Star. — 1826-12-01 (London, England)

DRAFTSMAN. It will be recollected that about a fortnight or three wetks ago, a young Gentleman, whose name was unknown until the Coroner's Inquest sat, was found lying dead, in the mud in the Thames, off Esicz Wharf, in the Strand, with his pockets emptied of their contents, with the exception of a key, and a pawnbroker's duplicate of a brooch, pledged at the shop of Mr. Essex, in Aldersgate-street. There were such dreadful contusions on the head and forehead, and also on the nose, which was broken, that the friends of °the deceased were strongly of opinion that be bad been murdered, and afterwards thrown over one of the bridges into the water. In this opinion they were strengthened by two burgeons, who were not examined on the Inquest, but who had seen the body, saying that they believed he bad not come by his death by &ownirsg.4-Ik)wever there was no evidence to stew to the: contrary, and the Jury found a verdict of—" Found Drowned." The body was subsequently interred in St. Clement's Church-yard, yet still the parents and friends: of the unfortunate young man had a presentiment that he had been wilfully murdered, and his body shrown into the River for concealment. Under this impression they came to a determination to have the body disinterred, in order that the bead should undergo minute sm.. pical examination, by which means their minds would he ,et at rest. Accordingly application was made to Mr. Muisnutr., the Magistrate, of Bow-street, for permission to disinter the corpse, which was immediately granted, and Wednesday forenoon, about eleven o'clock, the body was exhumated by Edwards, the undertaker, and conveyed to the bone-house, where the head underwent an anatomical examination, by two skilful professors, in the presence of Mr. HOLLAND, the lather of the deceased, and several of his friends. The result was, that nothing could be discovered in the head that would warrant the surgeons in pronouncing that the unfortunate young man bad been murdered; and the friends and relatives having expressed themselves satisfied, the body was placed in the coffin, and agaii consigned to the grave.  LAW lEPOR?.  COURT OF EXCHEQUER, Nov. SQ.  Val A2TOINNT-OOMIAL 14 OLDlnif" The ATTORNEY GENERAL stated CO the Jury that this was an information, consisting of several counts. The first was for procuring a permit under pretence of transferring a certain quantity of wine to a Mr. Buckby, a manufacturer of anti-attrition paste. It would appear by the evidence that Mr. Buckby was not the purchaser of any such quidatity of wine, and that the permit had not been returned to the Excise-office. The second was of a similar nature. In this the supposed purchaser was Mrs. Oldfield, the mother of the defendant. He (the Attorney• General) should not dwell upon the circumstances then, but suffer them to be opened to the Jury by the evidence which he was about to offer to them. it was his intention to shew that these two perinits Were fraudulently obtained, for the purpose of concealing illegal and punishable practices. The third count arose out of the preceding ones; it cempjained of there permits not being returned to the Excise-office, Which he could only insist upon, when he bad proved that the permits were not applied to the purposes for which they were obtained. The fourth count alleged the adulteration of certain wines; the mixing of Capel with sherry., and then selling the said mixture as pure sherry. He need not remind the Jury that Cape wine paid a Very small duty, and sherry a very high one ; or explain to them the mode in which the revenge was defrauded, and the public imposed upon and injured, by the sale of a composition of this description. He would not detain the Jury any longer from the evidence, but he must be allowed to observe, before he called any witnesses, that as it would be proved that the defendant had been in the habit of adulterating his sines inanother way also—with certain compounds of almonds and oyster-shells—the Jury would see the necessity of an information of this kind, if it were only for the purpose of holding up an example to others. There were many persons who constantly adulterated articles in daily use; add these adulterations, if they were not injurious to the health and constitutions of the consumers, were at least a fraud upon them, in making them pay, for I instance, duty upon lex which had beret seen China; or upon pepper maitufacturei out of dirt. After a long trial, the Jury then retired for about a quarter of an hoar, and upon their coming into Court again, returned a verdict fit the Crown on one permit, that of Mr. Buckby.