The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1826-07-03 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF KING'S B6CH, GUILDHALL, JULY 1.
PARIS V. FRY.

This was en action of trespass for driving over and injuring the
plaintiff. Plea, the g.neral issue.
Mr.:Scan LET T and Mr. ('AMtPnct.r. conducted the plaintiff's
case —The plaintiff is an itinerant dealer in black-lead pencils, and
the defendant a type-founder. On an evening in the month of No-
vember last, the defendant was driving a one-horse chaise through
Houndmitch, when, the evening being dark, he drove over the
plaintiff, who was crossing the Street. lie was taken up seriously
hurt, in consequence of the horse having trodden on Iris face. The
defendant immediately stepped, and Rave directions that proper
care should be taken of the plaintiff- and observed to the by.
standers, that his horse being high-spirited, and the ostler having
neglected to put on the bridle curb, lie was unable to pull up when
the plaintiff was crossing. The plaintiff was taken to the Jews'
Hospital in the neighbourhood, where he was ur.der surgical care
for 91 days, his head having been seriously injured.—lt appcarei
that the plaintiff, who was very much afflicted with the gru•r ha I
been several times in the same hospital before for that complaint.
During his confinement, in consequence of this accident, the d •-
fendant sent three sovereigns to the Hospital, to provide him with
comforts which he could not otherMee have had.

Four witnesses proved the plaintiff's crse.
Mr. Cost'sx, for the defendant, addressed the Jury, and con.
tended that, under all the circumstances of the case, the probability
was that the injury was purely accidental, in a hich case the plain.
tiff could not recover a verdict. There was no evidence whatever
that the injury was wilful, or even arising from ncgligen-e. The
only piece of evidence which could affect the defendant was his own
admission, that his horse was high-spirited, and that the ostler had
neglected to put on the bridle-curb Admitting, however, that
there was any ground for making the defendant liable, still it was
a case for very moderate damages, inasmuch as the defendant's
conduct afterwards was such as humanity and good feeling had
dictated.

' The Loup Crime Jusrics told the Jury, that if they billeted
any one of the four witnesses called for the plaintiff, the defendant
was liable for such 'node/ate damages as appeared to them to be
just.
The Jury retired for about an hour, and found their verdict for
the plaintiff—Damages, 311. 10s.
Before the case went to the Jury, the defendant was willing to
have submitted to a verdict for 50/.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Jctr I.
JAMES V. GRAY.

Mr. Sergeant TAnDY stated that this was an action brought by
the plaintiff, to recover damages for an injury he had sustained
through the negligence of the defendant's servant. The plaintiff
was a respectable surgeon, residing in Croydon, and the defendant
was a coach-master. On the 25th ofJuly, last year, the plaintiff
was oniiorsebaek, in the High-street of Croydon, with his horse's
head tarried towatda London. Hie horse was immediately behind
a cart, and the plaintiff was engaged in conversation with a friend.
when one of the 'Brighton coaches, called " The Royal Patriot,"
of which the defendant was proprietor, and which was driven by
the defendant's servant, came up, and having passed a cart that
was standing on the other side of the way, the coachman negli.
-gently drove his horses so close to the side on which the plaintiff's
horse was standing, that the spread-bars struck the plaintiff's horse,
which itntnediately began plunging, and threw the plaintiff, who
fell under the fore-wheel of the coach, which passed over his leg,
and fractured it in such a manner as to confine I four months to
his house. This was the injury now complained of, and the
for had felt it his duty to commence the present action, less for the
purpose of obtaining heavy damages than with a view to teach
watchmen that they were bound to drive carefully, and to warn
coach-masters that, unless they employed careful servants, they
must take the consequences of their imprudence, in entrusting so
important a duty to negligent or unskilful persons.
The plaintiff's friend and some other witnesses swore to the fact
that the whole blame was imputable to the coachman, who had
driven too near the side of the toad where the plaintiff's horse was
standing. They admitted that be was not driving at a rapid rate.
Mr. Serjeant WILDE, for the defendant, observed that it fre-
quently happened that accidents arose from the negligence of those
who ultimately suffered from them; and he believed that such
would be food to be the case in the present instance. The horse
on which the plaintiff rode was a spirited animal, and, on the ap-
proach of the coach, began to shy, when the plaintiff', in order to
avoid running over the friend with whom he was conversing,
checked his horse, and, unfortunately, checked it so sharply, that it
backed towards the coach, and, in doing so, was struck by the
spread bars between the wheelers and the leaders. It then became
very restive, got entangled with the leaders, seas unmanageahl-,
and finally threw the plaintiff; who, fa.ling under the wheels of the
coach, met with that injury of which he now complained. That
injury, however, was purely accidental; or, if it could he said to
be owing to any other cause titan that of accident, it must be attri-
buted to the shing of the plaintiff's horse, and not to the neg-
ligence of the defendant's coachman, who had driven both steadily
and carefully, and who had avoided, as much as possible, go-
ing too near the aide of the road where the plaintifra houeiru

sanding.
Several witnesses were called to make out this defence ; but they
disagreed among themselves as to the position of the plaintiit'i
horse, and as to the proximity of the coach ; and one of them, a
person who had formerly beets groom to the plaintiff, and who was
called to prove that the plaintiff's horse was a very shy animal,
proved exactly the reverse, declaring that it was perfectly quiet,
and never shyod but at clothes dapping in the wind, and at the tails
of a w'mdmill.

Mr. Serjeant TAnDY replied.
The Loan Cutts. Jurrics summed up the evidence to the
Jury, and left it to them to determine whether the injury of which
the plaintiff complained was occasioned by the negligence of the
defendant's coachman, in driving too near the plaintiff's side of the
road, or by the shyness of the plaintiff's hone. If they were of the
former opinion, they would find their verdict for the plaintiff; hut
on the other hand, they believed the shyness of the plaintiff's
horse had occasioned the accident, and that the defendant's coach-
man had driven with all due care, they would find a verdict for the
defendant. If they gave a verdict for the plaintiff, the only re-
maining question was that of damages, and that was II question
purely for their consideration.
The Jury consulted for n short time, and then returned a verdict
for theplaintiff— Damages 304

ADMIRALTY COURT SATURDAY, JULY I.
PIRACY.
_ . _

- -
George Ramer, Deaiel Pleas sing, sad Simnel Be!!, young
men, who were mariners on board the merehant ship Alert, in Sep-
tember, 1826, on a voyage from Shoreham to St. Peterabuegh
homeward stood Indicted for piratical' svising_the said vervlll
when within about live loom of . The facts proved
were dime euthisreiso was Me Massa of the Alen, and
61r. William Herring, of inesethed, berms. Durlog part of
the outward voyage, the the.. pdessees iretiesestontly intoxicated,
and assaulted the mate. Or
__ iievlrtag, Mt diet/Mar September,
1826, Off Minos'. ON, bBllllBlllll‘themOth add* eeneistel
eleven persons, and retold Asifilliffellloosiesa of the Matte and
mate, unless they bad a islim of Nat awe allreel Ibis instead
of beer. The sum was lira $ 1111 m% OWL ft aftsrealds gs

under weigh. The prisoner Balmer was constantly drunk
riotous, and refused to obey orders ; lie threatened the Csit,
and swore he would drive the vessel on the rocks and bun. ,
The Captain, being alarmed at the violent conduct of Hui,.
Rave up the command of the vessel and retired to his cabin, .
his mate. Bell and Flemming went on deck, and the fop
walked backwards and forwuds, and said that lie had got
cointnand of the ship. Ile called to I3ulmer to Mforin him how
sleet, and the latter directed him to steer south-east. The pripittr
went to the cabin, and Hubner vized the Captain's desk, and st,
tempted to drag the Captain out of his bed, to compel him too.
sume the command of the vessel. The prisoners had beets'',
alarmed lest they should drive on the rocks, or run aground on tot
Isle of Ilogsland. The Captain resumed the command on ate
begging his pardon, and prioriised to look over their fault if fief
conducted themselves well on the homeward voyage.
Mr. BAH itr, as Counsel on the part of the prisoner', soggesw.
that there was r.s proof that it was the intention of the prisoner. %
keep permanent possession of the ship.
Lord STOWELL and the other Judges concurred in that opir..u-
and the Jury acquitted the prisoners.