The National Register.
London, England, 1819-03-28 00:00:00

CAUSES.

Rota er and °Ars v. Atari Lin. 4.- Undefended.—This
action was brought to recover the SUIT) of .2.8. 16s. 6d. fur
btrley sold and delivered. Hie delivere of which being sa-
tis'amorily provetl,tho Jorv, under the direction of his Lord-
ship, found a verdict tor piaitittif - Da:names .44 .
Lt tot and other, v, Joh.: Sa,te• P.—This action Was brought
to recover idr.V. advanced on a ptomissory note by the I tea
surer of the Munde•lv Friendly society, with au arrear of
interest Mr. Chalker, the stbscribi.:g winless to the note,
having proved the hand writing of the defendant, the Jury
found a verdict for plaintilri for I 111. sa.
t v, t.—No detence —1 his action was brought
to recover !2s..it for flour sold and delivered: and the pro -
nii of payment being prayed by James Houghton, the offi •
cer, when he arrested the defendant, a verdict was given for
plaintiff fur *2851.
8 be I Drell v Dern. Lemon.—Undefended.—To recover
the stall of :IV. IS.. 'lt for work and labour done to de
fendant's null. Verdict for plaintiff, damages 34!. 18s. let.
Doe tat the demtlf ff d !Agile. v. Tha. a t Hi. hardtan.
—Tills Wad an action of ejectment fit recover the possession
of about 17 acres art fen land at Hilgay in this county. It
appeared that the defendant took possession of this land
about five years ago, but not under any agreement, nor had
he ever paid rent to the plaitrolf Ihe defence set up w 4•;
that the plaintiff had no title, and that even if he had the
defendant was undertenant to a Mr Hedge The plaintiff
having satia actorily proved his title to the laud, and the de
fenclain not being able to prove that he was undertenant to
Mr. Iledge, the Jury, under the direction of los Lordsh p,
found a verdict for pl tintilF
Green and IlVe v. &Imam and frife, for an assault.—Green
is a shopkeeper at swauton Morley, and the detend•nt a
wheelwright in the same parish.—lt appeared that the two
females had some trifliug dispute, and a few blows pasted,
which were a a trin:n,,ir nature ; but the defendant, by en
deavouring to prove that the plaintiff caused the dispute,
strengthened Green's case; sod a verdict was given fur
plaintiff, damages 406,
(orrk) v We:tr.—Record withdrawn.
. .

III,VI. ands h r. v. Markin. nufi es /arra I his W 33 an issue
out of Chancery to try the val dity of a will made in the
year 1779 by Robert Pursglove, late of King's Lynn in Nor
folk, bloekmaker —lt appeared hat Mary flaw ~ins one of
the defendants, who now wanted to invalidate the will.
proved it a few years since in the proper Eccleivastical court
Frances Bonnet!, one of the subscribing witties-es, proved
that in the year 1779 she lived servant with a Mrs Hawkins
(sister to the testators and one ot the said d.-tendants; that
she well recollected being sent for to Nlr Pursglove's house
to attest he execution of his wit with two other persons
• everal other witnesses were called to prove t he hand writing
of the testator, the death of one of the other auburn),
ing witnesses, and that searches and inquires had been
made to find the third witness but without effect Copies
of admissions were produeen to shove that persons entitled
to property under the will, had been admitted under it It
was contended by the defendant that, part or the wit being
written in the man gin walnut, any refer,:nce, it tended to in-
validate it; but it appeared to have been all one hand writing
and written at the game Stine, and not introduced after the
will was eaccu ed: and the Jury being satisfied of the fact.
they did. under the directing ot his Lordship, find a verdict
I for die plaintiff _ _

J Arr Ralf.. v. fl,e lohol-tants of she Ifondred .f 1 hp, i st m
1;,1.4- .—Th:s was an actmn under the Black Act,9th Geo I.
c. to recover the sum of tt.)ol. being part of the loss whi, h
plaintiff sustained in consequence or two corn stacks and
barn aid other building: having been wilfelly set lin fire
in January lt+ls. Ii appeared that plaintiff...la the owner and
occupier of a -mall farm at Lessinghana in Norfolk, and that
one Thomp-on was inoicted and tried at the I st Lent
assizes on suspicion that he was the person who tier fire to
property, hut that he was acquitted Wunesses
were called to prove that the necessary forirs required by
the above act had been complied with. Ptaintiff's son proved
that, previous to the fire, he suspecred there were evil dis-
posed persons in the neighbourhood, a calf having been a
few nights before susr. ided in an outhouse belonging to the
plaintiff. and some harms,. thrown inttra pond that brand
father as; re induced to watch the premises for several nights;
and they actually watched till a very late hour ir, the night
preceding the tile, which happened in the morning: of the
a;thof January 1918, between and 6 o'clock, and that the
damage was between 4 and 5001 —Other witnesses were in
a:iendancc to corroborate the above facts,but the defendant's
counsel being satisfied that the plaintiff's properly was wi:-
I oily set on fire, and that more than :2001. damage was in-
curred, the Jury, under the direction of his Lordship, found
a verdict for the plaintiff for that sum; and his Lordship, in
his charge to the Jury, regretted that by the provisions of
the at t uo more damages could beg; veil.

The K" g v. Gsoll.VZlnti ot herr -This was on indictment
for an assault alleged to have been committed :tt Wells. on
the 1 •itli of August 1816, on one Henry Thomas, a Custom-
House officer; and the prosecution has been conducted under
the direction of his Mak.a:y's Commissioners of the Cus oms.
A Special Jury was summoned, and notice of trial was given
at the last summer RS‘IZC,, but on the day preced ng the com-
mencement thereof, the solicitor for the prosecution counter-
mande I it. Another notice of trial was given for these as-
sizes ; but as scarcely any of the Special Jury attended. the
coatisel for the prosecution declined to pray a Tales; and the
cause, alter a vast expense to the delendam., who have tw ce
mihpirriaeci above thirty witnesses on their behalf, stands over
till nutit e of trial he again given.
We think the O.... Pendants would do right to petition the
House of Commons fur relief against the vexatious delay and
expense•

v. Botter.—Th;s was an action to recover the
profits of :el twin glebe land, at Salle, which WAS occupied by
the defendant after he lied resigned the living. Both par-
tes are clergymen and brothers Tlany objections were
taken to the torrn of action by the defendani's counsel, and
ultimately a verdict was taken fur the plaintiff by consent,
for Ihbl. G.. 6'4. subject to be reduced to :10 . 9c by the
opinion or ,he Court of King's Bench oa a punt of law.
v was action to recocer 91/9.'. and up-
wards, the nnumnt of dilapidation% suffered by the defen-
dant on the beture-mentiuned living of Salle. Three sur-
veyor, w-r • called on the part of the plaintiff, to prove the
amount of repair, necessary to be done; and on the part of
the defendant, Feceral workmen living new, Salle, for the
sAme pin post:. '1 he Jury tcturued a verdict for plaintiff.—
damages

MARCH

nig.lol4 v. IVa 51Pr....111 this action Messrs. ltignolds,
cf
Norwich, sought to recover :Owl they had advare.-
to one Eveifeit. and which had been gil.:•atitied :hem
the defendant, who had joined Eveiiett in a note h;r•
I he note had been delivered op to Evene.t under take repie.
se:nations. as W 4,4 Stated by the plainar. B.L. Morgan,
the part of the plaintiff..., was called to give eviaii-ac e reapa..r,
log the note, or .tni.e conversation which bad tv.s•csi uu :he
sni,ject of it, hot could state no: Icing w bleb could Lie cc ceiss4
a. evidence.— i he plaintill', were notwui.eal.