The Sun.
London, England, 1825-01-08 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, JAN'. 7.
This day the Adjourned Sittings were commenced before the
LORD CHIEF JUSTICE at Guildhall.

BRETHERSTON v. BoswooD.
This was an action on the case, brought by Mr. Bretherston
and Mr. Waterhouse, against the defendant for negligence in
driving their coach, by reason whereof a person of the name
of Amos suffered a severe bodily injury, for which they were
obliged to pay him the sum of 4001., and this sum they now
sought to recover.
Mr. SCARLETT, Mr. MARRYATT, and Mr. ARCHBOLD,
were .for the plaintiffs, and Mr. BROUGHAM and Mr. ALDER-
SON for the defendant.
The circumstances of the case were these : The defendant
was engaged as a coachman by the plaintiffs, in the early part
of 1823, to drive the Liverpool mail from London to Coventry.
—On the evening of the 2d of June, in that year, he drove the
coach from the Swan-with-two-NeckS, in Lad-lane, to born-
bard-street, and after taking up the mail-bags, he proceeded
on his journey. The pavement in the poultry being under
repair at that time, the -coach was obliged to take a circuitous
course by Charlotte-row and Bucklersbury, in order to get into
Cheaside. It appeared from the evidence for the plaintiffs,
that when the defendant mounted the coach he was not per-
fectly sober. On approaching the turn of the street at Buck-
lersbury, he drove the near-wheel horse on the foot-way, and
the splinter-bar came in contact with the' corner house. In-
stead of pulling up the coach as he might have done, he lashed
the horses on, and the result was that the coach was overturned.
Mr. Amos, who was an outside passenger, was thrown under
the coach and violently bruised. His legs were lacerated, a
partial mortification ensued, and a portion of the bone of the
let, was in consequence discharged. He was confined to his
bell for nine weeks, expended on his cure a sum of 3851., and
was not likely ever to be restored to the perfect use of his lower
limbs. He brought an action against the plaintiffs, who, upon
inquiring into the circumstances, paid him 4001. The accident
being wholly the result of the defendant's negligence, they now
proceeded against him.. .
For the defence it was shown that there were several other
proprietors of the Liverpool mail, who were notjoined in this
action, and who had paid their proportions to the compensa-
tion of Amos. Therefore, the present plaintiff's could at best
recover only the proportional sums-which they-had contributed
to Amos. It was attempted, also, to be shown, that the acci-
dent arose not from the misconduct of the defendant, but from
the circumstance of a mare, called the Cambridge mare, having
jibbed, or hung back at the turn of the street, as she was very
much accustomed to do. But it turned out that the Cambridge
mare was not harnessed to the mail at all that night, and the
horses employed were the regular ones, and perfectly quiet and
tractable.
The Jury, under his Lordship's direction, found for the
plaintiffs—Damages 651., being the proportions which they had
paid, leaving it to the other co-proprietors to bring their sepa-
rate actions.
THE NEW COURT.—Several improvements have been effect-
ed in this Court since the last sittings. Stoves have been erected
under the floor, which diffuse an equal degree of warmth
throughout the edifice. A part of the floor has been Matted,
and the walls are hung with the portraits of the Judges, which
decorated the old Court. These paintings have been cleaned,
and in their present situation they look to advantage.—
There is still considerable difficulty in hearing. The seats
for the Counsel behind the bar ought to have backs to
them, and the floor beneath them should be matted. It is but
justice to add, that the general aspect of the Court Is creditable
to the taste of the architect, and to the opulence of the Corpo-
ration of London.