such interest, and therefore the bill ought not to be confirmed.

The attorney general, on the part of the crown, supported his demurrer, on the ground that the crown had no interest whatever in the case, and could not therefore be made a party. He also contended, that the plaintiff had no right to perpetuate evidence, because he had no present interest in the property of the marquis of Donegal.

Mr. Sugden, for the plaintiff, maintained the propriety of permitting his client to perpetuate evidence. If this were not done now, the witness, whose evidence was necessary to prove the legitimacy of the plaintiff, might die, and thus he would be unable to obtain possession of the dignities of his ancestors. He further contended, that although the plaintiff had no present interest in the landed property of the marquis of Donegal, yet, as the eldest son of that peer, he was entitled to certain privileges which ought to be considered in the nature of property, and that therefore he ought to be allowed to perpetuate the evidence required.

The lord chancellor decided that the demurrers must be al lowed, but advised the parties to carry the case before the House of Lords.

11. The colliers in the vicinity of Wellington have quietly returned to their duty; and the military (except the company of the Shropshire militia under captain Mortimer) have taken their departure. Warrants have been issued against those men who were most active during the late tumults, and three have been committed to the gaol, viz. J. Amis, J. Wilcox, and T. Palin,

for tumultuously assembling and doing damage at the Old Park Works, &c. The cordial thanks of the magistrates and inhabitants were communicated to the Wellington, Shrewsbury, Hales Owen, &c. troops of cavalry, for their promptitude, temper, and firmness.

A Stockholm paper of the 13th says" The chancery of justice has delivered to the tribunal the protocol which contains the depositions of Nils Brygger, a native of Gothland, formerly a journeyman dyer. This Brygger has denounced himself; and confessed that, in 1811, when the English fleet was off the west coast of the kingdom, he was induced to convey letters concerning the late king Gustavus Adolphus from the fleet to persons in the country; and that afterwards, in 1815, 16, 17, and 18-that is, since the prohibition of all communication with Gustavus Adolphus, the late queen, and their children-he had had verbal communication with Gustavus Adolphus and the late queen; and lastly, that he had been induced to carry letters from the queen. Besides these denunciations against himself, he has also denounced count Rosen, as having had, in 1811, a private conference with Gustavus Adolphus on an island near Gottenburgh: he adds, that the late queen wrote many letters to the count, which he (Brygger) delivered. Count Rosen being informed of the accusation made against him, has begged his majesty for a judicial inquiry to prove his innocence. The confession of Brygger having been laid before his majesty by the chancellor of justice, the inquiry has now been ordered, and the documents given into the

hands of the attorney-general, Lousin, who will immediately bring the affair before the Supreme Court of Justice. But it is universally believed that the informer is an adventurer, and his denouncements false."

13. COURT OF KING'S BENCH. -Davis v. Tagg.-This was an action of assumpsit, arising out of the sale of certain articles of jewellery.

The defendant, who is a journeyman jeweller, trading a little on his own account, sold to the wife of the plaintiff a variety of trinkets; viz. a neck-chain, a seal, a ring, a watch-key, and a pair of ear-rings, warranting the same to be "veritable gold of Ophir," of the fineness at least of 80s. per ounce. Some time after the purchase (ready money having been paid for the goods), the plaintiff learned from a friend, who was a little judge of such matters, that he had been bamboozled. The articles having been submitted to the inspection of a refiner; that artist declared, that they had been bought at nearly twice their value. Mr. Scarlett now, seeking to recover 7. as the difference between the actual worth of the jewels, and the feigned value which had been put upon them by the defendant, relied upon the warranty of" gold at 80s. per ounce."

John Davis, the son of the plaintiff, proved the warranty; and evidence was given to show, that the trinkets in question were worth very little more than half the money that had been paid for

them.

Mr.Denman, for the defendant, contended that the jeweller's words-80s. per oz.-were not to be taken as a warranty of the articles, but merely as words of

course, such as a tradesman would naturally employ for the recommendation of his goods.

The Lord Chief Justice held that the assurance of the defendant amounted to a warranty; and that a tradesman had no right in disposing of his wares to indulge in assertions amounting to falsehood.

The jury, by consent, found for the plaintiff.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.Watts v. Platt.-Sergeant Pell stated the facts of the plaintiff's case to the jury:-The parties live at West Drayton, and are in an humble line of life. In 1812, the defendant, George Platt, a farmer, met Jemima Watts, the plaintiff, at a dance at her uncle's, who kept the "Six Bells" publichouse: after which he visited her at the cottage of her mother, a very poor woman; she was then about 18, and he under 30 years of age. The mother at first wished her daughter to decline his acquaintance, as she did not conceive her a suitable match for a person in such good circumstances as the defendant. He, however, persevered, declaring it was his intention to marry her, and actually purchased the ring for that purpose. The courtship continued for upwards of eight years, until the defendant, without assigning any motive for his conduct, took it into his head to marry another woman; after which, he still attempted to continue his visits; and, upon being upbraided by the plaintiff with his breach of faith towards her, he protested, with tears in his eyes, that his misconduct had been productive of more unhappiness to himself than to her. This was the substance of the case proved by the mother, sister,

and uncle of the plaintiff, from whom, upon cross-examination, it was attempted to be extracted that she had permitted the defendant to take liberties with her which were inconsistent with propriety. These attempts, however, totally failed-the girl's conduct appearing to have been unexceptionable.

Sergeant Vaughan addressed the jury on behalf of the defendant, but called no witnesses.

The learned judge in his charge, observed, in strong and indignant language, upon the unmanly and cruel defence attempted to be set up by the defendant, in endeavouring, after first imputing to her the poverty of her parents, to prove his own infamy in seducing her in her mother's house, which defence had not only failed, but ought to recoil with vengeance upon his own head.

The jury, after three or four minutes' consultation, found for the plaintiff 500l. damages.

EXECUTIONS.-The following malefactors were executed this morning, in front of Newgate, pursuant to their sentences at the Old Bailey, viz.-Thomas Elliot, Joseph Wootten, and William Bullock, for street robberies, attended with circumstances of peculiar atrocity; and Abraham Hemmingway, concerned with Thomas Webb, who was executed Dec. 5, 1820, for robbing Enfield church. Elliot was the first who ascended the scaffold he came up with uncommon firmness and seeming contrition, and requested his cap might not be pulled over his eyes till nearly the time of the fatal signal. Wootten and Bullock came next. Previous to Bullock's coming on the fatal drop,

:

he said to the Rev. Mr. Baker"So help me God, I am innocent of the crime for which I am going to suffer!" On the scaffold he still persisted in his innocence. They were all young men, well dressed. Hemmingway was the last brought up: in his last moments he acknowledged the justness of his sentence, and said that he had been guilty of many crimes. He was lately street-keeper in the parish of St. Luke, Old-street. Before they were turned off, they all shook hands with each other, seemed quite resigned to their fate, and, with an audible voice, sung-"The Sinner's Lamentation." On the preceding evening a respite was received for Michael Harley, convicted of a highway robbery.

14. The Protestant Dissenting Ministers of the three denominations assembled at Dr. Williams's library in Red-cross-street, with a view of considering the projected bill of Mr. Brougham on the subject of education. Several ministers had expressed their sentiments, and among the rest the Rev. Dr. Lindsay. A friendly conversation having been finished, the secretary, the Rev. Dr. Morgan, was proceeding to read to the meeting a series of resolu tions, when the attention of the company was arrested by an appearance of severe indisposition in Dr. Lindsay. He fell insensible into the arms of those around him. Medical aid was instantly called in, but it was too late. The spirit had fled to God who gave it. The whole company were too much affected by this awful stroke to proceed with business.

A striking proof of the depression that exists in the shipping interest

of this country was afforded to day, when the contracts for tonnage to Bengal were concluded at the East-India House. During the war the East-India Company were in the habit of paying 40%. per ton; last year the terms were from 9. 19s. 6d. to 12., and they are now reduced to from 71. to 81. The quantity tendered was above 36,000 tons, of which only 3,000 have been taken up.

PARIS. The anniversary service for his late royal highness the duke de Berri was performed this day in the church of St. Denis. The ceremony was conducted in the most solemn manner. The church was hung with black, as usual at the service for Louis 16th. M. de Bombelles, bishop of Amiens, chief almoner of her royal highness the duchess de Berri, officiated, assisted by several of the canons of St. Denis. His royal highness the duke d'An goulême, and their serene highnesses the duke d'Orleans and the duke de Bourbon, prince of Conde, were in the choir in seats which had been prepared for them. Many priests were in the sanctuary.

16. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS. -Tarrant v. Jones.-This was an action brought by the plaintiff, an attorney living in Dean-street, against the defendant, who is a gold-beater, and his next door neighbour, for a nuisance. Sergeant Lens, with whom was Mr. Phillips (of Ireland), stated the plaintiff's case, and then called several witnesses, who swore that from the constant and heavy hammering at the defendant's house, from eight o'clock in the morning until nine at night, it was impossible for any one to live or do business at the plaintiff's

house. His servants said that, in consequence of the noise, they were afflicted with continual headaches, and one of his apprentices stated that it affected his nerves.

Sergeant Vaughan addressed the jury on behalf of the defendant, and contended that if they gave a verdict against him, they would put down half the trades in London. He knew his learned brother, sergeant Lens, to have a very large knocker upon his door, and he also knew him to see a great deal of company; he might therefore expect, from the constant knocking at his door, that his neighbours would proceed against him for a nuisance. As for the plaintiff, he was an attorney, and therefore a species of gold-beater himself as well as the defendant, often spreading a small matter over a large surface; and when he drew his quill against the defendant's hammer, he was more than a match for him. But, in fact, the defendant might as well complain of the plaintiff's cook as a nuisance, because she often made a noise at dinner time, hammering beef steaks to make them tender. The learned sergeant concluded by stating that, if necessary, he would call witnesses.

The jury said that their minds were made up on the subject; and returned a verdict for the defendant.

The learned judge then said, without pronouncing any opinion upon the case, the defendant ought to endeavour to remove, or reduce the nuisance, if possible, as another action might immediately be brought.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.Hunt's Radical Coffee.-The King v. Henry Hunt. This was an

ration.

Samuel Linstead stated, that he was an officer of the Excise, and that in February last he went to the defendant's manufactory, 97, Broadway, near Christ Church, in Surrey, and asked to buy 14lb. of breakfast powder. The witness saw the defendant, who said he did not sell less than 28 lb. of the article in question. He then bought that quantity, for which he paid 8d. per pound. The defendant's son told the witness it was better than coffee; that they were selling a great deal of it, and had sent a large quantity to Liverpool. The witness then left the place, but afterwards returned with a number of his brother officers, amongst whom was William East, the surveyor of the Excise. They went to the manufactory, and seized all the powder that was manufactured, or in the process of manufacturing. When they went to seize, and told the defendant their business, he said that if they did not seize immediately he would kick them out; they seized an iron furnace, some roasters, and 206 lb. of powder like coffee, and 1,469 lb. of roasted rye, which, if ground, would be the same as the powder. The defendant asked by what law they made the seizure, and was answered that they made it by the 43rd of Geo. 3rd.

On the cross-examination of the witness by Mr. Hill, as counsel for the defendant, he said that neither the defendant nor his son called the powder coffee, nor was there the least concealment. The

asked for breakfast

A return of the seizure and condemnation for want of claim was read, and put in evidence, which closed the case for the

crown.

Mr. Hill addressed the jury for the defendants. The learned counsel said, that, had not the jury heard something of this matter out of doors, they must be surprised to hear that no man should be allowed to make his breakfast of any thing like coffee, unless he purchased that expensive article. It was very much the same, as if it were sought to recover a penalty from a man who could not afford to drink wine, because he presumed to regale himself with porter.

Thomas Hunt proved that his father never called the breakfastpowder coffee, and that he desired the witness never to call it so.

Baron Garrow charged the jury, that the law in this case was clear; and if they believed the facts, of which there could be no doubt, they must find a verdict for the Crown.

The jury immediately found a verdict for the Crown on both counts-Penalties 2004.

EXPLOSION OF A PRIVATE DISTILLERY.--This evening, a little after eight o'clock, the inhabitants of Boyer's-buildings, St. George's-in-the-East, were thrown into great alarm. Their houses were shaken from the foundation, and almost every pane of glass shivered, in consequence of an explosion which took place at the house of a German, named Clarke, residing in the above place. The report was heard throughout the neighbourhood, but the cause of it was for some