The Sun.
London, England, 1823-10-24 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF RING'S BENCH, Oct. 23.
ASSAULT.—WARD versus STOLZ/ AXD
This was an action brought by the plaintiff, who is a miller
at Stratford, to recover from Richard Stokes (the 'proprietor of
the Harrow Inn at Stratford), his two sons, and a person named
Franc* compensation in damages for an assault committed
upon him in the month of January last.
Two witnesses having sworn to the auault, and the circum.
stances attending it,
His LORDSHIP suggested a reference.
The Counsel on both sides having consulted together, agrood
to a verdict for the plaintiff—Dansages 101.

1110WAUTX AXOTlalia v. JOU/.
This was an action of trover brought by the plaintiff's, who
are the executrices of Richard Howard, deceased, to recover
from the defendant, who is a surgeon in Chancery.lane, the
value of certain hooks, the preperty of the deceased.
Mr. SCAULZTT (with who was Mr. Wrung) having stated
the can, called
Mr. George Tennant, a solicitor, who deposed that about a
month previous to Mr. Howard's death, which took place in
April 1819, lie was sent for to make a codicil to Mr. 11.'6 will.
At this time Mr. Jones, who succeeded Mr. H. in his business,
was anxious that the books should be left to him as a legacy, and
wished Mr. T. to ask Mr. H. to do so. Mr. T. having drawn
up the codicil, asked if the testator wished to give any other
legacy, and he replied no. Witness communicated this to the
defendant, who expressed great regret, and some time after-
wards told witness that Mr. H. bad givenhim some old medical
books which were in the garret, but refused to give him the
books (the subject of this action) is Chancery.lane. Witness
then told the defendant if the testator should change his mind,
be (witness) would at nny time be ready to draw up another
codicil to the will, and that such a codicil would be *scenery.
He was never afterwards called upon to draw up such a codicil.
After the testator's death he went with the plaintiff to the de-
fendant's house, in order to ascertain the value of the books
before probate could be taken out. The defeotlant thee said
that the deceased made hies a gift of the books • and as a proof
of that assertion be read !rem a periodical publiiiation a biogra.
phical account of the deceased, furnished by the defendant. In
that publication it was stated, that the deceased had made a
gift of his library to the defendant.
Its his cross examination be said, that he knew deceased had
a short time before his death given away a good deal of his
funded property. Such was the claim which the plaintiff con-
sidered the defendant had upon the testator, that she wished
him to leave to Mr. Jones a legacy of 8009 i. which was given
in the will to a person then dead.
Re-examined.—lle asked deceased if he intended to leave any
legacy to the defendant, and he replied " Nor the Jones's have
got the business, that's enough for them." The deceased often
told witness, that as his collection of books was rare he intended
to give it to the British Museum.
Mr. Rees, the plaintiff's Attorney, proved the demand
made to the defendant fur the books, and his refusal to deliver
them up.
Mr. Ilaslewood deposed, that the deceased's collection of rare
books on hawking, hunting, and angling, was very valuable.
He had occasion in 1811 to borrow some rolnmes from the de.
ceased ; sours of the volumes were worth from thirty to fifty
guineas each. • •
The defence set up was, that the deceased had marls a gift of
the books to the defendant.
Ann Davidson deposed, that she was servant to the deceased
at the time of his death, ani for five or six years before. About
tea days before his death, she, a Mn. Harris, now dead, and
the defendant, were standing at his bedside. The defendant
said to Mrs. 11. that the testator had made him a handsome
present ; Mr. Howarth said, what's that you say ? to which the
defendant replied, 1 was telling Mrs. H. of your kindness in
bgiving me your books. The tonna: then gave a nod of appro-
ation.
Mr. SCAILIIITT replied.
Ilia Lotman?, in summing up, told the Jury, that if they
believed Davidson, and were of opinion that the testator in-
tended to part with all interest in the library, eves if he should
afterwards recover, their verdict must be for the defendant; but
if they should be of opinion that he intended the gift to take
effect at his death, then their verdict must be for the plaintiffs,
as the defendant would then claim under a Nuncupative Will,
and in this case the formalities necessary to make such a
valid were not observed.
The Jury found a verdict for the plabatlffe—Damagee 10001.
(the damages laid in the declaration.)
TURNS? •ND OTIISIB v. PllOll LXI) ornicas.
This was an action of trover brought by the plaintiffs, who
are the assignees of a bankrupt named Beaumont, to recover
front the defendants, the master and owner of the ship Sir
Charles .111`CarthY,
the value of goods shipped on board that
vessel in November last.
The bankrupt was an upliolitsr at Maidstone, and on the
30th of October last committed an act of bankruptcy. On the
2d of November he had bills of lading signed for good shipped
by him for Sierra Leone, and consigned to Sweep,
On the lith of November the Captain was served milli notice
that Beaumont was a bankrupt, and not to deliver the goods at
Sierra Leone. Ths Captain delivered the goods at Sierra
Leone to Savage, and it was contended, that having signed a
bill of lading before he got the notice, he was bound- to deliver
the goods; but as it appeared from the evidence that the greater
portion of the goods shipped belonged to the bankrupt, a vex,
diet was found for the plaintiffs.—Damages 3001.

TWYNAIbt V. cooly.
This was an action for surgical assistance aid medicine.
The plaintiff's son deposed, that his father practised in Kings.
land-road as a Doctor, and cumi the most dangerous ulcers by
the application of herbs, /c.c. The defendant, who is a cork
cutter, was his patient for a bad leg, and witness heard hits say
he was so well after being ten months ostler his father's care,
that he could walk 20 miles without doing himself any harm.
Cross.examined by Mr. Otrawtor—My father is by trade a
leather breeches' maker, but God gave him the gift of coring
sore legs. The Learned Counsel here handed to witness
one of the plaintiff's cards, in which he professed to cure
" Cancers while swelling; cancers after mortification had taken
place; the stone, without cutting; dropsy, without tapping,"
&c. etc. That is one of my father's cards ; he cures by the
" inspiration of Gon."
For the defendant was called his son, who deposed that the
plaintiff did the ees'endant no service ; on the contrary he was
worse after leaving the plaintiff than before he went to him,—
The plaintiff blistered the leg, and then applied caustic, which
gave his father considerable pain.
A respectable looking surgeon deposed, that the treatment
deposed to by the last witness mammy improper. The defend.
ant applied for his advise, and he cured bun by the application
of bandages • the disease was mime veins in ate lag,—.Verdict
for the defendant.