The Sun.
London, England, 1807-07-22 00:00:00

CfVTL SIDE. ,

There are only five causes entered, of which thyee,
were tried this day.

woo» U. TITELLUSSOM.

Mr.:BoiLANn opened the pleadings in this case,'
which stated, that the Plaintiff was possessed,;oreer-
' tam closes, called Leggersitth Nlcad, in this county,
which. wertibecupiedliy 'one James WaterS, 'aB his
tenanti„and that the'Defendant . had cut away the
bank, by which certain parts of the laud were co-
loreciwrith iwatet, to the injory"ofthe reversion.
111r.:Serkant St-lEl'llElw then detailed the circrun-'
stances of the ca-e. The Plaintiff, he stated, was a
Major in the lulu, and the Defendant, Mr. The);
luSson, it was well known, was a Gentleman of-
considerable fortune in the county, having an estate
at Aldenham:. This estate Mrs, T. Ini&very.rnuch
beautified and improved ; and, in kis desire to coin-
plete his improvements, he had, without asking per 7,
tnission of his neighbour, made free to take.poses-
- slop. of a.pncel of hi's. land,' for 'the :purposes' of con-
vening a brook into a canal, which would form a.,,e-
-ry .picturesque view from his windows. By the plan
produced; it would be seen Mr. Thellus,on posse 5,:2:1
the land.otipne'side down to the edge 'of the-brook
in 'question, on the other .side heipOtisessed only:a
part of the.land, the laud of the 'Plaintiff,forming
another part; notwithstanding this he had.poi .I
away the whole length, to idetrthe stream, ‘cithott
even informing the Plaintiff that, he wished to be
accoannodated with a few yards of, his land.
The defence 'Which' was how to be set up was,
that what w is done was an improvement to 'the te-
mainder of the Plaintiff's UstaTe. But the Learned.
Serjeant-bbserVed, that an .Englishrnall W;e11 flat
htrve his estate improved Lwithout his own pennis-
sioo. He should dearly shew the encroachment,
which would, entitle the Plafhtiffto reeovei• such da • 1
mageit as the Jury Should: thitilc'the:case desen'ed.
Four witnessed proved, that,- by th&Defendant's
direction, the bank abuttitag the. Plaintiff's laud was.
cut away, in ot-der to make a sloping edge for the
new canal;. and a Mr: Kelsey, a' SurgeOn, Stated
that the ground taken amounted to ationt one-eighth'
of an acre;, which was valued at about 101.
Mr. Serjeant BEsT, .for .the 4.•ft.mdant, admitted,
that Ilk Client must i,ave a p.tsit against him,
but insisted it was a very ill-natbr,rd,ation,, as the
land of the 'Plaintiff was benehiled by ha9,Ag
.the
floods drawn off by an unproved Ai afe'r:eimrse.
V-,:rdict tut- Plaintaff-Datfiao.es

SHARPk: V. TAYLOR

This was au action to iv, LA,..tr.,50: the an-rount of,
half a year's
,rent clue tor 0 h.:telik.:n and 0ur,07 gar-
citto, at Barnet, in this was•'tm
question as to the occupation Lit 4lie laud by the De-
teminut in. his defence, he 'contended thu,
the letting was by one" LuVeddy, 'and not by the.
Plaintiff. •

Loveday was called airn wittiehs, -and- he stated.
that-he-Willi Um; irt-la XV to tb. Id, *and managed,
laic concerns, and•that he lei the ground in question,
as his agent ; • but the written agreement 4-nd all the
receipts were_ giVon, ,khe name I..,ove.dily, as on
his owli oecpuht, Ant ou referring to ilar written
agreement, it appeared, that there, was written on a

, .
_ . .
corner of it, " By Authority of Mr. Sharpe," which
Loveday said he believed *as written at the time at'
its execution..
Mr, Gmtuow, for the Defendant,,,contended, that
the Jury could not.give crycht, to the witness, Inas- ,
- much as all the written documents.contradicted.hitn.
In the body. 9f the agreculeig,4e mated the land to
be his awn, 40.0, all the receipts. were.couched in the.,
same .14pguagek„Ue insisted that the .action. :waS
brought in !the natne ot Sharpe, , it't order to make
Ll.,ovedaY a witness in his own cause.
The LORD CHILF JU4STIC observed, tlw. if any
reason: had been , pro% ed why Loveday should-Lave'
tin interest. not to bring. the'action in, his own nornst,
supposing he were really interested, he should have;
thought the case so suspicious, that the Jury
have been warranted in not.believing hill, .But
such, reason appeaTing lo eXjst, lw saw no
why .they'should,not•give him credit.—VerdiCt tor,
CRIMINAL SIDE.
John Woodstock was incited for feloniously
stedin, two seven-shillings piecei, the property of
Natti,ntiel.Smitit Machin.

The Prpsecumr, Mr. Machin, kept a shop at,
Hertford, and the Prisoner' lived with him as his
shoprnan. Hating had oceasion, as he said, to sus.:
ped the Prisoner, he ...atelied him; and on the 2aql
of 4pril last he saw hint take sortie money of a
customerion the drapery side of, the shop. He ask-
ed liiinhow much, he said it W3s I9S. ,
shillings pieces and -ss..nd
, chich he said he .put
into the till, Mr. Machin had lust before emptied
the till, and therefore went to look if tt contained
the money, bUt it,did not. `, • .
Ile Prisoner ,ippeared much cOnfused, but as the,
Prosecutor did not find the 4ioney on him, he con-.
totted himsolf with dismissing him his servico.
however insisted on first searching his box.,,,and
time he fot,ind SA guineas in gold, some half-gui7
ne,is;'Hrs4 seven-Shilling pieces. 'Phis the Prisoner
saiLl.he received as the priCQ of a horse inch lie had
sold. l'he next d.ty the two seven-shillings pieces
were found in a roll of cheque cloth, near I.oiere
the Priioner' stood when he received the money,
and the ProseCutor caused him to:) be apprehended.
Several'WitnesSes were called on the.part of the
Prisunei, Who,.ipreved thin they saw him in pos4L-3-
, sion of at least 46 guineas beture he went into the
Prosecutor's service. VerdiEt-Net