The Statesman.
London, England, 1823-05-19 00:00:00

• •''

..r'~

COUFV.OF.AIXWS

1201 AT.

try
par.*. . Cprd
tryakageat,eflt Az
41 .p 4- - - , gvitir* .1416
,§o.d i .
tb•rti in Ms Min-Mine, and flat of his partner, hy
PrOcuralinn"l4} ibaldiffnlfinOthin llrifikt72,lsli•V_ingn
poscaf obtaining payment of ,t tiftlitant- Mir W 'Ph"
1 ndia Company., irksi.defendapts. or ibis .nit . -la-
dorsed the mils hi their aricn.ntirea,lhdiretnnt the.
r
•to•tb6 Plaintiffii who. upon being satisfied, .
‘t ,Mr.
Card hell nieover of :airway to stet fox ,Mr. gap, On.
•ppodiatelyperi the amount:
_After the ttsvfy -Nits pa
paid, it was anierisitierf that 'use. lope, ipzespnts
,f.c.slin ledia.on inmed,the Jane; DUO* pf .
..ii,,was
shames
oo thellOthillinfli, likil). :Snob after ,p Mr.
• 'James Murray. beingnext of kin to Mr. Hope,.gbtained
letters uf.eiltninistrption of his ;estate and Ale*: slid
claimed the amount If the bills from the 6/mpttny..as
the propvity of Atte intritale; • t badeiliiied most the
'tonna ne, aline/et that they bed. a atidtlot money
,to.Ose deft. iviiii;'Opoi /high .4u. prarylivaiiht.an
iction•against thiCoisipany.- 11 lbe sawn of .that
case, it owned out that,Me. fleet' thnd .no inthetift to
: - indorse' the bills i.e *questing "thy .prommadon, ' Abe
Court l'Odleff.olo.ll thr construction Of his.power of at.
torpey (ram Mr. Mom that be was.nat antborisedno.to
act, and in the result the Company were 'held diable;to
pay the hillsameond time, and they accordingly mild
the amount to Mr. Murray. Thernow 'bratitht thrir
action against the defendspos, hp the ground ilint they
had before paid the bills upon the faith of their In-
darsement, and up* their indemnity. • li appeared in
evidence, that Messrs. Card and Davis (now Insolvent)
had kept cash irieti.the defendants; and .at the time the
bills were indorsed, had rash in their battik; and that
When the defendants tecehred the amount of the hills
fram the Company, it nu paidovertothe fanner. The
defendants theusselna had no
:interest .velmtrver in the
hills, bad appeandto have Aerlved no advaatege from
the transaction. TheAliestlminia, was, Whether. under
these Cite amstanees, they Were liable tb Indemnify the
plalntiffs,for.the sensed payment of the bills. It was
agreed that the facts of theme should be turned into a
special verdict for the more deliberate opinion of Ilse
Ulm,. Two-questions were put for the consideration of
the Jury, first—whether the plaintiffi had originally paid
the bilis upon the faith of she defendants' indorsement
'only, or epee the faith pf the•inderacilient 11. Card and
Davis; coupled with the power of attorney above-men-
tio,eed ; and second, whether in this transaction .the
defendants were merely agents for Card and Davis,
*About having thenitelres any property in the. ills.
The Juiy faand specially tint, that the plaintiffs had
not originally paid ibc bills 'pop* the faith of the de-
findanfsr indorreinint ; and second. that the defendants
were merely agents for the plaintiffs. Card and Awls
laving themselves .no interest in the bills.. •The case
lien this finding.rentaini.Yer 'kilter consideration by the
Court above. •

OLD BAlLRY.—.ll.runDay.
. •
Rdward Thomees was indicted for perjury.
Mr. Bot.t.lND stated that the perjury...with which the
prisoner was charged. badheen committed oa a trial that,
took place in that Court last session, when persons of
the name of Robert Martin and John Martin were con-
. aided, the former of having stolen, and the latter of
receiving a quantity of cam& moulds and candles. The
candles bad been stolen from Tbeobald's.read, by K.
Martin, about six o'clock in the evening of the 20th Feb.
• . and a person had followed them to J. Martin's house, in
Crown.s,reet, Soho, where they were found by the police
officers the next day. On the trial of the Martins, the
prisoner gave evidence of an alibi in favour of Robert
Martin, 'steering that be saw him in Crown•street at
the time; that, according to the other evidence given on
the trial, he must have been in Theobald's-road ; and the
prisoner also stated that he himself had lived for six
months in the house, No. 17, Long-acre. It would be
proved that what the witness bad sworn respecting
Robert Martin could not be true; and that het
had never lived at 17, Long-acre, nor was at all known.
• The case for the prosecution was proved by a number
of witnesses, exactly as it was stated; and the Jury,with-
out a mom..rt's hesitation, found the prisoner guilty.
The MC0111)1E11 immediately sentenced him to hard
labour •for six months in the House of Correction, and
at the expiration of that time to be transported for seven
years.
An officer of the Court mentioned, that when the pri-
sotr.r was ordered to be committed for trial, after be had
Kirk) evidence on the trial of Martin. he said " This is
what I have got for the five
T. Fenwiek. aged 28, was capitally convicted of steal.
ing in a dwelling house.

All DDLESEVSESSIONS.—SiruRDAY, .31sT 17.

Janine! Waddington,*of well-known notoriety, was
tried for assaulting Ann Thomas, a child, 10 years old,
• with kite: t to violate her person, on the 10th of Febru-
ary. The witnesses on both shies were, at the desire of
the prisoner, orderi4l out of Court. Ann Thomas, the
prosectitrix, was then sworn, and examined, but her evi-
dence was of a nature to'ally unfit for publication.
• Waddington made a very long unconnected defence,
complaining of his persecution in this affair, and the
loos of friends thereupon. He called two witnesses', who
tery much contradicted the testimoey sof the little girl.
The jury found -the prison.“-Not thrifty.
Henry Gaylord, was indicted for stealing a pair of
handcuffs. kcone the evidence 'adduced, it appeared that
the prisoner had been apprehended, and handcuffed by au
officer for some trifling offence which he had committed,
and as he was being token to a place of confinement, he
managed to break from the custody of the. constable.'
.As, however, he conlil not run..away, without the hand-
cuffs, he took them with him. but he was afterwards re-
taken, and a charge of felony was made against him.
Theobject of the prisoner was evidently to escape from
'his tmprisou•nent, and not to commit a theft; he tea:
therefore nc•quitted of the ch,arge, but ordered to be
detained fur the offence fur. which he was originally
• takeu.

- POLICE.

ItOW-lITRNET.-310.1111i s INVII AND NATIONAL Mu
.LODISS. —S..tutstay Mr. Ilenbutr appe•sied to answer an
. information laid against him Junior the statute, for pub.
. n ithnut ass imprint,.a work entitled ,Ilooret Irish
and National Melodies. by which he hsd incurred a pe-
• rsity.of :201. -Alta a very vinisiderable discussion, the
Nagt,stratee eonvicted 'him • the penisitv of 101.--
After the conviction had take') piece Mr. Lrenhow inti•
mated Mat he shinaeforbear publi;hing the work ip
(yore.
AIIsRLBOROVOII iTRIIT. I 1 long investigetion took
place is the press e ruotu its tbis °Rice. before Sir ti. VA ft-
-11.1-71 T, into the conduct of two hitherto respectable t rules-
*en, actitajv as consrablec for coextensive parish st tike
Aiest eutistf the fown: At the subject is shortly to 119-
derge a =Ott Ibteiry in. *dasher 'plow, ts

n:rhingr
--Re TA ah- , ° ittenr.o.“.Fpwr .
.-0.4,4t,p . .-, It l'ixdopg!. •
sitiinkifh Itidissitt:tp. sp. 440410. lA9a • . ~_ ~',
the ikltiYoetc.oider tke poOwlgikl_ttlVMWlsl:7,AnkPAl :
yeisr ;b! ji iiihitleinii Ajisuid /bpi, ,who 1,41..tegp .
A4Ditriiiiiiijipas,issiqiiinr,situri:foltis Amy, .
• evict. I. o'ili.T. sheliplic i. If
,perignal .effTC.:ki 1 . 1
sitle of . 'A*, .driiti by she Ilfsdroul ?mitt! .
naafi the Coinpai4# at borne, anti iesoitted 'the* tics .
• 1.440. An &d frielPtio this toontv. thettchrityink.,o it-
sinois its,it coperAosoliip. wAftii
,41,•s•Pfill• IMr. CPO
xhb hickkir sited libels eoin!ryas,ageat,if r...sym
31:po!'yer if isitaissey,' ire4iviesi tbs .61111 Aid i
-...:. ''' a '•e• ts --• ....DPW