« ZurückWeiter »
maintained that the defendant was entitled to a verdict.
The Lord Chief Justice then summed up the case, and observed to the jury, that the chief point which they had to try was, whether the representation in the letter was actually true, or such as the writer might suppose to be true, or whether it differed materially from the representation which ought to have been made to the underwriters. The vessel, at the time of effecting the ensurance, was stated to be at Pernambuco : it was not necessary that this should be literally true; it would be sufficient if she were there at the time when the owners received their last advices from her captain. Now it appeared from the evidence, that the vessel finished her outward voyage at the end of July, or in the beginning of August, 1811; and that the captain communicated the fact of his arrival to his employers at St. Michael. In all probability his letter would afford intelligence whether he should sail immediately, or wait some time for a fresh cargo. If it did afford such intelligence, it ought to have been communicated to the underwriters. It apo in reality, that she was aden in August, and sailed in the beginning of September. It was therefore their business to consider whether Vasconcellos knew of that fact or not; and if they thought he was acquainted with it, to consider whether he had not been induced, by fear of losing the vessel, to effect a policy upon it: if they were of opinion that he had been induced by fear to ensure the vessel, then
he ought to have communicated the cause of his alarm to the underwriters; and therefore they must find a verdict for the defendant: if they were of a contrary opinion, then they must bring in a verdict for the plaintiff. The jury immediately returned a verdict for the defendant.
SURRY SESSIONS, JAN. 27.
Anne Atkinson and Thomas Stephens were indicted for having conspired to defraud the parish of Bermondsey, by exposing their male bastard child opposite the workhouse of that
parish. Jane Johanna Stapleton said, she lived at 56, Brunswick-street, Blackfriars-road. The female defendant came to take a lodging at her house; said she was the wife of an exciseman. In the evening she came again with the male defendant, and paid earnest; both took possession in about a week, and lived together as man and wife. The woman was far advanced in pregnancy. The man said, that when the child was born, they should take it to his mother's, as they were going to America. The child, a boy, was born on the 28th of July. Witness was at the birth. Mrs. Lewis was nurse. The child remained in the house three weeks, after which it was taken to Lowdell's-court to nurse. The father and mother left the house the same day, and returned in about a week, and sent for the child. They then took the child out with them ; they returned at - half
half past ten at night without it. The man was in a very agitated fainting state. Witness asked where the child was. The woman said it was very well, and well taken care of, at his grandmother's. Witness was not satisfied, but continued her inquiries for several days. The female defendant told her, that she and the man took the child, and bought a rush basket and a piece of new flannel, wrapped the child up in it, put it into the basket, and that the man tied it to the knocker of a door opposite Bermondsey workhouse, while she watched at the top of the street: Sarah Lewis said she nursed the female prisoner on the 23rd of July in Brunswick-street, in her confinement. She nursed the child a week, after which she left it with them ; afterwards she saw the child at Bermondsey workhouse. Maria Clarke, in August last, found the door, on opening it, rather heavy. She gave it a second Fo wasthen knocked on her knee by something falling against it. She screamed, and Mr. Ross opened the door, when there appeared a basket, containing a child about five or six weeks old. There were child's clothes in the basket. The child was taken to the workhouse, which was opposite, and delivered to Mr. Stephens the master, the defendant Stephens' father. The father of the male defendant said, he supposed his son was married, but never heard at what church, nor saw the certificate. His son told him so four years ago. The female prisoner was not the person to whom he said
he was married. Witness had a young child brought to him in August. He was master of Bermondsey workhouse. He never saw the person who brought the child. The child had been in the house ever since. Verdict—Guilty. Sentence— six months' imprisonment.
court of KING’s-BENCH, SATURDAY, FEB. 6.
The King v. the Parish of St. Mary, Canterbury—This WaS a question respecting the settlement of a pauper, under the following novel circumstances:— The pauper, a boy, had been bound apprentice to a mastermariner, resident in St. Mary, Canterbury, and continued with him some months; but circumstances arising which prevented the master from getting his vessel to sea, the master, at the end of that time, asked his apprentice whether he would like to be turned over to another master, or whether he would go to school for a time and learn navigation. The boy chose the latter, and was accordingly sent to a school in Canterbury by his master, where he continued some time, when he ran away and returned to Shadwell, to which parish he had originally belonged. Here he afterwards became chargeable to the parish, and was passed to St. Mary, Canterbury, on the grounds that he had obtained a settlement in that parish by his service of a year. Against this decision of the magistrates that parish now appealed. The Court, after hearing the argument, decided that no settlement had been gain:
ed in St. Mary’s parish : to constitute a settlement, there must not only be a binding, a sleeping and support, but there must also be labour. In the present case, the master had not had the latter. The boy was bound to him to learn practical navigation, but he had not done so: he was sent to school, where he was taught theoretical navigation only; and there he went by his own choice, and not in consequence of any control exercised over him by his master. This was not such a binding and service as would settle the pauper, who still belonged to his original parish ; and the order of sessions, settling him on St. Mary, Canterbury, was ordered to be quashed.
count of common PLEAs, TUESDAY, FEB. 16.
Christie v. Jones.—This was an action brought by Mr. Christie, the auctioneer, to recover from the defendant 509!., which he alleged, being money belongin to him, was won by the defendant, at games of cards, of his clerk, at different times and places.
William Rickards said, he had been servant to Mr. Christie seven years. He was discharged at the end of July last. In his situation as clerk, he was in the habit of receiving money coming to Mr. Christie as an auctioneer, to a considerable amount. The various sums were paid on account of jewels, pictures and property, sold in Pall-Mall. The witness had known the defendant between one and two years. The defendant lived in Pall-mall and kept a billiard-table. The wit
ness had played with him, on many occasions, at cards. He played with him for money about the 22d of April last. The defendant knew he was a clerk, but did not know he received his master's money. The first time he played with him at cards, they played at the Star and Garter, Pall-mall. They played at cribbage, and the witness lost 30l. the money of his employer, Mr. James Christie. He met him again about 30th April, and playing again with Mr. Christie’s money, lost 70l. On that occasion they began with 5l. a game, and increased it to 10l. and 15l. He met the defendant also at Bedford's Rooms in Pall-mall, and played with him to a late hour. Two of the defendant's brothers were present, and he believed Mr. Bedford was there, but could not speak positively. The witness also played with a friend of Jones’s, . was introduced to him. This friend pretended ignorance of the game, and it was understood that he was from the country. The defendant proposed his #ind should play for him, and the witness should give him two holes at cribbage; leaving him, at the same time, at liberty to instruct him in his play. The witness was a winner on that occasion to the amount of 60l., part of which remained unpaid, but Jones paid it next day. On the 1st of June he played with the defendant's friend on the same principle he had played before. The stakes were made good by the defendant; he lost 125l., which was Mr. Christie's money. He was unable to pay 15l. of the lost mo
that night, but the next day he met the defendant, and paid him 15l. out of Mr. Christie's money. He, upon another occasion, played with the defendant's friend at the sign of the Haunch of Venison, in Brook-street, for 150l. The defendant put down the stakes. The witness lost 80l., which was Mr. Christie's money. He remembered going with a 100l. bank-note, which he had taken at Ransom and Morland's, in payment of a check given by Mr. Woodburn, of St. Martin'slane, for property bought of Mr. Christie. He lost the note in question to the defendant. John Langdon, another clerk to Mr. Christie, was at the Haunch of Venison, in Brookstreet; he went by invitation of Rickards, and met him there laying with the defendant. A Ir. Davidson was also present. Davidson was the friend of the defendant. About 12 o'clock Rickards went out for money and came back with a supply, which he lost. Mr. Serjeant Vaughan addressed the jury for the defendant, and contended that no credit ought to be given to such a person as Rickards, who came into court as a witness, to avoid a prosecution for felony. He called no witnesses. The Chief Justice drew the attention of the jury to the main features of the case; namely, the credit due to the principal witness. It would be dangerous, he said, to the public interest, to hold that a person who had been decoyed into a gaming house and i. to commit crime, was not to be received as a witness. Transactions similar to that be
fore them in general took place at midnight, and persons who became dupes of the designing gamester were perhaps the best witnesses to bring offenders to justice. Independently of all other considerations, the jury would find the witness Rickards confirmed by other witnesses. If the jury had a doubt they would give the defendant the benefit; if they had not they ought to find a verdict for the plaintiff. If they did find for the plaintiff, the might rest on their pillows wit the consolation that they had rendered a service to the public. The jury without hesitation found a verdict for the plaintiff —Damages 5091.
oLD BAILEY, FEB. 20.
On Saturday Phillippe Caday alias Philibert, Joseph Amand Tregrosse, and Louis Amand Cleransac, were indicted for hav. ing brought from Mosambique in Africa to the island of Mauritius, certain persons to be sold as slaves.
The Attorney General stated the case, and the law as applicable to the jury.
G. T. Brodley, in Feb. 1818, was a midshipman of the Magicienne frigate stationed in the Mauritius. On the 21st of that month was with the master in the tender, lying in port Jacotay. While there, they saw a schooner about two in the afternoon, standing off and on Souliac. The wind was against them, and Mr. Evans, the master, ordered Mr. Garrett and witness to go overland to intercept the schooner. They had about eight miles to go, and they took a party of seamen. They got to Souliac * half past four, and saw the schooner trying to get out to sea. In beating out she ran on a reef, and witness and his party went on board of her, where they found twelve or fifteen persons, among whom were the prisoners. Mr. Philibert appeared to be the master. The other two appeared to be mates. Mr. Philibert presented the ship's papers to Mr. Garrett, and told the latter that they kept no log-book. Witness went into the hold, which was fitted up with a loose dock or platform about four feet below the upper-deck. Witness had only seen one other slave ship, and she had no platform. There was no cargo except water on board. He examined three casks, and two of them had salt water in them. Mr. Garrett returned Mr. Philibert his papers. He conceived the schooner was fitted for a slave-ship. He supposed there were upwards of twenty water casks on board, much more than necessary to supply twelve or sixteen men. The schooner went down. On the 24th of February witness searched a storehouse close to the bank of the river Souliac, and found the yards and sails of the schooner, and about a dozen pair of shackles or irons of different sizes, fit for men, women and boys. They took them on board the Magicienne. He did not see the prisoners till they were in custody. J. Sloughton, a seaman on board the Magicienne, confirmed the testimony of Mr. Brodley, and added, that whilesome of their party went down to board the schooner, others were firing at her from a hill, as they took her to be a slave vessel.
Lyse Victorine, examined through an interpreter, said, in February and March last she was a slave to Madame le Brun, at Hermitage, in the Mauritius; recollected a great number of blacks arriving there; there had been a hurricane about that time; there came with the blacks Messrs. Philibert, Cleransac, Tregrosse and Fontaine, accompanied by sailors; the blacks were put in a storehouse near Madame le Brun's house; there was a great many blacks, men and women and two or three children; she did not understand their language, nor could they speak French ; they all appeared strangers to the island. They remained three days in her mistress's house, where the prisoners lodged during that time; they went away on the second day with about half the blacks, but returned with them the same day and put them in the store. M. Cuvillier came to her mistress’s while the blacks were in the store; he brought servants, provisions and clothes for the new blacks. She remembered the soldiers arriving at her mistress's house at night; they knocked at the door but were not admitted; the prisoners and Cuvillier were there at the time. Her mistress told the soldiers she would not open the door unless the commissary came; the soldiers remained outside all night, and the commissary came the next morning, and the door was opened; the prisoners were taken . by the soldiers, and the blacks from the storehouse, except some who were ill; she had never seen the prisoners but that time at her mistress's house; she is married and