The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1806-03-29 00:00:00

HARILY V. YIELD .?'d ANOTHER.

Mr. Serjeant &sr stated, that this was an ac-
tion of deceit, for selling the Plaintiff short measure
in two ehaldrons and a half of coils. The Plaint-
iff, he stated, lived at Epsom, and the Defendants
I were coal-merchants at Croyd.sn. The P 1 iintiff,
who kept a little coal shop, had been indebted to
the D,:tendants, but getting out of their clutches,
he resols•ed to bring the present anion, which was
founded on the following circumstances • Having
ordered two chaldrons and a half of coals, which
were sent to him in one of the Defendants' wag-
gons, he observed the sacks were smell, and he
desired to have one of th.•m measured, and, by law,
a bushel measure ought to be sent with each cart
load of coals, that the buyer might have the coals
measured, if he were so inclined. In violation,
however, of the statute upon this subjed, there was
no bu•'tel measare sent along with the coal cart, in
consopence of wloch he at first refused to receive
the coals, but he afterwards did take them in, and
had them pet in a shed which was nailed up, and
the door sealed, until the Defendant himself came ;
they were then measured in his presence, and 16
bushels were proved deficient out of the two chal-
dross and a half. lie should prove these fads,
which would entitle him to the verdid of the Jury.
Ha added, that he should be also able to prove, if
necessary, that the Defendant did not attempt to
deny the deficiency, but attempted to put it on the
mistake of his servants, and offered to give the
Plaintiff '2.0 guineas to let the matter pass in silence.
Ile, however, rather chose to let a Jury of his
Country measure out the proper quantum of da-
mages.
He called two witnesses, who proved the fads as
he had stated them.

Mr. GAtitow, fur the Defendants, put the mat-
ter on the mistake of the Defendants' servants,
which he said originated in this way : They used
sacks of lisle more than two bushels, in bringing
the coals from the craft to the shore, a the full
Nick was ts .1 heavy a load for a man, and by mis-
take they had filled several of these sacks, instead
of the regular-sised ones, which were sent to the

Mr. Justice HEATH told the .fury, he thought
this was a very proper aftion. No proof was ad-
duced to substantiate the defence that the deficiency
arose from mistake ; at all evenjs, the Plaintiff
could not know it, and it was well known that
many frauds had been praCtised by the coal trade.
He added, it was not a case for much damages,
but they would give what they thought proper.
The Jury found for the Plaintiff—damages 40s.

RICHARDSON V. TRIEWD.
This was an afticn of slander. Mr.G A e ROW stated
that the Plaintiff WAS a gingerbread baker, at New
Cross, near Deptford. Having occasion to come
to town one day, he was desired by a neighbour
to bring for him albs. of raisins from town. He
went by chance into the shop of the defendont, who
Jived in the Borough, to buy thcse plumbs. He
asked the price of several other articles, and per-
haps eat a few of the raisins as they were weighing.
On a sudden, the Defendant attacked him with the
following accusation—" When you neat come to
any shop, don't pocket my plumbs ;" and persisted
in asserting that he Lad pocketed a parcel of them
in his coat pocket. The Plaintiff denied the accu-
sation, but the Defendant persisted, called him a
thief, and turned him out of doors, into the mob
which was gathered about the door. It had often
been said, "Cry out mad dog, and you need not
find a stick yourself to beat the animal thus stig-
matised ;" so it fared with the Plaintiff. But the
matter did not end here, for as the worst behaved
usually cry out first, so the Defendant immediately
went to Bow-street, and got a warrant against the
Plaintiff for assaulting him. He afterwards indieted
him at the Surrey Sessions, and is he there could
swear in his own cause, and the Plaintiff could
not be heard oa his oath in answer, he was con-
. witted, and sentenced to a month's imprisonment.
He was aware that the Jury could not give damages
for this aggravation of the Defendant's conduit,
but it was a good reason why they should not
lessen the damages they might be disposed to give.
Two witnesses, of the names of English and Co-
vers, proved that they heard the Defendant call the
Plaintiff a thief, and say that he had pocketed a
parcel of plumbs. English stated that he called in
the afternoon of the same day upon the Defendant,
and told him that the Plaintiff was a respetable
tradesman at New Cross, and that being in his
working dress, he thouitht the Defendant might
mistake his charaBer. fhe Defendant, however,
was in a great heat, and repeated that he was a
thief, and stole his plumbs.
Mr. Serjeant Bele, for the Defendant, a intirted
that the words were affionable, but contended that
eansinal damages would answer the justice of the
case, as the Plaintiff sustained no :eal injury. It
appeared that the Plaintiff had assaulted the De-
fendant, and he thought the assault nsight be set
off ag Jinn the slander.
Mr. Justice HEATH observed, that he should
have been of opinion, that in the origin of the bu-
siness it would have been as well to have balanced
the account, by setting off the beating against the
abuse. But the Plaintiff had been punished for the
d assault, and be thought the Defendant shouid now

•
in his tutu, ply Icy I'.i+ 'slander. If tl.e tl z
so too, they v-oull give above 40s. ddrosges,
WOLild carry cus:s.
The Jury found ft:r the Plaintiff'—Dantlpj 101.