The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1824-09-13 00:00:00

provocation death had casual, it would have been manslaughter ;
het wo.dd not the plaintiff have been called as a witness had this
been o:cease? " No, that is impossible," said Mr. Searle:ft, " for
lie would have been dead !•• (Loud and continued laughter). The
I.earced Sergeant very good-naturedly admitted the blunder. What
be meant to say was. had they taken another method of proceeding
Straight have been examined before the Jury. Ili, client was a gal-
lint offise, formerly in his Alajerity's 13th Regiment of Dragoons,
t.r d had exehanged from ill health abroad (we believe the L.-arned
Sergeant to have said) into the tllst Regiment in the time of
}race. A gross insult hail been offered to his father, and he had
resented it; and whet would have been the conduct of the Learned
Cour.sel (Mr. Scarlet's) son, who was in the 'acne regiment as the
siefendant, had he heard his father traduced in such a way '?why
he would have been the first to have resented the insult, and lie had
been no sun nor a soldier had lie nut! What was he to have done?
the defendant would make no apology, nor would he meet him as a
i•eritleano, and this was his only alternative; but it was not done
13 the Italian like manner his brained Friend had said it was;
no. he went to demand an apology, and instead of giving one, the
I.4.,intitt oddest insult to injury. and his client had certainly made
ore of the cane he find With him. Tho lusy had heard the words
the plaintiff used, " That I.e hall kicked the old man's bottom."
to ;use the mildest epithet. Was this nut enough to provoke the
sibilant Officer? /lad rot the plaintiff's object been money, he
would never have brought the action ; but if the Jury gave 405., it
would carry costs, and be three years' pay out of the Captaari's
ccitt; quite enough fur vindicating a parent's wrongs. The
Learned Sergeant, after a review of all the circumstances of
the Case, Twocceded to call a witness to prove the words used by
the plaintiff.
John IVoilehouse examined by Mr. Williams—He is an attor-
ney at Bolton ; he knows Lieutenant Itycroft ; he knew him before
the 53d of .duly ; lie is an uftleer of dragoons; he met him in Idol.
ton on that day, about two o'clock in the afternoon ; on seeing the
witness, he inn a question to him; it was about unitething sup-
p.ered be (‘Codchnuse) had said to a Mr. Merry ; he delayed giving
him any answer. ; he asked me if I had made use of certain expres.
lifts to a Mr. Merry. ; they were reeds that applied to Mr. Ity-
attit's Inther ;he said that be had been and was r:turning from
Liverpool tl.e preceding week with Mr. Merry, who--
Mr. 1,14 t: All LETT objected.
The .1c Do think it is not evidence, Mr. Sergeant Cross?
TheJene. E.— Proceed, Mr. Williams.
The witness proceeded. He said that he hail kicked old Mr. I,
Ry.auft, and he asked me if that account was correct; he wits so
preciing that he at last told him the words he had made use of;
they were these, " that he had kicked the backside of old Mr.
I:yeraf:." '!'hest were the wonls lie, Ilampson, had told him
( witness). and which he told to Mr. Merry, who told it to Mr..
Eyeroft. the defendant.
Mr. Scant-Eve—\n; I object to his being a witness.
The J UDGE.--Certaittly the objection is good ; they cannot ex-
amine him.
_ _

The Writ-book was produced.
I:xtract of prexipe, (-aphis ad Respondemdion, " Ilampson v.
Rferoft." tested Illth July 1824.
Extract from the Precipe Book. of the second Writ, Capiar ad
Rerpordendam, " llampson v. Ridgway sod itycroft," tested
290 Jnly.
relf.SCAlatTT replied, and said the compliments the Learned
Sergeant had paid bim were not true, as he was not that eloquent
Advocate he had described him to be, and that what he had said
with rcswet to his poser over a Jury was ironically used towards
Lim. and be had rather at all times not be brought in question.
They, the Jury, had heard certainly of eloquence, and so
they had the WOWS, " my Learned Friend," which were common
In a Court of Justice, whether true or not, (a laugh.) lie had a
diffivent opinion of gallantry to that laid down by him. Mr. leer.
gevnt Cross ; and with respect to his own son, he trusted lie never
had, nor ever would have such feelings of revenge as those possessed
by the defendant. Mr. Searlett then adverted to the nature of the
affair, and concluded by calling on the Jury for suitable damages.
The LeunedJUDOE briefly charged the Jury, and said it was
se.necestiery for him to go through the whole of the case, as they
had heard the evidence and could draw their conclusions. The
sole question wes the question of damages the plaintiff was entitled
to—that be was entitled to a verdict was clear. With respect to the
rosocation proved by Wodehouse, the witness fur the defence. if
5!:Py believed him, thitt souk, go in extenuation of damages. I.
the whole, it was their province to consider how far the Plainlitr'S
saes lad been made out, and whether the insult given to the father
thd not forum something in mitigation of damages in favour of the
sort.
The Jury consulted a dust time, and gave a verdict for the
pl cote—Damages U.
This cause had been a good deal canvassed, and excited great
r.se:y. The Court was fully attended, and all the parties we bc-
lieee were in Court. The defendant and his friend *at near the
Attorney-General.
Thy RIDAY, SEPTEIIIIER 9.