The Statesman.
London, England, 1809-11-24 00:00:00

MATRIMONY.

yr it much to be regretted, but indisputably
1 certain, that many persons of both sexes are deterred
from entering into the married state, by infirmitica, which
delicacy forbids them to disclose ; nod there arc not a few,
who, being already married. are rendered miserable, for
want of those tender pledges of mutual love, without which,
happiness in the: 'Late is, at blast, very precarious. It has
been ascertained beyond doubt, that these circumstances are
occasioned by a general or partial relaxation or weakness in
either sex; and it is equally rertaitt, that the gelatine
AROMATIC LOZENGES OF STEEL
are the best, if not the only remedy for this species of dehi-
!by. When taken Into the stomach, they immediately dif-
fuse themselves, like a vapour, through, every pore, producing
ctlis-ts, at once delightful, salutary, and perniaant. When
the spark of life begins to grow dim, the circulation languid,
and the faculties paralysed, these Lozeoges are found to give
tone to the nerves, exhilarate the animal spirits, invigorate
the body, and re-animate the whole man. When aversion to
everrise, his, or depravity of appetite. and pallid count,-
stance, indicate approaching con-umption, the delicate fe-
male will be preserved, and restored to health and society,
by the benign influence of this medicine. When the drill-
slims of imagination, or the force of bad example, bate
tempted unguarded south into the cLuverous labyriuths of
secret senamlitv, delnlitated his body,-or impaired his in-
derstavding, these Lounges will protect hint from limer-
big disease, the infirmities of premature old age, andu
wretched dissolution. When by lusosious banquets, copious
lehatioos, Paphian excesses, and midnight revels, she sous
and daughters of dissipation have brought oo themselves
debility, relavatioo, imbecility, and a long train of nervous
cam plaints, these Lozenges will restore h I.lth and vipair to
the debilitated frame, and cheerfulness and animation to Cie
THE AROMATIC LOZENGES OF STEEL are pre-
pared and sold by tile Inventor, Dr. Senate, at his hothe,No.
Al, Southampton-row, tilooinsbury, where he may he con-
sulted every day personally, nr by letter, enclosing the usual
fee; also, by Appointment, sold at Nis. 4, Ludgate-hill; Mr,
Richards, druggist, &c. 193. Strand ; Gera's, s9S, Oxford-
street, near Denn•street t Allen. ;b. Oxford-street, opposite
the Pantheon; C h rig), corner of Sin big Garden; Ilia:a-. 3411,
Strand, next the Lyceum; Golding, 42. Cornitil; Bolton
Koval Exchange; fitythh-, 30, Chenpoide; Ambridge, IS,
F'iccadillr; Ward, 321. Holborn; mid no where else in Lon-
don. Price 7s. per II ix, Duty in lotted.
At the above places may also he had, Or. Senate's Treatise
an Female Complaints. Price Ys. bd.; a book which should
he tend by every married woman.

YTON, late Partner with Sir JANZI BRANi.
1.4 coma, removed to No. 2, Cori1i;11. near the Mansio!.-
house, solicit. the Attention of his Frienls to the Scheme of
the NEW LOTTERY, which eneral r. FORTY CAPI-
TAL PRIZE'S, with only 3,900 Number:, and the whale to
be drawn in One Day, February 14, 1810.
It is with much confidence F.YTO N th^ favour of
the Public, having, Li the la:4 Two Lotteries,dlyidrd nausngst
his Friend.
3.. Prizes of X 90,000 1 ..Prize of .. £2,030
1 —lO,000 1
5,040 3
Also, the firand Prize, Nu. 3,69, entitled to £21,7a5 ; and
numerous Twerily Tlon:ands, Ten Thousands, KN.. &t. to
the few ptereding Lotterie- to really an incredihle Annum.
(rr Please to observe, ."I:yto,i is removed to Nu. 2, Coro-
hill. mei the Mturion.h.siie.
•

iAlir INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH.

Thursday, November 13.
WItIOUT V. WARDLE.
This motion for a new trial being called on—
Lord ELLENnoitouou read the report of ibe
evidence at the trial.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said, he was to shew
cause against this rule, and unless Col. Wardle
could prevail on the Court to administer justice to
him by a rule diff:rent from that which prevailed
in ordinary cases, it was impossible for him to
entertain any hope of success in this application.
He was qnite sure that from the facts known if/
his Learned Counsel they hail given him no hopes
.of success, and he was quite sure also, that if the
facts which have since transpired, and which he
should lay before the Court, had been laid before
it, the Court would never have granted this rule
to shew cause, because on these facts his Clients,
the Plaintiff and his witnesses, stood in a very ea.
traordinary situation, and different from that in
which they stood when this trial took nlaca; not
that they had anti• apprehension of the cruise..
quences of standing forward on this occasion,
' but their situation was new and most extraordi.
nary. Colonel Wardle, before this motion was
made, had preferred a bill of indictment at Hicks's
Hall, against not only the Plaintiff in this action,
but also against throe who gave evidence at the
trial of this cause. He was correct in saying
this, for it was matter of record in the Court
wherein he was now speaking, the indictment
having been removed into it by certiorari. it
was an indictment fur a conspiracy of the Plaintiff
and his witnesses to get a verdict for him by
means of perjury, which verdict was now nnd:r
the consideration of the Court. The removal of
that indictment entbled the Attorney-General,
he said, to see on whose testimony it was found,
and he found the same persons on the back of the
indictment as those who arc now brough: forward
to state facts in support of this application, and
on whose testimony Colonel Wardle hoped to in.
duce the court to grant him a new trial. Now,
with great deference to the Court, he would take
leave to ask them whether they would entertain
this fishing bill of Colonel %Vardle to extract out
of Mr. Wright and his witnesses all the facts
which they will state in answer to his application,
in order that Colonel Wardle may know how far
he may safely go in sweariug, when be shall be
examined as a *Rpm upon the indictment for a
conspiracy. He asked the Conrt whether, if they
knew that Colonel Wardle had indicted these
very persons for a conspiracy, and thou came
forward with a motion, calling upon them to
state all they know of the transaction on which
they aro to be tried, to aid him in his attack
against them in a criminal proceeding, the Court
would have granted a rule to shew cause, " I
hope," said the Attorney.Goucril, " that Colonel
Wardle is now out of Court, :is he states himself •

--.-- -~

to have been at the trial. I hope he will not al.
ways have that excuse to offer ; or that he was
betrayed by those who had the care of his ease,
for which reason he came for the extraordinary in.
terposition of the Court in his favour."
LORD ELLE vatonocou—" I hope no idea is any
whore entertained that the CoUrt granted this rule
to shew cause on an idea tliat Colonel Wardle
was betrayed by any body who had any share in
the conduct of his defence at the trial ; no such
idea suggested itself to us when the rule for a new
trial was granted."
Mr. Artiaste.Gaintaxx—" No, my Lord,
that could not be imparted to my Learned Friends
who conducted the defence of Col. Wardle, for
more honourable men never practised in the pro.
fession. Colossel Wardle hinter/I- did
not say ht direct terms that he was bctrhyed by
them, but there was a kind of insinuation in his
alldavit as if he thought that his attorney did
not do his duty, and this he seemed to counte-
mince by changing his attorney. I hold that"
said Mr. Attorney-General, " to be a trick—to
be part of the contrivance of Colonel Wardle its
this case, with a view of inducing the Court to
believe what Colonel Wardle dares not swear
that be thought his case was nut properly coo.
ducted on the former occasion by that attorney.
But I am drawn fur a nionieut from the ohm?*
ration I gas making to your Lordships. Colonel
Wardle complains that the witnesses who proved
the case before your Lordship, aid hey, dia
not state truth ; plainly saying, in other words,
that they were guilty of perjury on that occasion
—that he says in effect, but he has not dara-1 tts
indict them for perjury : and he has the folly to
suppose, that if he can induce our witnesses to
state all they know upon the whole of this case,
he may make fuse of it afterwards against them,
by knowing what he and his witnesses may after.
wards with safety swear upon the trial for con.
'piracy, he will be able to convict them to -a
certainty. Was such a contrivance ever heard
of? Was such an impudent pruceedine ever be.
fore heard of iu a Court of Justice ? To indict
the Plaintiff, and all his witnesses for a coo.
spiracy, to procure a verdict—imputing to them,
that they had procured a verdict by perjury of
the witnesses examined for the Plaintiff, that they
might be prevented from giviog evidence of the
transaction here, lest they should disclose the
whole of their defence to him when they come to
be tried upon the criminal charge made against
them—that ha may know how to attack them al"-
-eoriviuda with somethiag for which they cannot •
be prepared. There is in this a species of contd.
mice, which our Lordship would hardly sits.
peel of any man, withoto evidence to induce such
a suspicion—by which Colonel Wardle thinks,
that he shall either prevent these persons from
being witnesses ngainst him on the discussion of
this Utile, or if there are such-Avitursses, that he
shall be ably to take advantage of them after.
wards on the trial for a conspiracy. He
could prevent the wife of the Piaiatiff from
being a witness. I really know nut how to de.
scribe such a transaction,' or in what terms to
express the sense that I have of the folly and the
wickedness of it. Your Lordships will consider,
that this indictment is hereafter to be tried, and i
believe that Colonel Wardle had soma apprehen.
sion of his own fate, on his being a witness in the ,
criminal prosecution which he his instituted upon
this subject, and therefore he wished to know,
whether there was something behind all this; and ,
therefore he moves for a now trial, for which there
is not the least colour, to draw from the plaiutiff
whatever strength there is in Ms cue, to enable
him to arrange hereafter the criminal ease which
be wisher to make out against the plaintiff. I hope
Colonel Wardle is within hearing. If he be in
the Hall, I will take care that he shall bear what
I say; and I would not say this if it were not fur
the excuse which Colonel Wardle made on at.
count of his not being present in Court at the
time of the trial, and therefore I beg your Lard.
ship to consider Colonel Wardle as now being in
Court, giving his own instructions to the Learned
Gentlemen who are to discuss this subject in his
behalf ; he saying that his own instructions were
not given to them at the trial. This rule is moved
for against Mr. Wright, the Plaintiff in this cause,
and I say it is brought •forward against him and
against his witnesses, for the purpose of enabling
Colonel Wardle to see how far he may with safety
go on the evidence which they shall give on the
trial of the in.lictment which he has preferred
against them; but, my Lords, my Learned Friends
and I feel the situation and the peril of our Client
from the course which Colonel Wardle has
taken in this busines,. We told him that he.
was called on to answer a criminal charge, and
that his witnesses were included in the peril ; that
persons so situated in a civil case, were never put
into such a situation as they stand in now in a
criminal one, and that your Lordships, when
you came to be informed of these particulars,
would sec that these civil proceedings , were
tatted for the purpose of facilitating proceediugl
of a criminal nature, or that the proceed.
ings which are of a criminal nature were insti.
tituted to influence the case of colonel War-
dle in the civil part of it; your Lordships would
discharge this rule un this statement of the fact•,
and we added, that if these facts bad beet, corn-
municated to your Lordships at the time of
moving for a new trial, you would not have
granted the rule to shew cause. But the At.
torucy General said, that the answer of Mr.
Wright was that for %hid 4 he should always
think well of him, the subatomic* of which was

,
I

- --:

*lto •

that he knew the peril to which he oust be ex.
posed, indicted as he and his uittiesses went fur
a compiracy, by coining forward to state in this.
civil cause, all they knew of the transaction; but
ii
such' was his consciousness that his eslitr'eas
founded upon truth, that he would run all aisttls,
and state the whole of his ease iii shewing4usse
against this rule. !lad all these facto bat been
known to the Court wlt n the motion wils abode
for the new trlal, the Court would never bare
granted the new trial.
The Arvin NEY-GENtRAL then referred to the
letter of Wardle, addressed to the People
of the United Kingdom, which he gait' was
penned on the day of the trial, and published the
day following ; he ridiculed the idea of this Ad.
dress to the People of the United Kingdom, upon
the subject of an Upholsterer's bill, wile had
brought an action against a gentleman, oho after
proinisin,z tip pay him, had refused to do su, and
which a Jury had, by their verdict, said he ought
to do. The Letter was—

" TOTH!: PEOPLE OF THE UNITED KINGDOM.
" Parliatoeutary conduct has been by the
&uproot ikon of so many of my countrymen, 1 feel myself
called upon, insoinequeoce of an event that yesterday took
place,ismoriliatelv to address yououid that in vindirat ion of my
character,renderrdopeo toutinck from the verdict of the Jury
up.ist the evidence of Mrs Clarke,and Mr. Wright. the bro-
ther of ter .uosol-terer, in a came in which I was clef lidant, in
the court of King's Banes. The dot it of the et Men, e the
public prints will afford. It is with ra.• ea oldie, that my
Goemei,satialled in the r mad. that the Jury would out, upon
suet te-oimnly as nod been given by toe Plaintiff's brother
a t 4rs. Clarke alone. fin', a verdict again t me, Aid not
co not, with my entreaties (repeated to farm in withal: dur-
IU tae trial, in the strnagest terms) that Major Dodd, Mr.
(Howie and other respectable witnesses rubpcmitted by Ilse
ana:ef anti invbelf, wipt be cad tinted, as I knew their
teatusoay would be ruanded in truth, :ail in direct cou:ra-
di:tion to w:tat huAl been sworn hgniost ow. Under such
ciresonsinne" the verdict was obtained. there only remains
for tae now, bet ir • my God and as, country, to deckire,
flat It we- obtained by perjury alone ; and I an pledge in,-
self to prove the fact toe earliest opportunity the law wit.
allow me to do so. Atutiandy, therefore, do I look forward
to that pe;itart; awl I trust that till then tie public will sus-
pets! th:ir judgment upon the case."
Now, the AtTott•ilLY-GKIIIZRAL sail, that this
letter *as not true, fur that Colonel Wardle did
not earnestly intreat his Counsel in wilting to c.,11
these wituesses, fur that he lett hi; Cuunstd to their
own discretiou whether they would call Major
Dodd and the othec witnesses or not, of which
there was the beet prod that could be given, from
an incident which happened while Mr. Serjrant
Best was addressing the Jury in behalf of Culotte'
Wardle. Ile, the Attorney-General, leaned to.
wards Mr. Park to learn whether any
awitnenies
were to he called for the Defendant or riot ; when
Mr. Park said he knew not what to do—he hating
opportunity of consulting with Mr. Serkaut Beet,
while he was addressing the Jury ; and he, Mr.
Park, had been left to his own discretion, as well as
Mr. Serjcant Best, whether they 'heel. call wit-
nesses or not. But now Col. Wardle would have it
be believed, that he did give these positivedirections
to his Counsel which he did not, and he affected
to have been surprited by the verdict, and by the
evidence, when there was no foundation fur any
such sitrpriz,.; and if the Court were now sitting
in jndgmrnt upon Cut. IVardle upon a charge of
perjury, upon the affidavit which he had made in
the support et the application for a new
such was the state of the facts, that the Court
won't' find it tliffieult to declare that Colonel War.
die ought to be acquitts II of that utrenc...—The
Ateiruev.General thin took a view of the whole
of the elcience in this case, and declared, that
such was the state of the case, that note ithsrand-
ina the boasting of Colonel Wardle of what
be w odd do, Mr. Wright and his witnesses looked
Jr a ard with eagerik is to the trial fur a consiii.
acy, and were cetifident of ail acquittal ; so con-
fident, that they desired him, notwithstanding the
elvaatage it might give to Colonel Wardle, to state
the whole of their affidavits made in opposition to
this rule.
The Court held, that the stating of the affida.
vita made in a civil cause, by those who were Ik.
fondants in a criminal soil, arising out of one end
the sante set of transactions, a (mid be bringing
the parties improperly into jeopardy, and creal.
lag a dangerous precedent ; and therefore held
that these affidavits should nut be read.
Mr. Serjeint lit:sT.then entered upon time case
in support of the rule, and made a long and very
able speech to show the necessity of a new trial
being granted in this cause. He said that the
ground on which he hail put this case was, that
the verdict had been obtained by evideuee 410
which, the Defenilaist could not be aware, mg
therefore it was a surprise upon hint ; and that-fie
consequence of what was I W Ohl at the trial, mod
upon whirls the verdict was founded, the Defen-
dant was lAI to seek, and had the good fortune
to find, muds new matter in evitl-nce, such as if
it had been tilf.red at the trial, the verdict would
have beers fur the Defendant. He thanked the'
A Money -General, fur be insitrisonte -Manner itt
which he had spoken of the Curiasel for Colonel
Wardle, the colidurt of chose case had been n.
trusted to hiiu ; and, as to the idea of p•.sitivr,
instruction+ to call witnesses on behalf of Colonel
Wardle, he haul to declare, for himself, that he hail
received nu such iiistructiona, nor did he believe
that either of the Learned Counsel who were
with him in the CAU‘C, had received any such in_
strut-Wins. flail he received any such iii-tree.
lions, he should have followed Own; at all 11,1.
Zards ; bat be bad been left by Colonel 11 ardle
to his own discretion, and although he knew that
Major Dodd could have contradicted Mrs. Clarke
and Sir. Daniel Wright, yet it appeared to him
to be rashness to call Major Deihl to be con.
fronted with Iwo witii..sses, and two such wit.
nrsses as aim. Clarke, without being aware
that there was any other witness to nipped
Major Dodd', testimony. But mow Oben Wisq
abundance of evidence !ci supporl
.ite lh
ti.on referred to the affidavits of Major Dtatla4 Mr.-
(; forme, Mr. Curt, and fir Richard Phillips, alt
not which are already before the public, having
lie. ii detailed at the time of moving fur the rut...
I; *risen proceeded to maintiin that there would
a failure of justice, if there should not be a
new trial granted in this cans'; (ur that Mrs.
('as ke and Ovoid Wright hid been materially
co tradieted by the affilasits to which he had re-
f,.:4013 and on which this rule fOr a new trial bad
be a utitaloed. It would be a singular tiling if

TRI

it should turn out eventually that these parties
should be convicted of the conspiracy with which
they stood charged, and at the same tin*, this
new trial should be refused ; fur, in that case, Mr.
Wright wunld be convicted of having obtaised a
verdict by conspiracy, and been allowed to keep
its his pocket the money, although convicted in a
crime by his endeavour to obtain it. He main-
tained that upon the whole of the affidavits, it
was manifest that credit was given, in the first
instance, by Wright to Mrs. Clarke, and that
charging Colonel Wardle with the debt, was an
after-thought ; and if credit had been given to
Mrs. Clarke at first, it was impossible to Charge
Col. Wardle in the second instance, because
IC he had undertaken, as clearly ho had not,
that undertaking would have been void by the
„Statute of Frauds. The pressure of this point was
felt at the trial, and therefore they hit upon the
ctpedient of saying, that the first goods whit*
had been sent in by Wright to furnish the hogs.
of Mrs. Clarke, before it was pretended that Col.
Wardle ever saw Mrs. Clarke, were not sold, but
sent in upon hire ; and upon this Mrs. Clarke and
Daniel Wright were at variance in their evi-
dence—the one saying that they were never sold,
but remained upon hire; the other saying that
they were upon hire at first, but that they were
afterwards included in the goods for sale. The
Learned Serjeaut. then reminded the Court of
the manner in which Mrs. Clarke had at first
sworn at the trial, that she became acquaint-
ed with Colonel Wardle in the autumn,
which autumn she defined to be the months of
September and October; but being reminded of
the letter of a person of the name of bl‘Callum to
her, as the means by which she became acquainted
with Colonel Wardle, and which letter was nut
written until the 16th of November, she corrected
herself ; and so it stool as a thing impossible that
Wright should have trusted Colonel Wardle in the
first instance, for many of the goods had been sent
in before that time. If the rules of the Court
were such that a uew trial could not be granted in
this case, because Colonel Wardle should have
made his defence before the Jury, upon all the
grounds on which he moved for the new trial, Cu.
lonel Wardle must submit to pay the 10501. fair
which the verdict had been obtained; but so far
was the case from being clear to the Jury who
ttied it, urea although nu evidence was offered
Os behalf of the Defendant, that they took up
atone hours to deliberate, plainly indicating much
doubt its the case upon the Plaintiff's own shese.
tug; what might have been oxpected if there
bad been laid before them the evidence now laid
before the Court upon the atii lavita ? As to the
confidence which the Attorney General ex-
pressed his Clients to feel at the approaching trial
fur conspiracy, ho had to cry, isith a firtimess
equal to that of the Attorney Ucaielal, that Col.
Wardle had as eager a fur the arrival of
the hour of that trial as Air. Wright and his
witnesses; and that whatever might be the
event of this motion, the facts of this case would
remain as they now stood ; and he declared, on
behalf of Colonel Wardle, that this case was sup-
ported by the same conspiracy founded on the
same perjury for which Colonel Wardle meant to
bringing the parties to justice. After the observe-
lions which had fallen from his Lordship,he would
not occupy the time of the Court any longer. Ilis
client, he was afraid, most submit to love these
damages ; but he was willing to make this sacrifice
under a cutiLleace that he *wild have an upper
Utility of spewing that a font conspiracy haJ been
formed against him. He should nut reply to the
severe remarks which had been made by the At.
iorney-Gctscra', but should merely observe, from
the affidavits which had beets produced, that, as had
been said on another occa,duri, '• a great deal of
jaunty must aline!, somewhere."
Mr. PA RI followed on the same side. He ob-
served, that it was proved on the trial, that it
was not till the 16th or 18th of November, that
Sl r. Wardle was introduied to Mrs. Clarke ; and
)et Curt says io his affidavit, that he met the
Plaintiff, Wright, on the 9th of November, go.
ing to Westbuerise.pl ace, fur the purpose, as
Wright stated, of taking measure fur the carpets
and fenders in Mrs. Clark..'s house at that place.
ll this evidence be tru3, a by then this mast Wright
had claws/lodged that belied begun to furnish
Mrs. Clarke's house, and that some time before
she knew such a person as Mr. Wardle.
Lord Et.r.s.ataosounn— It appeared on the trial,
dig Wright had sent in several articles before the
tkAodaist was known to Mrs. Clarke, and these
were directed to be struck off the debt.

Mr. PA lei.— Yes, my Lord, but servants' beds
were no ntiuned, and nut carpets, of which uc
had heard much on the trial. Thu Learned
Counsel then alkded to his on n conduct on the
fiat, and observed, that' he had 'ffever receteelf
any perempti,ry instructions from his client to call
Messrs. Glenn: and Dodd ; he understood that
that was le. t to his on ti and his Learned Friend's
discretion. He did nut mean to rest the claims
fur a new trial on the ground of hi, client having
bean taken by surprize, bust rather upon this
very circumstance of the affidavit,, stating that
Wright had given credit to her, which was a fiat
contradiction to what appeared on the trial. Be.
sides, his client bad 61,4 a Bill in Chancery against
Wright, and it was a most important fact to ob-
serve, that Wright, in his atisner to that bill, ad-
mits that no credit was given to NVardlo in hit
books. In them there appeared nothing of the
thbt which he claimed.

Lord ELLENBOKOUGH.—The Defendant might
have filed his bill befure the trial, and would then
have obtained this information. The Court can-
nut look at (hat our►.

Mr. PARK then submitted, that were a new
trial granted, they sliuuld be able to prove that
Witglit had been bail fur Mrs. Clarke in near
forty actions, for debts of vartuni amount ; and
hue was Vint consistent with the pretence that he
%.,ulll nut t ost her

Lord ELLERausiguals.—lt was easy to suppose
bit Wright knew iie bAssoc bail for her without
any risk ; he kn w Cie ,aas a feasase coarerle,
an.l nut liable. People in his way are tuterabiy
acute in thirst. matters.

Mr. PARK w unltl truubic the Court with only

r A frititLf A %I

one more observation. From the affidavit of Curt
it appeared that Wright actually gave his draft to
the amount of 1061. to Mr. Curt for the fixtures
in Mrs. Clarke's house at Westbourne-place; and
also that Wright actually paid the first and second
quarters runt fur the house, by drafts or checks on
his own banker. These checks could be prodaced
in Court—they were evidence that 6ould not lie—
much stronger than parole testimony, to skew that
Wright bad mixed himself with Mrs. Clarke's trans-
actions, and had credited her to a great extent,
long before she knew Mr. IVardie. All this spewed
that he was in the constant habit of giving her full
and ample crediC
Lord ELLtskaoaotiou—" Wu not this Curt
the most natural witness fur the Defendant to have
brought forward at the trial ? One would have
thought the Defendant's attention would hare been
naturally directed to such a witness."
Mr. PARK concluded with submitting to the
Court, that these is titter' documents, which could
not lie, were much stronger than any parole evi-
dence, in support of a new trial, in order that
the ends of justice might be substantially at-
tained.
Mr. MAIRTATT, on the same side, began by
adverting to the observation of the Attorney-Ge-
►►eral, that this was a scheme of Colonel Wardle's
to get at the evidence upon which the Plaintiff and
his witnesses meant to rest their defence on the in-
dictment for a conspiracy ; and remarked, that
' Colonel Wardle had committed himself as dice-
Wally al this device, if it was one, as he could
hare hoped to have committed the other parties, as
lie had told the circumstances upon which he in.
tended to rest the prosecution. But the question in
the case was, whether there had nut bees, sufficient
new matter discovered to lay the foundation fur a
new tri ►I ? With regard to the circumstance of a
want of the means of coum►unication with hisCouti-
sel, under which Colonel Wardle stated himself to
have laboured, l►e might have been in the hall, and
yet deprived of the oppor• unity or having that
prompt and speedy communication which the na-
ture of the evidence, as it proceeded, might have
required. Cul. Wardle could nut exactly know
the circumstances which were to be brought for.
ward against him. The interval between the dc.
mend and the trial was short, and Colonel Wardle
had not much time to prepare himself. The de-
mand was made on the Ist of June, and on the 3d
of July the cause came on fur trial. The demand
was general.
Lord ELLENROROCGII---" He might hare called
for a bill of particulars."
Mr. MARRTATT, In continuation, observed,
that the Plaintiff's witnesses had stated that the
goods hired were converted upon Colonel War.
dle's undertaking into goods sold. Now, it ep.
pears I from the Plaintiff's answer to a bill in Chan.
cery, as late as October last, that Wright had no
account at all in his books with Colonel Wardle.
There was a contradiction to the whole case of the
Plaintiff generally, and of each of his witnesses
severaily. It appeared from the evidence of Curt,
that the Plaintiff was proceeding to take measure
for carpets and leaders for the house in West-
hounu•.place, before Mrs. Clarke knew Co-
lonel Wardle. The Plaintid• had subsequently,
down to Midsummer last, paid Mrs. Clarke's
rent. flu therefore clearly intended to give
credit to Mrs. Clarke, fur if he had beefs blimiol
by a particular engagement with the landlord, he
might have allowed him, unless he wished to give
Mrs. Clarke credit, to have distrained for his rent,
and sold the furniture, instead of paying him ir►
money. It then appeared, from the Sheriff's
books, that Wright had been bail for Mrs. Clarke
in several Reasons, another proof that he had given
her credit contrary to the assertion of Daniel
.Wright, that his brother would not have trusted
her fur a farthing. Another materiel tact was,
that Wright, having debit►d the goods to Mrs.
Farquhar, which probably meant Mrs. Clarke's
mother, he had insured them foe her, and also ►n.
mired for her other property, which she had pro-
cured from some other quarter.
Lord ELLEinsonuseett—" Did t►nt this power.
fully call for yuur attention before ? You might
•
have gut at these circumstances by the u.e of res.
I sortable and ordinary diligence. By reasonable
diligence you might have gust at all of them except
the answer in Chancery ; and with respect to that,
the trial might have been put off till the answer
came in." _

I Mr. MARRTATT further observed, that Curt
had contradicted Mrs. Clarke by the deposition
in his affidavit, that Mrs. Clarke had told him
that the new house in Westhourne.place was to be
furnished by Mr. Wright, and nut by Colonel
Wardle. Daniel Wright had stated, that th.
goods which had been originally gisen on hire,
' had been converted into gtool, sold, and placed to
the accuutii or Colonel V 4 ardle. Yet if appeared
from Mr. Wright's oun arbilksion, by his answer
in Chancery, that there was no account with Col.
W. in his books. lie said that the Plaintiff wonld
havegiven nu credit to Mrs'. C. and yet it appeared
that he hail been hail fur her in many instances.
Sir R. Phillips hail been engaged in a treaty with
Mrs: Clarke, for the publication of a certain book,
and had afterwards been applied to by a N ..blr
Person, whom he need nut name, fur the sup-
pression of the hook. Sir Richard stated, that in
the course of the transactions respecting (his pub.
!legion, Mrs. Clarke Ihid declared that she was
indebted to Mr. Wright fur this very furniture.—
These facts bad been dicovered since the trial, and
sonic of them could not have been foirid out be.
fore by any reasonable diligence. The Defendant
then, he submitted, had new matter to offer,
which he could not have before discovered, in ad.
dition to several circumstance which he might,
perhaps, have found out— and was, besides, taken
by surprise. lie therefore, hoped that the Rule
would be made alisulnie, and a new trial granted.
Lord ELLEMBOROUGH said —" I think that the
Court would establish a must dangerous prece-
dent, much to the disadvantage of the administra.
tion of justice, if this attempt In obtain a ova,
trial were successful ; fur then it would only re-
main for Defendants to lie by, to hear the case
of the Plaintiff, and, without bringing any eve.
deuce at the trial, to make an application to the
Court, un the ground of present capacity, to

•

. ,

, -
contradict the facts swore to at the trial, 'And
require that the case might be bead a second
:time upon motion for a new trial, on the grew's'
of the present capacity of the Ddendant, who had
neglected to use ordinary Viligenre in his defence
at the trial. Whereas the Court, in granting a
new trial, expects that the party moving fur it,
should have used his opportunity of bringiug
forwerd his defence at the trial ; for the Court
expects that the party shall nut be deficient in the
ordinary and customary attention to the sub.
jcct of his defence at the trial. But %here that
attention is bestowed, and the party is actually
surprised, the Court, his Lordship slid, in case
the party was actually surprised, by the course:
which things bad taken, was in the babit,of
granting a new trial." But, his Lordship asloed,
what pretence of surprise existed in this case, in
which a party, determined to use ordinary dili.
gence, might not hare been prepared to meet
the proof. here his Lordship went over all the
heads of evidence which had been stated in the af-
fidavits to he new in point of matter since the trial.
That of Mr. Curt, who stated facts concerning the
Plaintiff's having taken a house of him fur Mrs.
Clarke. Cul. Wardle knew Curt to be the laud.

lord, and therefore there was no pretence for say-
ing, that it was owing to rurprise at the trial his
evidence became necessary; ho was twist naturally
pointed out as a witness fur the Defendant at the
trial, if he wanted to prove the facts stated in his
affidavit; and as to what Mrs. Claiko swore at

the trial, Col. Wardle must he supposed to have
contemplated his relative situation with 51ts.
Clarke, and therefore ought to lie prepared to re.
fute her testimony, if she swore any thing that was
false, relative to what passed between him and
the Plaintiff; in OW presence of Major Dodd ;
and as to the house utile!' Mts. Clark• occupied
while Col. Wardle was argnainted with- her,
thing could be more natural than foritim to look
at the lease of the hustle, and then to have wil-
-1 (enacd the landlord, who would have related on

the trial every thing which appeared its the affich.
sit on that subject. Tois ars no ground of new
trial on accouut of surprise, it was the effect of
the Defeudant's negligence, and this in 'than was
its that respect an application to the Court, nut tii
administer relief to diligence or to vigilance, but
to neglig ace and supineness. As to the subject
of the assurance on the house being harged to the?
D fondant, he was apprised of that by the bill of
• Ideticulars of the Plaintiff's demand which had
been delivered to him, and he might hare been
piepared to meet it at the trial; and if the bill
of particulars was defective, it must have beets
amended upon summons taken out before a Judgo
fur that purpose, but that article was disallowed
by the Jury. As to the discovery which had beets
made by Wright's answer to a bill which had been
filed against him in Chancery, by which it had
been said he admitted that Colonel Wardle was
nut charged in his bucks, notice might have been
given to Wright to produce hi< books at the trial,
or the bill in Chancery might liave been filedsoon-
er, injunction night bare hers obtained against
Wright's proceeding at law, until the coming its of
the answer to that bill, and. therefc,re, that tumid
be iso Inducement to the Court to grant a new
trial. For all these reasons, the ground did not
appear to his Lordship to be made nil, that the
case at the trial came by way of surprise on the de- • •
fendant,for there was couthing at the trial, to meet 1,
which the Defendant might nut be reasonably ex.
petted to be prepared. As to his not having ay.
tual consinutsiratiois with his Counsel, lie aught
most potentially hive (bn, so, by taking about
twenty steps to cone into Court ; fur it was net
doubted that he nits %%elk mg in the Hall, and it
appeared by the atlidavits of his own witnesses,
that they were directed by him, to appear in
Court; sod this farther appeared by Colonel
Wardle's own letter. In short, the Defendant
knelt the *note of the Plaintiff's case, and might
hive been prepared to meet it, so that there was
tics real grumpd fur a new trial, sod if the Court '
should g. ant one, there would be infinite tlangcr
iu the precedent; for which reasons hi. Lordship
was clearly of opinion that this rule ought to be
duseharaest.

Mr. Justice Gaon was of the same opinion.—
There was sufficiant evidence given at the trial to
sustain a verdict, and there was uo pretence roc
sa)ing that defeudant had been taken by ser.
prize, cons,quently he ought to have been pre-
pared to inert It ; and if he had not, but took his
chance by resting his defence upon a speech to the
Jury, without evidence, and afterwards re-
pented 01 that cu rse, and thought it would have
been better fur h in to hive examined a itnesses, the
fault was his ono, and that was no ground for
granting a 'sew trial. lie wised with his Lordship
in the obk•rvations he suede on the particulars of
the evidence, and was clearly convinced, there
ought to be no new trial in this case.
Sir !inmost BLA NC said, that this application
came tinder very peculiar circumstance:. it *4lls
very extrauldishiry, that this application for set.
sing aside the verdict, on the ground of surprize,
shoul.l come forward at a time when there was an
indictment pending fur conspiracy. This cireum.
stance alone would be sufficient to make the Court
extremely cautious in granting the new trial. Ile
took the rule, lionever, .to be, generally, that
when an application of this sort was made, on the
grutind of surprise, or evi.lenee discovered since dm
trial, it was incumbent upon the party to show, that
nu exertion of ordinary intlusti y itsid diligence could
prevent them (sum such surprise, or have disco,
sered the evidence in tune fur the trial. This was,
however, not attempted to be dune on the present
occasion. iie could nut have been surprised either
as to the nature of the action, or of the principal
witnesses that were to be called upon to pruve it.
his attention, or the attention of his Attorney,
should, therefore, naturay have been directed to
the books of Mr. Wiight, wits testa:et to the per-
son to whom the credit was given, and to Mr.
Curt, who was the I indlord of the house at West.
I rue-place, who now had sworn about the pay-
.nent of money fur fixtures, and who might have
b. en naturally supposed a person capable of gir.
sag information as to the delivery of tI e furniture i•
his home. If new trials were to be granted in
such a cue as this, when the party was not selr-

y _~ ..

A as to the nature of the cave, and yet
not think it proper to contradict the Plain-
, witnesses, Defendants would, in other
s, have a very considerable advantage. They
Id have nothing to do but lie by and hear
cue made by the Plaintiff's witnesses ; and,
r a ♦erdict hid gone against them, bring
and a number of witnesses to impeach tho
losses of the Plaintiff. They would hats this
t advantage, that the Plaintiff's witnesses
Id be pledged and bound down by what they
I never sworn ; whereas the new set of wit.
ors would sec o hat had been already sworn,
would shape their evidence accordingly. The
l'etitlant must take the conaLquences of his
n neglect; and if even injustice had been dune
this case, it would be better that justice should
i be attained in one individual case, than the!
Ole rules of the Court should be violated, and
r tccurity of all other property destroyed.
31r. Justice LiattAix entirely concurred with
r opinion of the other Judges, that the pro.
ctiun of any papers, facts, or witnesses, which
ilil be had at the former trial, was no ground
ti a new iliAl, as the Defendant had not been in
I, wise taken by surprise by it....Rele dis.

3tgot•
11 r. W:

irdle Wag not in Conrt.

SUBSCRIP77OAS.

!LIIIE COMMITTEE beg keret° 'airiest, to
UN* SUBSCRIBERS to the Fend already established
C a Anise thee of thud who are corsiosatn AS .111MICI
iusrtm FROsECSITED by the PROI'IIIE'CORS of CO-
LAT-HARDEN THEATRE, that although '27 nut nf 41
'the IN HICTAI lINTS preseated, were thriovin not by the
Ma wl Jurys yet the claims upon the land nifty heroine much
Mater that is, pericipt, in I;eneral, apprehended ; a .d that
air exertions gionld, therefore, be rakatoted, amber ;hears-

-tad.
•EBSCRIPTIOX3 CO NTINCR TO sr. n'kcetvgn AT
The (ghee of II GST A TEVNIA 1,17, Heel-greet ;
fir. Samuel Skinaer.street. (Treasurer) ;
Mr.J.Powell,3, Grow- Ploce,Caroden- lown,(Secretary ;)
Mmes. Durte LA Hour. li.infuellers.33l, Strand;
Mr. Ilan. , A:46°mo-, i, Duke-street, Gnisreour-square
Mr. T. Tegg, Bou4)eiler, 111, Cherapside ;
Mr. hisusantu, corner of Leather-lane, Holborn.
*most OSatabcrlptima shoddy advertised £414 19 CI
CONTRIBUTION LEVIED oil SHONE,
ONE OF -THE COVENT-GARDEN
RUFFIANS, BY A,111..G RA H A 3 1 ,Til E
DIAGIWCRATE, FOR PA W NING NI R.
WIENHOLT'S HAT, OF W lIICH H
WAS ROBBED IN THE PIT ..... £2 4
vie 114 Sobscriptlon of a few Friends visiting Cie
parlour at the Falcon, Old lisb-street, per George
Willow.. Secretory 9 0
it .C. a Friend and Well-or ii4er to the O. P.'s IJ
It is resocsted that all Communicntions oo the soliievt of
the above pro,ecutiuns. 1.1;7 be mode to Mr. Willitwa West,
Aitartsty, N.. 7, Clement s-Inn.

----
Arrived. Malls. Thse:
1 Verdi'
I
1 Marerford. ... ... ..... 0
0 . tiaisrabdrgh
0 . . I.isbrin 1
0 Cadiz

•--
NMI: or sTorhS MIS I/A Y AT (),1 F. O'CLOCK.
per L'ent.C.im. Ron . I
Long. Annl..lBe 9-16 .
Related VI ()tannins Ye prem.
Irr Cent...JO' 1 India 1anta15....29.. 295.
5 per Can.—Mee Ezra. 13111 s, $-. lie.
i'lpoills for itsr.. ill. Lauer" 'glebe* M. Lir.

THE STA TESMA

raorosiTt TZNAI.

LONDON:
FRIDAY, movassan '2l.

ink Pickle schooner did not, as *as antics.
pated, bring a confirmation of the action in the
Mediterranean. That vessel was charged with
dispatches of intereit and importance, greatly sm.
perior to the confirmation even of that event,
in
the eyes of Minitters—no less than the humble ac.
ceptanct of the haughty Marquis WELLESLEY Of
the cordial invitation of Mr. PERCEYAL to accept
a sitivaliOn under his administration. Hence-
forward his Lordship will figure as Secretary of
`gate fur the Foreign Department. We have bad
ample ciperieuce of the vigour of Mr. Ca?4,ll*O
and Lord C%SyLEREAGII. The Public will nuw
wait with all due respect for a display of the vi-
gour of the ‘VELLIsLeys.

Seville Gazettes to the Ist inst. have been re-
ceived. They contain, as usual, fettering ac-
suunts of the strength and motions of the Spa•
'fish armies. Could we bnt believe the particulars
announced in these Journals, it alight seem that
Cie French armies have found it necessary to con.
ientratt.. Cieir scattered divisions, in consequuce
of the i•icreasing strength of the Spaniards. It
were, however, blind credulity to yield belief
lettere we have so invariably been deceived--es has
unfortunately been the ease with respect to the
►narratives in the Spanish Gazettes. With regard to
the alleged insurrection, we can only express
our hope that the sentiments and conduct of the
inhabitants are materially changed since the re-
treat of Sir Joan Muoity, in Gallicia.—
The English fleet is stated to have been seen off
Barcelona. This increases the probability of an
action. We, however, thins, that the original
report will turn out to be the fact—that theft*.
oy of the transports, consisting of two or three
line of battle shirt, arc all that ha►e been caught.
If the convoy was destined for Barcelona, the fall
of that place, for want of protisiutis. is nut an un-
reasonable aaticipatian•

WE ha‘e illiS day given the remainder of the
Affidavits on which the Motion for a new Trial, in
the case of Colonel ‘VAILOLF., WAS founded ; and a
full account of the decision in thy Court 01
Kings Bench yesterday, on that Motion. It
be !wen, that the qttiiitiJn tuned us a polot