The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1824-12-25 00:00:00

COULTUSEDy. DAVIES.

,
1,1
t,' 1
I.
i ,' .
;
i
.;
I
!.. ;
~i. F ,
~.. 4.

~~, ~~
~'

,

'

~'''

,
4
6 '

This was an actiongrOaYihTtbe a surgeon, against
ire defendant, a cow-keeper and hone-dealer, to recover the sum
of thirty guineas, which he had paid him for a gelding.
The ease on the part of the plaintiff, as stated by Mr. Mal-
t TAT? was, that the phiiiitiff should use the animal for a month,
and that if it should turn out unsound or restive at the end of that
titled, then that the money should be returned.
Severe' witnesses proved the unsoundness of the gelding.
Mr. Liu RN EY, fur the defendant, said he would prove that the
animal was recently brought front Wales, and was sound, and fro
from vice. If, subsequently it were broken-winded, the fault
originated with the di-treatment of the plaintiff, who, probably a
good doctor for man, proved but a very indifferent doctor for horses.
To prove this a 's% elcinnan was produced, and an interpreter
sworn ; but the interpreter could not underotand the Ancient
Briton, and the Ancient Briton could not understand or speak
Elish.
Other witresses were called, who deposed to the soundness of
the horse.
The Jury found for the plaintiff—Damages 311. 10s.
THE LING, AT THE PROSECIJTION Or rABILIWa v. BELLAMY.
Mr. LAHIMILOW stated, that this was an indictment for wilful
and corrupt perjury against the defendant, for certain false evi.
C.:nee given by him on the trial of a person named Scott, which
teak place at the April Adjourned Sessions for the County of
.51 iddlesex.
Mr. C. F. WILLIAM briefly stated the circumstances of the
case, and would call evidence to prove the charge against the ele-
fondant. Ile hoped no personal sarcasm would be levelled against
Mr. Parkins, who was solely actuated by a sense of justice in pro.
remising on this occasion.
James Buncombe produced the record of the conviction of John
Stott.
When comparing the indictment which was before the Magis-
trate*, as set forth in the present record, it was Mond that they did
r ot agree, particularly as to the names of the Magistrates who pre-
sided at the trial.
'the Loan Couto JEST ICE—NV NM answer do you give to
that, Mr. Williams ?
Wit.armas—The name of Mr. Const is set out in both,
sod I submit that nothing depends upon the saute order of names
being preserved in the present newel.
The LORD CHIEF UST ICE—But is that a sufficient verifies.
the of the record ?
Mr. IVILLIAMS—My hoed, I'll prove by the Clerk of the
Peace, the Magistrates stated to be present in this accord were ac.
present at the trial and conviction of Scott.
--- Webster examined—l am a clerk in the office of the
Clerk of the Peace.
Do you remember if .Mr. Baker was present at the Sessions for
Anvil ?
''he Loess CHIEF JUSTICE—No, no; I shall expect the
question to be put—if he knew who were on the Ifench, without
suggesting any names.
Juror—Whence did you bring that book?—From the office of
tt:e Clerk of the Peace; and it contains the minutes of the pro-
ceeding at the .Sessions.
Who is Mr. Bichards?.—One of Mr. Selby's clerks.
Does be attend here ?—He does.
Is that the official book kept for such entries?—lt is.
liy the LORD CHIEF JVSTICF—At what time is each entry
made; for they all appear to me to be written at one time ? No,
my Lord; 1 can cay they are written from day to day.
Cross-examined—l did not see Mr. Richards here on the sth of
Awn! last. Ile regularly attends here. Mr. Richards is ill.
The LOUD (Tarr Jtyr tc E—lf we are to supply a deficiency
on the record. it must he a fact in be proved by stoic one who was
prevent. I don't know how to treat that as an official document.
is only a copy, or mere minute made by sours peren. If the
man himself were here who made the minute, it would be another
matter.
Mr. WILLIAMS sullmitted that that book was the only record
which could be produced. This book furnishes the only account
oi the alaoistrates being present at each Sessions. The evidence
or an adjoUrnment is by record, and by this record (reasoning by
etiology), wit! hold good as to the detail of the persons there
present.
The Loan Cone JUST ice—You are not here !upon the day
of the Sessions, but on the adjournment day, the fith April.
S7iuiva—The nair.es of ad the Magistrates in the Commission
are not entered, hut only such as attend. •
Mr. Wn.i.Lams—Suppose, my Lord, there was only the name
of Mr. Const and others.
The LORD CHIEF J COT ICE—Well, then you would be right.
The Como° W--si ERJ EAST said he had no wish to press this
objection, foe if his learned trio ads had a fair foundation to go on,
he would be happy to proceed. But then they must only proceed
regularly, and upon proper evidence. The deficiency of the record
could only he supplied by the person present, and making the re.
cord. But the record was not accurately set out, and if Mr.
la/chants saw the Justices here, he should be hers to-day to
prove it.
Mr. C. PaItLLFII followed en the same side, and contended that
the record now proved, was only a copy of the parchment roll.
There was the clerk of a clerk making a minute of what passed, or
from a report given him by another of what passed. Such a docu-
ment mold not be consadcred a record ; it was only a minute on
which tie record was framed.
Bow is the record made up ?—(Le parchment, and front the
minutes in that book.
Mr. WI ethane—Then, my Lord, I cannot give baton teoti-
mooy than the minute hook ; it is as if the pries ics:el testimony
boon which the parchment roll is made up.
The Loan Corer' Jurrico—ln Wei like the present, I
always wish Counsel to take every objection, and I have repeatedly
said so. If my judgment be wrong, the party can have a fresh
The -,esoion here was, no sufficient evidence had been
ciency of the record. The minute made by
to be a record—it is not even in the shape
there was another book being more like a
is record to cure the defect of another. The
and therefore not sufficient to cure the

deficiency of the record in this case.. The variance is not supplied,
and the defendant is therefore entitled to an acquittal.

TIBT v. BETTS.
This was an action brought to recover the sum of one guinea and
a half per week fur three months, for teaching the son of the defend.
art the French language.
Mr. C. F. IVILIAA MS, IV: the defendant, contended that there
was no agreement to glee the plaintiff any remuneration, and that
his teaching his son was to be compensated fat by the defendant in-
troducing plaintiff to his acquaintances.
Several witnesses were called on both Wes, and after a recapitu.
Intim of the evidence, the Jury found a verdict for the defendant,
This case, which did not involve a single particle of interest but
to the panic!, occupied the greater portion of the day.

. .
indictment. The question
given to supply the deficien
the clerk 1 can not take to 1
al a rezord. Again then
1 MC C. rti , :tr.! how was this re
boo!, is tt. Of imperfect, an
t ')
. -.,
It. A - .
.. i -
i. i 1