The National Register.
London, England, 1817-06-02 00:00:00

SHERIFFS COURT, E E won o-novr.

A was Jury impanneßed tosissess damages in a crim. con.
cause, Geo. Procter, Esq. r. Charles Standish, Esq. judgment
having been suffered to go by default.—Plaintiff is a young
man of considerable fortune-in the connty of Hertford, and
married Main...eat wife, the daughter of Mr. Hill, also a
gentleman of- fortune in the same county, in 1810. Mrs.
Procter, at the time of her marriage, was but twenty-one
%ears of alle ; she was beautiful and accomplished. They
had no children, although Mr•s. Procter had several times
miscarried. Mr. Procter, shortly after his marriage, prn-
posedan excursion abroad, conceiving that it would contri-
bute to the happiness of his wife. it was during this exenr-
sion,nt Rome, that the defendant, who is a young man of
considerable fortune in West:wetland, became criminally
-connected with the wife of the plaintiff.—After Mr. Procter
quitted Rome, he perceived en estrangement in his wife's
affections, bat it was aot until his return home, awl the arrival
of a female servant from abroad twelve months after, that he
was fully satisfied of his dishonour.—Dorothy Marque, the
servant, deposed, that while at Rome her mistress told her a
person (Mr. Standish) would call, whom she wished to speak
to in her (witness's) bed room; he came accordingly, and she
then called Mrs. Procter out of the sitting room, where
sire waa sit ting with Mr. Procter, and she joined Mr. Standish
in the bed room, which was next to the said sitting room—
witness then left them together.—Mr. S. came frequently
afterwards, and remained alone. with her mistress, in the
same room.—ln reply to ■ question, if she knew any thing
improper killer mistress's conduct before %sitters; replied in
the negativc,excepting a few notes she wrote to M. Cicini, a
Merman, while at Naples.—Mr. Gurney, for the defendant,
laid nearly all the blame on !he female, and contended that
the husband bat sustained little damage by the loss of a lady,
who, after a short acquaintance of a %reek, •yielded to the
sdultorer.—'Ybe• Jury, after consulting five minutes, returned
a verdict, Damages 6001.
Mr. Standish, the defendant in the slow* cause, took that
came in compliance with the will of the late Sir Frank Shul-
1-Ash, to whose large estates he succeeded.

TITE NATIONAL REGISTM.

SCOTLAND.

COURT OF SESSION—SECOND DIVISION.
Nst DOD r. It kTHORN, E. 31.). AND OTHEIDI.

This simpler cause has for some time been depeuding before
the Court. The for is are shortly these :—The farm s.ervants
of tr. Hatboro, a gentleman who has an estate in the comity
of Wigton, were, in the winter of 1812, cutting down, ua
the estate, a large tree, situate at the side of a field inane-
diately adjnining time high road which leads to the town of
Stranraer, when the tee happening to fall at the moment Mr.
Linwood, a farmer, was passing on horseback, a large brooch
struck hint on the neck, and oceassioned his almost instantane-
oar death. As this melauckoly eircomst ;MCI' made a (mushier-
able noise in the emintry, the robiic prosecutor, in order to
discover if there was any blame or culpable neglect in the
parties emicerned, indicted Graham, the man as ho was in
the set of cutting down the tree when it fell, to stand trial at
the Ayr Circuit, tor the culpable homicide of Mr. Linwood.—
Graham Was accordingly tried at the Spring Assizes in 1.813,
bat the Jnry, set nes no blame in him, acquitted him.
Mr. Linwood kern widow and six children. This unfortu-
nate family brought au action against Mr. Hathorn, the pro-
prietor of the estate ; against another gentleman of the same
mimeos ho ;occasionally took a charge in looking after mat-
ters on the estate; and against The above Graham and sillier
subjects, who were attending or concerned in rotting down
the tree, concluding for damages, for the lose the family
bad sustained by the death of their natural protector.
The cause Caine before Lord Craig., as Ordinary. It ap.
peered, that althonah greater precautions might have been
used to prevent the tree falling to the high road, yet the etr-
e stanre was very Incidental. The case was formerly
judged of by the Inner Houseoponinformation for the part ie-.
The Judges were much divided. Lords Batinatyne and Madge
being of opinion, that the pursuers had made out a ease whits!)
might to subject in damages not only the persons emplotil iu
the operation, but even the proprietor, 11 gli aliment 3111.1
knowing nothing of it. Lords Justice Clerk, (denies., and
Robertson, entertained different sentiments, thinking there
was not enough in the circumstances of the case to subject
any of the defenders. 'the latter were therefore Absolved from
the conclusions of the fiction.

The case was reconsidered nn the 14th cnrrent, upon a re-
claiming petition from Mrs. Linwood and her family, and
answers for Mr. Hathorn. The same Judges were present,
and each adhered to his former opinion, so that it is now, by
a majority, finally decided, that there was no sufficient ground
for giving damages against the defenders.