointed the plaintiff to the,riluation, front
which. by an article in the new con -fitution, lie was cunt-
pelted to displace hint. It was there expressed that no
"resident or teslertinL7 field-01117:er should be appointed
who was not a slit tii e leoie sithjert. A letter
from Lord Ilathiost I. the defendant was also proilneeti,
iu which his Lor,:sltip staled that it was the wish of the
Print e Regent, that no tot eigtwrs shim Id be employed in
Mat service.

3tr. St t ititurr. 63 fisc Pats nr4he di•elahii-
eti any intention ofinspoftiqg 111 romitiet to tile plaintiff.
• Tlir eater Jtverirr, •in titimlng" (.I)qrrretl, that
the mie.tion of motile/. 144trti entirety non the terms in
which tree erdrr ers drawn sir. -
'rise lot!ti.l fur the phrtntiff, Ihnt•ogrg.

'ECU RIES' OFF! C COPAN .1 -STE E ET.

11.ILTAN c. NIXAK

In this elute a gory WWI 9tainutoped to assess damages
far stirtaitied the plaintiff, in etinietrence of
the neuligetielluf her agent, the tlefenclant, who had
suffered judgment to go by defralt.
NIT. Serjeast Ilfoiotes.rr stated. that the
a a idow, had, upon the representation of Mr. king..
the defetitiriti, Leen inilitted to ad. am e the Sum of
61141/. for the plare.base of an /infinite of 111 11. 'I lie
defentlrnt. *bent she amointed her iii;ent upon the ..c-
-e rot. her that the bargain woulti Ie hi hly
adratilszrous. aid ilea. the annuity was secured by
'the itnestrumiresed iiir-intere,.t of two rentlemen, one
of whom. Wh;tweir... into. ahroail, for the education of
his children. wrs howei er; after the
'money had been paid, that thus'. two secaritins n'-re
insolvent, sad their lifeint...est hail helot ammilly
sold before the neeyeirtion wis entered into. 'file
plaintiff had now no prospect of Lal. her
kpurehasei •••••• ey, the security britia• ahlornitely
aid Imo complied tis *dart proceedine— sicalnst her
agents. 'I he !warned ronnsel stttid. bis diva %%mild
be satisfied with, her purchase-utostry and live per cep.
intrtvit.
Mr. 11aelure. eiceentor of the plaintiff's Inliduril's
will, proved the deed, which showed the 4eiN
sanred and the writitg of king. who was a psoy
to it.
The Jury, offer an able eliarice from the SI:-
I'ONDART, brought in a serJlet Ari, the plaintilf—
Montages 6