The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1821-09-05 00:00:00

'hoes prevented by hieaso point, Is should entitle kiiineit
to their verdict.
' The Learned COUS•SI called unreel whinnies hi support
of his statement, lose of whom were 'lighten*. sad others
iron-foutiders. The pipe f►om which the 'v4402108 hail
been nestle was pedthieva is Court. It ilea bees fractured
close to the joist, and though the eighteen tied iron-Amu&
en spoke to the good quality of the material, they could
not account for the fracture, as from she depth the pipe was
kid it would sot be affected by external pressure. It ap-
peered from the evidence, that thongh t►e commouication
with the gasometer, might be cut off a both ends of the
pipe* in Furth-street, the gas would remain hi the pi pee int
• length of time afterwards. It wee proved that the pipes
laid is Forth-stint were tested previous to being lased.
Mr. DR0C91141%, is reply to the case ebich had been
attempted to be made wit against him, obsened there was
tiow 'Wog which all his Learned Friend's ingenuity could out
'kilns° of its effect—that the explosion took place, that the
gas did blow up t►e house, that it was owing to something
is the pipes. to some e.eape of t►e gas, that this almost
fatal accident ►append ; and this escape ought nut to have
been 'offered 141 be made. The feet was the foundation of
the case hater, the Jury, and colleted him to the verdict bo
sought at their beide. The ewe of ►is Learned Friend
went to conirm the claim which the public had to care and
precaution on the part of the Gas Company. He left hie
case wit► the Jen, mid kuked forwacd with emillidenee to
Om result.

The Jutietit suomeii up the eeklesee, 4611 the Jury re-
tere►d a verdict for the Plaistiff—Dietegte 4.501. sed the
enteest of the Surgeon's bill.

SURREY SUMMER ASSIZES.

CROYDON.

SHERWOOD v. COOSH.
This was an action by • builder, iu the Borough,
to recover 354!. the alilOinit of his bull fur erecting
house for the Defendant. The Defendant pleaded
—first, that he was not liable ; and. second, be
pleaded a set-off to the amount of 244/. for mrdi-
ctnes supplied by him as an apothecary to the
Plaintiff and his family. It appeared that the
Plaintiff and Defendant had been long acquainted
with each other, a that the Defendant had at-
tended the Plaintiti 'a family for many rare. The
Plaintiff bad built a house for the Defendant,
which came to the sum above mentioned, and unoii
demanding the amount of his hill, the Defendant
insisted that the Plaintiff owed him 2441. for me-
dirket supplied to his family, and desired that
that rum might be deducted from the bill. This
the Plaintiff declined doing, and lie brought his
action. The Defendant's set (Awes principally for
supplying Mrs. Sherwood and her daughter (both
of *horn had died lifter a short illness), her son,
and a chin...omit. who 'isolated iu the family, with
medicines Cur some time short of two years. Mrs.
Sherwood had nut been seriously ill till immediatety
,before her death. sod Miss Sherwood was only ill
fur about ten dept. The Plaintiff's son had had
'very little medicine, but the charwoman appeared
to have had a tolerably liberal share. On the cross-
examination of the Defendant's late assistint, who
a/miscalled to prove the set-off. lie said lie remembered
to have heard the Defendant say " that M ra. Sherwood
wise an uncommonly good patient, for lie could per-
suade her to tak,g,es much medicine as he pleased."
The medicines far the charwoman were privately
instated, is order to prevent the Plaintiff knowing
that it was delivered on his credit. The quantily
of medicine delivered iii less than two years anoottot-
ed to nearly 2,000 droughts, 300 mixtures, and 460
boxes of pill., mill some days the expense of me-
dicine was 1/. 16,. per diens.
Mr. MA*RYATT, on the part of the Plaintiff,
contended that this was a fictitious ret-off. made
up for the porpose of defrauding tl e Plaintiff of his
just debt. IVtiatever the Defendant was reason-
ably entitled to receive for his medicines and trou-
ble, the Plaintiff was quite ready to pity, but he
could not submit to grass imposition.
Mr. Baron Wool) summed up the case for the
Jury ; and the Jury found their verdict for the
Plaintiff, damages 2541. thereby allowing the De-
fendant 100/. fur his set-otl.