The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1825-12-10 00:00:00

CUSSELL, CliTiT.24. VINES.

This was an action on a Bill of Exchange for IBt. accepted by
the defendant. and indoned to the plaintiff.
Mr. Otis NET tasted the ease. He said that he understood the
defence to this action woe, that the defendant was under an at the
time he accepted this bill--a most ti;shonest defence undoubtedly.
The defendant had, however. had notice ta appear; and he (Mr.
Gurney) was assured that the Jury would Le cotirMrel un the view
of him, that be was at least four or f ve-and-twerty. AgJn he
might to tell the Jury, that this bill was given for a horse which
Ole young man bed purchased for 181. and sold fur /A Could he
then be ender age ?
The proof of the issue being on the parr of the defendabt.
3lr. TAISOU RD, who wall for th? defendant, culled 11r. COONT•
stirgeun prac.i,ing at ReadicE, where Ow art;

-too.

-`~`~ -

BRITISH' PRESS,

who bad been present at the birth cf the defendant, of wimm he
had an entry in his book, from which it appeared that the de-
fendant woo barn in November lilII,.•
3lr. firtrearEt made some objection to the proof of the Weedy
of the defendant, which being over-ruled by the Lord Chief
Justice, the plaintiff was immediately nonsuited.

PALMER V. SPARKS.
This was an aetidn foe an assault and false imprisonment. The
! defendant is the occupier of Chalk Farm. The plaintiff is an
operative coachmaker. The plaintiff, with some friends, on the
lit July last, was walking towards Chalk Farm ; when they got
near the house they observed a party or sparrow-shonters. There
I were some boys outside the hedge gathering up the sparrows that
fell there. A sparrow fell in the hedge, which the boys could not
get at; and the plaintif, Mr. Palmer, got into the hedge for the
purpose of picking up the sparroW for them. While in the act of
doing this, Sparks came up, r.nd celled Palmer a scoundrel, and
! other opprobrious names, for trespassing on his grounds, and or.
tiered him to come down and leave them. Before he got down
! Sparks pushed the muzzle of his gun into the side of Palmer;
struggle ensued, and a constable came up, to whom Sparks gave
orders to take Palmer away. Palmer went with the constable to the
Chalk Farm public-house. Some time after a friend came in, and
asked Palmer if he was in custody, to which he replied that he did
not know, when his friend said he had better take his hat and walk
off. when hr would see whether the constable would stop him. lie
did so, and the officer did not atop him. This was the assault and
imprisonment complained of.
There was pleaded. first, the general issue; second, ajustifica.
don that the plaintiff first committed the assault.
Mr. GURNEY havirg proved his case,
Me. SCAR LETT addressed the Jury at some length for the de-
fendant. and called several witnesses to prove his justification.
Mr. Oust:we replied.
The Loan CRIES JUSTICE, in his summing up, told the Jury
that there were two points for their cunsideration,—the assault and
the false imprisonment. In respect to the first of theme, as there
was no justification, and as all the witnesses concurred is saying
that Sparks had been the assailant, there must be a verdict for the
plaintiff, with such damages, as they might think proper. With
respect to the charge of false • impdsonment, the qu,estion ior their
consideration was, whether Sparks had given orders to take the
plaintiff into custody, or whether he had merely given orders to the
officer to take him away out of the field ? If they were of the for.
nice opinion, they would find a verdict on this point also fat the
Plaintiff: and of the letter they would find for the defendant,
The Jury, after consulting together the some time, returned a
verdict for the defendant on the false imprisonment ; and tor the
assault they found a verdict for the Ilaintiff—Damages tarty
shillings.