The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1822-07-01 00:00:00

LAW INTRLLICIINCIT.
COURT OF RING'S RENO', SATURDAY, Axe 49.

PAGAN AND WRFC 111.
'this was an action to recover damages far all as-
souk committed be the Defendant's dog en .the
wife of the Plaintiff. The parties, it appeared in
evidence. livtin Angel-court, Windmill-street, and
rich keep a faithful Tray, who are on terms of
friendship almost parallel with their master.; in
ether words, they quarrel wbenever,they meet. On
the day in question, Mrs. Fagan's dog bed been
talten-out by the servant for an airing, and was ow
his return, when he was encountered by his oppo-
nent, and / desperate battle commenced. Mrs.
*alien, hesnng the din of war, went out to aid her
favourite or separate the combatants. This she
-effected; hat Mr. Heckle was determined to esrry
nn the contest to extremes, and encouraged his dog
so persevere. Mrs. Fagan, who was seined with ■
whip, then took her dog op, intending to carry him.
of the field; but Mr. Iluckle animating his Tiger
ivy his voice end gestures, Tiger made ■ spring at
his adrerssry, notwithstanding the position which he
bad ;.ken near his mistress's Ingot, and missing his
Pius* Axed his teeth in Mrs. Fagss'a arm, which
wae.seriously lacerated. This was the assault Comm
piained of, and proved by Plaintiff's witnesses.
On the part of the Der .eit!_siat several witnesses
were yelled, who deseribed Mr. Hackle's dug as
she Mast patient. inoffensive animal in the parish ;
bat. spoke of Mr> Fagan end her pet as bearing
eery- deferent characters. They denied that Dar.
Duckte had any thing to do with the fray, bat de-
- scribed Mrs. Fagan as coming oat armed will) a
tremendous whip, with which AA attacked poor
T;goid and void his sides without merry; she at
•thieitrie Witie took her own dog up in her arms,
ind'ertistittiptiNvin triumph, -bestowing on Mr.
tfluckl/ every etiorteons epithet which the St.
Gun 's- dictionary. improved by her own fertile
imagination, would furnish her with. The wit-
'meet., did not deny that her arrn was bitten, but
°rata them went so her as to declare her opinion,
that Shle'reeirived the injury for which she now
sought redress and damages at the hands of the
Defendant, from her own faithful animal.
The Jury, after considering some minutes, fotind
for the Plaintiff—damages, One Faithing ; costs,
One Farthing.
COURT OF C031310N PLEAS,
SATURDAY, Jvaa 29.
• - •

I:IPORTANT DECISION TO LIVERY STABLE.
-KEEPERS.
•

ASHLEY T. PITT.
This was so action in trover, brought to recover
th, value of two horses from the Defendant, who

is altvery stable-keeper st Brighton.
(11r. Serjelnit Letts stated the case for (hr Plain-
. t.ti, who is • Gerry stable-keeper in town, snd who
1e.4 two job horses toy lids, who, left them at
Brighton, in the care of the Defendant, who is a
beery stable-keeper at that piece. When they were
sent fur lie charged S I. 10A., hot the charge sus
c4.nsidt-red as exorbitant. sad 291. was tendered,
oh•cli was refiner), sod the actiott was now brou•ht

t& recover the value. of the hurter cittained. The

L-orned Serjeent said, that this was the first time
tt•at the question as to the riglot of livery stable-
keepers to dettrn the hor.es for the expenses hail
cow before a Court of Justice. He nrgtoed ut
great length. to prove that the siro4tion of tl.e
innkeeper and that of a livery itable-koeper, were
tota!ly different, mid that the latter had not, like
the bower, the right of detaining boreea for the
expenses.
Evidence was called on the part of the Plaintiff,
to prove the tender of pna►t of the money to the De-
fendant, and that that sum was a fair remuneration.
Vu the part of the Defendant, Mr. Serjeant Teddy
eirnicd that any tender had then made, and usserted
t'•yt the witness who had been celled to prose that
fact was unworthy of credit on hia oath.
Chief J itstice DALLAS gave it es his opinion that
the livrry stable-keeper could hove no lien on the
horse,: nr p►operty. for his situation-vrns
fureut from that of the innkeeper. The innkeeper
was obliged to receive the horses of travellers, and
to entertain them, but the livery stable-keeper was
untie, uo ouch obligation, and received the horses
only upon a contract, and upon that contract he
• mfeht .hring his action.
Jury returned a verdict for the Plaintiff—,
Damage+ 751.

ARCHES COURT, Jan SS.

PERRIN v. PIRRIN.

Ti.il was s suit of eivorce. promoted by Mr. W.
, Perim, of Leadenhall-street, corn-factor, against
nonce. Eleanor, his wife. by reason of adultery.
'Un- Einem directed the case to stolid over for
lir,fr.tig of Dr. Dud'on on the same side, and
. „„tifteruatd4 Dr. Jean's reply.