The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1825-01-28 00:00:00

of the utmost importance to the extensive classes of 'master and
vervant. The vercrict,'he'would show, was entirely erroneous, and
a most cruel redaction on the character of a very respectable lady.
The declaration stated that the words were false and malicious.
There was, in fact, no evidence that the words were false.
The CHIE7 JUSTICE—SO I told the Jury; and 1 likewise
distinguished this case from a common action of slander, and said
that it are necessary to prove that the character was false, and that
it was false to the knowledge of the party.
Mr. Sergeant VAIVISHAN--Certainly, my Lord, your Lordship
(lid distinctly put it to the Jury to ray whether it iras done from
spleen.
Jostles °AIRE r le—Spleen is certainly malice.
Mr. Sergeant VAUGHAN contended, that even if it was done
from spleen, it was still a true character, and that as they wore
agreed upon the law, that It must be false to the knowledge of il.e
party, as well as malicious, it must be seen whether the character
wee not true. Miserable would be the condition both of masters
and vivant*, if they were not at liberty to Five a true character.
I he action was brought for a false character given by the defendant
to a lady of the name of Burnet. Now, what was this character?
The defendant says, " I believe her to be perfectly sober and ho-
nest, but she has a great want of steadiness ; which is implied to
mean that the plaintiff behaved improperly towards the male sex.
Was it to be established that a master's saying his servant was very
unsteady, that he should be liable to an action, in which he might
Le east tug 1001 damages? The first witness called was Mrs. Bur-
net. who proved that the defendant said the plaintiff' was sober and
honest, was not a good dress-maker, and Inn came into her family
ss nursery maid, but on account of unsteadiness, was removed from
that situation to be lady's maid. To which witness replied, that
having daughters growing up, she could not take her on that ac-
count. In her cross-examination she said it was unsteadiness with
regard to the children; but on her re-examination she said that it
acs a general want of steadiness. The Learned Sergeant observed
that the defendant never once touched on the subject of steadiness:
with regard to men, and said that it was r.ot for the damages that
he was contending; it was for the reputation of a lady, whom it
was impossible to suspect of telling a wilful falsehood ; stringer
evidence must be called.
The next witness was Mr. Jenkins, with whom the plaintiff had
some acquaintance, and who undertook to arrange a reconciliation
between the plaintiff and defendant. In the course of the conver-
sation Mr. Jenkins had with Mrs. Cox, he asked her if she had
said to Betsy Wyatt that she should go to her wretched hovel in the
country, for that she (Mrs. Cox), would take care that she should
not get a place in town ; to which the defendant answered, that she
had not said it to such an extent. The witness then asked her if
she meant to deprive bee of her character. In answer to which the
defendant went into e.:e whole history of the case.
The CHIET JUSTICE referred •to his notes taken at the trial,

MO read some passages of the evidence.
Sergeartt Viscr.llAN. in eontiuuation, observed, that having
heard the notes read, it would be impossible to impeach the cheese-
s, r of the defendant, since it appeared u a fact that the plaintiff
was removed near to her mistress's person on account of her un-
steadiness.
The CHIEF JurricE said, that he thought the damages very
large.
Mr. Sergeant VAIICSITAIr said, that he would not have moved on
the ground of excessive damages—that he was contending the ques-
tion was whether the character was true.
The Cum,. JUPTICE—" Don't you think that if the de-
fendant had told the whole truth concerning the ringing of her
hell, and not finding the plaintiff at home at live o clock in the
morning. but that she had continued with her fora ear after,
sod had received presents of clothes in consequence other sub-
sequent good behaviour —don't you think the lady would have
taken her?"
• Mr. Justice PARE—" The circumstance of giving presents
'proves the malice. I think that masters do not perform their duty
to the public in general, if they do not give the whole truth of a
characer."
Mr.Sergrant VAUGUAN—" If mv client had at all concealed any
badness in the servant's character, Mrs. Burnet, on the discovery,
might hare brought her action for misrepresentatioa."
?tale partied do paymcot of ants.

PRICE awn ANOTHER V. WILIINSON.
In this case an inquisition had been held before the Secondary,
in London. It was an action for work and labour, brought by the
plaintiffs. who are Ecclesiastical agents residing in the city, and
were employed to find a purchaser for an estate, part of which was
an rAvoason, or if they could not find a purchaser, they were to
seek for some person who might be willing to advance money on a
mortgage of the property. They accordingly sought for, a:A in-
troduced to the defendant 3 person who was desirous of advancing
the money, and who accsrtlingly did advance the sum of 4,2904
It had been agreed between the parties that the plaintiff should
receive two and a half per cent. for his trouble. But to this claim
the defendant, on the inquisition held before the Secondary, op-
posed to him the statute of 12 Anne, cap. 16. SCC. 2., which limits
the remuneration of an agent, in certain cases, to bs. per cent.;
and the Jury found a verdict accordingly.
.51-. Sergeant VAUGHAN now moved for a rule to set aside the
irquisition, on the ground that the plaintiff was not concerned in
the bargain, and did not, therefore, come under the dam of per-
sons comprehended in the stattre.—Rule granted.
COURT OF REQUESTS, COURT-STREET, WHITECHAPIL,
THURSDAY, JAN. 27.
IRON COFFINS.
BRIDGMAN V. BALL.

This was a case in which the plaintiff, the well-known patentee
of iron coffins, now carrying on his business in the Commercial-
road, aught to recover the sum of N. fix. from the defendant, a
respectable tradesman in Shadwell. for the necessary fees paid to
the overseers of that parish, on the interment of the defendant's
child, in an iron coffin, on the .Val October last.
The defendant refused payment no the ground that the fees had
been paid without his previous knowledge and consent, front which
circumstance, together with its being an illegal charge, he con-
sidered he was not liable. The present proceedings were instituted
as much to have the question of the right of parochial officers to
t!emand the exorbitant charge of 10s. on the Interment of every
adult, and half that sum for children, in iron coffins, as for the
money sought to be recovered.
Mr. Ball, on being asked by the Chairman what were his objec-
tions to paying the demand, stated, that on the demand being
rnsde on him, he memorialised the Lord Bishop of London and the
Secretary of State for the Home Department, but they individually
could do nothing for him, and advised him to apply to the Eccle-
siastical Court, where they were sure he would obtain justice. He
accordingly did make the application, and entered a caveat to try
the rase; but the parish officer*, before it came to be tried, involied
Lim in a litigation with the parish, which obliged him to compro-
mise the matter with them, by their allowing him 3W. not to pro-
seeute it.
The CJIAIRMAN interrupted the defendant, by saying, that the
erly question for him and the Jury to decide was, whether the
n.cney was or was not paid for his use ? and that having been
proved by the witnesses, he considered the plaintiff had a right to
recover.

Thor Jury, after a few minutes deliberation, found a verdict for
the plaintiff, Pearirg the question of the right of the pariah officers
to enforce the difference of fees between the common and metal
Lcffins as it stcod.
SPRING CIRCUITS.

THURSDAY, JAN. 27, 1825.
All tlie Judges (except the Lnrd Chief Justice Rest, who was
absent from indisposition) met this day, and chose the Circuits as
tallow&

Nostroz.z—Lord Chief Justice Abbott, and Mr. Justice Ch_
*eke.
hl trmawn—Lord Chief Justice Best, and Mr. Baron Elullock.
Hour—Lord Chief Baron, and Mr. Baron Graham.
NORTHEIN—Mr. Justice Bayley, and Mr. Justice Holrnyd.
WESTERN-31r. Justice Park, and Mr. Justice Burrough.
Oiroao—Mr. Baton Garrote, and Mr. Justice Littledale.