The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1824-11-10 00:00:00

.11,SFPIta v. PI RI RA.

!:
•~

lump r. Nurßosr.

rnossi:A v. I.Ev.

Mr. fire v moved fiir;isCitaliti,;;;;l enter, to slew canoe why
fur Plaintiff in this Mute' ‘llolAii rut ie set aside, and a
nursuit entered up. It was an action for work and !weldor,, and
also for a sum of ounce laid out by plaintiff (an broker) for de.
lend ult. arenesling to Ids direction. The plaintiff is not a broker.
Inc en agent in the Foreign Stock 3larket. Ile was employed by
dant to purchase ten shares in the Equitable I,nau Company,
stores it appeared were purchased by him at the rate of
L:. IN, per share. 'file grounds on which be (Mr.fiumeo applied
fir a rionsnit were, that these shares were nut •t goods, wares. or
'Mere!, indise;" that the• plaintiff was not a broker; that the Ss'.
, • ,ty was an illegal one within the meaning of fl lien. 111. c.
11. lilt that the engagement was a mere h-imsrary one, calling on
lantriff to purchase shares in a Society about to be formed. should
:Peeive the sanction of an .►tt of Parliament ; and further, that
plaintiff• eid not us• suffici-nt Oiligctire in delivering to defend.
er,t these shares when pura.ond, by which daisy their value was
r,siderahly deprecia:cd, for it appeared they were really at the re.
• offices on the F.ith and l ith, and were on one of these days
I. night by ptaintiti; yet defendant gin no intimation of it until the
when he received from plaintiff a Inc.n apprising him of the
Fut.:l,6.e. and calling on him fur payment of the sum laid out, and
• c,comi.siun the/eon.
/fine granted.

11.VITY m. cattrw.
Mr. Sergearrt {Vitus: moved foe a rule to .hew cause why a now
tutt shm/r1 not be granted in this rise. The action had been
tried et the last Eserer Assizes. before the Lord Chief Justice, and
• 'retain returned for the defendant. The action was brought
irtattist tin Magistrates, for having steed under a fake construe.
fun of the 6th vol 7'h ellepti.ri of the 52d ficarge 111., by putting
t..e p:i.ii• tiff out of roast-a...ion of a farm. The ground on which
lily aced was, 'h., of his having deserted the possession, and left
Arc firm uncultivricl. At the commencement of the trial an ob.
; TtiOn was taken, that the 3lagibarates had tin tight to take the in-
I .onstion an which th,y select, as it was not given on oath ; the
et:it:ace of the landlord merely made 3 statement of the desertion,
and that rent was io amens, on which theJustiees Intim-Med to
to t'a'r-sin ihi the Imuthortl. I his point was towed at the trial.
The M tgstratea contended, that an actlVlarainst them did not lie.
s their adjudication was not Goal, and it might be apiealed
•',Hist, but that ILP 13111(311' of action could not he rmorted to.
iiis print was overruled by his Lordship, and the action proceed.
ed
in. The farm was kt at a rent of shoot 2001. a year. As won
at the first half. year's rent was due, • distress was levied fur the re-
..ivery of it. This was at a time when the stock of the farm was
%Insider:Mr, and a part of it was purchased by the plaintiff at the
• The ground of resisting the payment of the rent by the
piamtiff was, an alicgrd agreement by him that allowances were to
be made him for any improvements he might ntake in the farm,
which the landlord afterwards refused. About the time the Mat
huff yezr's rent became due, the plaintiff removed toe cottage,
wilich was described as two pin-shots distance from tile farm
which hr had occupied. lle toi.k the prine;pal part of the furni-
ture of the house and of the stock with hint, and left a few trifling
articles behind, and open this removal of his property the Justices
procceded to treat him as a peewit, who deserted possession. as
lie did not leave sufficient property on the ham to satisfy the dis.
tress. It was found, however, at the trial, that the plaintiff conti-
nued to cultivate the farm. and was actually engaged in the cultic
ration of it at the time the Justices interfered to forcibly eject him.
It wan proved also, that the farm was in is better elate at the time
the Justices interfered, than when he first came into Pessertiost.
The way in which his Lordship pot the question to the Jury in
summing up, was calculated to lead them to omit the consideration
cat these facts, which acre proved at the trial.
THE ',alibi:lllyr .11!!IT ICE said, that he put it to the Jury
whether the mew,. 1111 l . by the plaintiff, wider such eirtumistances.
was it data fide possession, or whether the conduct of the plaintiff
was not 511Chl as inertly to evade the effect of the statute of the 62d
lien. 111.

Mt. Seto-art Wil.rsx submitted that it was not. The plaintiff'
L:tunttil improvements pursuant to agreement, which
were refused by the lantli.nd ; and the cultivation ref the farm, at
t: e time of the interference of the parties, proved that he did not
Assert it. The next paint to which he would rail their Lordships
attention was. that the inforuuitiona on which the Magistrates acted
were not taken urnv oath. In the stdtutc directing inhumations
viten before Alegi:watt,. in much cases. it VMS expressed list
they should be taken tat oath, but it was intended that they should

The Loot) Cuter .1INTICII: said, that ei that point WWI saved
at the mot, the L.:mm..l Ocr;e:int might Facie.: to the next:

Mr. Sergeant W i tint: sata, that the only °flirr point to which he
had to eall their Loritsbips* attention was. that the parties act ...I
without having gone over the fans, and ascertains:J. by personal
übaervAtion, whethrr it WM in a state of e.ilitration or not. They
did not gi farther than the I and rmtlii nut know the general
state of the farm. He (Mr. Serg...nnt Wilt}e) Olrerrli to go field by
Geld throtigh the whole tarns, and prove that it was in a suitable
state of cultirstion for the sea on cf the year at winch the J usticca
'martyred —little gramcd.

Thi< ewe, which was an action for statute?, was tried at Bury,
before Slr..lu•tire /iaa Ice, when a verdict t:as round fur the plain-
/images 20/. . _

Jr. Sroess moved for a rule to altow cause why judgment
eloold not b• arrested, upon the ground that the word. contained
in the count nu which the verdict was given arm not actionable per
Sf . There wry- stveral emats in the declaration ; the Jury brought
their verdict on the ltdi. and negatived all the others. *lle (Mr.
cpoirnilin that that count was not ■ sufficient legal ground for
as action. The word 4 alleged and proved in it wirre—" I think
ibis busing.' ought to have a more rigid inquiry. for he Intinfered
tits wife; that ir, he administered improper medicines to her for a
certain enmpkint. which was the cause trf her death." Now this
o: ht merely refer to the administering the medicine. and was per-
fectly consistent with the ninst henevottnt intentions on the part of
the husband. The word " tnurdertsl" MIA explained away by the
context. The count should have contrined an ',mend°, in ardor to
be a legal ground for an action.
Mr. Justice BATLEY-11pm thew, Wank the object would ap-
nea to be any thing hut the cure of the complaint.
Mr. Sxocee--Many medicines, perfectly harmless in some in-
atanttei, may prove fatal in others.
The Loan Cut ED' JUST ecE--Vou entered, then, that these
wndv cannot, upon a reasonable interpretation, mean an imputation
of murder. • _

Mr. Jointer Bars Er—lf a man, by improper applicant's% of
medicine, HI another, mit:Moot that be manslaughter ?

111,. uc s .—W it h due sub Mission to your IA dship, the plain.
tiff for any thing that appears, may be an apothecary. and then he
could not be entisilereil guilty of Manslaughter. fhe question
was, whether the canals were sufficient to imin to either murder or
manslaughter 1 If the word •• niurdet " were omitted, the action
would not be sustainable. There the meaning of that word was
precisely defined. in as to amount to the seine as if it had vin been
used. Upon th,:se id* hi submitted to his Lordship that the
words contained in the declaration were nut actionable.
little refused.

Mr. R11590:1.1. morcil for a nil* to show CIIA4C why a new teal
far. The action was tried at the
ibroke, before Mr. Just,rc lice-
' application was, a 'misdirect ion
verdict was given for thedefend-
the plaintiff. fur an injury which
• defendant diverting the current
tint
.110411te, upon the plaintiff's

premises, to the injury of his propene. Two specific instances of
Injury were set forth, but owing to • defect in some of the counts
ut the declination, they were restrict'sl in the evidence they were
prepared to adduce. This hr (3lr. R.) did not object to, hut the
tneadirection of the Learned Judge formed the ground of his ap.
placation. In charging the Joey, he said that it was hard to say
that the plaintiff was entitled to any damages, end it to any, to
what amount. This was the more remarkable on the part Of the
Learned Judge, as the witnesses at the trial proved that the water
had been diverted from its ancient course, that it flowed upon the
premises of the plaintiff, and in more than one instance inundated
his cow-house, ami damaged fifteen or twenty bushels of oats, in
his barn. so as to render them twins,. Another point of misdirec-
tion in the charge of the learned Judge was, that he adopted the
opinion of the defendant's Counsel, and that he gave its sanction
to the diversion of the stream from its former course, by purchasing
a haggard through which the water passed, subsequent to the date
of the injuries of which he complained. A thin! point of miadiree.
nun was the adoption of another opinion of the defendant's coun-
sel, who suited, that if the walls of the Intrn were chinky and
insecure, it was attributable to the neglect of the plaintiff; and he
was nut entitled to Ositia;Tes. Ile (Mr. R.) did not know before
that it was necessary for a person to have waterproof walla to his
barn, and that it was lawful fur his neighbour to punish his omis-
sion in not having then., by directing any inundation he might
Think proper against his premises, to injure and destroy his
prop rty.
The loan CniCT JuSTICT—Take a rule.

At three o'eliwk. the Lord Miyor, accompanied by the late I.ord
3lavor. the 'teemlet. Stieraii, a-tt several .11sItnnen, entered the
Coon, and after havint: paid their respects to their bon:ships,
invited them to the Cheri dinner that day at Guildhall.

should not be grAtoted to this cone.
kat r,izeo for the county of Pembi
wink!. and 'he grmind or the present
by the Learnt.' Judge to the Jury.
..t.IN ail The
ged toac' lion
tT:e.s3ua brinunefty"theh:
of • Amin of yaw from its anvil