The Sun.
London, England, 1801-07-31 00:00:00

from two guineas and a .half-to three guineas a
week. I hare known him near upon -eight years."
The Learned Counsel for the Defendaht perceiv-
ing the efreft his.last. question upon the, condua of
the Plaintiff at- the hospital had, commenced his ad.
dress by saying,,• that he certainly had
.no instruc-
tion from his Client to put that queStion ;. that he
did not intend to have asked it, hut it suggested
itself to him on the sudden, and therefore he de_
.sired that the Defendant might not, be.made to sof_
fer for an attempt to traduce 'the charaCter of the.
'Plaintiff. The Defendant was, in truth, a res.ped_
able man, and Clerk` to Messrs. Railton and Co.—
He was very sorry for- the accident ; but the. Plain.
tiff had brought it upon himself. by 'his imprudence,
for he had joined some women of the town in the
street, and had proposed to give them half a'guinea,
_and asked the Defendant, as he happened to be go-
. ing along, to do the same thing, and said 'he was
shabby fellow for refusing. The Defendant
thought this a scheme to pick` his _pocket, and
wortlsarose, and this accounted for the Defendant
calling the Plaintiff an impostor. If the Plaintiff
had himself been the cause of this accident, how_
ever serious it was, he .must bear it, for the Law
threw it upon him. This case he should prove by
the testimony of a Witness who
,happened to be
passing at -the time this quarrel happened, and
uould give a better account of it than had hitherto
been ‘,4iven, for not one of, the Plaintiff's Witnesses
saw the beginning of this dispute. •
Robert Spencer—" I am a paper-hanger, and live
in a Court in St, Martin's Le-Grand. On the zisc
of January I was: in Fieet-street, Which I particu-
larly recollel by the Circumstances that haPpened.
I had, at that -time, no acquaintance with either
the flaintiff or the Defendant. I had been at a
Benefit -Socieiy at the other end of the town, and
was going home as fast as I .could
.walk ; seeing a
number ot. women, I suppose
.20 or 3o girls, which
I should think, by their appearance and behaviour
• were women of-the town, the, Plaintiff was amang
these women. Tae Defimdant I saw in the middle
standing with the Plaintiff,-and these women col_
Jetted together. . This was before the,quarrel ; the
Watchman w'as not then Come up; there was no one
present as a Witness but myself: only the. women
and the :Pyaintiff, and the-Defendant,: The first
thing that. took tip my attention was this-,4 heard
Mr. Reed say,- " I make a:motion, that _ you give
tliese Ladies half-a,guinea," says Mr. Reed, "
will give these women hall-a-guinea'; do you se_
cold the motion also, -that each of •us gives half-a-
guinea.:" Mr. Lane told him; " -that he -knew
nothing about 'these women nor of him 'either."
Upon Mr. Lane's answer (this was imtnediate,/y in
the course of half a'minute) some. words occurred ;
Mr. Reed said, " yoif are a shabby rascal," and
went up to him -immediacely, then they -went to
blows. the best of my 'knowledge, Mr. Reed
went into the street before the Watchman cameiup;
but. at • the time he called Mr. Lane a' shabby fel-
low and a rascal,. there-WaS 'nobody present but
myself and. the women. The blows came on very
quick, but to the best of my-knowledge, Nlr. Reed
gave the first blow ; I have-not the feast doubt of
tt. The Defendant did riot call the Plaintiff an
impostor betbre that time ; -I 'never saw more than
two of three blows between them. Mr. Reed was
standing on the edge of the pavement, bidding de-
fiance, and supporting his stick against Mr. Lane
who' was complaining of the Police, by which such
persons
.were allowed to assemble as they did, in:.
festing the street, and as to Mr. Reed, I thought
he was conne6ted with these women. I heard the
charge given, but I did not go to the • watch..
house."

LOrd KENYON observed to the Jury, that who-
ever-the perion was who was originally to blame,
the consequence had been calamitous to the Plain.
tiff, who brought this.cauie before them: but in
point of law, if the first assault came from the
Plaintiff, the Defendant would be entitled to a
Verdia.. He did not 'see how this assault could
be divided—it was one running fight ; but it was
observable, that the Defendant's pleading did not
agree with the defence now set up, for if that was
true, he ought not to have pleaded merely Not
Guilty, but he ought. to have justified what he did
'in his-own defence. By the pleadings, he did not
say -the Plaintiff struck him first ; if the Plaintiff
struck first, he could have no Verdict. If the De-
fendant struck first, he was answerable in damages
—and then the Jury would say, what th.-ir amount
would be under all the circumstances of this case.

Verdi& for the Plaintiff—Damages cool.

At the late. Suffolk Assizes,, the following cause
Was tried :

JOHN NUNN.% ARTHUR 'BROOKS.

This Was an action of considerable inVortance to
the agricuicural- interest-Of the country, brought
against .the Defendant for a trespass, in consequence
of damage sustained by his fiockof sheep consuming
a crop-of trefoil growing on the lands of the 'Plain-
tiff, in the common field of
,Horningsheath (part of
which lies in the pa:ish -of St. Mary, Bury), over
which the Defendant, as lessee of Great Hornings.
heath Hall Farm, claimed a right of sheep_walk,
that is, of feeding sheep thereon,, whenever not
sown with corn or gram.—The- evidence of the
Plaintiff tended to prove that the field in question
was every-year-land, and Only subject to• sheep-
shackage, ,that is, after the, crops of all denomina-
tions are reaped, it never having becti cultivated by
the regular succession of crops as in cases of sheep.
walk, one-third lying fallow, every year 4 on the
contrary, the occupiers had always sown what they
liked, as often, and, where they liked.
After hearing a great number of Witnesses to
establish the Plaintiff's, case, and nearly as many to
repel the same, on the part of the Defendant, the
latter of whom contended, that, for a long series of
years, artificial grasses and turnips had only been
sown by' the indulgence or leave of the occtipier of
the Hall, or Manor Farm, who had resisted the
same-in two or three instances, though not before

litigated it.
The jury, which was special, found a verdi& for
the Plaintiff, Kith zol. damages, to the gteat satis-
ftdion of the farming interests.