The Sun.
London, England, 1806-11-11 00:00:00

LAW REPORT.

COURT OF KING'S 13ENbCiI, Nov. 8.
GODDARD V. WHITMARSII.
This was-an aaion brought by a cutler, at Shef-
field, against the owner of a Stage coach, for an in-
jury sustained by the overturning of the coicb, froM
••• which accident the Plaintiff's collar-13one 'was se.-
verely fradured. The cause ,was tried the last As-
sizes, and dverdi6t of 5601. damages fouild for the
Plaintiff. •
Mr. Serjeant- LENS moved to set aside this vts-diet;
on the grounds of excessive damages.,-and said, that
it did not-appear upon the-trialk-that the iwtr-turning
of the coach was at aililattributable to the condud of
the" driver; but happevied through mere accident.- It
appeared, however, 6at two of the horses were
'young, and not used to harness.
Mr. Justice-LkWlisicog observed, it was not 07e-
nerally'the pra&ice to put young horses•in any coach,
much less a- stage coach. • • •
Lord ELLENBOROUGH thought, it a cage for the
cousideration of a Jury only, and it seemed to 'be
'tlie.iinpression of perms upon the. spot, that the
coach -was oVerset by-improper. driving.: Ho could
not_say the verdia was so evidently wrong as to
grant 'a new; trial, and. therefore the bile was•
fused:

.......~:: ~ I ...i
.: .

VIE' RING V: VALENTINE JONES, ESQ.
Mr. PARKE moved for a writ of Manalhquis to be
directed td the iudges certain Courts in' the Ishii&
of. Grenada; Barbadoes, DorriiniCa, and sikne others;
in the West Indies, 'to take depositions of certain
Witnesses on behalf of rhaDefendant, put-stiant TO.
an Mt of Parliament of the 42d Of His present Ma.-
jesty..
. The Defendant was, indi&ed in his chattia4r of
Stiperintendant and Director of prOaSionb, forage,
and stores, in-the West India Islands, • during the:
cornmand of these Islands
..by General Sir Ralph
Abercromby, in the years 17960797, and 1798, for
peculation, &-c.—Rule granted. . .

NOVEMBER 10.

RUSSEL V. MARTYR.

Mr. Serjeant SHEPHERD moved for anew trial in
this case. It was an action tried at the last Surrey
Assizes, to determine whether the Planqiif or De-
fendant had been duly elected to the office of
Churchwarilen. of the. parish. of Guildford. He
stated,-thavit appeared in evidence, that at a Meet-
ing held for that purpose, by the inhabitants of
Guildford, it becawis a question, when they -shonld
close the poll, or how long it should continue open ?
It was agreed, that that question• should be detr,
mined at the close of tile poll on the first day. :Ac7-
'cordingly, at four o'clock op, the day ()tithe Elealion,
it was asked, whether they should cloSe the poll at
four o'clock the.next day ? and it was unanimously
agreed to. A Witness stated, that he put the ques-
tion, and nobody dissented ; but, upoacross-exArni-
nation., he-said, he had not put' the contra, naaly,
whether any body had dissented ? and be stated he
had not ,done so, because it was clear that there was
no-dissentient present.
The -Learned Judge (HEATH), who tried the
cause, was of opinion, that this was not a legal
way .of taking the, sense of the meeting ; and that
therefore the poll had been improperly closed.
'l.ibe Learned Serjeant argued that. it was a ques-
tion of fa& to go to the Jury ; but the Learned
Judge over-ruled him, and said, it was a mere
question of law.
The Jury, when they gave their verdi&, said,
they had co doubt but that the.sense of the meeting
had .been taken, but that they found their verdi6t in
pursuance of the direction of the Judge. •
The Court granted a Rule to skew cause.

Cour:: OF COMMON PLEAS, Non. ro.

METCALFE V. THE DEPTFORD CREEK-BRIDGE

COMPANY.

Mr. Serjeant Wrzt.i.rAns applied for a rule to spew
cause why the verdia in this case should not be set
aside, and a new trial granted.
The Plaintiff, Miss Metcalfe; or rather her Cull-
mittee, she being aiunatic, were part proprietors of
th& ferry, or "reputed ferry; known by the name of
the Greenwich Sunday Ferry. ' Miss Metcalfe's fa-
ther was proprietor of the ground on one side of
the river Rainbolt; and about 50 years ago granted
to a Company .of Watermen the right of ferrying
from the other side to that where hiS property lay,
and of landing there. The same persons procured
a similar lease from the Proprietor of the other side, and
a ferry was accordingly established, which wad after-
wards known by the name of the Greenwich Sun-
day, Ferry. This ferry. had been continued from the
period of. its commencement, about 50 years ago,
till the year 1804, when_the Defendants were'au-
thorised by'A6-t of Parliament to erea a bridge over
the river neat to the place where the former ferry
was held. At the passing of the A& it was a very
valuable possession' to the Plaintiff, and it was
cordingly provided in the A& that the possessors of
it should be indemnified. The Defendants had ac-
cordingly
.settled witli the Proprietor on the other
side of the river, and also With the Lessees of the
Plaintiff's ferry, but. with ihe Plaintiff, who was
then a lunatic Without a Committee, they refused
to enter into any kind of ,compromise. She was
accordingly obliged to bring her gtion. The ob-

j.:Oion taken
,to, her title, and in, consequence of
which she failed in her -attempt, dill .not occur: to
the Counsel of the Defendants; but was'suggeSted
by the Lord Chief Justicp, before whom. thetrial
took place.
Sir JAMES IVISIPtEtn said, -he tecolle&ed the cir-
cumstances. He had been of opinion that the Plain-
..
tiff had not made out the- averment in the declara-
tion, she was seized ityfee of anoint ferry,
or repUted ferry,. When person possessed of the
one side had not the privilege of landing on the
other side without the consent of the oppoSite Pro-
prietor, -311 d prbtiured, this liberty only by having
obtained a lease of the ground on the opposite side,
he could not esteem thitt such a-- right, as warranted
the establishment of a -priilege of-ferry. If
bridge had not been ereeted; and any other two. per..
Ngho possessedland on, the opposite sides of the
river, chose to agree in establishing another con-
veyance by water, in opposition to the ferry nOw
claimed as a right in the Plaintiff,: Courd'She haVe
opposed it ?—.lf, however, the . Learned Serjeant
thought the case was 'tenable, he had no objection
to his taking .the,,Atile,- -He :believed -.there was
hardship in the case, but was afraid the present was
not the action by which redress was to be procured.
7—Rule granted.

',inTuesday,morning, between the hours of one
and two, was apprehended, in a common lodging-
house, in Carlisle, by Thomas Spence, a messenger
from Paisley, MattkeziStaith, accused of the mur-
der. of a female child about three months old, in
Paisle)Y. The infant was the illegitimate offspring
of a writer in Paisley. the father had given the
mother of the child (Agnes Kelly) the sum of
three pounds,:to- assist in' maintaining her off Spring,
which was consumed in .drink between her and
this Matthew Smith, with whom, it would ap-
pear, she had some connexion. Not knowing
where to get a fresh supply, Smith strangled the
innocept, and., laid -it:lierreath. the root of 'an old
tree in the garden, and sent for the apprentice of
a Dokaor in Paisley ; it is strongly supposed With
the view of selling the is_
for )the purpOe of
dissedlohil Wlien they had- arrived at the., spot,
the child havina somewhat recovered; was crying.
,
The monster, Smith, then look it by ; the heels,
and' &shed- its •Tv'ead against the ground with 'all
his ,fotte,::five Or:six times ; but 'the mould being
soft, this expedient was not sufficient to terminate
the existence of the pobr _little sufferer. The
child .stil breathing, the Dodoes apprentice tied
an handkerehief, as tight as possible,. around the
stomach;
_to .prevent the playing of the lungs.—
Notwithstanding. these various devices, life was
' not yet totally.. extinft.. In order to complete
their hellish intent, Smith held the child's head in
a bucket of water, which terminated its sufferings.
The child was then_ put into a rag .cellar,.and was
discovered shortly after, by the nauseous smell,
with one of the feet, and part .of the leg, eaten
away by rats.—Such complicated barbarity could
not. escape the all-seeing eye of a just .Providence.
The very means Which were used for the 'accom-
plishment- of this " most strange, -most unnatural"
murder, were the means of its,. discovery. The
handkerchief, which was tied around the infant's
body, belonged to the master of the apprentice,
and was stamped with his name. Accordingly he
was suspeaed : he 'owned the handkerchief, but
denied any-knowledge of the transaction. The ap-
prentice then confessed; and turned evidenee for
the Crown. Whereupon messengers were dis-
pitched in every' diretaion ; and by the indefatigar
hie activity of Spence, Smith was discovered as
above related He ,Was next Morning, sent 'off to
take his trial.

Consumptions and' ether decays of nature, whe-
therithe effeas,nf natural, consequences, or proced-
ing•from imprudgncies, or an advanced stage.ofilife,
have, engaged the study andnttention of the, first
Physicians of this and all other nations in vain, until
Dr.;,9olOmon's Cordial Balm of Gilead was happily
discovered, and promulgated to the world, and which
has produced. such -instances:- of its good et-Mils as
must convince the most incredulous of its amazing
restorative • poWers.. To enumerate its truly happy,
healing, balsamic, and renovating efficacy, testi-
monies of the first authorities are now extant. It is
admirably calculated:for bilious and other disorderS
of the stomach and bowels ; for head aches occa-•
sioned by • indigestion ; and, for. preventing palsies
and apoplexies, so' often the consequences of free,
living. Recourse should be had to it after every ex-
cess, and upon every slight indisposition.—The ios.
6d. and 335, bottles may be had- of ,Matthews and
Leigh, 18, Strand, and of every reputable Medicine
Vender in the Kingdom, with the words, " Semi.
Solomon, Liverpool," engraved on the Stamp.