The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1824-12-03 00:00:00

COURT OP COMMON PLEAS, TEVILIDAT. Dzc. 2.

ISlttinp after ifiehaellaaa rem at Weatasiader.l
lITZZD tr.

Thin was an action brought by the plaintiff, an apothecary, re.
aiding in Iledforticereet, Wdford.egrare, mount the defendant, a
lady, living with her mother, in Ehahon.street, Somers Tows,
to • eeover the tm of 111. lfs. W. foe medicines supplied to the
defetdant.

The CHlet Jrsv ter observed, that ly the defend.
ant bad not recovered, and that she t thought the plain-
tiff was not citified to reeover--(A laugh.)
Mr. Sergeant PELL said, that the defendant bed recovered, sal
that he hoped the plaintiff would recover also.
James Turner, shop-boy in the savior of the plaintiff stated.
that he went with ntedkines to Mies Henley's mother's homy, and
that her mother rzeeived the medicines front him ; one day Miss
Henley took the medicines herself; her mother was on that occasion
from home ; he repeatedly saw Slits Henley afterwards, at the
house of the plaintiff, in Bedford-street, where she received medi-
cines herself and took them away • he met her subsequently in
li rord•strecs, when she said that ;be would settle the plwinttff's
bill when she settled with her attorney ; witness often called on the
el.fitilant for payment, but never received any money • he also
called for the phial*, some of which were four-ounce phials,: but he
Out not know what medicines they contained ; Miss Henley told
witness that she had been ill of a fever, ands determination of blood
to the head.

Mr. Sergeant Witnt, for the defendant, called the attention
of the Learned Counsel to the plaintiff to the Act of Parliament of
46 George 111., e. 194, a. 21, for the rel.-anion oldie practice of
ap!thentries. .

111 r. sergeant PELL said, "Oh! certainly; my Learned Frierd
wishes me to move that the plaintiff practised as an apothecary be-
fore the passing of the Act."
Tits Cut Et .1 Icr—That was in 11115.
Mr. Sergeant I's:t.t. said the Aet was datttl the Ist of August.
181.5. IN then called • witness, who depd.cil that the plainuff
practised as an apothecary in 1813, and attauled the witness's
family.
On cross-examination, the witness said that plaintiff attended his
tinnily as • 6.h:suf.
A diploma frum.Snrgeens' Ilan was put in.
. . _ .

Itlr. /sergeant 11.1t.nr objected, that there was no proof of the
plattitill having re!rularly practised before 1815; he had attended
the family of the last witness merely u a friend, and that was no
evidence of regular practice, according to the meaning of the Act
of Parliament, which Irett taplieit and iTilefltiVt.
Sergeant Pvt.,. then called other witnesses, but they did
nut answer, and they were consequently called upon their sub.
. . .

fhe Clime JCIITSCE thought there mu no evidence to go to
a Jury.
!Ir. Sergeant I'Et.t. then wished to recover the v:due of the
The Comte. Jr wrier thought drat the plaintiff' could not
recover the value of the phials because the Act of Parliament
did not tdlow hiw to p-actise r. 4 an apothecary. or to syll ne-dicinet
without hrinC regolar!y qualified. Ili+ Lortt.hip thought the
plaiidiff could r.ot recover in a Court of Justice toe doing that
-vhicli the law did nor allow him to do.
The plaintiff eras then nrui,uited.

COrRT Or rm.:lit:Qum:, TUUUDAY, DEC. I.