The Statesman.
London, England, 1814-04-19 00:00:00

~~,

Ineteatat7.*.ittutulre, Or
'ery , Abtfal opiiiio:ll. OM'
.t 4,
object), the ;Plldhtiff titter was regaled to ti
upon himself the adralolsteatioa.before'he*li ,f4i
canunuoicated' fat. the refusal ; •he tra only
guyed to appear and show mune, so that, 440'1'
never iit:Contempt.
1`

.. posoirety of
't:" , O.r.npliYiinnotitt
;lir tfiii hemp
r at
m f u •.. '
1.- • AY'
Ads a
Ilitii
I.he

COURT Gr CIiaNCERY, Astau4llo,
This tlarthe Lord Chancellor be 1411.11 grit Seat
before Lister. Term., ~, • .
,PRITCHAED V. LEAKS.
etL Ann

~_ , .il in contempt. •
.., , .. . . .
Mr. /TART nthhesio, thht the Ittjunc. , granted in I I:,.%4VENSC
this case, which weiftto restrain the Defendant from Mr. ABBOTT, for the Defendants, said, 4 shoeld , cilt!,°W;
( not contend that the sentence bf excoinmuttic :on I • „h.-4 ,iNDILst
.11111
proceeding at law upon a Poet' Obit bond which hack
I was right ; bet the lattei 'pe 'rt of the or al! _IS in acti
been granted by therlaintiff to the Defendant, should
~
!.citation-cited the Plaiatiff-tdhippear and take ltd- i I'M"' J'lliiktiir''
be dissolved, unless cause were shown before the ris-
the ship City of .
ministration. • h
ing of the Court to-day. 1' Lord Ehhewaherategan.—The offence ie espies's, Malifis to Eogland,
efence suffered h
Sir SAMUEL ROMILLY said, the circumstances d •
stated to bithilsot Appearing in ordine ad.r, awl 0;6 .d, •t- h• uh,_
,he
'this case were exactly similar to those of the case of
tar the Sheriff,
tence Is a nitlflity. His Lordship then ohsejied, : 'rim- '"'' • hi.'"4, ..-tib
Pritchard and Kent which had beets disposed of by
that the declaration charged both the Defender* to '' aati"
,a,kia, a the_.- &maces sh :and ...the:
his Lordship about a fortnight ago, and it could
. have committed the wrongs inuliclous/N.
hardly be expected that his Lordship would make a ens bierught toe heel-lug
,
principal is not liable for the individual malice
eonda ries. Office,
different order its this case from. that which he had
agent ; the Plaintiff must therefore either Amid itt, heth
and • . .
made in the one alluded to. There his Lordship had. • a hpecial,Jury.
h charge of malice against the agent, or against
continued the Injunction till the bearing of the cause,
.Defeudants. . " . e Jury,. with hie usual
.. -te •.
the Plaintiff in the mean time paying the arrears of , psaid,there i it.
, Mr. ARK
interest due, and as it should become due, and also
.• 111fieftt, was made '
against either.
paying into Courtalie sum in the hood, when the pe..
evidence having been
I 'hale. Assort' then submitted, that facealupPoUnathien .iOLf th.ebe•D'eh4felf':l"r"ttisiel'Plia' i
viol of payment should arrive. These flame terms the
, thet Foceedings it did not appear that the Defendant,
Plaintiff was here ready to comply with.. .
,haalensade:
apiost
one only.
I OrhParkinsen, was answerable at all. I very
:clear and diSC.
The LORD CHANCELLOR oldeeed, that on these a verdict for the Plain)
'Lord Es.hzesoirouor observed, that the schedule '
1
terms the Injunction should be continued. r. , of excbmmunication was charged to. be transmitted ; a
MURRAY V. MURRAY. by the Defendants to the Bishop of Bath and Wells: To nix EDITO.'
A bill had been filed in this case on **part of ,it would be a point very fit for the consideration of
Colonel Murray, son of the late General Murray, the Court hereafter, whither the Plaintiff, 'having, No. 18, neva.'
against Mrs. Ann Murray, his mother, t sh_late Sir hjejoed the Defendantse mod stated them ' jointly to SlR,—Yqu will
James Pulteney, Mr. Donaldson, and . have committed certain weerega,could afterwards peeve Piper a copy. dtth
well, the executors and trustees of the let He might have charged the Vicar- this, day to Mr. Lai
-rat Murray, calling on them to account foe certain Genial', with proceeding through the agency of hi, tee of-the Stock
large sums which had 'been paid by the trustees to • easiorate.iftappeared thit theV leer-Genera I presided from althiterson .*
Mrs. Murray, &ring the minority of the. Plaintiff,:'. at theUrt Court. ' ' - • ! collect' Tam info'
over and above the sums to which she was entitled Alt-. Aanorr submitted, that the words before the intendon'ofprOpoil
under the will of the testator, and an order had Defendant Parkinson, dtc. were merely the style of for his informatioc
been made ba, the Lord Chancellor, restraining the the Court, arid did not necessarily import, that he was having asserted, ''
'Defendant, Mr.. Murray, from receiving any part, present: and it was stated, that the Surrogate Vicar. persons of great
of an annuity which, by agreement betneeu her and General decreed, &c. . ; connected with the
the Plaintiff, ahosit sir months after his coming of.,
Lord FALENBOIttir:C:II saidhhe should have listened fited above 50,0001
age, it had beets settled should be paid to her, in Ito the Learned Cousts:el's objection/ if there had been ' which took place
lieu of Ail other elalete.apOrs the property of her any person before named to whom the word " sur-'f It is thy intent
deceated. husband, -eta . sack 'aceount swell be rogate" would apply :. but the Vicar-General was ire- public to come forwe
taken. ' fore alone spokes Of ; and toe requisition afterwards by Mr. Macrae, wt
'Mr. LEACU now brought this order under the • was to appear before the said Thomas Parkinsonhur ceive the reward me
view of his Lordship :by way of reeheeriug, colt- his surrogate. • ' the parties.
tending, that the order Ought to be discharged, go- I Mr. Amsorr then addressed, and contended, that I am, Sir
big, as it did, in a mein which it was by no thatas, 'if the Judge of the Court had jurisdiction of the
clear, that the Plaintiff had• any relief or claim subect:matter, though ht's sentence might he reversed
whatever against the Defendant, to deprive her, in, as erroneous, no action at law against him would lie.
/ROM MR. COCURANE JOHNSTONE TO MR. CHARM
the mean time, of every thingijse bad to depend up- : The sentence bias certainly erroneous, because no day LAUIIENCE, CHAIRMAN OP THE COMMITTEE Or Tit
On for her subsistence, except, indeed, the trifling' was assigned on which the Plaintiff was to-take the STOCK EXCHANGE.
pension of 601. a year,h to which she was entitled as : administration, and probably because the Court had " No. 18, Great Cumberland-street, lssh April, 1514,
the widow of au officer of rank. no right to compel him to •do so. " Sin,--I have to request that you will be se
Mr. Roves:Le followed on the same side.. . hive the De. good as to inform me, what are the intentions of the
„
Sir Saneht. ItolithreT nr 1 the gued in support o 's - a
Lord ELLENBOROCGII said, he would
motion ror a •entient, leave to argue these
ha
points on Stock Exchange on the subject of the letter which I
order, hs inch the risintiff was entitled to bola, 'if ' nonsuit ; and would at present assume, ttlhe ac-
addressed to you, relative to the. proposal of Ids.
it bias not meant that Ise should be precluded. from ; don was maintainable, thel
proceedings being. cer-llacralh
'all right of calling for an account of the management htahnly,•irregular. The Erclesiaitical Courts were I. " Lord Cochrane, Mr. Bolt, and myself, 'itt
:of his affairs while lot aas ass infant. Theequestion ''armed with no other compulsory DrOCFSB than that of *thing to subscribe one theasead pounds each, it
'teas not here, whethee MI'S. Murray should.have Ito . excosnin uaica don a Mut his Liaidieri, iiis aware was a ; nitl'of the ten' thousand pounds required by Mr. Ma.
fund foi her ,suppert, -, for she had the fortAlted ; great hardshipl and thihalsterhised if ander a perilous Brae. 'Tile bearer waits your aeawer, which, he
house belonging tar time testator in Hertford-street, , resposisibility.- -a• 'I i:. - • .• , ; prevent any mistaket I hope you will bad tine it
Mai fair, which she let to the Earl of .Clotsraelt tor
1 'Mr. ABBOTT then confined himself to the ridestioti , commit to writing. . •
tiobi .• a year, but whatjtel. tits Plaintiff was .te-bil of dimiagei :_they pains, of excommunication Stever' " I eta Si,,our obedient servant,.
~s . I s T
left without any proaissieufrom his father's estate, hew, over the Plaintiff; for the schedule weft hewer (Signed) "A. COCIIILILNE JOU S'STONE.4t
The Lotto Cahweehtoix id, he should look lists • reacriu The parish church, foity davi after which,
'the &Bit:wits, and give hire llama on 7fhirreday.' _ . -IROS %grit. 1814. 'l'
i - •.- Jo. upon a diirififeanif to The Genet of Chancerh,,
„,a hw,rith " Sie,—l .4e_livered'yourtiOter to Mr. Cinder
, • .
• --"4""r"-.. ."
.':144."...."".4..-)akf.' 41.4414*.4111P' flier be'e'bt''4"d's th"s'iuintr "I.wmc° . f 'teepee Chairman Of, the Sub-Committee of tire
Collar tar lt [NG'S nENfalt, Aran IR. :.:" it would have been competent to the Ileitis ifr ta have . 4 , 1
Stockaichangth this alay,iMonelioy, and received
London atUalirlard Sittings aftei• #filai:y Term. opposed-there, or be might have moved to quash it
, , i the following verbal answer:—" Give my cervices
ACKCRLEY, =Q. V. IPARKtN6O, D. D. AND MAWDS- lin the Court of' King's Bench, where it is returnaute,lisi Mr. Johnstone, and tell him, that it is not from
, LEY, CLERK. !upon the ground of the nullity of the sentence.- 41 any
unpolite mistive I do not write an answer, but I
This was an action brinight by a Barrister, resid- had been contended by Mr. Park that the affirmation I ita desired not to commit pen 'to paper on any sos
ing ut Bath, against the Vicar-General of the dio- of the Court. of Appeal, at. York, revised the sets. I
; count whatever. I will lay his letter before the
cese of Chester and his Siartegsekt, for excommuni- ; tence. 'Phis Mr. Abbott denied ; but if it did, that
,Committee when they meet, and they will comma-.
eating the Plaintiff. It appeared, that the Plaintiff's was the act of others, and not of the Defendants. I
nicate to Messrs. Hichins and Fearn, his Stock.
father having died intestate at 'Chester, the Plaintiff:. The Plaintiff was. all this while contumacious. The brokers who will let Mr. Johnstone know the'
refused to take out administration of 'hit:estate and': question of hhe nullity of the sentence was never )reau it '.—i o,r, .
asps, as your obedient servant, •
effects, and was sued by'ceriain persons having an.; brought before the mind of tteCoothatt York, where I (..haeh
am ) • " JAS. Milt&
interest in the estate, as well in the Court of Chester ; a, common lawyer presided; 'eta When it was before 1 44- Tio the Hon.ll. Cochrane Johnftose."
es in the Court of Chancery, upon a bill filed against the Delegates theeserrtence was reversed, as well on i
,- . . ......-----
-
him for an alleged intermeddling with such estate. ! accoanhof theithsofficieueyof interest in theflespond.
The Plaintiff was cited in the Court of Chester for ; ents, as on the gramme' id the Appellasat ,not being
not appearing, and was pronounced contumacious ; l compellable to administer; and the Court did not
and on the 29th of December, 1807, sentenced to.:give the Appellantcosts. The appeal to the Delegates
the pains of the greater escommettication. The ;eras on account of the error of the court of York,
ksser excommunication excludes a party only from : and were the Defendants to assn cr for the errors of
the communion of ti.,:, s!ss; rah : the grader incapaci- others? . ••:
fates him from being a juryman, a witness, from ;
coOr roA
. U'litallOßOL:G II charged the Jury, that the
suing at law or in equity, and upon a writ de extom- Plaintiff had by the soil sentence of the Defendants ' ADVICE.
monied() capiendo being awarded, to imprisonment been placed in a situation from uhich he could not 1 luu HEN Men of Education and Professional
in any of his Majesty's gaets till reconciled to the be relieved without incurring all the expence for , V 7 Skill, use persevering endeavours to discover the most
church. The Plaisitiffnppealed against this sentence which he now sought reoaration in damages. It was safe and certain method of treating a few psevailing Disemest
to the Cunsistorial Court of the Archbishop of York, • necessary for him to appeal to the Court at York for slue suce nsfid•rconit of their experience is the lest proof of
perior ity.
which confirmed the sentence of the Court of the absolution from the sentence of excommunication ; I Messrs. GOSS and CO. Surgeons, bava beta indacad to mate
Bishoprick of Chesteh; and thence to the Hightoart but with such absolution, he did riot obtain an abso- i the core of
.the.f.ollatierwinc. the elect of thfe:rd reticular study
of of Delegates, consisting of three of his'llejesty's lute discharge from the original citation and suit, ' Tutztea= " andsitr% conmr‘meltuietallits:A.;ricriltuerts aninthtlemetos,nw hicks
Justices and four or live Doctors of Civil Lew, who which he ought to have obtained. If the Court of by an improved plan, are speedily and effectually cured; maim
reversed the sentence of excommunication on the 7th York had put him in stain quo, had completely re- . h
' residence wheitrilmeircilimisail:efreoleiliat 111(4:theatn
caotiliatiari ludvitecctes,,o in
of j one, 1811, holding, as the law certainly is, that ; lewd him, he needed not have one further : a suitor : unWteppily pursued by
the t
hey
of hot
setri4y ip the one caw*
there was no obligation upon any man to administer :
h war not bound ha tell the Court it was in error : it in sterility or barrenness; and in the otheg a. . 'Macrae. traits
to an intestate's estate. ' *is rather Me de, to receive thelaw from the Court. : '
. iiinpotelOnitles i I) remedied. terminate So
ailisirc4eissolaTmbilfilliOni.f (Ifni Ithinate dist Mine of debili-
Mr. Pane stated, that the first question which Thb Plaintiff --..
,
would he raised was, whether this` lion could be !costs of appea. to the Delegates.
_lt was true, that if' hits, or nrit,ing from any other these. by which the powers of
maintained at all, of which, after the late case-of! the writ de exconr. cap. had beets issued, the Court . tgheeor.cso4Tift.inonitriihtefieoymoe_eaerfeetilesi. as_ regularly educated Sar-
a' ft arta, ate. anal speedy restoration
Beaurain U. Sir William Scott (3 Cam 1
Phe-ls 388)/ ;of 'King's Bench would have relieved the Plaintiff ha ;to sound alas vigorous health. .
which had been acquiesced in, there could be no I one second : but who was to sue the writ ?' Not the ; b Tahemirpee,ruilt,rotnl' or:ma:1c? extensive
irpernirreill (t'1•11.7. epnlAribilliedts them
l•
doubt ; and the second question would be, 'whether, , Plaintiff against himself. rvlalice was not imputed ; ' ter inveterate or complicated, without int:Oen:nig the 'intim% '
if the action. could ever be maintained, it could its I
'but the Plaintiff was seven months under a sentence to the least restraint id diet or exercise; and in recent. Catiette.,!'
This case, where the Court had a clear jurisdiction, of excommunication not published. where an early ;:pplication is mole on di,covery of she infeetiosh
• they frequently prrforto a cure is the ,port space of two days, '
however they might have mistaken the law. As to The Jury gave the Plaintiff, 2641. 13s. 11d. The unprecrdeoted successor their mode of tre:ttment (which ball.
this question, Mr. Park contended, that they had Dever been known to fail in one single instance in a practice et
not a jurisdiction to compel a' man to take upon HALL V. RICHMOND. 'fifteen years, daring which period many thousand persons aim&
Sexes hare been owed, even after severe and iojeVious inethortt
himself the office of Administrator.—Upon the sob- This war an issue from the Court of' Chancery, to had been pursued by other Practitioners without effect), induces
ject of damages, it was admitted, that the Plaintiff's try, whether-the Defendant, at the time of his bank-
-1
them
to thins publicly offer their advice.
espeeces incurred befoae the appeal US, the delegates roptcy, was indebted to the Plainiff a certain sum-of ; mews. Gess sine ea
sexclusively professing the cure of these.
• • . particular complaints. order dial they may not be tnarkedo
wall 441. 14s. 11d. and in that appeal 1791. 19s. in money, received by him for his use. The Defend- iby a mistaken few, with the obloquy st. loFtly ntsached to the'
RdailliOn to which the Jury would hive the Plaintiff and was a wharfinger, and in 1809 Plaintiff lodged a ignorant empiric, ninth it
.hut jrliceta.themsetvett to stater that
-such hempensation for the anxiety and reproach of, cootablereble quantity of hemp at his wharf,. amount-
Li" e&e ivite.„leeZi„itt.l"(Verriti.fir:„7:l a:ht,`l,,',Vid"iniertrrs.,,it
the exeonfm'unication as they should. think just ; the tog to 43 tons, 7 cwt. and t thrth-e--The hemp was tale, and testimonials from the most eminent •Physicians, theil-
schedule of exeottliatinicntiOn, though transmitted tb't suthwed to remain at the wharf till June, 1811, at
their
rt
esszeoe,v,,i.or.e tin jot tis:Li reeerl,
(betatha t thei fleftessLsullitttliltil.. ~,,.
the Bishop of. Bath and Wells, in whose diocese the which, time Defendaet became 3111 bankrept. • On , the generalTractitioner, nod they presouir that their ;.netts!
Plaintiff resided, was never teed tit the PtaintOf's looisteg 'over Plaintiff's hemp at this time, it was slam censtituto a fair ground for the unprecedented confident*
parish church, on account elf the immediate appeal found•that no more than hOhons, 13 cwt. renuthsed. ,
uwoiitth which they have, 'by the Public, been so Liberally ho.
to the Court at York, and the Plaintiff was ab- For the value of the deficiency, Mr. Hall applied.to , Patients in tleitceuntre are requested to state the 'smoothes.
,solved'froas excommunication 'on the 26th 'of idly, the Cominisaioners for permission to prove his debt of their case, (
age. sad gestral habit of living, 'and iaclosing it'
1/4ifl. ~ . against the estate of the bankrupt. The Commis- remittance for Advice and Medicines, when the same will he.
e ten owsent to nay pArt of the kingdom.
ry tt - '
Lorti kl.czooticu said, there was no doubt 4" ''...hisers bewever, would not permit him to prove, but -GOBB and Co. as/means, 13, avow r••-es Flee-sere
. tit pet,
, ~
but I.llllf tits sentence was a nullity and void ; for; UR the rentedyh.watelay actiese ~gyp :Mover, lot which i •, i ' -
itkposing the Court had the power to eacommuni- liquidated damaeeS WpOirt not lip„ , .Von this refit. i ' ' lib I, • ' 14,- .
• out ------,----,,A-5-_,—._
i Wit, Oil !Pr il nod P.ublished by .D. I,ctratx., at lit 1
r_yo . '
NA a diailor 70ot taking lettere ps edhlinistrh- sal ihe present action wee brought e• I Si itilltas A. OR" R, WI hleet-nreet.
... .. .. - _ , u ~ .. ~...ush: l'iY.;:- P • , ~ .. .. .
d .

DIED.

On the.l2tb inst. at his house in Middlesex-place, London,
Wm. Bligh Mouck, Esq. eldest son of the law John Mend,
Esq. of Bath.
On the 9th inst. at his honse,-Tanner-street, Faversham' aged
72, Mr. John Stevens Minter, refiner of saltpetre at the Royal
Powder Mills, at that place, who for 59 years served his coos-
try without a blemish. He was gunner at the garrison of Gib-
raltar daring the late ever memorable siege.

• .
Tkilft FiATIEsmAN
$
haw w cll ta-1"11111i
a hou: e thiikh he kad he' frety'dOul

If the hemp.havigt ‘4, 44rik. 41 •
I being am/ 064 h% rill?"as
if f.--Daf4VilitsgStBl:l-fh Wog ;
p de6=_lro • •
'-
tliEßVlvsoflkT. • ►
cac'E V, Pal At/ -.1300.cgt14,.1e
cittlwykootyp x At
ton brOgh tor crnitinal inter; •e:
f's wife; commenced on
f London, during the passig Pita
and, and the Difendatte ntali
ludsz by default,.
alelb 'Uri, a Write(
i Sheriff, *.a..1111111100 1 Jury se
tbi*ltter was accoedu-u
• . -VT
snug on the lth Instant, at the*,
, before tilt; tollingiiiad
ry. extee West ex pleineet
sual Serino( Be
Plaintiff, atvOit apeech, no lest*:
B by Mr. BROUGHAM, on behaV./
mitigation or damagev, _whelp ow -
been 'limited tip bYibe Sheriffliek
isfinetmnnuet,4l*Jury brought if . •
Plaintiff of -JOCK: damages. ;
•
TOE or re s $714.17411.1141.
-7•60.•-•
Croberland-Mrter, April 18.1814.
11 oblige me, by inserting be yen
he inclosed letter which I aides*.
aurence, Chairnsilp of the Comiait.
Exchange, with the letter to ipe
wito•driivered it. From olitti mo
pruned, that the Committee have ao
itiog any recompence to MrAlactie
)n, and which, I attribute to Ids
" that' the disclosere will affect
veriitecttbility end -fortune, much
le Stock _Exchange, and who pro.,
01. by the boas, suggested by thee,
on the 21stlftgebruary."
(ion, therefore, to prevail oe the
rward in aid of 'the sum required
rho, be it recollected, is not to re..
!Wen he proves his charge spied
' .
your obedient Servant,
A. COCHRANE JOIINSTOIFIL
'.ANE JOUNSTOME TO XS.. CHARLIE
AIRMAN OF THE COMMITTEE 01 Tit